A professionally produced documentary that celebrates God’s creation is coming soon to a theater near you. Monday, March 19, in select theaters, “The Riot and the Dance,” a film featuring Dr. Gordon Wilson, debuts. Wilson is a Christian biology professor and author of a biology textbook with the same name. He is also brother of the well-known Reformed pastor and author, Douglas Wilson, whose son N.D. Wilson directs this film.
I was able to watch a screening of the film and found it quite captivating. The production is first-rate, and it compares favorably to something put out by BBC or National Geographic. But the message is distinctly different. The opening lines of the film come from Geneis 1, in the King James Version — which could perhaps put off viewers who are not already Christian. The film’s repeated theme is of God’s creativity and the role of wonder as we interact with all of God’s creation.
Unlike other Christian documentaries, this film does not try to convince the viewer of creation science. There are a few swipes at evolution, but no detailed argument as to why Dr. Wilson believes it is wrong. Rather, the film is a celebration and revelling in God’s glory as found in creation. This will be attractive to many Christian moviegoers, even if some lament the lack of a point-by-point interaction with naturalistic evolution. (For such viewers, Is Genesis History? would be worth checking out.)
The film begins in the Pacific Northwest — and literally the backyard, so to speak, of Dr. Wilson. From there it moves out to the mountains and the coast, then on to the Sonoran desert in Mexico, and ultimately the jungles of Sri Lanka. The film focuses on snakes repeatedly, and on other smaller creepy-crawlies. Hummingbirds do make an appearance however, as do weaver birds and several other species. Through it all, the enthusiasm of Dr. Wilson for each animal is contagious.
The film clearly stems from a young earth creationist viewpoint, and this shines forth in what may be some of its most controversial points. In one scene he showcases a peaceful seal population as the epitome of the Creator’s intent for creation. The next scene highlights Elephant seals as a negative example of the disorder of Creation. One is God’s intent and the other is what happened due to the Fall. This scene and another point later in the movie seem to be saying that the animals themselves have rebelled against the Creator’s intent. Throughout the film, Dr. Wilson keeps delaying a discussion of how a believer should view snakes. When he finally comes to that, he emphasizes that snakes were cursed by the fall and are an enemy of the seed of the woman. Yet any theologian would point out that it was Satan who was cursed, and it is Satan upon whom Christians tread (see Rom. 16:20). Serpents aren’t the enemy, but the Great Serpent is. Animals don’t (and didn’t) rebel against God, humanity did. The Fall certainly has affected creation with the introduction of sin and the advent of human death. But God created predators and glories in them (Job 38-40).*
The film’s intentional avoidance of addressing evolution head-on weakens its impact. If the amazing creativity of God showcased in the differences between animals speaks to God’s amazing provision for His creation, then what about the fact that 95% of all known species have become extinct? Was God unable to provide for those animals? The creativity highlighted throughout the film can be seen as a support for evolution, by those predisposed to Darwinism.
While the film may not convince skeptics, it certainly will speak movingly to believers. It was refreshing to see the amazing facts of nature presented through the lens of a Bible-believing professor. Christians affirm that it is God who stands behind the beauty of nature and this film directly praises God for that. I can applaud that wholeheartedly, even if my old earth creationism holds me back from a full endorsement of all aspects of this film.
Update: The film is available to purchase on Amazon.
*I refer interested readers to 40 Questions About Creation and Evolution, by Kenneth Keathley and Mark Rooker (Kregel, 2014), chapter 26 “Was There Animal Death Before the Fall?” and chapter 27 “What Effect Did the Fall Have on Creation?” I agree with their conclusion that young earth creationists “seem to be dogmatic about a position [that the Fall introduced death and corruption into the world – even changing natural laws] which, upon closer examination, appears to be more speculative than they have been willing to admit,” p. 269-270. See my review of that book here.
Is Genesis History? is a compelling documentary from Compass Cinema that released earlier this month. Producer/Writer/Director Thomas Purifoy Jr. has created a first-rate documentary that can stand toe-to-toe with the very best documentaries being produced anywhere today. His bibliography (shared at the film’s website) is testament to the effort put into this film. The film features interviews with several of the sharpest minds in young earth creationism: thirteen scientists (counting the bonus features), along with two theologians and a pastor. The host is none other than Del Tackett who many Christian viewers will recognize as the host of Focus on the Family’s The Truth Project video teaching series. The backdrops to these interviews are visually stunning landscapes (from the Grand Canyon to the Virgin Islands and many places in between) or engaging centers of learning (universities, research centers and museums). The sum product is a carefully crafted, engaging, thoughtful presentation of the very best that young earth creationism has to offer.
