It is often fun to look back into my archives to review my thoughts in past dialogues with Friends. That can be constructive, for although the Bible never changes our knowledge and understanding of what it teaches may change as we mature in our Christian walk. The blog below is from a January 28, 2012, discussion on the TimesDaily Christian Forum. Reading it again, I see that my understanding of the Creation story found in Genesis has not changed. This is what I posted in 2012:
In a discussion on the TimesDaily Religion Forum, begun by Firenze titled "From Sea To Land: Not How, But Why?" - my Christian Friend, O No, and I have begun a dialogue on the days of Creation. Were they 24 hour lunar days, as I believe - or were they long periods of time as my Friend, O No, believes?
In an earlier post, O No wrote, "Frankly, I am one who loves the Lord with all my heart, but I have no problem with scientific fact. The way I see it, the Lord created the laws of science when He created the universe, and everything is operating according to plan.
Bill, you always say that parts of the Bible are literal, and parts are allegory. You have said that if the literal meaning doesn't make sense, then read it as allegory. Well, to me the seven days are allegory. Each "day" of God's time is a LOT longer than the days of our time. When you read the creation story THAT way, everything falls into place, it all makes sense, and the conflict between science and faith no longer exists."
Yes, I have often written that, in reading the Bible, we first look for a literal meaning - and if that fits, that is our interpretation. If not, look for a metaphorical or symbolic meaning.
However, the Hebrew word for day is "Yom" which appears in the KJV Bible 2287 times and the vast majority of those times (2008 times), it does mean a lunar day, i.e., 24 hours.
And, in the New Testament Greek the word for day is "hemera" which is found 389 times. Of those incidences 355 times it means a lunar day.
So, it would seem that most of the time that we read "day" in the Bible - it is referring to a 24 hour day.
To attempt to read the Creation story of Genesis any other way, in an attempt to agree with atheist and secularist, is compromising. As you said in your post, when God created the heavens and the earth - part of that creation was all the sciences and all the laws which govern and define those sciences. So, there is no need to compromise.
And, O No responds, "Bill, you say, 'So, it would seem that most of the time that we read "day" in the Bible - it is referring to a 24 hour day.'
That still leaves 279 times, according to you, that the Old Testament uses the word allegorically.
Now, you KNOW I have never "attempted to agree with atheists and secularists" - so there's no need to make that insulting accusation. I decided as a child that the interpretation I explained in my previous post, the one where I believe God's "days" are so much longer than ours, is the one that makes most sense to me. Please, can't we agree to disagree without these hurtful and unfounded accusations?"
Yes, in the KJV, the word "yom" does have an allegorical meaning 279 times versus the 2008 times it means a lunar day. That is an 8 to 1 ratio. O No, would you walk across a busy highway or boulevard - if you only had a 1 out of 8 (12%) chance of making it across safely? So, why accept the 12% chance that God did not mean a lunar day - when much of the Bible supports this teaching?
O, my Friend, while it may appear in my post that I was speaking of you when I mention compromise; that was not my thinking. You and I are Christian brother and sister who can agree to disagree at times, without throwing rocks. However, what I had in mind was more the organizations, groups, and teachers such as Dr. Hugh Ross and his "Reasons To Believe" ministry which holds a Theistic Evolution belief.
Why is the Theistic Evolution compromise so dangerous to our Christian faith? When one begins to cast doubt upon the historicity of the Genesis Creation story - typically, they do not stop there. Dr. Hugh Ross is a good example. He, and his organization "Reasons To Believe" teaches the Day/Age Theory of Creation, i.e., that the days of Creation were not lunar days, but were billions of years.
The problem with this teaching, besides the fact that it attempts to negate the Genesis teaching of Creation, is that it begins the natural progression toward believing other non-Biblical teachings such as the Gap Theory and other misunderstandings. Theistic Evolution, Day Age Theory, Gap Theory, and Progressive Creation are all progressive bed fellows and are not Biblical.
If you will read "Hugh Ross, ICR, and the Bible" by James Stambaugh, M.Div., at: http://www.icr.org/article/hugh-ross-icr-bible/ you will find that Ross also denies that Adam's sin of disobedience caused physical death - and, against all scientific teaching of a world-wide Noah's Flood, Ross believes and teaches only a local flood - and, his teachings on Adam's fall not bringing physical death leads toward a belief in the Gap Theory, i.e., that death and suffering were in the world long before Adam and Eve were created. You can see the progression - starting with one false teaching and progressing to more false teachings. In this you can see the progression: Theistic Evolution, Day Age Theory, Gap Theory, to Progressive Creation.
