I’m so thankful you’re covering the topic of creation. I grew up in a context where anything besides Ken Ham’s particular interpretation of Genesis was considered basically heretical and “compromising the Bible”. That led to so much unnecessary doubt in my life when I would read or see the evidence for an old universe. It wasn’t until I found Christian scholars like Hugh Ross, Walter Kaiser, Stephen Meyer, William Dembski, C. John Collins, John Sailhammer, etc. that I realized YEC wasn’t the only Biblically faithful position a Christian could take. It really breaks my heart to see kids wrestling with this non-essential issue and walking away from thinking Christianity can possibly be true because people like Ken Ham have told them it is his way or you’re doubting the Bible. I wish I could teach all the different Biblical views that affirm the essentials of the doctrine of creation at my church, but I’m afraid that would lead to issues because of our church’s ties with Ham and his influence. Yet, I desperately see that it needs to be addressed and discussed. Honestly, I lean old-earth - but all I want is what you are asking for Gavin - humility and reasonable open mindedness on a tertiary doctrine that concerns a topic that needs to be handled with care. Quite frankly - I don’t care if someone is Old Earth, Young Earth, or even Theistic Evolution - as long as they affirm God is the Creator, a historical Adam, a historical fall, and can show me that it is consistent with the text. I just wish we as the church would stop fighting over non-issues like the length of creation days and would instead work towards unity around the bedrock Christian doctrines which includes the gospel. Sorry for rambling - but again, I appreciate all the work you do towards that end which Christ desires!

The evolution debate was a huge issue for me, and while I currently don't affirm darwinism, I'm pretty open minded on this subject and I'm not too dogmatic about it.

Im loving your channel more with every new video. I recently posted a video about evolution and I’ve been saying this exact stuff for YEARS! I’d love to collaborate with you, God bless!

Thank you for pointing out that the conservatism of the 21st century is not necessarily the conservatism of the Church historically

The Office references are continually life giving

Gavin I'm sadly running out of content from you. I'm grateful to God that you decided to come and do ministry on KZfaq.

You helped change my mind about this. Now I know several people struggling with the same issue and I’m more equipped to engage them and help. Thank you!

Why am I weeping? Why do I feel so much peace and joy? So many Christians are going to re-find their faith through this. Would I be overstating this when saying that it the work of Satan to try to add to what the Bible says more than what God intended it to say. "Did God say..." In the garden and the wilderness, we see Satan misquoting scripture or using scripture to say something it is not, trying to create stumbling blocks to faith.

This is the third time you've released a video that's made me think "this is the most important video TU will ever release."

Gonna watch the whole video later, but it’s sad to me that-as with Trent Horn and Jimmy Akin’s videos on this topic-the starting point for concern is “what will the young people in college think if we’re young earth creationists” rather than “what is the best reading of the biblical text (irregardless of what Augustine thought)?” It seems to me like so much of the broader conversation on this topic is not driven by a desire to come to Genesis, free from our preconceived ideas of the world, in search of truth. Rather, it always seems to start with “it will be a stumbling block if we’re YEC.” No other controversial topic gets treated like this (sexuality, gender, abortion, alcohol, drugs, etc.). As a person in my twenties, I can tell you that what this young person wants to see is Christians who will follow the truth boldly, regardless of where it leads, and without concern about whether the truth will be alienating to some people. As always, love your videos Gavin. I’ve been wrestling with Catholicism for the past two years and your channel has been a lifeline for me. Looking forward to watching this video in its entirety.

My GOLD takeaway from this video: there was openness to non-literal interpretations of creation many centuries before Darwin. This blows the assertion that the openness comes about BECAUSE of Darwin (in other words, compromise), right out of the water! So thank you, so very much.

Dr. Ortlund, Thanks for the great content (as always)! The Creation question is so tough because it's thoroughly theological and scientific! You are an absolute legend for taking it on and starting this conversation. Whenever things feel hard, remember this quote from the philosopher: “I say dance, they say, ‘How high?'” - Michael Scott. God Bless you!

We have been blessed by so many good videos lately! Thank you Gavin!

A key factor in me picking up your book was the artwork, but the contents lived up to it. Thank you Dr. Ortlund!

I loved Retrieving Augustine's Doctrine of Creation. Really enjoyed the work that went into this video as well. It is amazing how Augustine focuses on so many important theological implications of God being Creator (especially creaturely contingency) that get left out when the age of the earth is the only conversation piece at the table. Thanks Gavin!

Can’t believe I missed this when you posted it. Incredible work, thank you Gavin!

This was great! The part about the Church Fathers and medieval theologians discussing animal death was new to me, almost a paradigm shift from what I assumed was the Christian way of thinking about death. I'm surprised you did not bring up Origen - I believe he uses even stronger language than Augustine when warning against a literalistic reading of Genesis 1.

Thank you for this video Dr. Ortlund, it was both timely and edifying, and is most appreciated.

This video as an answered prayer! You just got a new donnor :) Props from Portugal and God Bless!

You have to be one of the best voices in this debate that I have discovered in 20 years. Good work, and thank for the careful, respectful, measured approach. I am amazed at many of the comments on these videos that clearly show some people watching simply cannot hear what you are saying.

I'm sad to see so few likes here. I'm a Christian, a scientist, and theistic evolutionist - it would be awesome to see you and #inspiringphilosophy have a discussion on this!

