In my opinion, we have spent so much time arguing over Genesis 1 (Are the days 24 hour days? Is there a “gap” between 1:1 and 1:2? How old is the earth?, ad infinitim . . .) that we have missed the real point: “Creation started with God, it is very good, and He has given image-bearing man the exciting privilege of enjoying it, and the awesome responsibility of managing it.” As I noted in my exposition on Sunday, we must understand Genesis within its historical and literary context . . .
As Oxford scholar David Atkinson writes in his commentary (IVP, "The Message of Genesis"): “The writer (Moses) does not attempt, or want to explain creation. With reverence, he wants to catch us up into its wonder. He is not concerned with the question ‘How did God do it?’”
However, next Sunday, we will devote one sermon to the Creation-Evolution debate . . .
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Good point about Genesis. If my car were running I would come out for the next Sunday service. FYI I'm pretty much theistic evolutionist now, but I think Intelligent Design makes a good case.
@ Gen 1: When we typically think of God's creation, we think about the natural world and a physical creation. What I think is so substantial about creation is not just the awesomeness of 'creation', but the creation of meaning. After God was finished creating for the day, he would announce that what he made "was good". I think this is an interesting dimension of creation that we don't typically think about.
@ evolution: I used to be a theistic evolutionist back in the day before I really studied the science (and theology) behind creationism and evolution. The biggest contradiction between evolution and creation is the fact that the Bible says that death entered the world through sin and evolution says that we got here through the life and death and evolution of species over millions of years.
It seems as though evolution is simply man's attempt to reconcile our presence in the world without figuring in deity.
As Christians, we shouldn't be (or feel) ridiculed for disregarding evolution. After exploration of the fossil record and the improbabilities of macroevolution, I believe we can intelligently bow out of believing in evolution.
Hi scott,
One way to resolve that theology with natural selection is considering that God knew man would sin and as God transcends time, he could act preemptively, allowing nature to develop in a way that constantly reminds us of the price of sin. In that way, sin did bring death into the world, yet in our temporal experience, it appears before the fall.
William Dembski presents a detailed explanation for this resolution at his website.
http://www.designinference.com/
The pdf of that article can be downloaded here:
http://www.designinference.com/documents/2006.05.christian_theodicy.pdf
Great discussion guys. I am really looking forward to Sunday which I'm sure will generate even more discussion. Scott, on the issue of "death," it does appear that biological "death" in some form was present before the fall (for example, man and animals were givne plants to eat). However, "human death," or "sin-related death," is depicted as being caused by man's sin. Mark, I was just wondering if you had ever considered the Old-Earth Creationist view as a possibility?
So, how long were Adam and Eve on the earth before the fall? Was it a day, 1000 years, or 10,000 years?
Carnivourous action...did that start after the fall?
Another interesting observation...Genisis 1:5,8,13, 19, 23, and 31 all have the "And there was evening, and there was morning-the (first through sixth) day.
Day seven...has it been completed yet? Or are we in the resting day?
Jared
You guys bring up some interesting points on the relationship between death and sin. I had a few thoughts. Going with what Dr. Whitefield said on the 11-10=07 podcast, no matter how you want to interpret creation or fuse it with evolution, a First Cause to it all must be supernatural. To get something from nothing goes against the very nature of our universe. God created the universe as a neutral playing field that - barring miracles - follows incredibly elegant, yet simple laws. Biological death is a consequence of these laws and, at least to me, seems independent of how humans choose to act on their free will.
Couldn't it mean, then, that when sin first entered the world that the death which resulted is a spiritual death - the separation from God? Isn't that somehow more meaningful to us?
In regard to missing the point of Genesis 1, I can't deny that I'm drawn to the speculative nature of the details as to how God did creation. If God's goal was to catch us up in its wonder, the mere fact that we have such a heightened fascination with trying to understand it is evidence that the goal was met.
A somewhat relevant quote from Herman Melville:
"Your voraciousness, fellow-critters. I don't blame ye so much for; that is nature, and can't be helped; but to govern that wicked nature, that is the point. You are sharks, certain; but if you govern the shark in you, why then you be angel; for an angel is nothing more than a shark well-governed."
from Cook's sermon to the sharks in Moby Dick
Romans 8:18-25 has some interesting things to say about creation.
"Against its will, all creation was subjected to God’s curse. But with eager hope, the creation looks forward to the day when it will join God’s children in glorious freedom from death and decay. For we know that all creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time."
If God's curse on creation was death and decay, then maybe it did not exist pre-curse? Just more wonder to add, I guess.
Post a Comment