Jump to content
IGNORED

Genesis: an exposition of the text


thilipsis

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  253
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   149
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/10/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/11/1963

When did essential doctrine become an 'ism', creation is a core Judaeo Christian doctrine. We have no reason as Christians to shy away from the historical narrative that the doctrine is based on. There are a lot of ways to go with this but I can sum up the first point with three words, 'created', 'made' and 'set'. There is a progression of thought in the Biblical account, certain things were 'created', the idea being a new creation generally being understood to be from nothing (ex nihilo). Then there is 'made' which is something made from something else, that's kind of an oversimplification but still the general idea. Then there is set where God makes adjustments to certain aspects and elements. It's commonly believed among creationists that the sun was created on day 4 but a closer look at the words and phrases used indicates that God was simply adjusting the 'firmament' to make the lights in the sky visible on a regular basis from the surface of the earth. 

The Genesis Account of Creation:

Thought I would post up some of my notes from my studies of Genesis 1. One interesting point is that there are three different words used to describe God's activities during creation week. Just hoping someone might take an interest in a more detailed exposition of the text.

Day 1: God 'lets' the light in, thus creating the first day (Gen. 1:4).
Day 2: God creates the upper atmosphere, called the 'firmament' (Gen. 1:7).
Day 3: God separates the land from the seas and creates plant life (Gen. 1:10).
Day 4: God then, 'sets', the heavenly lights in the visible sky (Gen. 1:17).
Day 5: God creates the birds of the air and marine life (Gen. 1:21).
Day 6: Finally, God creates the beasts of the field and Man (Gen. 1:25).

The phrase, 'heaven and the earth', is a Hebrew expression meaning the universe. All we really get from this passage is that the cosmos and earth were created, 'in the beginning'. The perspective of creation week is from the surface of the earth, starting with the Spirit of God hovering over the deep (Gen. 1:2). In the chapter there are three words used for God's work in creation. The first is 'created' ('bara' H1254) a very precise term used only of God.

Create ‘bara’ (H1254) - 'This verb has profound thological significance, since it has only God as it’s subject. Only God can create in the sense implied by bara. The verb expresses the idea of creation out of nothing...(Vines Expository Dictionary)

It is used once to describe the creation of the universe (Gen 1:1), then again to describe the creation of life (Gen 1:21). Finally, in the closing verses, it is used three times for the creation of Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:27). The word translated, 'made' (asah 6213) , has a much broader range of meaning and is used to speak of the creation of the 'firmament' (Gen 1:7), the sun, moon and stars (Gen 1:16), procreation where offspring are made 'after his/their kind' (Gen 1:25) and as a general reference to creation in it's vast array (Gen 1:31).

Made ‘asah’(H6213) "A primitive root; to do or make, in the broadest sense and widest application" (Gen 1:7, Gen 1:16, Gen 1:25, Gen 1:31, Isa. 41:20, 43:7, 45:7, 12, Amos 4:13). (Strong’s Dictionary). "The verb, which occurs over 2600 times in the Old Testament, is used as a synonym for “create” only about 60 times…only when asah is parallel to bara…can we be sure that it implies creation." (Vine 52).

Then there is a third term when God 'set' (nathan H2414), the lights of the sun, moon and stars so that their light is reqularly visible from the surface of the earth. In this way the narrative shifts from the very precise word for 'created' to the more general 'made', and then the much broader use of 'set'.

Set (nathan H5414) A primitive root; to give, used with greatest latitude of application (Gen 1:17, Gen 9:13, Gen 18:8, Gen 30:40, Gen 41:41). Elsewhere translated ‘put’, ‘make’, ‘cause’, etc.

The creation account has great significance for the rest of Scripture and how these terms are used in the original and their natural context is essential to really following the text as it was intended to be understood.

Original Sin

Accepting human evolution from that of apes is not only a rejection of the Pauline doctrine of original sin, it's a myth of human ancestry. When the New Testament writers mention Adam they speak of him as the first man and the reason why all of us are under the curse of sin and death. Paul tells us that 'by one man sin entered the world' and 'by one man's offense death reigned'. (Rom 5:12-19). Paul ties Adam directly to the need for justification and grace in his exposition of the Gospel in his letter to the Romans. Luke lists Adam in his genealogy calling him 'son of God' indicating he had no human parents but rather was created (Luke 3:23-28). My concern is simply this, the myth of human lineage linked to ape ancestry contradicts the clear testimony of Scripture and essential doctrine, specifically justification by faith. Paul is clear that all have sinned in Adam and that is the reason that we cannot keep the Mosaic law.