I'm excited to watch this whole video soon. (just caught the beginning) But I thought you might be interested to look up Dr. Jay Wile's blog. He's a young-earth creationist who is very gracious towards Christians with differing views, and has even gotten some backlash from other YECs for insisting that belief in evolution or an old earth is not heretical. He came to his views through his study of science, not Scripture. Also, I really love the book The Edge of Evolution by Michael Behe, I'd recommend anyone check it out who likes to follow these kinds of debates. He does a deep dive into why our current understanding of evolution fails to explain the complexity of life. He doesn't arrive at any hard and fast conclusions about creation or the age of the earth, but the book raises tons of interesting questions.

Love that you're tackling this topic, thank you. Love the Office references maybe just a little more 😂

I think the issue is then saying then was there an actual fall? If there wasn't did we need Christ? was there an actual Christ? Is there an actual heaven and new earth? it seems it's all up for grabs when we can start picking and choosing what is meant to be literal

Thank you for this video. Though growing up in a Young Earth Creationism environment, my season of doubt/struggle that I experienced years ago was partially answered by mostly Old Earth Creationists. However, I still am very hesitant to express my warmness to OEC in my environment. As you imply, there is the idea in some of modern American Evangelicalism that anything besides YEC is a capitualation to the culture, putting science's authority over Scripture, not taking the Bible seriously, etc. Thank you for your input and humility with this topic and all of your videos.

Thank you very much for this video, brother!

I appreciate the tone you use in approaching this issue. My parents are YECs and sincere followers of Jesus. It pains me when other Christans mock YEC rather than having a conversation about it.

This is an issue that has been near to my heart for so long. I was raised as a young earth creationist and I would still identify as such now. When I was young I did have an overly conservative view, rejecting anyone who rejects YEC as a true Christian. The Lord has grown me past that, but that is coming from an outflow of grace, not logical understanding. I don't really understand how to square any other view with the text of Scripture. For example, you mention animal death before the fall. Genesis 1:30 explicitly says that for every beast of the earth, God gave green plants for food. How do you deal with that? If animals were actually eating other animals, why does it say otherwise? The problems get worse if you extend the logic. You can argue that a lion killing and eating an antelope can still be described as "good", but can that same lion kill a human? Before the fall, there was at least no human death, so how did that work? Were humans impervious to harm? Would animals supernaturally refuse kill humans, even if they might hurt them? By what evidence could we suggest a specific answer, rather than pure speculation? That's just one example, but there's at least four or five more like it. I have not found any satisfying answers to these questions. Every Christian I have talked to justifies their belief in a way that appears to place human knowledge above God. For example they will point to distant starlight and say "it's impossible for the Earth to be young, therefore the Bible can't be speaking literally here". This view especially doesn't make sense because the appearance of age is literally what is described in the text. Adam was created as an adult. So were the plants and animals. Any scientific method you used to determine the age of Adam one second after he was created would tell you he was an adult. Why is it "impossible" that the same properties would be applied to the rest of the natural world? The place this view takes you to seems to be very dangerous, it allows you to simply dismiss the Bible whenever it's inconvenient. Again, I recognize that there are many Christians that do *not* slide down the slippery slope into doctrinal error. What I'm missing is the reason why they don't. If you can use evidence from the natural world to dismiss Scripture, why can't you dismiss it entirely? For example biology tells us that resurrection from the dead is impossible. So therefore we should reject the bodily resurrection of Christ. Or we could say that social science tells us that prayer doesn't work, therefore the Bible is wrong when it says to pray. Or at least it's wrong in claiming the power of prayer, perhaps prayer is useful to us internally, but it cannot cause supernatural events. I have atheist friends that use this to reject the Bible outright. They say that there's no evidence of resurrection, or creation, and so if the Bible is wrong there, it must be wrong elsewhere (or more commonly, everywhere). However I have dug deeper, and every one of them would still refuse to become a Christian if resurrection and creation were proven true beyond reasonable doubt. They then go on to say that God is evil for allowing suffering, or slavery, or divorce, or polygamy, or instructing the Israelites to do battle against other nations. If God was objectively and measurably real, they would spit in His face and call Him evil. It seems to me that salvation is primarily a heart issue, not a rational one. In order to be saved, you must accept the resurrection of Christ, which is not a position that you can provide scientific evidence for. You can argue for it's *reasonableness*, which we should do, but you can't prove it. I completely understand Augustine's concern, we don't want to make a mockery of Christianity by believing obviously false things. But the central tenant, resurrection, is one such thing. And I haven't seen any evidence personally that the evidentiary problems are the true barriers to salvation. It sounds like I need to read your book and some of the other books that you recommended. In order for me to find peace about this, I would need to find answers to the problems created by dismissing literal creation (the animal death problem, as well as the others I did not mention). I would need to discover some "hard" metric that very clearly outlines when we can be confident that Scripture is not describing literal history, in a way that prevents a slippery slope to denying the resurrection or clear moral teachings. Do those answers exist? If so, I'd love to find them.

