“Compromise” is a concise defense regarding several erroneous, non-biblical interpretations of Genesis 1. Ken Ham, Terry Mortenson and Werner Gift address three prominent views creationists hold that compromise the natural, literal interpretation of Genesis 1 with the theory (and lie) of “millions and millions of years.” These three views hold to a Divine Creator, but seek to mesh this theory into an implausible explanation of Genesis 1. This presentation is objective, fairly thorough and stands on the Divine authority of Scripture, instead of the incorrect humanistic view of “millions of years.”

Compromise addresses three false interpretations – the Gap and Ruin-Reconstruction (another name for the Gap Theory) Theories, Progressive Creation and Theistic Evolution.  The Gap Theory states that there is a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. In between these verses, proponents insert millions of years in order to mesh the false evidence of millions of years into Genesis. Ken Ham addresses how this theory grew to exist. He then describes seven reasons why this theory has no biblical foothold. Additionally, Ham looks closely at the grammar of Genesis 1:1-2 to show how the original language (Hebrew) does not allow for an insertion based on 1) the connective particle, 2) the definition of the verb “to be,” and 3) the definition of replenish from Genesis 1:28.

Ham and Mortenson describe the false views of Progressive Creation (PC).  PC takes an evolutionary view of beginning (Big Bang), but attributes the work to “God.” It states that God created new creatures over millions of years and death, bloodshed and disease existed before Adam. It also describes a man-like creature (minus an “image of God” spirit), which also existed before Adam and promotes a local Genesis Flood. The authors refute each of the claims as contrary to Scripture and as assaults on the character of God’s authority.

Werner Gift exposes “Ten Dangers of Theistic Evolution (TE).” TE is the same as evolution, except that God begins the process and uses evolution as a means of creating and evolutionistic agendas have priority over Biblical statements. That is, the Bible must be re-interpreted, when and wherever it contradicts the present evolutionary worldview. (p. 48)

Then, Ham justifies why God could have created everything in six literal days. He addresses the “six-day-creation” positively and then refutes eight objections to the six-day-creation view.

Finally, Mortenson addresses why Christians shouldn’t accept millions of years. He examines several passages outside of Genesis that preclude a Christian from the non-biblical interpretations of Genesis. This is a great summary book that would be helpful to discussions with evolutionists. Be prepared and armed with the truth. “Compromise” will do that for you.