To receive Christ as Savior and Lord is to worship him as Creator.

According to Paul:

Sin came as the result of, 'many died by the trespass of the one man' (Rom. 5:15), 'judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation' (Rom. 5:16), the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man (Rom. 5:17), 'just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men' (Rom. 5:18), 'through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners' (Rom. 5:19).

The Bible is a book of history and our true lineage is found there, not in the modern mythology of Darwinian evolution. Essential doctrine is at stake and while you can accept evolution as natural history in part rejecting the creation of Adam and original sin runs contrary to sound doctrine. Accepting human evolution is not a rejection of orthodoxy but the rejection of the creation of Adam and original sin definitely is. Believing that land dwelling creatures became amphibians, transposed into whales and dolphins are certainly interesting ideas but would have no bearing on doctrinal issues. The doctrine of justification by faith has a central focus, the sin of Adam and it's inextricably linked to special creation.

The book of Romans tells us that God's invisible attributes and eternal nature have been clearly seen but we exchanged the truth of God for a lie (Rom 1:21,22). As a result the Law of Moses and the law of our own conscience bears witness against us, sometimes accusing, sometimes defending (Rom 2:15). We all sinned but now the righteousness of God has been revealed to be by faith through Christ (Rom 3:21). Abraham became the father of many nations by faith and the supernatural work of God (Rom 4:17). Through one man sin entered the world and through one man righteousness was revealed (Rom 5:12). It looks something like this in Romans, taken chapter by chapter:

  1. Exchanging the truth of God for a lie, the creature for the Creator.
  2. Both the Law and our conscience make our sin evident and obvious.
  3. All sinned, but now the righteousness of God is revealed in Christ.
  4. Abraham's lineage produced by a promise and a miracle through faith.
  5. Through one man sin entered the world and death through sin.
  6. Just as Christ was raised from the dead we walk in newness of life.
  7. The law could not save but instead empowered sin to convict.
  8. Freed from the law of sin and death (Adamic nature) we're saved

The Scriptures offer an explanation for man's fallen nature, how we inherited it exactly is not important but when Adam and Eve sinned we did not fast. This is affirmed in the New Testament in no uncertain terms by Luke in his genealogy, in Paul's exposition of the Gospel in Romans and even Jesus called the marriage of Adam and Eve 'the beginning'.

Now I realize I have dumped a ton of stuff in the opening post and this is a casual discussion forum. It's just that what this comes down to are two worldviews competing in this controversy, as Bible believing Christians ours is a Biblical one. I've poured over the scientific literature, philosophy, history even sociology and came to one core conviction, Creationism is an exercise in evidential apologetics. When attempting to defend the Bible as being true and reliable history it becomes essential to realize, the Bible is primary source material, at least, in a Judaeo Christian context. I've debated Catholics, Protestants, Darwinians, Theistic Evolutionists and an army of trollers for years. In this thread I'm inviting you to a Bible study on the subject of creation.

The trend in the Church, both Protestant and Catholic, has been toward Intelligent Design. The reason for it is some times scientific but essentially theological. At some point you are going to have to decide what you are going to stand on because the Theory of Evolution and the Bible as Redemptive history are clearly in conflict. You have to wonder what is at stake here because it's more then a philosophy of history, essential Christian doctrine is at stake. I leave you with a couple of choice quotes:

Darwinism destroyed the dogma of the Fall upon which the whole intellectual fabric of Christianity rests. For without a Fall there is no redemption, and the whole theory and meaning of the Pauline system is vain. (Wells, H.G., Anticipations of the Reactions of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon Human Life and Thought)
 
Faith in God and in the events of salvation history must necessarily begin with a belief in God's role as Creator. (Benedict XVI, VATICAN CITY, APRIL 23, 2011, Zenit.org)
 
he doctrine that species, including man, are descended from other species...being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition. (Preface, On the Origin of Species)

Grace and peace,
Mark

Edited by thilipsis
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Nonbeliever
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  738
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   346
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  05/28/2014
  • Status:  Offline

7 hours ago, thilipsis said:

When attempting to defend the Bible as being true and reliable history it becomes essential to realize, the Bible is primary source material, at least, in a Judaeo Christian context.

This is to say, the Bible will be used to defend the claims in the Bible, correct?

