The Creation Week: A Systems-Based Approach

Faith & Science Conversation
109

Kelli,

One of the BioLogos interviews on “Language of God” was with Frances Collins. (Others in the BL camp have stated similar experiences.) He noted general types of people within the Origins discussion: Atheists (only evaluation, adaptability, etc, No credit to a god); Old Earth Creationists (God and evolution with 2 significant differences with the BioLogos folks: More emphais on Intelligent Design and, related, How often God intentionally stepped into the evolutionary force He initiate to create a unique species (e.g. humans) that could not possibly have come directly from lower life form (OEC paraphrase); Biologos (God created the universe, the heavens, the earth, and the natural laws within his creation, knowing how they would develop, knowing the future, but giving attitude to several species, especially Homo sapiens, to have free moral agency, to make choices He know they would make, but allowing the choice allowed for a more robust relationship); the YEC. FC indicated that Atheists and YEC folks were binary: evolution did not allow for God - period - against God did not allow for evolution - period. He found it easier to talk to the Atheists than the YEC. At least, the Atheists had the common ground of science to talk with the OEC and BL. OEC and BL wrote a book together, stating the subtleties of their two positions. interesting read. The point of all this history: certainty is a weakness, recognizing cognitive dissonance is a strength. CD allows me to ask what is not addressed by Scripture? CD allows me to ask if there are two books God wrote (create)? Scripture for addressing all things spiritual and more and reasons for living, even for nature; and the Book of Nature, from which God gave us the capacity (our minds) to learn so much about the universe He created. Kelli, I have the felling I lost you at BioLogos; you’d need to listen to the rich material present these past 3 years. My perception is that you’ve closed your mind to such questions. Perhaps, you’ve idolized the Bible, or some imperfect translation, over God and His creation? Go in peace.

110

I think you mean “evolution”. Although, one could argue that this term also applies pretty well.

111

I am no translator, however, i have to ask…
if you truly believe that, then how can a theistic evolutionist possibly make such a claim when one starts with the premise that Science must come first and the bible align with the science?

That would seem to me to be an absurd way to approach Christianity!

take the following proposition

Science is right and the creation story is wrong

IF true, have i as a creationist compromised any Christian beliefs of the New Testament?

If false, are you codeming yourself because you ignore the very reason for our need of a saviour and salvation?

before you answer that, consider the following…

The Bible categorically claims “the wages of sin is death” “God comanded Adam, Do not eat of the tree…or you will surely die”

theistic evolution answers the above by stating “oh its a spiritual death”.

Heres the thing, what did God say to Adam, Eve and the serpent in Genesis Ch 3?

So the LORD God said to the serpent:

“Because you have done this,
cursed are you above all livestock
and every beast of the field!
**On your belly will you go,**

** and dust you will eat,**
** all the days of your life**"

To the woman He said:

    “**I will sharply increase your pain in childbirth**;
    in pain you will bring forth children.
    **Your desire will be for your husband,**

** and he will rule over you**."

And to Adam He said:

“**Because you have listened to the voice of your wife**
and have eaten from the tree
of which I commanded you not to eat,
**cursed is the ground because of you**;
through toil you will eat of it
all the days of your life.
**Both thorns and thistles it will yield for you**,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your bread,
until you return to the ground—
because out of it were you taken.
For dust you are,
and to dust you shall return.”

Now for those who quite happily make this a poetic story with no literal meaning or application, i have to ask,
Do serpents fly?
Are serpents popular amongst the animal kingdom?
Does the ground grow weeds and do men toil it to survive?
Are women generally used as the plaything of men?

The above might sound like really stupid questions, but if you honestly think about them…do they not see fulfillment exactly as written in the world around us right now? Can you not look outside your door at home into a backyard and see the weeds and thorns (for those who dont live in concrete jungles obviously)

If the first few chapters of genesis are interpreted in the manner that theistic evolution does, how then do such individuals explain the reality of weeds and thorns, pain in childbirth, and the general dislike indeed even hate for snakes among humans and animals?

112

No one is doing any such thing and that sounds like a pharisaical false accusation.
 

You may have seen this before:

Truth comes from reality – the truth that comes from the reality of the data that God has revealed in the Bible and the truth that comes from the reality of data that God has revealed in creation. They do not and cannot conflict. If they appear to, then our interpretation of one or the other or both is flawed.

