Free The 10 Things You Should Know About the Creation vs. Evolution Debate by Ron Rhodes

commanded, and it stood firm" (verses 6,9; compare with
Genesis 1:3,6,9,14,20,24). Hebrews 11:3 likewise tells us that
"the universe was formed at God's command." No time interval lapsed between God's commanding words and creation leaping into existence. No slow process of evolution was involved
in any way.
    Genesis uses three Hebrew words to describe God's work of
creation. These are bard ("to create"), asah ("to make"), and yatsar ("to form"). God alone was responsible for creating, making,
and forming all that is in the universe. And He did so without
using preexisting materials. One moment, nothing existed
anywhere in the universe. The next moment, after God gave
the command, the universe leaped into existence. This is known
among theologians as creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing).
Instantaneously, God brought forth each "kind" of animal and
plant, and each then reproduced "after its kind."

    This reproduction "after its kind" is consistent with what
we learn in 1 Corinthians 15:39 (KJv): "All flesh is not the same
flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of man, another flesh of
beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds." The Hebrew
word for "kind" (min) is probably more flexible than our present "species,"49 but the word prohibits macroevolution-the idea
that one "kind" can evolve into another. Humans always reproduce as humans, dogs always reproduce as dogs, and cats always
reproduce as cats. Reproducing "after its kind" does, however,
allow for microevolution, involving minor changes within
species. As Duane Gish points out, "each kind was created with
sufficient genetic potential, or gene pool, to give rise to all the
varieties within that kind that have existed in the past and those
that are yet in existence today."50
    Young-earth creationism is the viewpoint that most consistently interprets the Genesis account in a plain, straightforward,
literal fashion. Sometimes young-earth creationists are caricatured
as wooden literalists, but this is an unfair charge. Young-earth
creationists do not hold to a wooden literalism-the kind that
interprets biblical figures of speech literally. They believe that what
is understood to be symbolic and what is taken literally should
be based on the biblical context itself. For example, Jesus used
obviously figurative parables to communicate spiritual truth.
    A literal approach to Scripture recognizes that the Bible
contains a variety of literary genres, and each has certain
peculiar characteristics that must be recognized in order to interpret the text properly. Biblical genres include history (Acts),
the dramatic epic (Job), poetry (Psalms), wise sayings (Proverbs), apocalyptic writings (Revelation), and many others. An
incorrect genre judgment will lead one far astray in interpreting
Scripture.

    Even though the Bible contains a variety of literary genres
and many figures of speech, the biblical authors most often
conveyed their ideas literally. And where they express their ideas
literally, the Bible expositor must explain these ideas literally.
Such an approach gives to each word the same basic meaning
it would have in normal, ordinary, customary usage in writing,
speaking, or thinking. Without such a method, communication between God and humankind is impossible.
    Young-earth creationists believe the text of Genesis indicates
that it is to be taken as a historical genre. They see no marks
of poetry or saga or myth in the Genesis account. They reject
the method of those who believe the text of Scripture must be
demythologized to make it fit with science. If we take such an
approach with Genesis, what is to prevent us from interpreting any other part of Scripture in the same way? What should
we do with the incarnation? The resurrection of Christ? Certainly
these do not make sense according to modern science, so should
they be demythologized? Young-earth creationists think not.
Better to take God at His word than to succumb