I would agree that darwinian evolution is in conflict with Christian theology, but having said that we still somehow have people like Dr. Francis Collins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  253
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   149
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/10/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/11/1963

6 hours ago, Bonky said:

This is to say, the Bible will be used to defend the claims in the Bible, correct?

I would agree that darwinian evolution is in conflict with Christian theology, but having said that we still somehow have people like Dr. Francis Collins.

I'm saying before you make up your mind what you believe or don't believe you should learn what it says. Internal evidence is what Its called, there's also external and bibliographical testing.

Now as far as Collins he has said he believes the New Testament including the miracles. I remember him and Richard Dawkins chatting like old friends about the seventeen dimensions of the multiverse. It just reminded me that Darwinism and String theory are highly convoluted attempts at metaphysics that border on mythology.

I go on biologos occasionally, what they call a figurative interpretation is nothing but allergorizing the text. All well and good but don't call it an interpretation without specific reference to the text and what is being compared. The problem is Genesis has no figurative language.

Edited by thilipsis
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  253
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   149
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/10/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/11/1963

6 hours ago, eileenhat said:

I have a long laundry list of 'ideas' (oops facts) outside of the box regarding Genesis.

Not sure what you mean so let's take them one at a time.

Quote

Evolution, wrong (vision of Garden/research).

Evolution is a phenomenon in nature, the 'theory of evolution' is a philosophy of natural history. Two very different things.

Quote

Earth globe, wrong (research).

The ancient Hebrews were not into cosmology.  God creating the universe on the other hand is something they knew about from the only one who was there, God himself.

Quote

"Tree of Life", God's eternal lineage (vision of it).

There are actually two of them in heaven, which is for the healing on the nations, the Revelation tells us.

Quote

"apple" from Tree of Knowledge (vision of it).  A processed wheat product (can source that in the Torah).

Its only thought to be an apple because of a lithographic print in Milton's Paradice Lost. I never heard of a wheat tree, I always thought something like figs. In tropical environments the can bear fruit year round

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  12
  • Content Per Day:  0.00
  • Reputation:   16
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/23/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  10/26/1973

Great post. I especially like the significance of the original verbs.  I've read origin stories from other beliefs and what a stark contrast they are to the pragmatic account given in Genesis.  Other origin stories are obvious manmade stories or just weird.  There's so much theology within the Genesis account.   How true so much of our theology depends on a literal Adam and our fallen nature.   How Jesus work on the cross depends on the events in the garden.  Surely Jesus would have corrected any misconceptions during his ministry.  

For thousands of years Jews and Christians didn't see Genesis as allegory.   Only until Lydell and Darwin proposed a slow gradual process taking millions of years was there any conflict in Genesis.  I see no reason for their assumptions to dictate other beliefs.   I wonder if the doubters of their day got hung up on Job 38:16 which mentions the springs of the sea.  If people thought the oceans were flat sandy deserts Job 38:16 would seem hard to believe.  Of course, these were discovered recently so there never was any conflict.  Recent discoveries from the Mt St Helen eruption support a quick catastrophic process of creation.  As you've said before there's nothing in Genesis at odds with science.

 

Blessings!

-Dave     

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Junior Member
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  23
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  179
  • Content Per Day:  0.07
  • Reputation:   78
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/05/2016
  • Status:  Offline

On 12/3/2016 at 8:18 PM, thilipsis said:

When did essential doctrine become an 'ism', creation is a core Judaeo Christian doctrine. We have no reason as Christians to shy away from the historical narrative that the doctrine is based on. There are a lot of ways to go with this but I can sum up the first point with three words, 'created', 'made' and 'set'. There is a progression of thought in the Biblical account, certain things were 'created', the idea being a new creation generally being understood to be from nothing (ex nihilo). Then there is 'made' which is something made from something else, that's kind of an oversimplification but still the general idea. Then there is set where God makes adjustments to certain aspects and elements. It's commonly believed among creationists that the sun was created on day 4 but a closer look at the words and phrases used indicates that God was simply adjusting the 'firmament' to make the lights in the sky visible on a regular basis from the surface of the earth. 

The Genesis Account of Creation:

Thought I would post up some of my notes from my studies of Genesis 1. One interesting point is that there are three different words used to describe God's activities during creation week. Just hoping someone might take an interest in a more detailed exposition of the text.

Day 1: God 'lets' the light in, thus creating the first day (Gen. 1:4).
Day 2: God creates the upper atmosphere, called the 'firmament' (Gen. 1:7).
Day 3: God separates the land from the seas and creates plant life (Gen. 1:10).
Day 4: God then, 'sets', the heavenly lights in the visible sky (Gen. 1:17).
Day 5: God creates the birds of the air and marine life (Gen. 1:21).
Day 6: Finally, God creates the beasts of the field and Man (Gen. 1:25).

