Consider the Days of Old

New WorldOn the verse, “Consider the days of old, the years of the many generations (Deut. 32:7),” the 13th century scholar Nachmanides explains that “Consider the days of old” refers to the Six Days of Creation and “The years of the many generations” refers to the time from Adam forward.” Many leading rabbis who lived centuries before Darwin understood that when Adam appeared on the scene, the universe might have already been much older. Most notably, this is the opinion attributed to Rabbi Nechunia Ben Hakana who lived some 2,000 years ago, which is quoted by many mainstream, medieval commentators such as Rabbenu Bechaya, the Recanti, Tzioni, and the Sefer HaChinuch. Rabbi Yitzhak M’Acco, a student of Nachmanides, suggested based on kabbalistic calculations that the universe is thousands of millions of years old.

With regard to humans arriving on the scene, the Talmud (Chagiga 13b) states clearly that there were 974 generations prior to Adam. The famous Tifferes Yisrael commentary to the Mishnah wrote in 1842 (prior to publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species): “In my opinion, the prehistoric men whose remains have been discovered in our time and who lived long before Adam are identical with the 974 pre-Adamite generations referred to in the Talmud, and lived in the epoch immediately before our own.”

Of course, the key point where Torah and evolutionists diverge is on the question of “accident versus design.” Evolutionists say that life happened by accident; Judaism says that God made it happen.

from the “Ask the Rabbi” column
“Evolution and the Bible”
Aish.com

I know I’m going to get “heck” for this, at least from conservative Christians and Orthodox Jews. Evolution and Creation are supposed to be incompatible in both religion and science, but the Aish Rabbi crafts a response to the question of Evolution that allows for both.

Up to a point.

I just finished re-reading Gerald L. Schroeder’s book Genesis and the Big Bang (and just started reading his more recent book The Hidden Face of God ) and Schroeder seems to believe something similar (also, see my previous blog post For God Rolled the Dice and the Universe Came to Be for more).

One of the problems comes along with trying to reconcile the six days of Creation in the Bible with the 13.7 or so billion years science says the universe has been around. According to present scientific theory, the Earth has been in existence for about 4.5 billion years.

How do six days fit into billions of years and vice versa?

Schroeder suggests a rather complicated interplay involving time dilation and relativity to explain that, from the Earth’s point of view, billions of years passed, but from God’s perspective, it was only six days. Schroeder spent an entire chapter laying the foundation for his belief and I can’t find any way to compress it into a paragraph or two in this blog post and still have it make sense. Suffice it to say that both science and the Bible are right as Schroeder sees it.

But what about life and evolution? According to the Bible, God created all living things as they are known today, including human beings, in just a few days. There were no previous and less developed forms of life, that became more complicated over time as they adapted to environmental changes, resulting in the creatures we have on our planet right now.

The Aish Rabbi refers to the Talmud which states that “there were 974 generations prior to Adam” and that those generations describe the lives of those beings we refer to as “prehistoric man.” Presumably, during that time, other creatures were also created, existed, and faced extinction.

It all makes a sort of sense, but I’m still struggling with seeing Genesis as being able to wholly map to the observations and interpretations we have about our universe based on astronomy, geology, and paleontology.

ancient_skyI admit, that whether you believe the Earth is ten thousand years old or 4.5 billion years old, devotion to God and love and charity to human beings shouldn’t be impacted to any degree in the life of a Christian or observant Jew. Still, it’s a compelling issue because the extreme literal stance on Creation taken by conservative Christians is one of the barriers to evangelizing more educated secular atheists. Educated unbelievers can’t be past the “Christians are ignorant buffoons” factor and I myself feel embarrassed when I hear a Christian trying to convince someone that Earth is a mere ten thousand years of age.

Christians aren’t likely to take the Talmud as an authority but it’s telling that “the famous Tifferes Yisrael commentary to the Mishnah” was written in 1842, prior to the publication of Darwin’s famous “Origin of Species.” Darwin, like the stream of Judaism the Aish Rabbi represents, believes in some sort of evolutionary process but that it was not random. God was always the causal agent, the Master Designer.

According to Dr. I. Prigogine, recipient of two Nobel prizes in chemistry: “The statistical probability that organic structures and the most precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be generated by accident is zero.”

Darwin himself wrote in Origin of Species: “…If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications — my theory would absolutely break down…”

The jury is still out regarding the sequencing of how life developed, over what time period, and the mechanics God employed. I believe God made human beings independently and as we are now without prior evolutionary forms, but what about animal life, which was never intended to have the unique position of man?

The Bible is well aware of evolution, although it is not very interested in the details of the process. All of animal evolution gets a mere seven sentences (Genesis 1:20-26). Genesis tells us that simple aquatic animals were followed by land animals, mammals, and finally humans.

That is also what the fossil record tells us, albeit with much more detail than these few biblical verses provide. The Bible makes no claims as to what drove the development of life, and science has yet to provide the answer.

