Search the Community

Cobalt1959 - I am reading Genesis "plainly," and I am not deriving the same meaning from it, and I have never met anyone else who got the meaning that you place on it either. So saying "I read it and get this meaning" is not proof. It is only personal opinion, and since you offer no explanation of how you actually arrive at that meaning, you are not engaged in any interpretation or exegesis. Perhaps one should read “plainly” but with their critical thinking intact. It is not my personal opinion but a standard of theology, one need only peruse a Systematic Theology book or read the writings of myriad theologians past and present to gain insight on the use of the term. One will even find Mediate creation on answersingenesis.org, so prior to engaging in a discussion of Genesis 1 it would be wise to have some understanding of accepted terms. Quote - As shiloh says, Genesis 1:24 talks of the animal kinds, (miyn). God created the animals, and the species of animals, at the same time. There was no evolutionary process at creation that involved animals evolving into other types of animals. Your "plain reading" of the text which you claim illustrates a mediate process is dispelled in the next verse: First a general look at Genesis 1 and it’s construction. “And God said, ...” clearly this establishes that all of creation was actualized by God’s spoken command or fiat. Each day begins with those very words, so that the commands of God were the source of all creation, the sole and only operative agent. (Psalm 33:6 – Heb. 11:3 – 2 Peter 3:5) One will also note that His commands were all sufficient certainly requiring no further action on God’s part. You conveniently left out that germane part of the verse... “And God said, let the land produce...”. Understanding as we do that the command is the sole operative then one can’t help but notice that the command/fiat is directed not to animals but to the land. Gen. 1:24 speaks to the mediate creation of animals as we know that animals like “man” were created from the “dust” of the earth/land. Earth/Land/Dust being a pre-existing material thus at one level clearly mediate creation. The passage avoids “let there be living creatures...” but again if the command itself is the sole operative then it is quite plain what God is commanding...the land. Quote - Genesis 1:25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. Here again is where one needs to read Genesis with some critical thinking though it is quite “plain”. If as scripture states the sole and only operative agent in creation was God’s commands (Psalm 33:6, etc.) then logically what follows the command/fiat is explanatory. “And God made...” statements are not the operative commands, but an explanation of results. Quote - Verse 26 says that same thing about man. Verse 21 says the same thing about the sea creatures. All three verses say that God created the animals and man Himself, directly, not through a "process." And if there were no theory of evolution to use to interpolate on the text, no one would come up with the meaning you do from verse 24. Verse 26 is so clearly mediate creation as man was made from “dust”, just as were the animals and plants. At one level mediate creation is irrefutable, at another level it an openly debatable point. The further question regarding man becomes does “Our image” mean spiritual or physical? So the verses in question do not actually state that God made anything directly but through mediate creation. The question then becomes, how? Creation was obviously a supernatural event however were the processes that we see today invoked by God at the outset? Is it not possible that God set in motion at the beginning all of the "laws" for the incipient powers, elements, material, etc. as to the natural processes of phenomena to be produced? Once again “evolution” rears it’s ugly head based on your definition of the term. You will note, if you so choose, that nowhere in the previous thread did I support a specific “evolution”. The only thing suggested was the use of the term to mean “God ordained processes”. Further, with a modicum of consideration one will realize that there exists a vast array of things we wouldn’t know if it wasn’t for science, and any number of things that support the scriptures.