The phrase, 'heaven and the earth', is a Hebrew expression meaning the universe. All we really get from this passage is that the cosmos and earth were created, 'in the beginning'. The perspective of creation week is from the surface of the earth, starting with the Spirit of God hovering over the deep (Gen. 1:2). In the chapter there are three words used for God's work in creation. The first is 'created' ('bara' H1254) a very precise term used only of God.

Create ‘bara’ (H1254) - 'This verb has profound thological significance, since it has only God as it’s subject. Only God can create in the sense implied by bara. The verb expresses the idea of creation out of nothing...(Vines Expository Dictionary)

It is used once to describe the creation of the universe (Gen 1:1), then again to describe the creation of life (Gen 1:21). Finally, in the closing verses, it is used three times for the creation of Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:27). The word translated, 'made' (asah 6213) , has a much broader range of meaning and is used to speak of the creation of the 'firmament' (Gen 1:7), the sun, moon and stars (Gen 1:16), procreation where offspring are made 'after his/their kind' (Gen 1:25) and as a general reference to creation in it's vast array (Gen 1:31).

Made ‘asah’(H6213) "A primitive root; to do or make, in the broadest sense and widest application" (Gen 1:7, Gen 1:16, Gen 1:25, Gen 1:31, Isa. 41:20, 43:7, 45:7, 12, Amos 4:13). (Strong’s Dictionary). "The verb, which occurs over 2600 times in the Old Testament, is used as a synonym for “create” only about 60 times…only when asah is parallel to bara…can we be sure that it implies creation." (Vine 52).

Then there is a third term when God 'set' (nathan H2414), the lights of the sun, moon and stars so that their light is reqularly visible from the surface of the earth. In this way the narrative shifts from the very precise word for 'created' to the more general 'made', and then the much broader use of 'set'.

Set (nathan H5414) A primitive root; to give, used with greatest latitude of application (Gen 1:17, Gen 9:13, Gen 18:8, Gen 30:40, Gen 41:41). Elsewhere translated ‘put’, ‘make’, ‘cause’, etc.

The creation account has great significance for the rest of Scripture and how these terms are used in the original and their natural context is essential to really following the text as it was intended to be understood.

Original Sin

Accepting human evolution from that of apes is not only a rejection of the Pauline doctrine of original sin, it's a myth of human ancestry. When the New Testament writers mention Adam they speak of him as the first man and the reason why all of us are under the curse of sin and death. Paul tells us that 'by one man sin entered the world' and 'by one man's offense death reigned'. (Rom 5:12-19). Paul ties Adam directly to the need for justification and grace in his exposition of the Gospel in his letter to the Romans. Luke lists Adam in his genealogy calling him 'son of God' indicating he had no human parents but rather was created (Luke 3:23-28). My concern is simply this, the myth of human lineage linked to ape ancestry contradicts the clear testimony of Scripture and essential doctrine, specifically justification by faith. Paul is clear that all have sinned in Adam and that is the reason that we cannot keep the Mosaic law.

To receive Christ as Savior and Lord is to worship him as Creator.

According to Paul:

Sin came as the result of, 'many died by the trespass of the one man' (Rom. 5:15), 'judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation' (Rom. 5:16), the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man (Rom. 5:17), 'just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men' (Rom. 5:18), 'through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners' (Rom. 5:19).

The Bible is a book of history and our true lineage is found there, not in the modern mythology of Darwinian evolution. Essential doctrine is at stake and while you can accept evolution as natural history in part rejecting the creation of Adam and original sin runs contrary to sound doctrine. Accepting human evolution is not a rejection of orthodoxy but the rejection of the creation of Adam and original sin definitely is. Believing that land dwelling creatures became amphibians, transposed into whales and dolphins are certainly interesting ideas but would have no bearing on doctrinal issues. The doctrine of justification by faith has a central focus, the sin of Adam and it's inextricably linked to special creation.

