This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information, or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org.

The Creation Story and Science, a general article in The One Volume Bible Commentary, edited by The Reverend J. R. Dummelow, M.A.

Many of the difficulties felt in connexion with the Bible story of creation arise from a misunderstanding of the bearing of modern science upon it. A few general considerations, therefore, may help to obviate them.
(a) There is a vague idea in many minds that science demands a much greater antiquity for the world than the Bible account will allow. This impression has probably been gathered from the statement in the margin of many Bibles that creation took place in the year 4004 B.C. It is well, therefore to be reminded that this marginal note is not a part of the Bible. It originated in calculations, both Jewish and Christian, which are now admitted to have been based upon imperfect knowledge. The sacred writer in Genesis does not commit himself to any definite limits of time, but simply speaks of the creation as taking place 'in the beginning,' and this phrase is elastic enough to cover the modern scientific position.
(b) Another difficulty is caused by the apparent antagonism between modern scientific theories and the statement of Gn 1 that the work of creation was completed in six days. Attempts have been made, from several points of view, to get rid of this antagonism, by taking the language of the Scripture in a figurative sense. For example, it has been suggested by some that the sublime panorama of creation was flashed into some primeval prophet's consciousness in a series of visions that occupied a space of six days; and by others that the days are not to be interpreted as natural days of twenty-four hours each, but as age-long periods of time corresponding to the successive stages in the evolution of the world. Whatever truth there may be in these suggestions, and however helpful they may be to many minds, others may be able to obtain a more satisfactory rendering of the Bible account of creation, by looking at it in the light of the three following considerations. (1) The story was written in the very childhood of our race, when human knowledge was only at the dawn, and men's minds were awakening for the first time to the problems of life and the world. It was inevitable, therefore, that it should be cast in a simple and childlike form, if it was to be at all intelligible to those among whom it appeared; and the wisdom of giving it such a setting has been more than justified by the impression it has left, and still continues to make, upon the thought of the world. (2) It is now widely admitted that the Genesis account of creation contains elements of belief which existed, perhaps thousands of years before the book of Genesis was written, among the peoples of Babylonia and Assyria. The connexion between the traditions of these early nations and the story of Genesis is still a matter of discussion, but one thing has emerged clearly from their comparison. Whatever elements the sacred writer in Genesis may have in common with the Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs, he has been able to redeem and purify them from their baser form, and invest them with the presence and power of a sovereign God, the one only Creator of heaven and earth. (3) The purpose of the writer in Gn 1 is not scientific but religious. His scientific knowledge may be bounded by the horizon of the age in which he lived, but the religious truths he teaches are irrefutable and eternal. To put the matter in another way: The scientific account of creation has been written by the finger of God upon the crust of the earth, and men are slowly spelling it out; but the religious account of creation is written in the first chapter of Genesis, in letters that all can read. Both accounts are from God, and should be received accordingly. As Dr. Marcus Dods has said: 'The greatest mistake is made when men seek in the one record what can only be found in the other, when they either refuse to listen to the affirmations of nature because they seem to disagree with what is found in the Bible, or when they are content with the teaching of nature, as if nature could tell us all we need to know about ourselves, about the world, and about God.' What was necessary in the primitive world to save men from grovelling, debasing polytheism was the knowledge that it was God, holy and good, who made all things, and that the crown and summit of His work was man; and this is the knowledge set forth in the book of Genesis. The real question for us is then: 'Does the story of Genesis so accomplish what seems to be its purpose, that only inspiration from God can account for it?' To ask: 'Is it a completely scientific account of creation?' is to raise an issue that is scarcely fair.
(c) These considerations must be kept in mind, for they are equally helpful, in dealing with the further difficulty that has arisen in connexion with the theory of evolution, and the marvellous discoveries with which it has been associated. Science is now teaching that the order and beauty of the world are not the result of one directly creative act, but the outcome of a long and gradual process, continued probably over myriads of years; and that the varied life of nature is not as it was fixed 'in the beginning,' but as it has been evolved, through age-long periods and many lower stages, from original germs. On the face of it, this teaching seems to conflict with the teaching of the Bible, and in particular to throw suspicion upon the story of creation as given in Genesis. It was thus it was received at first; but in recent years, as men have gone back to the old creation story, and pondered it afresh, in view of the teaching of science, their difficulties and perplexities have largely disappeared. Besides making allowances for the considerations already urged under (b), they have come to see that creation would be just as divine and miraculous, if it were slow and gradual, as it would be if it were sudden and complete. The power necessary to originate and support a ceaseless and prolonged process of development in the world would be no less than that required to bring it into being in a moment, and sustain it in its ordered course. Doubtless, God could instantaneously make a mighty oak; but it is no less wonderful that He should make it gradually, causing it to grow out of the little acorn, of which we can carry a dozen in the hand, yet every one of which contains within it a germ endued with the power to carry on a succession of mighty oaks through ages to come. To realise this is to advance a long way in the solution of the difficulty arising from the theory of evolution, and rob it of its power to disturb a genuine faith in the Bible. A further reflection, however, may be called in to support the mind of the biblical believer. Not only is evolution itself only a theory, which may in the future undergo modification, and may possibly be displaced by some other theory, but even if it is a true and final account of the origin of created things, the old creation story of Genesis is, to say the least, not incompatible with it. The process of creation, as unfolded in Genesis, when viewed in the light of the new scientific teaching, reveals a law of continuous development, which is at least a foreshadowing of the process of evolution. And so the apparent irreconcilability between them becomes largely reduced, if it does not indeed altogether disappear. 'These,' we read, 'are the generations of the heavens when they were created.' 'The inspired historian saw no Almighty hand building up the galleries of creation; he heard no sound of hammer nor confused noise of workmen; the Spirit of the Lord moved upon the face of the deep; chaos took form and comeliness before his inspired vision; and the solar system grew through a succession of days to its present order and beauty.' At last, when all things were ready---after how many myriads of years we know not---man came forth, the summit of the whole creation, for 'God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and he became a living soul.'

End of The Creation Story and Science, recorded by Tim McKenzie