In paleontology’s record of evolution, first came the discovery that life appeared on Earth almost 4 billion years ago, immediately after the molten globe had cooled sufficiently for liquid water to form. This contradicted totally the theory of gradual evolution over billions of years in some nutrient-rich pool. The rapid origin of life remains a mystery.

Then we learned that some 550 million years ago, in what is known as the Cambrian explosion, animals with optically perfect eyes, gills, limbs with joints, mouths and intestines burst upon the fossil scene – with nary a clue in older fossils as to how they evolved. It is no wonder that Darwin, in his “Origin of the Species,” repeatedly implored his readers (seven times by my count) to ignore the fossil record if they were to understand his theory.

The overwhelming weight of evidence tells us that something exotic certainly happened to produce life as we know it. Historically one of the most compelling arguments regarding the existence of God comes from the precision design found in nature. Design implies a designer, and Darwin’s proposal that evolution could have occurred without a Designer (by means of natural selection through random mutations) changed things.

The Aish Rabbi’s opinion is certainly controversial when considered from a fundamentalist Christian position and likely when seen from an Orthodox Jewish viewpoint (my wife says the local Chabad Rabbi believes the Earth is roughly 12,000 years old).

world-of-extinct-mammals

I’m writing all this, not to yank anyone’s chain (though I’m sure it will) but to explore my own thought processes on this matter. I didn’t become a believer until I was past forty years old, so all of my educational foundation is based on Earth being very old and that the basic process of scientific examination of our environment is sound and designed to produce more or less reasonable results (although history has shown that those results aren’t always correct upon subsequent examination).

Religion, for its part, has had to make up some rather fanciful stories to explain the fossil record, to explain our understanding of the size and therefore the age of the universe, to explain our understanding of the age of various geological formations on our own planet, and to explain a myriad of other findings from the world of science that seems to radically contradict an absolute literal reading of the Bible’s Genesis account.

I really enjoy reading about the sciences, though I’m quite the amateur. I enjoy astronomy. I like hearing about the latest “adventures” of the various robotic probes on the surface of Mars. I have an interest in reading about the journey of Voyager 1 at the edge of interstellar space. I think God created us with an insatiable curiosity about the universe around us and a drive to explore it with the intelligence he created in us.

Then the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”

Genesis 2:15-17 (NASB)

It is said that there was no death before the Fall (which happens in Genesis 3) so how could there have been life on a long-term scale before Adam and Eve? How could life in some form or another have existed for hundreds of millions of years before Adam and there not be death?

When God describes the consequences of eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, how did Adam know what “die” meant? How could the serpent convince Eve she wouldn’t die (Genesis 3:1-5) from eating the fruit if dying was unknown to her? Why would she fear death and why would she have to overcome that fear in order to eat?

Reading the various consequences God visited upon Adam, Eve, and the rest of Creation as listed in Genesis 3, none of them say that all life was immortal before the Fall and suddenly became mortal afterward.

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”

Genesis 3:22 (NASB)

Gateway to EdenIt seems as if the two humans in the Garden were mortal (along with all other forms of life) and only by taking and eating from the tree of life would they become immortal! The presence of death wasn’t dependent upon the Fall. All life in the Garden was mortal.

Why couldn’t any life that may have existed as created within the span (as the Aish Rabbi suggests) described in Genesis 1:20-26 (the millions and millions of years prior to the creation of modern human beings) have been born, lived, and died, and born, lived, and died, and born, lived, and died?

Yeah, I expect to get some static over this blog post, but I’m writing it to explore my own thinking process in this area and also to (hopefully) inspire others to think as well. We need to take a look at the evidence presented by our environment, take a look at the Bible, take a look at our dogma, and struggle with what all that is supposed to mean.

I believe God created us to think, to explore, and to struggle with the meaning of everything we see. I think He wanted us to wonder and to experience wonder. I don’t think He wanted the Bible to be some sort of cosmic solution machine spitting out all the answers to all the questions in bite-sized chunks, like eating from a bowl of Christian-Jewish fortune cookies.

We don’t have to get all the answers from the Bible. God gave us other tools to use as well. Telescopes, microscopes, and the Large Hadron Collider aren’t the enemies of the Bible. They complement it. They are the lens through which we examine the world which reveals God, just as the Bible is the story of the relationship between God and human beings.

Advertisements

9 thoughts on “Consider the Days of Old”

  1. Hi James,

    Nice article.

    I always wince (or worse) when Dawkins, Peter Singer, Christopher Hitchens, Dennet and others try (or tried) to show why believing in God is supposedly so irrational, harmful, destructive to society, etc. because as soon as they open their mouths about God and (usually) Christianity, it’s easy to spot that they’ve not actually studied either.

    By the same token the reverse is also true when (well intentioned, I’m sure) Kirk Cameron sets out to “debunk” science.

    I never understand why people get so worked up about things that we cannot prove!

    However, G. Schroeder is compelling as one who certainly has the scientific “chops” to speak/write about the subject of creation, yet he is also an Orthodox Jew who studies and searches the Bible in the original language. That doesn’t make his claims in “Genesis and the Big Bang” true however, as a non scientific type, I really found that book provocative.