The book of Romans tells us that God's invisible attributes and eternal nature have been clearly seen but we exchanged the truth of God for a lie (Rom 1:21,22). As a result the Law of Moses and the law of our own conscience bears witness against us, sometimes accusing, sometimes defending (Rom 2:15). We all sinned but now the righteousness of God has been revealed to be by faith through Christ (Rom 3:21). Abraham became the father of many nations by faith and the supernatural work of God (Rom 4:17). Through one man sin entered the world and through one man righteousness was revealed (Rom 5:12). It looks something like this in Romans, taken chapter by chapter:

  1. Exchanging the truth of God for a lie, the creature for the Creator.
  2. Both the Law and our conscience make our sin evident and obvious.
  3. All sinned, but now the righteousness of God is revealed in Christ.
  4. Abraham's lineage produced by a promise and a miracle through faith.
  5. Through one man sin entered the world and death through sin.
  6. Just as Christ was raised from the dead we walk in newness of life.
  7. The law could not save but instead empowered sin to convict.
  8. Freed from the law of sin and death (Adamic nature) we're saved

The Scriptures offer an explanation for man's fallen nature, how we inherited it exactly is not important but when Adam and Eve sinned we did not fast. This is affirmed in the New Testament in no uncertain terms by Luke in his genealogy, in Paul's exposition of the Gospel in Romans and even Jesus called the marriage of Adam and Eve 'the beginning'.

Now I realize I have dumped a ton of stuff in the opening post and this is a casual discussion forum. It's just that what this comes down to are two worldviews competing in this controversy, as Bible believing Christians ours is a Biblical one. I've poured over the scientific literature, philosophy, history even sociology and came to one core conviction, Creationism is an exercise in evidential apologetics. When attempting to defend the Bible as being true and reliable history it becomes essential to realize, the Bible is primary source material, at least, in a Judaeo Christian context. I've debated Catholics, Protestants, Darwinians, Theistic Evolutionists and an army of trollers for years. In this thread I'm inviting you to a Bible study on the subject of creation.

The trend in the Church, both Protestant and Catholic, has been toward Intelligent Design. The reason for it is some times scientific but essentially theological. At some point you are going to have to decide what you are going to stand on because the Theory of Evolution and the Bible as Redemptive history are clearly in conflict. You have to wonder what is at stake here because it's more then a philosophy of history, essential Christian doctrine is at stake. I leave you with a couple of choice quotes:

Darwinism destroyed the dogma of the Fall upon which the whole intellectual fabric of Christianity rests. For without a Fall there is no redemption, and the whole theory and meaning of the Pauline system is vain. (Wells, H.G., Anticipations of the Reactions of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon Human Life and Thought)
 
Faith in God and in the events of salvation history must necessarily begin with a belief in God's role as Creator. (Benedict XVI, VATICAN CITY, APRIL 23, 2011, Zenit.org)
 
he doctrine that species, including man, are descended from other species...being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition. (Preface, On the Origin of Species)

Grace and peace,
Mark

Romans 5:12-14

 

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."

 

I'm not quite sure what this means, but it sure is specific to say, "From Adam to Moses". 

Edited by delade3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  253
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   149
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/10/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/11/1963

23 hours ago, delade3 said:

Romans 5:12-14

 

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."

 

I'm not quite sure what this means, but it sure is specific to say, "From Adam to Moses". 

Indeed, the formal name for the doctrine is 'original sin' and it is reflected in the theology of Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant teaching. It is almost unanimous among the Early Church Fathers and emphasized unambiguously, in the Apostolic witness, canonized in the testimony of Scripture. Yet Theistic Evolutionists are conspicuously silent on this key element of Christian theism. One of the only prerequisites for us to receive the promise of the gospel is to realize that we are, in fact, sinners and God is holy, righteous and good. The question becomes how and why, not some of us, but all of us are sinners. The New Testament witness answers that question, 'judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation' (Rom. 5:16).

Grace and peace,
Mark 

Edited by thilipsis
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  253
  • Content Per Day:  0.09
  • Reputation:   149
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  11/10/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/11/1963

On 12/5/2016 at 10:04 PM, Dave LP said:

Great post. I especially like the significance of the original verbs.  I've read origin stories from other beliefs and what a stark contrast they are to the pragmatic account given in Genesis.  Other origin stories are obvious manmade stories or just weird.  There's so much theology within the Genesis account.   How true so much of our theology depends on a literal Adam and our fallen nature.   How Jesus work on the cross depends on the events in the garden.  Surely Jesus would have corrected any misconceptions during his ministry.  