The film presents the question as a tale of two competing paradigms: the conventional paradigm, which understands the earth to be millions of years old and humanity the product of evolution, and the Genesis paradigm, which understands Genesis to be literal history and the earth to be no more than a few thousand years old, with humanity the special creation of God. With the groundwork set, the project begins with geology and moves through a variety of scientific arenas finding that the Genesis paradigm does indeed live up to the evidence around us. Again and again the issue of worldview comes to the fore, if thinking according to the conventional paradigm, the evidence is discounted or explained away. If willing to think from within the Genesis paradigm, the evidence makes sense and can be truly compelling.
The presentation takes pains to be measured and level-headed in its approach. There is no smug creationist mocking those who believe that their ancestors were apes. This is a serious matter and those interviewed understand how far the pendulum has swung since the days of the Scopes’ trial. The impression you get from watching these men is they care about science and are open to refining their views as they grow in their understanding. They hold to the Bible’s account above all, of course, but these are not pastors playing with rocks – but researchers and seasoned experts who are convinced by the science they see.
I wish the film took more time to address Christian positions for an old earth that stop short of a full embrace of evolution. These approaches are swept together with evolutionary creationists and dismissed as attempts to reconcile with the current scientific paradigm — which may well be discarded in favor of a new understanding, as has happened many times before (even the Big Bang, according to astronomer Danny Faulkner, has its secular critics and is not likely to endure). The film does not really present both sides of the debate, or exhaustively deal with objections and alternate explanations. The film’s website does have resources for further study, however.
As one who has embraced old earth creationism, I was challenged anew by compelling arguments for the “Genesis paradigm,” to use the film’s language. The discussion of enormous rock formations in Arizona, where an enormous layer is found between two layers that are also found in the Grand Canyon (without that big layer between), does seem to suggest a large flood must be behind it. The bonus feature with an atmospheric scientist explaining how a global flood and accompanying high volcanic activity could trigger the ice age and produce the huge glaciers that covered so much of the continents in a matter of a few hundred years was quite compelling. The film starts near Mt. St. Helen’s and shows how much devastation one volcanic eruption made and all the layers it left behind. Yet while this is meant to show that layers can be deposited quickly (rather than over millions of years), I think it stands to show that the “uniformity” of the present has cataclysms enough to account for some of the geology that these experts claim must point to a global flood. The problems with dating methods presented don’t seem to provide enough evidence to me to counter the findings of science for the last 300 years (Christian scientists before Charles Lyell held to an old earth).
Not all young earth creationists will agree with everything included in the film. Biologist Todd Wodd holds that neanderthals would be classified as human, with most other “ancestors” of man being apes. (Many might not agree with that assessment, I imagine.) Perhaps the weakest link in the film was the discussion of astronomy. The problem of the vast distances in space (and the millions of years of time implied in those distances), has been addressed with many different solutions. Astronomer Danny Faulkner provides his own: the stars are brought to maturity very quickly on the fourth day (like the new plants on day 3) — but there is no further discussion of the many questions such an approach raises. An odd inclusion in the film, is the segment on the tower of Babel: while the discussion given about ziggurats being found in numerous cultures is interesting, the question of the dates given to the pyramids and ancient cultures in general has long presented a challenge for young earth creationism, and this is not even addressed.
But despite my few criticisms, this is an excellent production. The film will not convince every viewer, but it should make them think. I am having my children watch this to see a reasoned, careful Christian alternative to the conventional paradigm provided today. For young earth creationists, this is a boon. What better way to introduce the subject and follow up with additional resources? Christians everywhere can be supportive of the creation debate when handled with the care evidenced in this film. Most of those interviewed were humble and did not impugn motives to others in the wider church who disagree with this approach. Such an attitude becomes Christians of every persuasion.
For more information about this film, visit the film’s website: www.IsGenesisHistory.com. There you can find a downloadable “Guide to the Film,” more information on the scientists interviewed, and resources for delving deeper into any of the topics discussed in the film.
