Steve Schramm
[Originally published as the third section of TCQ Week 4: Scripture and the Age of the Earth]
The Bible Isn’t a Science Textbook, but History Matters
Those who are opposed to the “regular” interpretation of the creation account often say that the Bible isn’t a science textbook. They are upset because they think we are viewing the Bible too simplistically.
Their thinking goes like this: the Bible was written by ancient people who did not have knowledge of modern science. They didn’t know or care about the shape of the earth, how life was formed, how long creation took, the nature of the sky, etc. So when we talk about the Bible in relation to science, we’re simply misunderstanding what the Bible is.
I used to be quite offended by this. I eventually came to realize that, although I still disagree, they are more right than wrong. Let’s talk first about why I disagree.
It’s not hard to understand. I disagree because I read the Bible. The Bible does have something to say about the shape of the earth, how life was formed, how long creation took, and even the nature of the sky. Now, many will disagree over the details. But you can’t say those things weren’t important to the biblical writers: they wrote about them!
What these critics usually mean is that the biblical writers seem to assume a view of science that disagrees with our modern interpretations. Knowing that will cause accusations like “you believe the Bible has errors,” they are careful to say that the Bible is not teaching science (biology, astronomy, geology, etc) but that these “errors” were due to pre-scientific authorship.
What I eventually came to realize is that such a view is wrong. On the one hand, it’s true that the Bible is not a science textbook. On the other, where the Bible touches on scientific point, its explanations are strangely accurate.
Nevertheless, I still say the claim that the Bible is not a scientific textbook is more right than wrong because I realized my fellow young-age creationists were looking for science in the Bible but being selective about what counted. While they delightedly point out how the Bible records God mentioning the “springs of the sea” in Job 38:16, which were not known to ancient people but is something we understand today. This seems to show that the Bible contains insights about the natural world that were ahead of their time.
On the other hand, when you read about “the heart” in the Old Testament, the word being referred to usually means “bowels” or “kidneys.” In ancient times, the kidneys were seen as the seat of your emotions—one’s innermost being. But today, we know that it the center of being is in our “mind” — or the interaction between the non-physical “you” and your physical brain.
So, which is it? Is the Bible right about springs in the sea but wrong about your kidneys? This is the problem with thinking too simplistically about the Bible and science. It breaks down in the details.
Here’s what’s cool, though: concerning those kidneys, think about it—even today we say we have a “gut feeling.” We often experience how we feel in our guts. Scientifically, we now know there is direct wiring between our gut and our brain, and we even know that our metabolism (what we eat) dramatically affects our brain (how we think).
It doesn’t mean the ancients were right. But it also doesn’t mean the Bible is wrong! Springs in the sea — is the book of Job referring to what we think of when we think about the springs in the sea we didn’t discover until the 1970s? Only God truly knows. My point is this, springs in the sea are not enough to prove the Bible is true, and thoughtful bowels aren’t enough to prove that it isn’t.
Ultimately, the biblical writers used the language of experience called phenomenological language. They wrote what they saw, felt, heard, and believed. They weren’t thinking about science at all.
History: That’s What Matters
So it’s not a science textbook. However, the Bible is a book of reality — of history — and sometimes that history will be contrary to mainstream science. We’ve already discussed some of those ways.
Let’s take a few specific examples, tying together some of the threads we’ve started discussing.
The Creation Days and the Fall of Man
If the creation is millions of years old, then all that death, suffering, and disease occurred prior to mankind’s fall. But the Bible claims those things result from man’s sin, not that they come before it.
If one were to compress the deep time account of the history of the universe down, you could place the Big Bang at an hour ago. On that scale, Adam would have been created about 5 minutes ago. But in Mark 10:6, Jesus says, “But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.”
So the Bible isn’t giving a scientific breakdown of why the earth is young — but the theology it teaches has clear implications for science.
Fossils and the flood
We have in the fossil record the remains of billions of dead things, which many scientists take as representing the entire history of life on Earth. But each layer you peel back causes problems for the Christian with such a deep time view because it demonstrates that death, disease, and suffering all affected these long-dead creatures. This record cannot simultaneously result from millions of years of slow processes and also a year-long global flood. So you must choose either a local flood (which puts you at odds with the Bible) or a global flood (which puts you at odds with the mainstream view of earth history).
Dinosaurs
Some think Behemoth and Leviathan in Job are dinosaurs. I used to think that strongly. It’s still my default belief, but I think there is good evidence these were word pictures for ancient Near Eastern chaos monsters.
Let’s assume the Bible says nothing directly about dinosaurs. If biblical history is true, it says at least two things indirectly: They were created on Day 6 of creation and died during the flood (because all land animals died).
Do you get it? This means dinosaurs and man lived at the same time, and they were not destroyed by a meteor 65 million years ago, but by a flood just about 4,500 years ago. Again—the Bible is not making a scientific claim. It is teaching history, and history has important things to tell the scientific world.