For thousands of years Jews and Christians didn't see Genesis as allegory.   Only until Lydell and Darwin proposed a slow gradual process taking millions of years was there any conflict in Genesis.  I see no reason for their assumptions to dictate other beliefs.   I wonder if the doubters of their day got hung up on Job 38:16 which mentions the springs of the sea.  If people thought the oceans were flat sandy deserts Job 38:16 would seem hard to believe.  Of course, these were discovered recently so there never was any conflict.  Recent discoveries from the Mt St Helen eruption support a quick catastrophic process of creation.  As you've said before there's nothing in Genesis at odds with science.

 

Blessings!

-Dave     

I took an interest in the testing of the lava flow around Mt. St. Helen shortly after taking a look at creationism. The results simply didn't jive with a newly formed layer and to date I have yet to hear a substantive argument indicating why it gave such a late age. The Scriptures, particularly Genesis of course but also Job, the Psalms and part of Isaiah put great emphasis on God's miraculous creation. What I found over the years is the the Genesis account of creation is remarkably explicit and the literary features seem to indicate a strong progression and a strong emphasis on the creation of life in general and especially the creation of Adam and Eve. What further makes this of great importance is the New Testament witness concerning creation couldn't be any clearer. 

The strangest thing of all for me is that Theistic Evolutionists can't seem to manage an interpretation of Genesis 1 without allegorizing it back into the stone age. There is also very little in the way of dealing with other essential doctrine or genuine insight into Scripture. The reason this puzzles me so much is that I was close to going over to Theistic Evolution and I could do it, it would take some fancy foot work but it's doable. The problem for me isn't so much they disagree, the problem is that the evidence isn't all that compelling for Darwinian thinking either geologically, biologically or especially Biblically. It doesn't upset me, it puzzles me.

Grace and peace,
Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

  • Group:  Graduated to Heaven
  • Followers:  208
  • Topic Count:  60
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  8,651
  • Content Per Day:  1.18
  • Reputation:   5,761
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  01/31/2004
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  03/04/1943

On 12/4/2016 at 0:18 AM, thilipsis said:

When attempting to defend the Bible as being true and reliable history....
it becomes essential to realize, the Bible is primary source material....

~

On 12/4/2016 at 8:08 AM, Bonky said:

This is to say, the Bible will be used to defend the claims in the Bible, correct....
I would agree that darwinian evolution is in conflict with Christian theology, but....

:)

The Bible Will Be Used

For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16 (Berean Study Bible)

To Shed Light On A Dark And Dying World

The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up. From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Matthew 4:16-17

:emot-heartbeat:

My

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. John 1:1-3 (New International Version)

Cosmology

So the Word became human and made his home among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the Father's one and only Son. John 1:14 (New Living Translation)

Is Profoundly And Radically About Jesus

“Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.” Revelation 4:11 (English Standard Version)

And Has No Root In Scientism Nor It's Non-Observable Evolution

“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. “Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy. Exodus 20:8-11 (New American Standard Bible)

Which Is Never Seen On Earth By Man Or Creature

But ask the animals, and they will instruct you; ask the birds of the sky, and they will tell you Or speak to the earth, and it will instruct you; let the fish of the sea inform you. Which of all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this? Job 12:7-9 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)

Except In Saturday Cartoons

See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has an evil, unbelieving heart that forsakes the living God. Hebrews 3:12 (NET Bible)

And In Dreamland

Take care lest there be some one who leads you away as prisoners by means of his philosophy and idle fancies, following human traditions and the world's crude notions instead of following Christ. Colossians 2:8 (Weymouth New testament)

Pontifications

The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt. They have done abominable works. There is none who does good. Psalms 14:1 (New Heart English Bible)

~

Be Blessed Beloved Of The KING

The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Numbers 6:24-27 (King James Bible)

Love, Your Brother Joe

~

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160 (King James Bible)

The Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable.

Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you.

It is the traveler’s map, the pilgrim’s staff, the pilot’s compass, the soldier’s sword and the Christian’s charter. Here too, Heaven is opened and the gates of Hell disclosed.

Christ is its grand subject, our good its design, and the glory of God its end. It should fill the memory, rule the heart and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently and prayerfully.  It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure.

It is given you in life, will be opened at the judgment, and be remembered forever. It involves the highest responsibility, rewards the greatest labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents.

