Dr. Bernard Northrup Articles

One of the most qualified advocates of the Young Biosphere Creation view (also known as Two Stage Biblical Creation view) was Bernard Northrup. Much of his scholarly writing is now available online courtesy of Encyclopedia of Creation Science wiki.

http://www.creationwiki.org/Biblical_geology_-_Dr._Bernard_Northrup

“Dr. Bernard Northrup, 1925-2008, was a scholar of the Old Testament and Semitic languages with a ThD from Dallas Theological Seminary. He was on the faculties of Dallas Bible College (1953–1959), San Francisco Baptist Theological Seminary (1959–1972), Baptist Bible Seminary (1972–1978), Central Baptist Seminary, Minneapolis, Minnesota (1978–1985), and Shasta Bible College (1985–2005). In addition to teaching, Dr. Northrup also advised Bible translators working with Bibles International and Baptist Mid-Missions, checking work done by pastors in 17 tribal languages in India, the Philippines, and Africa.”

He said of himself in 2001, ‘I am a Christian Hebraist [Hebrew language scholar] who has studied the Tanakh [entire Hebrew Bible – Law, Prophets, and Writings] for nearly fifty years. I have taught it in the Hebrew, Aramaic, and English languages to many young men who were preparing to serve the Eternal.’ His personal interests included Biblical creationism and geology; he wrote extensively on these subjects, the Old Testament, and living as a Christian…”

See under “Articles on Creationism”

SOME QUESTIONABLE CREATIONIST AXIOMS REEXAMINED

Here are a few paragraphs of the 10 page document

“…Most creationists do not realize that they are contradicting Genesis 1: 1 by holding that earth was created before the sun. They hold that Earth was created either in Genesis 1 : 1 or in 1 : 1-3, while they interpret Genesis 1 : 14-19 as saying that the sun and moon were created on the fourth 24 hour day of creation. This “axiom” actually produces an apparent, man made contradiction in Genesis 1 itself that should be so obvious as to render the position untenable. The conclusion that the solar system comes into existence in Genesis 1:14-19 absolutely contradicts Genesis 1 : 1-5 and the revelational material which directly follows. First of all, Genesis 1 : 1 is the only place in the text of Genesis one which in any way discusses the origin of planet earth. The first verse says: “In beginning [there is no article) God created the heavens [a dual noun in Hebrew) and the earth.” The translator must recognize that the compound direct objects of the verb must be considered as coming into existence together in some way. And it is crucial to note that from Genesis 1:1 onward in the chapter, earth clearly exists. Note that in verse 2 earth not only exists but already has been covered by a universal sea and shrouded in darkness. This perfectly harmonizes with the Creator’s own description to Job of the earth’s creation in Job 38:1-9.

Earth most certainly was not created later in Genesis 1 for its rotation on its axis before a giant, distant mass which is a single, distant point, light source is required by the context. It is earth’s rotation before this body in the heavens which produced the first solar day in verses 3-5. (Most creationists unwisely insist that these are “24 hour days,” an reverse extrapolation of earth’s present rotational speed into the creation week! But this assumption is axiomatic and is not specifically revealed in the text. (Shades of uniformitarianism)! What can be proven is that the rotation of the earth before a heavenly body, remarkably like the sun if not the sun itself, produced the solar days of the chapter). Therefore it should be logical to conclude from the statement of Genesis 1:1 and the evidence of the six solar days in that chapter that the solar system and possibly the entire universe had to come into existence at the same time. Is that confirmed or denied by the context? These thoughts on the subject seem to me to be worth consideration. Earth must exist for it to rotate before an existing light source. Earth’s creation can only be described as taking place in Genesis 1 :1….

The conclusion that the sun was not created until after the creation of plant life produces another problem. Without the heat of the sun, even though that undoubtedly was widely diffused by the canopy, the seas of Genesis 1 :2·9 would have been ice. Otherwise one must postulate some other source of heat. The same Is true of the plants which were placed on the continent or at least in the garden on the third solar day of creation. Plant life would have been Impossible unless the creationist, in order to defend his position, becomes the Creator for that day. Does not plant life require the sun to warm the soil and to produce photosynthesis?

The setting of the “lights in the atmospheric heavens” speaks of the giving of governmental responsibility rather than physical placement. Another phrase by which the English reader easily is stumbled In trying to understand the events described as occurring on the fourth solar day is found in Genesis 1 :17. “And God set them (the two great lights) in the expanse of the atmospheric heavens to give light upon the earth.” The Hebrew verb which is translated “set” is the progressive form of the verb nathan. To the English reader this implies the act of moving an object and of placing it in a new location. However, the verb nathan is used in contexts of appointment to rulers hip in quite a different way. Its use in Genesis 41 :41 is very suggestive, and indeed, instructive. There Pharaoh says to Joseph: “See, I do appoint you over all of the land of Egypt.” That meaning is exceedingly appropriate here in Genesis 1 : 17. “Then God appointed them … in the expanse of the atmospheric heavens to give light upon the earth.” …

Read/download the full article: http://www.creationicc.org/1994_papers/1994_Part39.pdf

Dr. Ben Carson’s Speech

Dr. Ben Carson (famous surgeon and since 2017 the United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development) affirmed his belief in creation as taught in Genesis chapter 1. He specified that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1), but this was an unspecified amount of time prior to the creation days 1-6. This view is what we web call “Young Biosphere Creation model” (or Two Stage Creation). Dr. Carson summarizes this view of creationism in a speech posted on YouTube Feb, 2013. Note especially his comments beginning at minute 19:30.