DVD Blurbs:
“Attempts to deal with that one simple question: Is the biblical account of creation and flood meant to be understood as history? Does it describe actual history? And does the world give evidence of recent creation and catastrophic flood? Host Del Tackett tackles these questions head-on and does so in a compelling way.” — Tim Challies, Challies.com
“An engrossing primer on why we can feel confident believing the Bible’s account of creation. I just may need to watch it a few more times with the pause button and a notebook handy. Because for Christians educated within the prevailing evolutionary paradigm, Is Genesis History? provides a much-needed reminder just how young the theory of an old earth is.” — Megan Basham, WORLD magazine
“Will strengthen confidence in Scripture, clarify understanding of the relationships of revelation, science, history, and faith, and enhance understanding of difficult questions all while being both beautiful and entertaining.” — E. Calvin Beisner, PhD, The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation
I am happy to host a giveaway for a free copy of an intriguing new documentary: “Is Genesis History?” The DVD was released this month from Compass Cinema and the winner of this contest will get a free copy, compliments of the publishers. This movie is a first-class production hosted by Del Tackett, the host of The Truth Project. He interviews several of the sharpest minds in young earth creationism against a backdrop of stunning natural beauty — from the Grand Canyon to the Virgin Islands — all captured in high definition.
My full review will be coming later this week, but I wanted to share the trailer and the opportunity to win your very own copy. The contest ends Saturday night at 8pm Central time, so be sure to enter right now.
To enter the contest, just fill out your name and email address. I’ll need to get your mailing address if you win, so please use an email that you check regularly, or another winner will be selected.
**UPDATE**Curtis was the winner of the contest. Thanks for trying!
Book Details:
• Authors: Kenneth Keathley and Mark Rooker
• Publisher: Kregel Academic (2015)
• Format: softcover
• Page Count: 432
• ISBN#: 9780825429415
• List Price: $23.99
• Rating: Must Read
Review:
Of the many contemporary debates pushing and pulling on the Church today, the Creation and Evolution debate is perhaps the most alarming. The New Atheists like Richard Dawkins try to lump any Bible believer in with the crackpots and loonies, while some of the most high-profile creationists spare no punches as they condemn the vast majority of Evangelicalism for any of a number of compromises on this question. For folks in the pew, the situation is tense: Science continues to raise large questions, and the Church often seems to provide few answers. Many of our youth are pressured to abandon the faith as they encounter new arguments against creation. With at least four major views in Evangelicalism, there is not a strong unified position to lean upon. Most books on the topic defend their particular view and often take aim directly on other sectors of Christianity. These books do more to perpetuate the polarized nature of the debate than provide a clear way forward. And meanwhile it seems that the scientific consensus only continues to become an even larger stumbling-block to Christian faith.
In this context, a variety of new attempts to integrate science and faith have been proposed. Yet for conservative Christians this only raises new questions. How far is too far? What are the limits of integrating faith and science? How important is the age of the earth? Are all forms of evolution out-of-bounds for Christians? What about the Flood – must it be universal? Could animal death have preceded the Fall? What are we to think about Adam and Eve?
These questions and more are addressed in an important new book from Kenneth Keathley and Mark Rooker, professors at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. 40 Questions About Creation and Evolution (Kregel, 2015) charts a course through the debate, raising the right questions and providing many answers. A big burden behind this book is just to survey the positions that are being adopted by Evangelical leaders today. The authors carefully lay out the evidence (good and bad) for each of these positions. Keathley approaches the matter from a young-earth creationist (YEC) perspective, and Rooker adopts an old-earth (OEC) view, but each author takes pains to speak charitably of the other positions and honestly about the difficulties of his own view. Their irenic candor and careful grappling with the major positions makes this book a joy to read.
