Creation Is the Crux

Time and again the Bible makes reference to God creating the world. Psalm 124: 8 is an example:

Our help is in the name of the LORD,
Who made heaven and earth.

It seems to me that denying creation immediately removes God from His throne. At best he would be co-equal with the universe, but not over it.

As Creator, God is clearly identified as transcendent. Moreover, His ownership of all is beyond dispute, since clearly what is made belongs to He who made it.

So is it any wonder that the very fact of creation has come under attack in the last couple hundred years? Think about it. If you want to cut down a tree, you don’t start with the top most branches. You slice away at the base, and if you really want to kill it, you go after the roots.

In essence this attack on creation is clear evidence that we are involved in a good-versus-evil struggle.

With no clear answer for the questions of life (why am I here, how do I know what is right and wrong, what will happen to me after, do I make a difference), those opposed to God nevertheless declared Him dead or irrelevant, and certainly not enthroned in the heavens. He is, to them, a fantasy, conjured up by poor fools too ignorant or to scared to read a science book.

But those opposed to God reach such conclusions without any basis. They dismiss God as Creator because they think life more likely came about because of spontaneous combustion and a few trillion years of positive change, though science says the universe has a propensity to destabilize, not organize.

Never mind that such belief leaves Mankind without a moral compass, without purpose, and without a destiny.

In other words, the silliness put out for people to believe in opposition to creation provides no answers to the key philosophical questions. Instead, by denying God His rightful place and stripping Man of the answers to the questions of life, this denial of creation creates a void.

No God on His throne. No meaning to life.

But voids, like vacuums, seem to fill of necessity. Of late, it seems that Man has stepped up to be his own god. After all, no one made him. He simply came about, then figured it out. And meaning? To be happy and die with the most toys.

Who would choose such a view of life over that provided by the Bible: that Man is made in the image of God, loved by Him to the point that He satisfied His own requirements, paying for our sin, to establish an unending kinship with us. We who know His Son as Savior have eternal significance and enduring security. Here and now we enjoy the love of our Creator who identifies Himself as our Father and we have the delight of community with our brothers and sisters of like mind. Add to that the hope we have of everlasting life in His presence.

Two views. On the one hand, belief that we came from nothing, with no purpose, and we’re going nowhere. On the other, the belief that we have been created for communion, assigned a mission, and will live forever. The two worldviews are stark, stark contrasts.

Published in: on January 30, 2009 at 12:56 pm  Comments (15)  
Tags: , ,


  1. So true! I always stand amazed at someone who believes there is no God. It seems to defy all reason.


  2. Great post =]
    “I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how he could look up into the heavens and say there is no God.”

    ~Abraham Lincoln


  3. creationism has come under attack because there is no scientific evidence for it! There is, however, overwhelming evidence for evolution. If you care to educate yourself on the matter, here is a good place to start:


  4. Ira364,

    Evolution does not displace God as creator. The two can coexist.


  5. Very well put Rebecca 🙂 As far as evolution and God coexisting, not sure how that would work. In order for a species to evolve (for the mutated gene to become dominate with each generation) there has to be death. But death did not come into the world until Adam and Eve chose to eat of the tree and thus brought death into the world.
    Also, there is no evidence of one species changing into another. There are changes within a species (dogs are a great example) but never have they crossed over to another species. Dogs have remained dogs, cats have remained cats, and humans have remained humans.


  6. “science says the universe has a propensity to destabilize, not organize.”

    This is a basic misunderstanding. Entropy increases in the total universe, but not at all scales. We were each once a single cell. We grew and became organised. We eat, drink and breathe. We put out a lot of by-products, mainly heat. This increases the entropy (lack of organisation) of the universe, but only in general and on the large scale. In the long run we all die and blend in to the heat death of the universe. If you choose your scale of time or place you will find plenty of organisation. The universe is not just a single raw clunky story running down like an old clock. It’s more fun than that.


  7. Morgan–

    What I meant by that is, regarding Genesis and creation, I believe it to be true, though possibly not the whole truth. Meaning, God could have started Genesis by saying, “I came up with this idea, called an atom, which has a bunch of smaller particles inside it, and oh why the way, did you know what you perceive as being solid is mostly just…space?”


    God didn’t start the Bible that way, because He wasn’t trying to write “The Mechanics of the Universe”. His was writing to us humans so we would understand our fall, our propensity toward sin, and most importantly, to tell us He has a plan to reconcile us with Him. (And I will put enmity between you (the serpent) and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel. Genesis 3:15)

    Perhaps the beginning of Genesis is a very dumbed down explanation of the big bang. Perhaps the universe is multi-dimensional. When we were with God, we were in one “dimension” and the moment Eve ate the fruit the floor of that “dimension” became glass and we fell through into this dimension.

    As humans, I don’t know that we can fully interpret or understand the Bible (i.e., every little nuance of Genesis), just as we cannot fully understand God. But, we CAN learn about God through the Word, because God speaks through it. And, the Bible contains everything we need to know to make a successful journey through this life and into the next.

