Journal: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal
Volume: DBSJ 14:1 (NA 2009)
Article: A Review Article Coming To Grips With Genesis: Biblical Authority And The Age Of The Earth
Author: Matthew A. Postiff

DBSJ 14 (2009) p. 109

A Review Article
Coming To Grips With Genesis: Biblical Authority And The Age Of The Earth

Matthew A. Postiff1

Coming to Grips with Genesis: Biblical Authority and the Age of the Earth, edited by Terry Mortenson and Thane H. Ury. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2008. 478 pp. $16.99.

Coming to Grips with Genesis (CGWG) is a compendium of 14 articles written by young-earth creationists to defend the young earth and global flood interpretations of Genesis 1-11. The immediate goal of the editors is to present to evangelicals the “key historical, exegetical, and theological arguments demonstrating that the Bible teaches a recent and literal six-day creation and global catastrophic Flood” (p. 20). Ultimately the editors are trying to convince the reader that the age of the creation is of foundational importance for Christian doctrine—particularly for inerrancy, hermeneutics, the theology of death and evil, and the authority and perspicuity of Scripture (pp. 20, 433).

Historical Argument, Chapters 1-3

The first three chapters are siblings, each covering an era in the historical development of the interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis. James Mook opens this section by reviewing the writings of the church fathers. He believes that the Fathers are an important witness to consider as to the boundaries of correct interpretation but that they do not have the same authority as Scripture (pp. 24-25). Mook’s thesis is that the Fathers have been frequently misread as if they taught “deep time,” such as the day-age theory. He argues that a careful review of their writings demonstrates that no church father believed in deep time, and basically all of them believed in literal days, a young earth, and a global flood. He marshals evidence from numerous of their writings to prove his point and does not shy away from dealing with “problematic” Fathers such as Augustine.

Along the way, Mook makes two helpful points. First, though the Fathers came long before Darwin, they still had to deal with similar

DBSJ 14 (2009) p. 110

naturalistic and pagan presuppositions handed down from the Greek philosophers. Second, Mook pinpoints a possible reason for the misreading of the Fathers. Namely, many of their writings referred to the days of creation as if they pre-figured the length of history as seven thousand years. Thus each day, in their view, represented an age to come, and they saw the entirety of world history fitting within seven thousand years. Modern old-earth proponents incorrectly use this day-age formulation to suggest that the Fathers taught a...