Overview
Each chapter functions as a stand-alone treatment of a particular question. These questions are loosely arranged by topic. The first two parts focus on the doctrine of Creation in general (and its role in Scripture), and then in particular about the exegetical details in Gen. 1-2. Following this is a section on the Days of Creation. Here the following positions are examined:
The Gap theory
The Day-Age theory
The Framework theory
The Temple Inauguration theory
The Historical Creationism theory (or Promised Land theory)
The Twenty-Four Hour theory
Following this is a section on the age of the Earth. Here the genealogies and the arguments for and against an old earth are examined. In addition, the question of distant starlight gets special treatment. Included here is an examination of the mature creation argument. The next section focuses on the Fall and the Flood. The image of God and the idea of Original Sin are fleshed out here. The final section focuses on evolution and intelligent design. A history of Darwinism is provided along with its key supporting arguments. Challenges to evolution are also presented (often from atheistic scientists who still hold to common descent). The question of theistic evolution is also addressed. Finally discussion of the “fine-tuning argument” highlights the special place our Earth holds in the universe.
Highlights
This book is over 400 pages long, so I only have time to point out some highlights.
Careful Analysis of the Debate: I was struck by the careful analysis of why Evangelicals disagree so much on this issue. Concordism and non-concordism are addressed, and so is the matter of presuppositions. The authors stress that old-earth creationists (OEC) share many of the same presuppositions as young-earth creationists (YEC), they do not share the view that a YEC interpretation of Gen. 1-11 is the “only interpretation available to the Bible-believing Christian” (p. 20). YEC adherents really do often hold this as a presupposition and so their position is basically fideism: “if one’s presuppositions are unassailable, then his approach has shifted from presuppositionalism to fideism” (p. 21). OEC proponents allow more room for empiricism, which “allows experience and evidence to have a significant role in the formation of one’s position” (p. 21). This philosophical difference lies beneath the OEC vs. YEC debate and recognizing this can help in understanding the mindset of each alternate view.
Helpful Discussion of Each Major View: The discussions of each view are extremely helpful. Careful arguments are presented for each view, and then answered. The authors show how most scholars have good reasons to reject the Gap theory today, but they point out the fascinating history of this position (which dates back to the seventeenth century). By the mid-twentieth century, Bernhard Ramm could say that the gap theory was “the standard interpretation throughout Fundamentalism” (p. 112). The Day-Age theory is dismissed as treating “Genesis 1 as though its purpose is to provide a detailed, scientifically verifiable model of cosmic origins,” which hardly seems in keeping with “its ancient context” (p. 126). The Framework theory doesn’t have “a single theological truth” dependent on its unique reading of the text (p. 134). The authors have an uneasy assessment of the Temple Inauguration theory. They seem to revel in the connections between Eden and the Temple, but think Walton’s particular view says too much without enough explicit textual warrant. I note the odd argument that it makes “more biblical sense” that the Israelites believed “God lived in heaven both before and after the creation week” (p. 145). This prevents us from seeing creation as God’s need for a physical habitat to rest in. But didn’t God create heaven in the creation week? The authors seem intrigued by John Sailhamer’s Historical Creation theory. They raise objections but imagine others finding satisfactory answers to them. The Twenty-Four Hour theory certainly is more clearly defended, but strong objections are also raised. A mediating view is also presented that may well be Rooker’s own view: that the 24 hour days are to be seen as literally 24-hour days, but used metaphorically in the text. This whole section is worth the price of the book – the debate is laid out and dispassionately treated in a clear manner that provides directions for further study in a variety of directions.
Excellent on the Age of the Earth: I also appreciated the discussion of the age of the earth. The authors point out that the young-earth/flood geology position has only recently become the predominant Evangelical view. Prior to The Genesis Flood by John Whitcomb and Henry Morris (1961), there had been over a hundred years of Evangelical Christians who held to an old earth. Some discussions of the history of the YEC position devolve into an all-out mockery of the YEC position. This book is honest about the history (and the large role played by George McCready Price, a Seventh Day Adventist and geologist), but does not smear the YEC position with “guilt-by-association.” The major arguments put forth in Whitcomb and Morris’ book continue to be widely repeated today, but many of them have been forsaken by modern YEC proponents: the water-vapor canopy, a “small universe” (to allow for distant starlight), the Fall causing the second law of thermodynamics (entropy), and even the human and dinosaur footprints in the Paluxy River (p. 196). The scientific arguments for a young earth are actually quite tenuous. On the flip side, the scientific arguments for an old earth seem quite strong. Having studied this issue in some depth previously, I still found new arguments and considerations presented here. The authors also quote YEC authors who are also honest about the weakness of the scientific evidence. As an example, John Morris (Henry Morris’ son and successor) has admitted “he knows of no scientist who has embraced a young earth on the basis of the empirical evidence alone” (p. 198). The Biblical case for a young earth, in contrast, is quite strong. Even though the genealogies in Scripture are by no means air-tight nor intended to be strictly chronological, “we still have the impression… that not an enormous amount of time has passed since the beginning of creation” (p. 176). The authors conclude on this matter: “The conclusion must be that, though a cursory reading of Scripture would seem to indicate a recent creation, the preponderance of empirical evidence seems to indicate otherwise” (p. 224).