We are interested in truth.

2 Likes
113

 
The original unfallen creation was merely “very good”, not perfect (there is a word for perfect in Hebrew, and God did not use it):

God’s purpose was and still is to magnify the most valuable thing there is, namely himself (he would be lying if he said otherwise), and to increase and share his joy. He is happy in himself.*

Father’s intended purpose in creating the world was to was not to create a perfect one. His purpose was not thwarted. It was a two creations model** from the get-go, and the first one was subjected to futility on purpose, from its very start.

The original unfallen creation was merely “very good”, not perfect, since it did not and could not magnify God’s justice, mercy, grace and love through our Lord, Jesus, the Christ. Jesus’ motivation is also explicit and clear, and it was forward looking***: “for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame.” Hebrews 12:2. That joy is us(!), if you nave been adopted into his family.

The New Earth will be perfect.

 

*See The Pleasures of God by John Piper
**”Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Matthew 25:34
***Our motivation should be forward looking, too, toward future grace. See Future Grace, also by John Piper

2 Likes
114

You should not make omissions when you quote. It says multiply pain in childbirth, it does not say there was none before, like your neglection implies.

1 Like
115

So if you believe the Bible says the Earth is flat, do you have to deny all of the science demonstrating that the Earth is round?

1 Like
116

Because the Bible says this, Adam:

¹³Do not have two differing weights in your bag — one heavy, one light. ¹⁴Do not have two differing measures in your house — one large, one small. ¹⁵You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lᴏʀᴅ your God is giving you. ¹⁶For the Lᴏʀᴅ your God detests anyone who does these things, anyone who deals dishonestly. — Deuteronomy 25:13-16

I’ve already made this point in this thread. Any creation model, any challenge to the theory of evolution or the age of the earth, any interpretation of Genesis 1, must obey that Scripture. It’s not about “making the bible (sic) align with science,” it’s about making the Bible align with the Bible.

I’m sorry Adam, what you are doing is the equivalent of asking me the question, “When did you stop beating your wife?” It is a loaded question that comes with an implicit accusation that, for anyone who has never had a wife, or who does but never started beating her in the first place, is categorically false.

You need to understand that young earth creationism is not the Biblical creation story. It is a cartoon caricature of the Biblical creation story with a thick layer of science fiction slathered on top of it.

You also need to understand that many of us round here fully acknowledge that sin is very much a thing and very much the reason why we need a Saviour, evolution or not. Even if Adam and Eve were just some sort of theological construct rather than real, literal people, it wouldn’t mean that there’s no such thing as sin. It would just mean that we didn’t have someone in the dim and distant past to blame for it, and that instead we actually had to take responsibility for it for ourselves. In fact, the whole story of Adam and Eve is an object lesson in not passing the buck in the first place:

  • Us: “It was original sin.” Blame Adam and Eve.
  • Adam: “It was that wife that you gave me.” Blame the wife, and blame God.
  • Eve: “The serpent deceived me.” Blame the demon. “I need deliverance ministry.”
  • And the serpent didn’t have a leg to stand on…

Besides, to claim that sin doesn’t exist just because there are unanswered questions about how it got started is quite simply out of touch with reality.

3 Likes
117

Btw, science is not capitalized and the Bible is.

3 Likes
118

John 1:1-3 (NIV2011)
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
John 1:14 (NIV2011)
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

The Bible says that God created the universe though the Logos, the Rational Word of God, Jesus Christ. I believe this. Science is the method by which God’s people try to use the rational minds God gave them to understand God’s universe.

You seem to get all hot and bothered about how some people do not accept your understanding of Genesis 1, but fail to take seriously John 1 which is a much better understanding the Creation through the Logos, Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Why?
Is the NT inferior to the Old?

The Truth is One, just as God is One The Truth includes science and theology (and philosophy) which all originate in Jesus Christ, the Logos. Why? Because this is how God did it!

AMEN

119

That would seem to be backed by scripture. Romans 3 states that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Jesus asked the crowd for someone who had not sinned to step forward, and no one did. If a person were perfect and had never sinned then perhaps a literal A&E would be vital for justifying salvation, but I think that possibility isn’t even worth considering.

120

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.