O No, when I wrote of compromise, it was not you that I had in mind - but, rather it was people such as Dr. Hugh Ross.
What are other dangers of the Theistic Evolution teaching? The abbreviated article below lists ten dangers. Keep in mind that when it mentions "evolution" it means Darwinian Evolution. Evolution as micro evolution, i.e., adaptation to environmental, dietary, etc., changes, is valid as witnessed by different skin coloring in different nations where environments vary from extremely hot sun to very cool climates. And, physical attributes, i.e., size, etc., can be attributed to different dietary habits.
However, Darwinian Evolution, which teaches that one species evolved into an entirely different species - is 100% against all Biblical teaching. Over and over in Genesis, we read, "after their kind" telling us that all creatures "were fruitful and multiplied" after its own kind. A kangaroo did not become a horse or a cow. An alligator did not become a bird. "Each, after their kind," is Biblical and is true.
So, O No, and all my Religion Forum Friends, I pray that you see that there can only be one understanding of God's Creation. And, that is the one taught in Genesis, that, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1) - clarified and emphasized in Genesis 1:5, "And there was evening and there was morning, one day" (evening and morning can only apply to a lunar day) - and confirmed in Exodus, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them. . ." (Exodus 20:11). Any other teaching denies the authority of the Bible and it denies our omnipotent, all powerful, God who created us.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
In a discussion on the TimesDaily Religion Forum, begun by Firenze titled "From Sea To Land: Not How, But Why?" - my Christian Friend, O No, and I have begun a dialogue on the days of Creation. Were they 24 hour lunar days, as I believe - or were they long periods of time as my Friend, O No, believes?
In an earlier post, O No wrote, "Frankly, I am one who loves the Lord with all my heart, but I have no problem with scientific fact. The way I see it, the Lord created the laws of science when He created the universe, and everything is operating according to plan.
Bill, you always say that parts of the Bible are literal, and parts are allegory. You have said that if the literal meaning doesn't make sense, then read it as allegory. Well, to me the seven days are allegory. Each "day" of God's time is a LOT longer than the days of our time. When you read the creation story THAT way, everything falls into place, it all makes sense, and the conflict between science and faith no longer exists."
Yes, I have often written that, in reading the Bible, we first look for a literal meaning - and if that fits, that is our interpretation. If not, look for a metaphorical or symbolic meaning.
However, the Hebrew word for day is "Yom" which appears in the KJV Bible 2287 times and the vast majority of those times (2008 times), it does mean a lunar day, i.e., 24 hours.
And, in the New Testament Greek the word for day is "hemera" which is found 389 times. Of those incidences 355 times it means a lunar day.
So, it would seem that most of the time that we read "day" in the Bible - it is referring to a 24 hour day.
To attempt to read the Creation story of Genesis any other way, in an attempt to agree with atheist and secularist, is compromising. As you said in your post, when God created the heavens and the earth - part of that creation was all the sciences and all the laws which govern and define those sciences. So, there is no need to compromise.
And, O No responds, "Bill, you say, 'So, it would seem that most of the time that we read "day" in the Bible - it is referring to a 24 hour day.'
That still leaves 279 times, according to you, that the Old Testament uses the word allegorically.
Now, you KNOW I have never "attempted to agree with atheists and secularists" - so there's no need to make that insulting accusation. I decided as a child that the interpretation I explained in my previous post, the one where I believe God's "days" are so much longer than ours, is the one that makes most sense to me. Please, can't we agree to disagree without these hurtful and unfounded accusations?"
Yes, in the KJV, the word "yom" does have an allegorical meaning 279 times versus the 2008 times it means a lunar day. That is an 8 to 1 ratio. O No, would you walk across a busy highway or boulevard - if you only had a 1 out of 8 (12%) chance of making it across safely? So, why accept the 12% chance that God did not mean a lunar day - when much of the Bible supports this teaching?
O, my Friend, while it may appear in my post that I was speaking of you when I mention compromise; that was not my thinking. You and I are Christian brother and sister who can agree to disagree at times, without throwing rocks. However, what I had in mind was more the organizations, groups, and teachers such as Dr. Hugh Ross and his "Reasons To Believe" ministry which holds a Theistic Evolution belief.