I appreciate your work on this. Augustine has become something of a father-figure for me over the years as I’ve devoured his writings. It was incredibly freeing to read your book and see that even “the great” Augustine wrestled with how to approach these opening chapters of Genesis. I was saved out of atheism, and, as a consequence, always viewed evolution as a bugbear to be avoided at all costs. Now, after reading your book (& others) I’m still just as unsure about how to understand Genesis, but evolution is no longer the boogeyman, as if to accept it is to reject Christ. I think Christians should approach this subject with humility and charity toward other views, not with anxiety and suspicion. God’s word is true, even if I don’t understand it; “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” Some other helpful books were Swamidass’s “The Genealogical Adam and Eve” and “Reformed Theology and Evolutionary Theory” by Gijsbert van den Brink.

Brother, thank you for this and all of your podcasts. I finf modern-day Evangelical thought to be entirely mind-numbing, heart-breaking, and soul-crushing, and it's been hard to find middle ground not for appeasement but to reject the polarization and instead come up with the Third Way of the Cross as a response to scholarship, ethics, culture, Etc. I don't always agree with your conclusions but I am immeasurably grateful to God that I found this channel. Peace to you, with all praise to our Lord Jesus.

I'm currently a second year student studying mechanical engineering and both as a part of this and due to my natural interests growing up, I have studied the sciences a moderate amount. One distinction that I make is between more practical studies, like magnetism and sound for example, which can be studied, tested, and verified directly, and those such as the gravitational mechanics between different galaxies or, more relevantly to this discussion, the dating methods and predictions of modern science about the age of fossils and the earth, which cannot be verified in the way that, say, the attraction of two magnets can be. This is not to say that I reject anything scientists say on issues I feel to be disputable, but that I find such claims to be a very uncertain foundation for basing our understanding of the world, or of the Bible in particular, off of. This is in part due to the fact that such theoretical science is often changing such in the case of "Dark Matter" which I just learned in my physics class, is a theoretical entity that for several decades has been thought to exist and influence large-scale gravitational mechanics but is now on the verge of being rejected by much of the scientific community due to newer data. I'm curious how you feel about the making of such distinctions between what I would tentatively term "practical vs. theoretical" science, and if you think it is valid for Christians to be skeptical of the claims of those who believe the earth is far older than what the Bible and many lesser-discussed discoveries of modern science suggest it actually is?

Thank you Gavin for this. As an LCMS member who grew up in the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, I grew up being taught that either evolution is true or Christianity is true. When I began seeing good evidence for evolution in school, it led to me eventually leaving the faith. I also had relatively little reason to believe in Christianity. Thankfully God brought me back to the faith largely through apologetics. Now I have been transformed by the Lord and my faith has been a thousand times stronger than it ever was before. I now intend to enter the seminary. However, I’ve met many people my age who have left the faith permanently largely due to this issue.

Thank you Gavin for this video. You focused really well on your main point that historic Christian views were more broad than in today’s polarized landscape. However, I do not feel that you provided a fair or even balanced view on the scientific evidence between evolutionists and creationists. I’m sure you’ve researched this already, but catastrophic perspective on natural history has a lot more credence than the modern uniformitarianism that drives much of the old earth timelines. By itself, that does not necessarily mean we have a young earth. But there are also many challenges to biological evolution such as irreducible complexity and the use of mutations to drive the evolutionary process, which is quite far fetched when you get down into the weeds. The reason I think the world has become so polarized on this topic (in part) is that there is so much new information out there that our historic brothers and sisters in Christ did not have access to, and there is overwhelming bias in the scientific community today on these natural sciences. I appreciate the broadened view for Christians to unite under, but I would respectfully caution against overstating the scientific evidence for the old earth / evolutionary theories, which on the outset either assumes that God does not exist or that there are no miraculous (non-natural) events throughout our history. God bless!

This is a great work. I appreciate it a lot. My education is in the natural sciences( Mathematics, chemistry, physics, geology, etc.) I teach in these subjects, and always try to impress upon the students the beauty and grace of God through them.

I noticed that you said Augustine struggled with the Genesis creation account because it conflicted with the “sophisticated” views of his day. But you didn’t mention what those sophisticated views were. Isn’t that because they would sound laughably inaccurate and unsophisticated today? Perhaps that should inspire some humility in us regarding the accuracy of today’s “sophisticated” ideas.

I've got to believe that the earliest readers of Genesis took it to mean literal 24 hours days as that is the only type of day they were aware of and it is difficult to see any other interpretation in the text that an ancient reader would come to. Augustine seems to be an exception to this and even he seemed only to the possibility rather than actually asserting such an interpretation.

I came to Christ as a Theistic Evolutionist but as I've matured I've drifted closer to a Young Earth view. Mostly this has been driven by my desire to possess a deeper commitment to scripture than to fallible science. There are some concerns I have for theistic evolution, I cannot see God creating anything through the death and destruction of animals, and the death of animals before the fall is impossible because classic historic christianity has always affirmed that humans and animals had a Covenantal relationship, and Adam was given a Covenantal headship over animal life that fell when he fell. I'm interested in the Meta-Historical fall that I've heard from certain evangelical theologians who've suggested that Adam's Fall could work backwards in time as well as forwards the same way Christ's Redemption works retroactively, but I need more evidence for it from scripture as I dislike the new perspectives which are entirely unconcerned with the actual loss of a Christian Theodicy that the Fall provides Christians. I think Evo-Creationists completely misunderstand the concern over whether the creation story could be allegorical, obviously it could be, but the fall, the origin of evil and the pauls texts on Jesus being a new Adam are more important than the exact number of hours it took God to create everything. Why Evolutionists stay on these tertiary issues and not the deeper issues is beyond me. Always appreciate your work Gavin.