From The Inside Of My Gideon New Testament

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  18
  • Topic Count:  200
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  2,795
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   1,502
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  06/25/2012
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/26/1952

On 12/4/2016 at 1:18 AM, thilipsis said:

When did essential doctrine become an 'ism', creation is a core Judaeo Christian doctrine. We have no reason as Christians to shy away from the historical narrative that the doctrine is based on. There are a lot of ways to go with this but I can sum up the first point with three words, 'created', 'made' and 'set'. There is a progression of thought in the Biblical account, certain things were 'created', the idea being a new creation generally being understood to be from nothing (ex nihilo). Then there is 'made' which is something made from something else, that's kind of an oversimplification but still the general idea. Then there is set where God makes adjustments to certain aspects and elements. It's commonly believed among creationists that the sun was created on day 4 but a closer look at the words and phrases used indicates that God was simply adjusting the 'firmament' to make the lights in the sky visible on a regular basis from the surface of the earth. 

The Genesis Account of Creation:

Thought I would post up some of my notes from my studies of Genesis 1. One interesting point is that there are three different words used to describe God's activities during creation week. Just hoping someone might take an interest in a more detailed exposition of the text.

Day 1: God 'lets' the light in, thus creating the first day (Gen. 1:4).
Day 2: God creates the upper atmosphere, called the 'firmament' (Gen. 1:7).
Day 3: God separates the land from the seas and creates plant life (Gen. 1:10).
Day 4: God then, 'sets', the heavenly lights in the visible sky (Gen. 1:17).
Day 5: God creates the birds of the air and marine life (Gen. 1:21).
Day 6: Finally, God creates the beasts of the field and Man (Gen. 1:25).

The phrase, 'heaven and the earth', is a Hebrew expression meaning the universe. All we really get from this passage is that the cosmos and earth were created, 'in the beginning'. The perspective of creation week is from the surface of the earth, starting with the Spirit of God hovering over the deep (Gen. 1:2). In the chapter there are three words used for God's work in creation. The first is 'created' ('bara' H1254) a very precise term used only of God.

Create ‘bara’ (H1254) - 'This verb has profound thological significance, since it has only God as it’s subject. Only God can create in the sense implied by bara. The verb expresses the idea of creation out of nothing...(Vines Expository Dictionary)

It is used once to describe the creation of the universe (Gen 1:1), then again to describe the creation of life (Gen 1:21). Finally, in the closing verses, it is used three times for the creation of Adam and Eve (Gen. 1:27). The word translated, 'made' (asah 6213) , has a much broader range of meaning and is used to speak of the creation of the 'firmament' (Gen 1:7), the sun, moon and stars (Gen 1:16), procreation where offspring are made 'after his/their kind' (Gen 1:25) and as a general reference to creation in it's vast array (Gen 1:31).

Made ‘asah’(H6213) "A primitive root; to do or make, in the broadest sense and widest application" (Gen 1:7, Gen 1:16, Gen 1:25, Gen 1:31, Isa. 41:20, 43:7, 45:7, 12, Amos 4:13). (Strong’s Dictionary). "The verb, which occurs over 2600 times in the Old Testament, is used as a synonym for “create” only about 60 times…only when asah is parallel to bara…can we be sure that it implies creation." (Vine 52).

Then there is a third term when God 'set' (nathan H2414), the lights of the sun, moon and stars so that their light is reqularly visible from the surface of the earth. In this way the narrative shifts from the very precise word for 'created' to the more general 'made', and then the much broader use of 'set'.

Set (nathan H5414) A primitive root; to give, used with greatest latitude of application (Gen 1:17, Gen 9:13, Gen 18:8, Gen 30:40, Gen 41:41). Elsewhere translated ‘put’, ‘make’, ‘cause’, etc.

The creation account has great significance for the rest of Scripture and how these terms are used in the original and their natural context is essential to really following the text as it was intended to be understood.

Original Sin

Accepting human evolution from that of apes is not only a rejection of the Pauline doctrine of original sin, it's a myth of human ancestry. When the New Testament writers mention Adam they speak of him as the first man and the reason why all of us are under the curse of sin and death. Paul tells us that 'by one man sin entered the world' and 'by one man's offense death reigned'. (Rom 5:12-19). Paul ties Adam directly to the need for justification and grace in his exposition of the Gospel in his letter to the Romans. Luke lists Adam in his genealogy calling him 'son of God' indicating he had no human parents but rather was created (Luke 3:23-28). My concern is simply this, the myth of human lineage linked to ape ancestry contradicts the clear testimony of Scripture and essential doctrine, specifically justification by faith. Paul is clear that all have sinned in Adam and that is the reason that we cannot keep the Mosaic law.

To receive Christ as Savior and Lord is to worship him as Creator.

