Wilderness of Zin, 16th century BC. – The mood was at rock bottom. Discouraged by their scouts’ report about the enemy’s strength, the people had withdrawn their allegiance from Moses and Aaron and were to face the consequence: except for the youth under twenty and the faithful Joshua and Caleb, they would all spend the rest of their lives wandering the desert – and die there. When they subsequently attempted to enter the Promised Land on their own, they were defeated by the Amalekites and Canaanites and forced into a deep retreat. In this tense climate of disappointment and bitterness, old rivalries resurfaced and exploded in open rebellion.
Korah, a leading Levite, rose up against the fact that only Aaron and his sons were permitted to serve as priests. Princes from the tribe of Reuben – Jacob’s firstborn – felt cheated out of their natural position of priority. Supported by 250 influential leaders, they attempted to overthrow the existing order. The showdown took place outside the desert camp, and only in light of this grave background can God’s powerful response be understood: the ground opened up and swallowed the rebels, and fire from heaven consumed their followers.
There is much to learn from the story of “Korah’s rebellion” as recounted in Numbers 16. But here, let us focus on a seemingly tiny detail. When Moses publicly announces God’s judgment on the rebels, he uses unusual phrasing: “But if the LORD creates a new thing…” – as translated by the New King James Version. That “new” literally means “a creation (i.e., something that has never happened before).” The Hebrew word בְּרִיאָ֞ה (beri’a) is the noun form of the verb בָּרָא (bara = to create) and appears only in this single verse (Num 16:30). An event in which the earth splits at the prophet’s command, swallows a specific group of people and their possessions, and immediately closes again, had never occurred before. It is a demonstration of God’s creative power and defies any scientific explanation.
This verse teaches us what “creation” means. From God’s act of creation comes beri’a – something new, never-before-seen, unparalleled, unheard of (as various Bible translations suggest). Thus, it is not the result of natural law, since the defining feature of a natural law is the regularity of the processes it describes.
This applies to the creation of heaven and earth as described in Genesis 1 and 2. The contrast between that account and the processes expected from natural laws could not be greater. It is therefore surprising that many Christians believe one can reconcile the two by simply stretching the timeline.
From a cosmological point of view, a lone rock planet covered in water in an otherwise empty universe makes no sense – nor does light from a physically undefined source. The simultaneous appearance of all land plants before any marine life, the emergence of all celestial bodies around the green Earth on the fourth day, the appearance of birds before land animals, and the creation of a rational, communicative human being “without a past” – none of these things can be coherently interpreted within today’s recognized natural laws. Equally puzzling is how an ecosystem without death could function solely on plant-based nutrition.
It’s astonishing how many different ideas exist today attempting to harmonize the Bible’s clear testimony with the paradigms of natural science. Whether through theistic evolution or other forms of “Old Earth Creationism,” none are truly scientifically consistent, since they require a “crossing of boundaries” by invoking a Creator God – and they stand, to varying degrees, in contradiction to God’s Word. Yet things could be so simple. The six-day creation (Hexaemeron) of Genesis 1 is later summarized as: “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them…” (Ex 20:11). To refer to this creative work as Creatio ex nihilo – “creation out of nothing” – is actually an oversimplification. Hebrews 11:2 tells us “that what is seen was not made out of what was visible.” The Greek word phainomenon refers to something that can be perceived with the senses (or instruments). So, God did not use anything physically existing in creation. He did not create from nothing, but from Himself – Creatio ex Deus.
Once I have decided to allow the existence of the spiritual entity “God” into my worldview – and acknowledge that it cannot be measured using scientific methods – then it makes no sense to immediately try to limit that same entity with scientific arguments. We should simply accept that questions of origin do not fall within the realm of scientific inquiry but are answered in the Bible through divine revelation. It is reasonable to draw a distinction here, as French philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) advised:
“One must learn to doubt where it is necessary, to affirm where it is necessary, and to submit where it is necessary. Those who do not follow this course fail to respect the power of reason. Some break all three rules: they claim everything can be proven because they understand nothing about proof; they doubt everything because they do not know where submission is required; or they submit to everything because they do not know where judgment must be exercised.”
Anyone who declares a question as “scientifically inaccessible,” thereby defining an area in which one must “submit,” as Pascal put it, risks the accusation of abandoning science. In the case of the origin debate, there is an illustrative parody known as “Last Thursdayism,” which claims the world – including all its inhabitants and their memories – was created last Thursday. This theory is smarter than it first appears, because if the idea of “created age” is allowed in scientific discourse, then why not last Thursday?
Still, satire is satire, even if the serious statements of the Bible may sound similar to some. Creation was not completed on a Thursday but on a Friday. Whether Adam was created with “memories” is unknown, but it is evident that he immediately possessed cognitive abilities that humans typically develop over a lifetime. However, this didn’t happen last week – it happened about 6,000 years ago. A lot has happened on Earth since then, and its turbulent past has left evidence that science can access.
It would be beneficial if believers engaging with questions of origin operated within the paradigm of “science in a created world,” where the original creation is accepted as a non-negotiable axiom.
Those who do not get lost in the futile endeavor of trying to explain God’s creative work scientifically can instead focus on showing how the Bible is the key to understanding Earth and world history, or why naturalistic theories for the origin of matter, life, mind, language, morality, and spirit fail. Our era is, on the one hand, characterized by Romans 1:22: “Claiming to be wise, they became fools.” But the verses before that (19 and 20) gain new relevance in light of modern scientific discoveries: “…because what may be known about God is plain to them, since God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”