Great Augustine quotes!

Gavin's video graphics game has really stepped up. We see you, Gavin!

When I was in high school, I was a pretty cage stage young earth creationist despite having an interest in and knowledge of science. It wasn't until I discovered Hugh Ross's videos here on YT that I gave a non-24 hour day interpretation a shot and discovered it beautifully harmonizes Scripture and science. I am now an old earth creationist, open to evolution as a possible method of creation God used.

Thanks for this great discussion. I enjoy studying creation and origins (from more people than just Ken Ham 😉). You bring up a lot of really good points that YECs should be aware of about historical positions on the issue. I still disagreed with Augustin on this as well as lots of other things. (I wonder how much better he could have been had he known either of the Biblical languages.) I personally find YEC scientific arguments convincing (both in geology and biology) and aside from that I haven’t really been able to find satisfying ways around the following theological issues: If there was animal death before the fall, would animal sacrifice for man’s sin be significant? (Gen 3:21) What would the difference be between animal sacrifice and plant sacrifice? (Gen 4:3-5) Why did God only declare plants as food to both man and beast? (Gen 1:29-30) Why were humans not originally permitted to eat meat? (Gen 9:2-4) Why was God concerned about the violence of “all flesh” rather than just human violence? (Gen 6:11-13) Also, judged by the logic given in Exodus 20:11, the Israelite workweek seems to be based on the historic fact of the creation week, rather than the literary creation account (as it is viewed in OEC) being based on the workweek.

Appreciate this Gavin. I share your concerns, find it difficult to discuss because people get so defensive

Also a video focusing on Adam and Eve in relation to Evolution and old earth topics

It's so great that you make humility the focus. We should have humility in our interpretations of scripture as well as our interpretation of science.

I’m a young earth creationist, but I don’t see it as a central doctrine, so I hope this comes across kindly and not rashly. However, I do find some of the common objections to a young earth quite poor. 1. *_The earth appears old._* Of course it does. Adam was created an adult (according to young earth creation), wasn’t he? Trees in the garden had rings (indicating wet and dry seasons), didn’t they? The earth being created with age seems irrelevant to the question. I get that fossils trapped in layers that appear old is a different (and trickier) problem, but the general objection “the earth appears old” just doesn’t work. 2. *_The light of stars is showing very far into the past._* I don’t get this one. According to young earth creation, God created light before the sun, moon, and stars, right? Why shouldn’t we see the phenomena of stars which are far younger than the light (which was created first) would make it appear? 3. *_People try to defend geocentrism._* It’s strange to me how often this is brought up in context of young earth creation. First, because it’s a different question entirely. Second, because the sun does revolve around the earth, and so does the earth revolve around the sun. It simply depends on your reference point for motion (per Einstein’s theory of relativity as I understand it).

I certainly agree none of us ought to approach this topic too dogmatically, we must ask the questions the text asks and I don't think Moses is questioning the age of the earth, however in terms of embracing evolution, how would you interpret Romans 8 where Paul says that Creation ITSELF is groaning, again I am not finalized in my own takes on these issues but Romans 8 makes it very difficult for me to see how Darwinian evolution and the Bible are reconcilable

Thank you for making this video and writing your book on Augustine’s doctrine of creation, as controversial of an issue as it might be! The diversity of thought among orthodox thinkers in the early church concerning the manner of creation is one of the most important facets of Patristics for the contemporary church to be aware of-thank you for using your channel to so graciously and tactfully shine a light on it!

Please do more Augustine videos!

Gavin is correct that the crucial aspect of the doctrine of creation, is creation ex nihilo. I hadn't actually realised this in the context of this debate until now. That said I think ranking towards the top is the doctrine that creation was originally good. This is really the crux of the YEC vs OEC vs TE debate on a theological level: the various intuitions of the different parties of what constitutes good directs how they approach the subject. I think a discussion of what a good universe would look like without an angelic or human fall would be fruitful here.

I think it might be the third or fourth time I've reheard this video just because how much it resonated with me. I really have to agree that in so many of the places I look I see the very problem Augustine went through. My parents are YECs and I actually was super into it and Dispensationalism likewise for a long time during my middle school years, I remember arguing on why evolution was wrong and stuff and hw many people dismissed any mention of Christ I'd say because of my views and importance I put on a young earth. Now like you've said many times I realize just how much I majored on the minors. Fast forward now and I realize just what a mistake I had done literally like Augustine said. Now I think it's been well over a two or three years now that I've actually opened up to the freedom of views of Creation. And just how much I was made to think that say views like YEC or dispensationalism were like the sole orthodox Christian view and only now liberal Christians and Catholics would espuse anything else. My parents still aren't happy much with my views though I've explained them a bit, admitally I still haven't come out as identifying as a Amillenialist or an Old earth creationist with openness to Evolution just merely mentioning other views makes them really uncomfy and worried, so pray for me there to be humble in my approach. On a slightly different note the timing of the video was perfect though cuz just before I had finished reading Augustine's confessions and had that thought of why did Augustine out of nowhere decide to focus so much on Genesis and this video really helped me appreciate the context for why he did. I really want to get your book Ortlund I'll see if maybe once I can go to college I can pick it up. Thanks so much for a lot of your work Gavin you and Jordan Cooper really helped me avoid going down the catholocism pipeline. Blessings from Puerto Rico.