According to Paul:

Sin came as the result of, 'many died by the trespass of the one man' (Rom. 5:15), 'judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation' (Rom. 5:16), the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man (Rom. 5:17), 'just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men' (Rom. 5:18), 'through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners' (Rom. 5:19).

The Bible is a book of history and our true lineage is found there, not in the modern mythology of Darwinian evolution. Essential doctrine is at stake and while you can accept evolution as natural history in part rejecting the creation of Adam and original sin runs contrary to sound doctrine. Accepting human evolution is not a rejection of orthodoxy but the rejection of the creation of Adam and original sin definitely is. Believing that land dwelling creatures became amphibians, transposed into whales and dolphins are certainly interesting ideas but would have no bearing on doctrinal issues. The doctrine of justification by faith has a central focus, the sin of Adam and it's inextricably linked to special creation.

The book of Romans tells us that God's invisible attributes and eternal nature have been clearly seen but we exchanged the truth of God for a lie (Rom 1:21,22). As a result the Law of Moses and the law of our own conscience bears witness against us, sometimes accusing, sometimes defending (Rom 2:15). We all sinned but now the righteousness of God has been revealed to be by faith through Christ (Rom 3:21). Abraham became the father of many nations by faith and the supernatural work of God (Rom 4:17). Through one man sin entered the world and through one man righteousness was revealed (Rom 5:12). It looks something like this in Romans, taken chapter by chapter:

  1. Exchanging the truth of God for a lie, the creature for the Creator.
  2. Both the Law and our conscience make our sin evident and obvious.
  3. All sinned, but now the righteousness of God is revealed in Christ.
  4. Abraham's lineage produced by a promise and a miracle through faith.
  5. Through one man sin entered the world and death through sin.
  6. Just as Christ was raised from the dead we walk in newness of life.
  7. The law could not save but instead empowered sin to convict.
  8. Freed from the law of sin and death (Adamic nature) we're saved

The Scriptures offer an explanation for man's fallen nature, how we inherited it exactly is not important but when Adam and Eve sinned we did not fast. This is affirmed in the New Testament in no uncertain terms by Luke in his genealogy, in Paul's exposition of the Gospel in Romans and even Jesus called the marriage of Adam and Eve 'the beginning'.

Now I realize I have dumped a ton of stuff in the opening post and this is a casual discussion forum. It's just that what this comes down to are two worldviews competing in this controversy, as Bible believing Christians ours is a Biblical one. I've poured over the scientific literature, philosophy, history even sociology and came to one core conviction, Creationism is an exercise in evidential apologetics. When attempting to defend the Bible as being true and reliable history it becomes essential to realize, the Bible is primary source material, at least, in a Judaeo Christian context. I've debated Catholics, Protestants, Darwinians, Theistic Evolutionists and an army of trollers for years. In this thread I'm inviting you to a Bible study on the subject of creation.

The trend in the Church, both Protestant and Catholic, has been toward Intelligent Design. The reason for it is some times scientific but essentially theological. At some point you are going to have to decide what you are going to stand on because the Theory of Evolution and the Bible as Redemptive history are clearly in conflict. You have to wonder what is at stake here because it's more then a philosophy of history, essential Christian doctrine is at stake. I leave you with a couple of choice quotes:

Darwinism destroyed the dogma of the Fall upon which the whole intellectual fabric of Christianity rests. For without a Fall there is no redemption, and the whole theory and meaning of the Pauline system is vain. (Wells, H.G., Anticipations of the Reactions of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon Human Life and Thought)
 
Faith in God and in the events of salvation history must necessarily begin with a belief in God's role as Creator. (Benedict XVI, VATICAN CITY, APRIL 23, 2011, Zenit.org)
 
he doctrine that species, including man, are descended from other species...being the result of law, and not of miraculous interposition. (Preface, On the Origin of Species)

Grace and peace,
Mark

Mark, Have you seen this website?

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/LifeSciences27.html

It's huge but it's also well documented with tons of foot notes and it explains evolution was never proven. The link goes to a page explaining that all the fossils they once expected to find, were never found. If you jump ahead to page 33 it explains that many archeologists know very well that evolution is not true, but there's so much money wrapped up in this, as well as human pride, that they dare not admit evolution failed to be proven. Hundreds or thousands of high paid people will lose their jobs and their credibility. This is why the scientific community will not admit evolution is a false theory. The pity is the best scientists know all about this.

The new generation has to get rid of this idea. As these new scientists come out of school they have to resist going to work for a University or research facility that doesn't care what's true, all they care about is money bc the money is in evolution. But that's going to change.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...