The Nature of Creation
In The Beginning
I am sure almost everyone has heard or read these words. They are used everywhere, even in comedy segments, to describe when something had a beginning.
In recent decades and centuries, the idea of a supernatural creation has come under fire. With the rise of science, the creation account in the book of Genesis has been, for many, relegated to the pages of myth and legend.
These people, some even claim to be Christian, have decided that fallible man looking back over thousands, or in their minds millions and billions of years, has a better perspective on our origins than the God who did the creating.
This began the battle for our origins. Those that hold to a biblical account are often thought of as irrational, uneducated, illogical, to name a few of the milder accusations hurled at them.
But a closer look at the evidence surrounding creation and its nature may paint a different picture. Those that hold to the biblical creation may not be so off the mark.
Looking in the wrong places
I am going to address secular science first as it has been described as a field of research that looks for natural answers and the best explanation. Those who practice science really do not want God involved in their work, so they have designed science to omit anything supernatural.
This design has put secular science behind the 8 ball and a step or three behind everyone else. By omitting the supernatural, and including natural and the best explanation, have set themselves on a course to fail.
Since creation did not take place in a natural manner, these scientists and other researchers are walking down the wrong path, going in the wrong direction and looking in the wrong places for their answers to our origins.
It is like looking for the origins of McDonald’s while searching for evidence in the story of the origin of the pizza.
The Creation Myths
The existence of the creation myths found throughout the world. Lend physical evidence in opposition to a natural scientific origin. The common elements found in these creation myths make it impossible to consider that these stories came into existence by coincidence.
If our origins were natural, there would be no reason for these creation myths to exist. There also would be no similarities between them and every ancient culture of the world would not have one.
It is the similarities that protect these myths from their detractors and provide an element of truth to the Biblical account. Lindsey Murtagh wrote about these similarities in his work Common Elements in Creation Myths. Here are some of those common elements he discovered:
l Almost every culture has a creation myth
l They all explain where the wonders of the world came from
l They all have great influence on the people of those cultures
l Each geographically separated culture developed similar basic elements
l Many began with a birth or creating new life
l A supreme being is present in almost all of the creation myths
l The deity is responsible for new life
l Most take place on the earth
l Most have animals and humans living together peaceably
And on it goes. There are just to many similarities to be mere coincidence. I will not get into the copying argument as the one I used in a Noah’s flood article works here. Suffice it to say that most of those cultures have no reason to copy from those societies they never heard of or had contact with.
There is also no reason for the same myth to be spread to culture to culture and adopted by those cultures that had no creation myth. The story of Babel does explain how so many cultures had the same creation story.
What is Missing
When you study ancient cultures like I have you find that there is something missing from these cultures. There is no natural origins myth. In all of these societies that is the missing element.
It is not because ancient man did not understand the world around them. With all of the ancient technology, successes in agriculture, their inventions, astronomical studies and more, ancient man was as smart or smarter than modern man.
This does not mean that there were not individuals who rejected the ancient creation myths. If you read the book The Ghosts of Darwin, you will find that many people prior to Darwin came up with their version of the evolutionary theory.
Then if you turn to Bill Cooper’s After the Flood, you would read where the first recorded evolutionary theory was made in the 6th century BC in China. But like Darwin, these men were all individuals who did not agree with a supernatural creation.
Their ideas were not turned into myth and legend to be held for all time. Instead, they were relegated to the category of unbelievers who sought alternatives to religious faith. Their work left to disappear as time went on.
If these individuals held the truth, we would seeing a different set of myths in the ancient manuscripts archaeologists dig up.
The Nature of Creation
As stated earlier, secular science is not looking for any evidence to support creation. It can’t because it has taken upon itself to be designed in a manner that excludes the supernatural from their work.
Secular scientists would probably have more success in finding physical evidence for the Biblical creation account if they simply included the supernatural. That inclusion is necessary if scientists and the public are going to see the true nature of the biblical creation.
Our origins was done in a supernatural act not to be repeated in this earth’s lifetime. It was conducted by a God who holds more power than any of us can imagine.
Secular science cannot study creation because the supernatural act is beyond its scope and out of its boundaries. Our origins did not come about via the secular scientific method. Secular scientist are way out of their league when they try to study our origins.
Some Final Thoughts
When secular scientists and other believers try to relegate the act of the biblical creation to myth and legend, then call the believers irrational, etc., they are only making a statement concerning their own failure.
These men and women fail to see the true nature of creation and its validity. Some may purposely do that for whatever reason they may have. But their rejection of creation and construction of an alternative theory does not mean that the Biblical creation did not take place and is not true.
The evidence says otherwise.
© 2019 David Thiessen