Thank you, Brother

Awesome video, Gavin! Very helpful.

Good stuff. I sympathize with YEC's when they think this kind of interpretation is a slippery slope to denying miracles, the physical resurrection, and other supernatural elements. Although I'm not one myself I understand the concern.

This video is a God-send, thank you!

I recently found your channel. This is the 3rd video I've watched. First time commenting. The first video I watched....was on the Christianization of Scadenavia which was awesome. I love the accounts of how the gospel spread in Europe. It was a messy, wonderful, complicated process to say the least. As the Western World is relapsing into a sort of paganism, I find that if we can go back to study that time, it would be so beneficial to the church in how we move forward in our own time. Would love to see a video on your thoughts about that. In regard to this video, I think you incorrectly assume that YEC'ers aren't wrestlers with Genesis. Many of us studied the church fathers, and great thinkers throughout church history, just like you have, we just came to a YEC conclusion. We aren't nearly as rigid as you portray us to be. (all be it there are some, but to be fair there are theistic evolutionist and old earthers who came to their conclusions without much thought or research either.) If you and I were to go to Mt. Saint Helen's and used only the trusted scientific testing methods regarding when it happened. We'd get dates of hundreds of thousands to millions of years. We'd also see the geological features and based on modern assumptions believe the same very long timeline. However, you and I both know better. We have eye witness testimony and proof of this event happening in the 1980's. Just over 40 short years ago. We need to admit that saying "science says" isn't as secure as we modernist would like to believe. YEC'ers don't cut themselves off from great minds in the church. I love C.S. Lewis, "Mere Christianity" is one of the most important books I've ever read. I know he had a different view of Genesis than I do. But I no more cut myself off from him than you would Martin Lloyd Jones. I'd no more cut myself off from Augustine than you would Basil the Great. I'm not a Calvinist, but I certainly love many Calvinist teachers too. I'd love for you to have YEC guest on your channel. 3 men come to mind.....Dr. Jonathan Sarfati, Dr. Jason Lisle and Dr. Terry Mortenson. They've authored some excellent books on the Genesis issue, specifically from a YEC perspective. I appreciate your channel and the way you've wrestled with deep topics. Please keep the history videos coming!

Thank you so much for doing this video! I have been wrestling with this topic for a little while because I was stumbling upon people who I would say are orthodox Christians but hold to a non YEC view and I was puzzled by it (due to growing up thinking it was the “right” Christian view). I thought that people who said they were Christians but held to some sort of theistic evolution were “liberal.” Probably the majority of folks in my church hold to a YEC/Ken Hamm view. Evolution is viewed as being anti-Christian. I just appreciate your explanations and your humble attitude. I very much respect you and to hear you speak about this topic as you have brings relief and comfort. Would love another video about Augustine’s take on the fall and Adam and Eve. I am definitely going to get a copy of your book! God bless.

Great video as always! I'm so grateful that you are putting out videos on this topic. I know it takes guts to do so because there will be a lot of people who are offended just by the thought of evolution being true or the age of the earth being older than some thousand years. Stay strong and know that many others like me will find great relief and encouragement by hearing a person like you exploring different views on this topic. God bless you!

I grew up hearing YEC from my churches etc, and wanted to cling to it. But like you said, the evidence against it is so catastrophic that I would have had to believe God to be intentionally deceitful by making the universe *look* older for... some reason? Accepting Genesis 1-4 as non-literal, poetic descriptions of God's sovereignty is so much less of a stumbling block and I hope more churches can be respectful or this.

Would you consider doing more videos on Augustine?

That was interesting. What do you think about the rest of Genesis (the flood, the Tower of Babel, ....)?

Can you talk to a young earth creationist on this I'd like to see the two views go head to head with humility without the calls for heresy and not taking the Bible seriously. I'm yec myself but it's mainly because by sin came death and not by death came sin.

I am like the evangelical Christian that you talk about in the intro. And I am thrilled that you are putting so much thought and research into your triage videos. It's helping a lot to have you do all that work to help me become more informed and base my beliefs in Christian biblical thought. My parents went to bible school and had all the new earth creationist books and pamphlets to show us growing up. But I also went through public education and university and had the two contrary views. And I can say that there is so much more compelling evidence that contradicts the base Evolutionary theory. Even though men may try to remove God from Natural Science I've found plenty more questions that lead me to a Creator than firm evidence that contradicts His existence.

Yes! Please do the video on Adam and Eve!

Gavin, in your conversation about Augustine, you’re covering things we are in my church’s study of Genesis 1-12. The Ark and the Darkness are coming to theaters in late March. This will be seen by many Christians who look at creation in a very “binary” way. The way I’ve always understood it and how I was taught. Will you comment on this showing at some point?