    I realize, these thoughts are kind of “weird”, but…I’m just speculating. 🙂


  8. Good discussion.

    Ken, the fact that there isn’t sustained organization is the point. Evolution seems to require a sustained movement from disorder to order. Otherwise, why wouldn’t there be evidence of degenerate species as well?

    Morgan, your point about death is the most compelling, I think. Death was not originally a part of the Garden of Eden, yet clearly there were animals of all sorts. The only way around this is to read Gen. 2 and 3 as if they were not history and there’s no reason to do so.

    Jessica, I do agree that the Genesis account is not a scientific treatise and we shouldn’t make it out to be so. But I am surprised at the number of Christians who think that the scientific data has to rule out the creation account. As if God couldn’t make a mountain, with all the earmarks of being ancient, though it was only minutes old.

    If God made a tree by speaking it into being, would it not have rings, as if it had existed for years and years? It’s the old “did Adam have a belly button” joke. Why wouldn’t he? He was also, presumable, a full grown man with a mature set of teeth. Though one would think he must have lost his baby teeth somewhere along the line, that would not be true because he never had them.

    In other words, if a person believes God can create mountains, it negates the idea that we can actually figure out from the mountain, how old it is.

    Brandon, RHP, thanks for your feedback. Always appreciated.



  9. Might I share an organization that has helped me more than I can express to integrate a very grounded faith in Christianity AND a trust in empirical science? It’s called Reasons To Believe at They don’t get a lot of press and sometimes get some negative press by people who have been misinformed, but they are absolutely solid in combining both worldviews into an integrated and balanced whole.

    My knowledge of the Science – Religion debate came mostly through the writings of this organization. This allows me to refute lra364 in comment #3 above. There most certainly IS a lot of evidence for special creation. There is NOT however a lot of evidence for a creation that happened over a few days.

    One of the basic problems in this debate (and there are many) is the fact that there are several competing views that are all essentially creationist yet only the literal days version from ICR, The Institute for Creation Research, and its founder Henry Morris is well known. This makes for an easy straw-man argument on the part of evolutionists and the larger public is none the wiser. But their views do NOT stand up to scientific scrutiny. It’s time people understood that there are other creationist views and my support goes to Reasons To Believe. If you’re serious about integrating your faith and science give them a try.


  10. Readers might also visit “Evidence for God from Science” at


  11. Rebecca, good points. I agree, God can do anything he wants. If he wanted to create a world with the snap of his fingers, he could. However, a God who snapped his fingers and created a world where dinosaur fossils were already buried, doesn’t seem to jive with the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible doesn’t seem one who would send people on wild goose chases, making us think dinosaurs existed when in fact they did not…that sort of takes some of the meaning out of life. Imagine if you were a Christian and had spent your whole life researching dinosaurs, and when you got to heaven, God said, “ha ha, gotcha, was that some joke or what?” So, that’s my problem the “world is only 6,000 years old” argument. Sure God could do it if he wanted, but would that be consistent with his character?

    Daniel, thanks for sharing those links. I’ll check them out!


  12. Daniel, thanks for passing along those links. I agree that a lot of people don’t know what options are out there that accommodate both science and creation.

    Jessica, that’s what I believe about dinosaurs. Not that God pranked us into thinking there were dinosaurs when there weren’t. But there are things in the earth’s past that we weren’t there to witness or explain, so I think it’s a little presumptuous of Man to state categorically how things went down. Sure I think we can study and postulate, but I think all of our study has to square with what we know from the Bible.

    Whatever else Genesis has to say about the origins of the universe, one thing must be central—that God brought it all into being, that He is transcendent as the Creator, that He is pre-existent. Well, I guess that’s actually three things. 😉



  13. You’re welcome. This is a discussion that’s close to my heart as you can probably tell.

    BTW, there are more places in the bible that talk about creation than just Genesis chapter 1. The RTB web site has a nice, exhaustive list.


  14. I’ve always felt that creationism is actually an anti-God belief system. It requires a God that is cruel, deceptive and not very competent.

    Cruel because God created nature in a way that is “Red in tooth and claw” as Tennyson put it. That can’t be a result of the Fall of Man because man couldn’t have made nature cruel. Only God could have done that. Effectively creationists believe that God kicked man out of the Garden and then effectively kicked the dogs, cats and other animals in the ribs as they left.

    Deceptive because God left a mountain of evidence making it look like evolution has taken place. If it hasn’t taken place, why is that evidence all around us?

    Not very competent because at least 99.9% of all species that ever lived on Earth are now extinct. Yet there are not massive, empty ecologican niches. So apparently God “over designed” nature by a factor of 1000! Engineers occasionally add two or even three times redundancy. Any engineer that would add 1000-times redundancy is not a competent engineer. (That’s just one of a huge number of ways in which God is necessarily not competent if creationism is true.)

    The bottom line: if you really LOVE God, don’t be a creationist.

    (Creationists really love the Bible instead of God.)


  15. […] God, The Bible In case you missed it, Randy C left a comment today to the January 30 post, Creation Is the Crux. In it he said I’ve always felt that creationism is actually an anti-God belief system. It […]


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: