Is OEC Too Complex To Be True?

Someone said to me that the Old Earth model is too complex to be true. He said that The Bible was written so even a child could understand it and that you shouldn’t have to look at a bunch of other places in The Bible ((referencing to the other creation accounts)) to know what Genesis 1 is clearly teaching. He said that the localized flood model was even less clear from a plain reading of the text.

If you go that way, then let's just give the Greek New Testament and the Hebrew Tanakh to the kid and let them figure it out. It was written so they could understand it, right?

There is way more to interpreting the Bible than *read english version*, *draw on own experiences*, *tell people what you think the plain meaning is*.

Take the GNT - when Jesus says "It is done" the greek for that has much more information than "It is done (/finished..whatever) Tetelestai is in the perfect tense. It is done implies an ongoing benefit. things like that you don't get from the English. Also, if you study the history of the time you can soak in the original author/audience's prior knowledge instead of putting our prior knowledge/understandings onto the text - usually resulting in eisegesis rather than exegesis.

Moreover, complexity has no bearing on truth. If one is trying to use Occam's Razor, he needs to understand that the simplest answer must include ALL the evidence no matter how much evidence there is or how more complex the answer becomes due to the additional evidence.

Let's not forget that not all children can understand the salvation story- especially as you get younger and younger or less-developed. I'd like to know if he draws a specific line on the age or cognitive development level for a "child" understanding scripture. If so, then for his interpretation of Matthew 18:2-4, he will have to appeal to something else, for example; other scripture or nature, just like we OECs do. :)

Moreover, Peter didn't seem to think that everything in the Bible was written so that children could understand it. He specifically mentioned that there were things in Paul's epistles that were hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15-16).


  1. Replies
    1. OEC is an acronym. It stands for "Old Earth Creationism". Old Earth Creationists believe, basically, that the "days" in Genesis 1 are longer than 24 hours. We also agree that science gives an accurate estimate of the age of the universe. We're different from Theistic Evolutionists in that we do not believe that Darwin's theory of macro evolution is true. We don't think God used evolution to bring about life. We also believe that Genesis chapters 1-11 are historical events, and aren't allegories (fictional stories used by God to demonstrate a spiritual teaching). We affirm, like young earth creationists, that Genesis 1-11 is history (the events actually happened) and also that God specially created individual species on the planet (rather than guiding an evolutionary process).

      Famous old earthers would include people like Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, William Lane Craig, Lee Strobel, Frank Turek, Norman Geisler, and Sean McDowell. Famous young earth creationists would be people like Ken Ham, Kent Hovind and Josh McDowell.

      Famous Theistic Evolutionists would be people like Francis Collins, and Dinesh D'souza.


Post a Comment