I think my main concern (I'm not a strict 6-literal day, young earth guy) is that these views are entirely too dependent on current theories to shape the reading of Scripture, rather than the plain reading of Scripture. I don't know that most people through history would have thought to question a literal reading of Genesis. And if you're not doing a literal reading, at what point is it literal? Is the Flood not literal? Is Abraham not literal? Are the Jewish people in Egypt not literal? I get that Augustine was super cool with death before the fall, but it shouldn't be that easy to hand-wave that topic away. And the number of people who seem ready to throw Adam out with the bathwater is very concerning.

(I'm my opinion and demonstrable science) Thank you Gavin for your content! 😊

Gavin, love your work. This is probably the most troubling topic for me in where you are. I don't know how anyone can really see that the human eye could develop over eons through different species and blind random chance. Darwin's view of macroevolution is absolute nonsense when thought through properly. I understand why someone would maybe try to make it work (biologos) but we need to quit bowing the knee to "science" that is corrupted by funding and "peer review." If you think at a common sense level...evolution doesn't make sense. There are no observable and testable evidences for something changing kinds of animals. You just don't have it. For people that are growing weary of all the criticism and feeling like maybe they are dumb since most of the world disagrees...just look at modern evidences... molecular biology shows cells are remarkably complex at the base level. this couldn't be done naturally ex-nihilo. I do appreciate you being direct and letting us know where you stand. I also don't want people to fall away because of this (like you) but we don't need to apologize for rejecting darwinism. That being said, I'm pretty open to old earth...I just give NO quarter to darwinism. I believe it kills people and is the only let the atheist really has to stand on and it's absolutely a creation myth. James Tour would agree and anyone reading this should look into his origin of life videos.

As a YEC, I enjoyed this video very much, thanks Gavin. I just have one, very general point of constructive criticism, hopefully. The lack of any answers to any of the core claims YEC make (both scientific, and biblical), and general apparent lack of knowledge on the topic. It's as if Gavin actually only sat down to consider the old universe perspective and arguments for it. That's not how we can build any meaningful dialogue, I think. It is a good attempt, but it needs to go WAY deeper mr Gavin! For example, your remarks about cave stalagmites are trivial to our community, considering the amount of theories and data YEC have provided to explain how it could happen quickly (There is hard data for it), under specific circumstance (like the flood providing lots of water and minerals, and other theories). And what about all of the evidence for the universe being young? Like the supernovas, that have a 10,000 year life span but are still flying about with only theoretical explanations as far as we can see on the scientific side? Or the human footprints found in the 3 billion year old lava layers that scientists say "must've been left by an alien" or the supposedly long dead dinosaur era species still being found alive today (Latimeria). Same with the arguments like the light being created in transit, which is an argument I could never even understand. Even putting aside scientific explanations put forth by YEC astrophysicists... It's not in character of God to create an immature creation and wait for it to reach maturity and be useful to him in the slightest. That's not how he created Adam, was it? He did not create him a baby, right? And even if we dismiss the whole thing as a poem... When Jesus created hundreds of fish for hungry crowd to eat (that was literal, right?), they were not tadpoles, and Jesus didn't wait a season for them to mature and be edible. They were mature fish with a history of a full fish life in every cell of their being. I can't understand a reason why anyone would think God wouldn't create stars and their light with a history when creating them a safe distance from the Earth, when he says very specifically that he created them for us, humans, to look at and to use for measuring times and seasons. In short, Gavin's arguments for the old universe side are all low hanging fruit from our perspective, and he doesn't consider any of the YEC arguments, not even touching their top research and authorities with a stick. He says multiple times how the evidence for old universe, and even evolution (woah!) is "overwhelming", but he doesn't give any meaningful foundations for these claims other than appeals to authority, which all can be, obviously, counter-argumented by simply listing all of the YEC Christians, Fathers, leaders, and even scientists, including brilliant people like Newton, Pascal, Faraday, Townes etc. I'm also not sure why he was expecting to find all YEC Christians in the XX and XIX century, when evolution was developed and generally socially accepted long before that. In short, I don't think this is a way to guide us further in this dialogue. Doctor Gavin, vast majority of YECs that I know are not hardcore peoples you are afraid of, that go around spitting on scientific research and saying that if you believe the universe is old you are going to hell. Most of us are genuinely open to God creating the universe in whatever way he wants to. YEC is simply what we find most believable, considering the research and science behind it when compared to gaping holes in the evolutionary theory and timeline. Old universe has plenty of its own problems, and they do not start in Genesis, but in science. I recommend reading some scientific literature that suggests a younger universe, starting with classics like "Forbidden Archeology: The Hidden History of the Human Race" and then moving into more recent books, then perhaps reading some of the counters evolutionists have provided, and so on - just dive your teeth into the subject a little deeper to truly understand the depth of the discussion that's going on between us. mr Gavin, I can tell your intent was very good and I enjoyed the video a lot. But if you want to bite on this sandwich and be actually fair and representative of both sides in this dialogue, I suggest you either dig a lot deeper on BOTH sides, or invite an experienced YEC scientist who could give you our perspective and arguments so we can wrestle with theological, social and scientific implications of these positions fully and fairly.

This is great, and will come in handy in a formal debate I'm preparing for, I was a YEC for a LONG time, then was OEC, and for a while now I have been completely convinced by the evidence regarding evolution so I fall in the TE camp. Creation is quite a complex and nuanced topic, I appreciate the expansion in this video .