Conservative yet Open on the Effects of the Fall: The book does draw hard and fast lines, and one of them is the historicity of Adam and Eve. This is ultimately a matter of “biblical authority” (p. 242), and it becomes a “litmus test” for Christians who would want to advocate some evolutionary position (p. 378). The question of the Fall and its impact is perhaps the most important question that divides the OEC and YEC views. They see the Fall as the historical moment of Original Sin, yet animal death before the Fall and the Fall’s impact on the natural creation are more open to reconsideration. The “notion of animal death existing prior to Adam’s fall does not appear to be, theologically speaking, an insurmountable problem” (p. 261). On the Fall’s impact on creation: “YEC proponents seem to be dogmatic about a position which, upon closer examination, appears to be more speculative than they have been willing to admit” (p. 269-270).
Critical of Evolution: As an eager reader of the book, I was challenged by this section, perhaps the most. The discussion on evolution will not encourage any simplistic acceptance of evolution. The authors’ introduce many of the problems to the standard Darwinian model that have been raised of late. Intelligent design is also carefully explained. More space could be given to scientific responses to these new challenges, perhaps, but the section does a good job pointing out the questions which still surround the mechanics of evolution. As for Christians wanting to embrace some sort of evolutionary model (not based on naturalistic Darwinian assumptions), the authors present three essential points that must be maintained:
The uniqueness of the human race to possess and reflect the divine image.
The unity of the human race.
The historicity of the original couple and their disobedience. (p. 378)
Assessment
This book will prove to be helpful for those who want to survey the state of this debate in Evangelicalism today. The authors don’t sugarcoat the controversy and are at times painfully honest. They bring a wealth of research together, surveying the historical background to the controversy and marshal an impressive array of scientific arguments for and against each major position. Some may not appreciate how certain positions are embraced tentatively. Yet others will see this as a strength. Some will fault the authors for going too far, others will scoff at some of the attention drawn to what they consider obscure arguments for a young earth. The book will challenge those pushing the envelope and vying for unflinching acceptance of evolution in all its forms. It will also challenge those who pick and choose among the scientific studies – cherry picking anything that supports their YEC position and ignoring the rest. Above all, the book brings us back to the Bible and the text itself – what exactly does it affirm and how should that shape our consideration of these questions.
Ultimately this book calls for greater unity and charity in this debate. It is precisely here that this book is most needed. YEC proponents too often come across as abrasive, and their arguments seem to lack “tentativeness” or humility. OEC apologists can easily get caught up in the intramural debate and continue the caustic harsh tone. All of this is not only off-putting, but unhelpful. This book presents an alternative and a possible step forward. I trust it will make a contribution toward more light and less heat on this perennially thorny issue. I highly recommend it.
About the Authors: Kenneth D. Keathley (PhD, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary) is professor of theology and director of the L. Russ Bush Center for Faith and Culture at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He was previously professor of theology at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary. Keathley is also the author of Salvation and Soverignty: A Molinist Approach.
Mark F. Rooker (PhD, Brandeis University) is professor of Old Testament and Hebrew at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. He has previously taught at Moscow Theological Seminary, Criswell College, And Dallas Theological Seminary. Rooker is Author of several books on Old Testament and Hebrew language topics.
Today among conservative evangelicals there is a concerted effort to defend the “biblical” position that the earth is young. Growing up in fundamentalist Baptist circles, I like many others, simply assumed this was the Bible’s clear teaching. I also assumed that this was the historic position of the church.
There are plenty of good arguments for young earth creationism (YEC) as it is known today. These arguments have persuaded a majority of evangelicals that this is the Bible’s teaching and the position to stand for.
But has support for a young-earth position always been this widespread? Judging from the last 200 years, the answer appears to be a decided no. Today, that support is weakening and authors Kenneth D. Keathley and Mark F. Rooker have recently given us a book to help evangelical Christians sort through this question and the wider creation-evolution controversy. In their book, 40 Questions about Creation and Evolution, Keathley and Rooker point out that the young earth position took center stage only in the last 50 years.
Before I provide an excerpt with their comments, I do want to speak briefly about this helpful book. I appreciate the openness each author has in carefully laying out the evidence (good and bad) for the various positions that evangelicals hold. One of the authors favors young earth creationism, and another leans toward the old earth view. But both take pains to speak charitably of the other positions and honestly about the difficulties of his own view. Their irenic candor and careful grappling with the major positions, is what makes this book such a joy to read. A full review of this book will come later, but for now, I wanted to offer this excerpt for your reading and possible discussion.
Here is an excerpt related to the origins of today’s young-earth creationism. I should note that unlike some other works which point out the history behind the YEC position, this book does not malign that view and in pointing out the history it does, is not using the “guilt by association” tactic either.
The Rise of Young-Earth Creationism
As we noted earlier, most Christians, including evangelicals, accepted the view that the universe was millions and perhaps billions of years old. [My comment: he is speaking of Christians in the 18th and 19th Centuries.] This is true up through the first half of the twentieth century. R.A. Torrey (1856-1928), who helped to found both Moody Bible Institute and Biola University and who edited a series of books called The Fundamentals (from which we get the term “fundamentalist”), held to the gap theory. Even William Jennings Bryan, of the Scopes Monkey Trials fame, held to a day-age interpretation of Genesis 1.
Two of the most ardent anti-evolutionists of the twentieth century were W.B. Riley (1861-1947) and Harry Rimmer (1890-1952). Riley, editor of The Christian Fundamentalist and president of the Anti-Evolution League of America, held to the day-age position. Riley insisted that there was not “an intelligent fundamentalist who claims that the earth was made six thousand years ago: and the Bible never taught any such thing.” Rimmer, a self-educated layman and apologist known for his debating skills, held to the gap theory. In a celebrated series of debates, the two men argued for their respective positions with Rimmer generally considered to have been the victor.
Until 1960, the view that the proper interpretation of Genesis requires that the earth be less than 10,000 years old was advocated almost exclusively by George McCready Price, an apologist for Seventh-Day Adventists. Seventh-Day Adventists believe that the writings of their denomination’s founder, Ellen G. White, are divinely inspired and are to be treated as Scripture. White claimed she received a vision in which God carried her back to the original week of creation. There, she said, God showed her that the original week was seven days like any other week. Price worked tirelessly to defend White’s position as the only view that did not compromise biblical authority.
In 1961, John Whitcomb (1924-) and Henry Morris (1918-2006) published The Genesis Flood, which has sold over 300,000 copies and launched the modern creationist movement. Whitcomb and Morris argued that Ussher’s approach to determining the age of the universe was generally sound and that he universe must be less than 10,000 years old. Combining flood geology with the mature creation hypothesis, The Genesis Flood presented a compelling case for young-earth creationism. It would be difficult to exaggerate this book’s impact in shaping evangelical attitudes toward the question of the age of the earth. In many circles, adherence to a young earth is a point of orthodoxy. (p. 187-188)
When I first learned this, I was amazed. It freed me to rethink the matter from a new light. If good Christian leaders like R.A. Torrey, B.B. Warfield and the like could uphold direct creationism yet allow for an old earth, perhaps the matter is not such a do-or-die point. This doesn’t speak to the acceptance of evolution or a rejection of a historical Adam. The book’s authors do draw some clear lines in the sand, but when it comes to the age of the universe, that is a matter on which they agree to charitably disagree. May more of us follow this approach to the controversy. The age of the earth need not be a slippery slope, and good Christians are found on both sides of this debate.
A professionally produced documentary that celebrates God’s creation is coming soon to a theater near you. Monday, March 19, in select theaters, “The Riot and the Dance,” a film featuring Dr. Gordon Wilson, debuts. Wilson is a Christian biology professor and author of a biology textbook with the same name. He is also brother of the well-known Reformed pastor and author, Douglas Wilson, whose son N.D. Wilson directs this film.