  2. For me, it’s important to face that if we believe the Bible is truth, we must believe in the ability to study our environment in order to establish facts. Truth and facts are two sides of the same coin, they’re close companions who are holding hands but who are not exactly the same thing. However, truth and fact should witness to the same reality, the reality of the God of Creation.

    Earlier today, I read Derek Leman’s Torah and Non-Jews: A Practical Primer, which I will leverage heavily for Friday’s “morning meditation.” One of the points Leman makes is the absolute necessity to continually study Torah and the rest of the Bible in order to begin to truly comprehend God’s intent for Israel and the rest of humanity. The same is true relative to understanding why the Bible and the revelation of our environment (from the smallest sub-atomic particle to the largest galactic structure in the universe) are complementary witnesses of God.

    This isn’t something that we will “get” by taking a sixteen-week study course and reading a couple of books. There is no ending to learning, study, meditation, and contemplation. All this is part and parcel of our relationship with God and we dedicate our entire lives to it and to Him.

  3. James: Have you ever considered some distinct view of things? What if what you read in Genesis account of creation is about a creation being so perfect that it is not what you and I are experiencing right now? Have you thought that the description of creation you read in Genesis, you also read in the final part of Revelations? How about you and I are living in a parenthesis () in God’s project: a timeframe with a perfect creation -> a creation with death in it, and thus all fossils and stuff -> a new earth and new heavens creation. The fallen creation groans waiting for its redemption just as we are waiting for it (Romans 8:18-23) So the question would be : How did creation fell? What happened in that process?

  4. Actually, I do consider the Bible to be “framed” by the Creation account and by the end of Revelation. Mankind started out in paradise with God in our midst and we’ll end up that way. The point I’m making in this blog post is simply that there is harmony between the general revelation of the universe and the specific revelation of the Bible. God isn’t playing a game of “hide the ball” with our physical environment.

  5. Hi James. Thanks for your response. I was just trying to point out, that the Creation account in Genesis could really be about the Perfect Paradise that God intended for us to live in, which as you say, is where we’ll end up as Revelation states. But that account is not talking “exactly” about things that you and I experience in this fallen creation that we live in. For instance: Gen 1:16 says “And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night…” To me, there is a specific reason for God not to have Moses writing “the Sun to rule the day, and the Moon to rule the night”…. Maybe there is a hint in there : The greater light was something else that later on became the Sun, and the lesser light became the Moon, but in the beginning they were not exactly the way they are now, in this fallen creation… Another example is that in Genesis 1:30 we read “And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.” We can state then, that no animal ate other animals… there was no death. The “natural food chain” that rules in our world and that we learn in school…. is not natural to God in His Creation !!! Since there was no death, then not a single leaf fell off a tree …

    (By the way, please forgive my English, since my mother tongue is Spanish)

  6. Your English is fine. No worries.

    I think I see what you’re saying. The Creation account in Genesis describes a world in which we currently don’t exist…an idealized and perfect world. Therefore, what it describes can’t be mapped to the world we live in today. Interesting concept. I’ve never heard of Creation thought of in that manner before. I certainly can’t prove or disprove it, but then we still live in a created, if imperfect universe today. There must be something of God here, too and therefore, we must be able to find evidence of God in our current world. That’s what I’m trying to communicate.

  7. Hi James. Of course there is evidence of God in our fallen creation. (Romans 1:20)

    Just continuing with the idea that I’m trying to explain, please consider the body that Yeshua had when He rose from the dead. None of His disciples seemed to “recognize” Him… Mary Magdalene thought that Yeshua was the gardener (John 20:13-16) until she heard Him calling her the way He used to say her name. The disciples going to Emmaus (Luke 24:16) could not recognize Him until He blessed and braked the bread, the way He did so many times before. Then, Yeshua resurrected body goes through walls and locked doors, to be with His disciples, in their midst. (John 20:19) So, we could infer that the stone in the sepulcher was removed not because Yeshua needed an opening to go out, but for the disciples to go in the sepulcher and be witnesses of His resurrection. Also, check what happened when Yeshua shewed Himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias: “And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord” (John 21:12) Why should they ask Him who He was??? Didn’t they recognize Him??? Would you have to ask a friend of yours, that you have just seen days ago, “Who are you?” ???

    Finally, in the resurrection of the dead, we will have a new body, raised in glory, being transformed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye (1st Corinthians 15:35-54); that is, our bodies that are corruptible flesh will be changed into incorruptible bodies (such as the ones Adam and Eve had, since they were not made to die, but to live forever). In that glorious moment, we will not be naked again, as Adam and Eve found themselves naked after sinning, short of the Glory of God (Romans 3:23); in the twinkling of an eye, our tabernacle will be clothed with our house from Heaven (2nd Corinthians 5:1-4)

    I would think that Yeshua’s resurrected body corresponds to Adam and Eve original bodies, and since we will be resurrected, we will have such perfect bodies as well.

    I think that there are issues that we cannot explain in a “natural” way. Shalom !

  8. Well, I can certainly agree that we can’t always rely on our understanding of the physical world when trying to understand the metaphysical.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s