Immediately after the sentence quoted by Dr. Ortlund, Augustine states "the law of natural selection" 1400 years before Darwin in the City of God, Book 12, Chapter 4. "Of the Nature of Irrational and Lifeless Creatures, Which in Their Own Kind and Order Do Not Mar the Beauty of the Universe": "For things earthly were neither to be made equal to things heavenly, nor were they, though inferior, to be quite omitted from the universe. Since, then, in those situations where such things are appropriate, some perish to make way for others that are born in their room, and the less succumb to the greater, and the things that are overcome are transformed into the quality of those that have the mastery, this is the appointed order of things transitory. Of this order the beauty does not strike us, because by our mortal frailty we are so involved in a part of it, that we cannot perceive the whole, in which these fragments that offend us are harmonized with the most accurate fitness and beauty."

As CMI Creationists say, "In Augustine’s mind, God would have created all matter as well as the seminal ideas in the blink of an eye. The material expression of those ideas followed later. We have to combine his instant creation theory with his literal reading of other events in Genesis. Adding his belief that the world is about 8000 years old makes it extremely hard to call on him to support Darwinian evolution of any kind or deep time."

@14:33 and wow - to think one of my study bibles has quotes from Ambrose right next to quotes from Augustine!

“Part of what forms people’s beliefs is the historical context that they are in.” If we could keep that in mind. Thanks for the discussion.

What is your opinion on Cosmic temple view of Genesis 1? 😊😊😊

very interesting

My biggest hang up, when it comes to reconciling scientific dates for the origin of man, is the genealogies. I can readily affirm the possibilities of gaps in the genealogical record, but I must admit, that at a certain point it starts to seem strained to think that there could be _that many_ gaps. For instance, if you were to tell me that the Genealogies were about 50% complete, I'd have very little difficulty accepting that. But to say they are only 5% complete, is a lot harder for me to accept. I'd love to hear how others from an Old Earth perspective think through this.

Thanks for the great video. Wondering if aspects of Creation contribute to, or almost necessitate, His maximally great attributes. Does He require a world that invokes sacrifice, courage, selflessness, etc, even to the point of death, to definitively prove His maximal greatness?

Hey Gavin! Another great video. You, and your viewers in the comments (at least the one’s I saw) do an excellent job modeling humility and openness to other opinions. I appreciate it, I hope to grow in the same. I can’t help but wonder how the YEC argument of maturity in creation can’t help answer at least some of these objections / questions / evidences in science. When God made man, He made him fully mature - not an embryo that needed to be developed; same with Eve. Could it not logically follow that God did the same with the rest of His creation? Such that the appearance of age (millions of years, which is all hypothetically deduced anyway) in planets, the geological layers, and the solar system would all be easily accounted for? I’d love to hear more about this! Keep up the great work.

Gavin unrelated but I'm struggling to understand the Catholic and Orthodox perspective on sola fide even after many conversations with a close eastern Orthodox friend of mine, I would really appreciate hearing your perspective on that topic

I very much appreciate all these thoughts and your work on this, and certainly I would not take YEC to be something that is essential to the faith. however, I'm curious, what is your interpretation of Gen 1:30 "...[to every beast] that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food"? Do lions not have the breath of life? what is Augustine's view here?

How are we to address the passages that speak to creation groaning or suffering under the weight of sin, longing for the day when the New Heavens and the New Earth will restore everything to its pre-Fall state? What are we to think of passages speaking to those days of New Heaven and New Earth when there will be no death? Will we still be killing animas for food? Seems counter to the whole idea of what a redeemed creation.

Some of those moments with Jan and Michael were so stressful and anxiety inducing that i could not watch and would have to fast forward. Id be laughing but it would just be too too too much. Lol.

What do you mean by the term evolution? Would that be Darwinian evolution, where an animal just happens to have changed/mutated in some way that helps it survive, and so it does? Would that be theistic evolution, where God has directed or controlled the changes in animals? Or maybe you had something else in mind.

I would love to hear a dialogue between Gavin and a YEC guy.

Very helpful! Thanks!

It's funny, I love your channel. I am (kinda/sorta) a YEC (I hold to the Byzantine calendar, which puts the age of the world at about 7500 years). However, I am not a YEC because I believe the Bible or Christianity demands it, and I thank you sincerely for dismantling that false notion.

I really enjoyed your video. I struggle with what you said at 36.7. I would interpret Gen. 2:2 as the reason God rested is that his work of creation was done, and it was perfect. I lean towards a Younger earth view. There are several questions that seem to never be struggled with. I do have an advanced theological degree as well as a science background. I have 3 questions and I don't think there are clear answers to them. 1. How long did Adam and Eve live before the fall and how many children did, they have? 2. How much of the universe was affected by the fall? What was the earth like before the flood? I believe that the flood was universal. I appreciate your work on Augustine and I look forward to reading your book. I also struggle a little with what comes across to me is that you present the Young Earth folks as legalistically dogmatic and not struggling with the issues. Even though I don't always agree with them, I do see them continuing to struggle with evidence. On a personal note, I am really enjoying seeing how the findings of the James Webb telescope is challenging the dogma of our present age that is trying to displace God with science. I believe that it is a sin that we are wasting billions of dollars trying to find life outside of the earth and we don't take very good care of what God has given us.

What's a couple million years between friends?