Halley’s Bible Handbook

It was brought to our attention that the later edition of Halley’s Bible Handbook (which was quoted on this site under “Online Resources”) was changed in the Fourth Day section. However, editions 1-24 affirm a Young Biosphere perspective. Here is the original text:

Fourth Day 1:14-19

Sun, Moon, and Stars. They must have been created ‘in the beginning.’ On the ‘first day’ their light must have penetrated the earth’s mists (Gen.1:3), while they themselves were not visible. But now, due to the lessened density of the clouds, as a result of further cooling of the earth [and intervention of the Creator] they became visible on earth. Seasons came when the earth’s surface ceased to receive heat from within, and became dependent on the Sun as its only source of heat.

Bracketed phrase added – JBW

The page under Online Resources has been changed to this original edition.

The Bleeding World of Noah’s Flood

Attached pictures illustrates my current treatise called, “The Bleeding World of Noah’s Flood.”  The fountains of the great deep (Genesis 7:11) were not water fountains at all, but lava fountains, volcanoes, igneous intrusions worldwide, a perfect lithosphere broken into tectonic plates all by a super huge asteroid impact of “Goldilocks” size about 5000 years ago. Anyone who wants to read the treatise (25 pages) just request it and I will send it by email.
– Gorman Gray

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

William Kelly: An Older Universe

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons,[f] and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17 And God set them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. Genesis 1 (NKJV)

The Young Universe/Earth model advocates consider those who don’t interpret Genesis 1:14,15 to be an ex nihilo creation to have a deficient concern for the biblical text. This would also imply that the YBC belief in an undated universe indicates a less fundamental view of biblical doctrine. But Bible Truth Publishers is the vehicle of conservative Brethren writers from decades past. Note this quotation from William Kelly that Day Four describes the purposing of the solar heavens instead of their initial creation out of nothing:

Then we are told [Gen. 1: that “God made,” not created, “the two great lights.” The language is never varied without purpose. Rosenmüller the younger was an admirable Hebraist, and certainly free enough in his handling of scripture; yet he has no hesitation in his discussion of this question formally, but insists that the genuine force of the construction is not “fiant luminaria” (i.e., let lights be made), but “inserviant in expanso coelorum”, i.e., serve in the expanse of the heavens). He compares he singular with the plural of the Hebrew verb for being, and deduces the inference that the language can only express the determination of the luminaries to some fixed uses for the world, and not to their production. (Kelly, William. In The Beginning – and the Adamic Earth, 1891, reprint. 1970, Bible Truth Publishers, pp. 62-63.)

Astronomy’s Indications of an Older Universe

Christian apologist, Frank Turek, discuses the origin of the universe and includes this observation by astronomers:
“Robert Jastrow suggested the same when he ended his book God and the Astronomers with this classic line:  ‘For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.’”
Excerpted from Turek’s book, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (p. 84)
https://crossexamined.org/god-and-the-astronomers/
Gorman Gray has addressed this issue in The Age of the Universe: What are the Biblical Limits (p. 20,21).
A MAJOR SCIENTIFIC PROBLEM FOR CREATIONISTS
Dr. Duane Gish has authored a book entitled Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics. Dr. John Morris has published The Young Earth. Neither publication addresses the question of the speed of light and the magnitude of the universe. When asked, separately, why they did not pursue that topic, these well-known authors answered almost identically. Both simply asserted that they did not want to get into that subject. Explanations attempted by other writers leave thinking people uneasy. A large segment of creationists interpret Genesis as limiting the age of the universe to a maximum of 10,000 years. And yet galaxies exist whose light requires millions, even billions of years to travel to earth. How can this be?
The question begs for an answer.
So far, no one has suggested a satisfactory response to this problem. Despite various attempts, doubts persist that this issue has been resolved. Barry Setterfield has proposed that light velocity has changed from near infinity at the original creation to the presently measured rate. His theory thrived for a while among creationists, then was less popular but is still within consideration. Dr. Russell Humphreys, creationist physicist, has offered an attempt, and because it has largely replaced the previous unsatisfactory answers in popularity, chapter 7 [in The Age of the Universe] will offer a more elaborate critique of his idea. Dr. Humphreys, like Setterfield, tackles the problem head-on, but both may be leading us down a dangerous, “snowbound” trail. Mistaken basic ideas followed by ever so perfect logic necessarily lead to a mistaken conclusion….
Creationists have a serious problem. Avoidance of the subject by some of the top leadership, a lack of consensus everywhere, and quick response to any glimmer of hope (such as the current interest in relativity or the changing speed of light) is a tacit admission that the answer has eluded us. Young-universe creationists are dogged by an unresolved problem.
…Creationists are trying to make the Bible say what it does not say in the same way that theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists are trying to make the rocks say what they do not say. …Whether promoting uniformitarian geology or a mandatory young universe, we are asking our listeners to believe something for which there is neither biblical nor scientific proof in either case. Arguing from an inaccurate factual or biblical base—disaster is assured.
In taking the undefined-age-of-the-universe position, no concession is made to popular scientific opinions regarding the age of the cosmos or world geology. Acceptance of Flood geology leaves one an outcast to evolutionists and rejection of a mandatory young universe leaves one an outcast among many creationists, hardly evidence of yielding to intellectual pressure.…The straightforward Bible interpretation offered here solves all major problems by keeping us out of dangerous territory, namely, a universe required to be young and a fossil record required to be old. It is a simple, biblical solution for both errors, unpopular to both camps.

The Context of Dinosaurs

Genesis Apologetics has posted a 20 minute video on YouTube entitled: Does the Bible (Job 40) Describe a Sauropod Dinosaur (Behemoth)? It gives an informative summary of the amazing design of these animals and convincing evidence for the global Genesis Flood.  Young Earth Creationism (as represented in this video) and Young Biosphere Creationism (as advocated on this web site) hold in common this belief in the way dinosaurs relate to Scripture and the fossil record.