I appreciate the willingness to discuss this issue and I believe in the display of Gavin’s genuineness in this video. However, I think the debate is framed wrongly and, humbly, I believe Gavin undermines his own argument in discussing Augustine’s views on creation. Firstly, framing the issue by stating that the church used to be more open to old earth and evolution in the 20th century is starting off the discussion a century too late. Ministers in the church only started interpreting the Scriptures in this way during the 1800s, when these philosophies entered the public imagination. The current conservative backlash against these ideas is only present because the church caved to these philosophies in the 19th century and we are only now starting to get back to what the Scriptures actually say about creation. Gavin’s appeal to Augustine is what ultimately undermines his argument. Why did Augustine depart from a historical reading of Genesis 1? Because he was embarrassed by that reading in light of the intellectual elites of his day. He found refuge in the allegorical method of interpretation, which made it more palatable to philosophers of other faiths. Was Augustine’s allegorical interpretation correct? No one that I know of holds to his interpretation today. Why should we follow in his footsteps when it comes to current deistic and naturalistic philosophies (old earth/evolution) today? History will show us to be in error as well, if we care about what the heathen think more than what God says. Let us not make the same mistake Augustine did. If you want to have a quick history lesson in how these philosophies came about see this excellent lecture by Joe Boot: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fN6grdhemtjJYmw.html. The scientific evidence Gavin references is not founded upon repeatable observation, but upon these ungodly worldviews. I sympathize with Gavin’s struggle. I had similar struggles in college. However, I’m at peace with Genesis now and I don’t have inner turmoil over these issues anymore. This is a simple issue. Let Scripture interpret Scripture. Leave the manmade religions out of it. God bless.

There's a lot of truth here, Dr Ortlund, but isn't it misleading to speak of men like Hodge and Warfield and Machen and Bavinck without clarifying their views on Darwinianism? Openness to the day-age theory and openness to man's descent from lower organisms are world's apart.

Oooh we’re getting controversial 👀

Speaking on the theological mystery surrounding creation is great; especially on the importance of not being overly dogmatic in these matters, and reserving a degree of deference for those in the natural sciences. However, apropos Darwinian evolution the respect offered by Christians is disappointing considering the shallowness of the data and evidence. We would do well to demand strong evidence for such a world shaking theory before it’s granted any room in the halls of respect; this however is something we have failed to do.

Good video. Won't say much. I hold to a YEC view (though not in a dogmatic way) but Dr Ortlund is correct in saying that this debate is not a central issue everywhere. Here in southern Africa, that is not an issue. Funny enough, we don't really even care about the science. It's more like "Alright. Let's focus on other things." Just thought of bringing that out.

It's interesting to come at this topic with an open mind and presuming the Bible says it can't happen.

ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως (see Mark 10:5-9) -- I personally, as a former hopeless materialist, and deep-time evolutionist, am far more concerned about what Messiah Jesus believes and teaches, rather than the spiritually questionable Augustine from centuries later. Augustine formulated the theological quagmire of baptismal regeneration for infants, didn't he Gavin?! I think it is highly unwise to describe him as the "Greatest Theologian," but one could say he was widely popular. While special creation is important, the Flood of Noah is of at least equal importance as a single act of the Almighty in this world that MUST impact our view of theology. When I read Genesis 6:6 in Hebrew, I tremble -- translated as: "And YHVH regretted making human beings on the earth, and his heart was grieved." Maybe a little less time watching Office and studying Augustine is warranted . . .

A genealogy isn’t the age of Earth. Genesis is silent on that. Btw question. If Genesis 1 was meant to be 24 hour day, how would the writer expressed it other than saying ‘yom’?

And just like that, Dr. Ortlund just became everyone’s favorite pastor for that office reference 😂😂

The speed of light has been slowing down over time, indicating it was faster earlier in history, and essentially infinitely fast at the moment of the big bang. So at least that much does not necessarily weigh much in the direction of old earth.

As someone who grew up atheist and later in life became perplexed by the Cosmological argument and also coming to believe the Bible had to have a Transcendent Mind behind it, really cast a lot of doubt on my atheism and turned me into someone searching for truth, but one question I can find no answer to is suppose God used evolution to create life. What would the purpose of using evolution be? Evolution is the one theory that can be used to propose that there was no God needed to create life; and it gives hope to atheist everywhere. If God did use evolution what is a good reason as to why he may have? It seems sometimes that Christianity is just finding ways that try to show why evolution does not have to be contrary to God; but is there a good reason that God may have used evolution? One thing I think of is that it is more impressive that he created in an instant a universe that would unfold with built - in parameters to create and support life. An instant creation of a universe that unfolds over billions of years with natural built in parameters would be greater than a deity who snaps his proverbial fingers to create a planet, then another, and another and then creating millions of life forms one by one in a miraculous fashion. INSTEAD of that it would be more impressive if God in an instant created a universe with all the built in parameters to create a dynamic universe and a universe with built in laws of physics to create life. Thoughts from anyone else?

What is your personal take on creationism, Gavin? Do you believe in young or old Earth? Do you believe in evolution? For me, the evidence leans to an old Earth, and doesn't compromise a literal reading of Genesis. Evolution, on the other hand, in my opinion, is not compatible with the Genesis account. Not to say i am not open to evolution, we just would need to compromise the Bible in such a way to fit evolution in to lose some of the relevance of the details of Genesis