Why is the Theistic Evolution compromise so dangerous to our Christian faith? When one begins to cast doubt upon the historicity of the Genesis Creation story - typically, they do not stop there. Dr. Hugh Ross is a good example. He, and his organization "Reasons To Believe" teaches the Day/Age Theory of Creation, i.e., that the days of Creation were not lunar days, but were billions of years.
The problem with this teaching, besides the fact that it attempts to negate the Genesis teaching of Creation, is that it begins the natural progression toward believing other non-Biblical teachings such as the Gap Theory and other misunderstandings. Theistic Evolution, Day Age Theory, Gap Theory, and Progressive Creation are all progressive bed fellows and are not Biblical.
If you will read "Hugh Ross, ICR, and the Bible" by James Stambaugh, M.Div., at: http://www.icr.org/article/hugh-ross-icr-bible/ you will find that Ross also denies that Adam's sin of disobedience caused physical death - and, against all scientific teaching of a world-wide Noah's Flood, Ross believes and teaches only a local flood - and, his teachings on Adam's fall not bringing physical death leads toward a belief in the Gap Theory, i.e., that death and suffering were in the world long before Adam and Eve were created. You can see the progression - starting with one false teaching and progressing to more false teachings. In this you can see the progression: Theistic Evolution, Day Age Theory, Gap Theory, to Progressive Creation.
O No, when I wrote of compromise, it was not you that I had in mind - but, rather it was people such as Dr. Hugh Ross.
What are other dangers of the Theistic Evolution teaching? The abbreviated article below lists ten dangers. Keep in mind that when it mentions "evolution" it means Darwinian Evolution. Evolution as micro evolution, i.e., adaptation to environmental, dietary, etc., changes, is valid as witnessed by different skin coloring in different nations where environments vary from extremely hot sun to very cool climates. And, physical attributes, i.e., size, etc., can be attributed to different dietary habits.
However, Darwinian Evolution, which teaches that one species evolved into an entirely different species - is 100% against all Biblical teaching. Over and over in Genesis, we read, "after their kind" telling us that all creatures "were fruitful and multiplied" after its own kind. A kangaroo did not become a horse or a cow. An alligator did not become a bird. "Each, after their kind," is Biblical and is true.
10 DANGERS OF THEISTIC EVOLUTION
Christian Answers Network
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c015.html
In the Theistic Evolutionary system, God is not the omnipotent Lord of all things, whose Word has to be taken seriously by all men. But, He is integrated into the evolutionary philosophy. This leads to 10 dangers for Christians:
Danger NO. 1… Misrepresentation of the Nature of God
The Bible reveals God to us as our Father in Heaven, who is absolutely perfect (Matthew 5:48), holy (Isaiah 6:3), and omnipotent (Jeremiah 32:17). Theistic Evolution gives a false representation of the nature of God because death and suffering are ascribed to the Creator as principles of creation. Progressive creationism, likewise, allows for millions of years of death. . . before (Adam's) sin.
Danger NO. 2… God becomes a God of the Gaps
In Theistic Evolution the only workspace allotted to God is that part of nature which evolution cannot “explain” with the means presently at its disposal. In this way, He is reduced to being a “god of the gaps” for those phenomena about which there are doubts. This leads to the view that “God is therefore not absolute, but He Himself has evolved -- He is evolution.”
Danger NO. 3… Denial of Central Biblical Teachings
The entire Bible bears witness that we are dealing with a source of truth aut****d by God (2 Timothy 3:16), with the Old Testament as the indispensable “ramp” leading to the New Testament. . . The biblical creation account should not be regarded as a myth, a parable, or an allegory, but as a historical report. . . The doctrine of Theistic Evolution undermines this basic way of reading the Bible, as vouched for by Jesus, the prophets, and the Apostles. Events reported in the Bible are reduced to mythical imagery, and an understanding of the message of the Bible as being true in word and meaning -- is lost.
Danger NO. 4… Loss of the Way for Finding God
The Bible describes man as being completely ensnared by sin after Adam's fall (Romans 7:18-19). Only those persons who realize that they are sinful and lost will seek the Savior who “came to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).
However, evolution knows no sin in the Biblical sense of missing one's purpose (in relation to God). Sin is made meaningless, and that is exactly the opposite of what the Holy Spirit does -- He declares sin to be sinful. If sin is seen as a harmless evolutionary factor, then one has lost the key for finding God -- which is not resolved by adding “God” to the evolutionary scenario.
Danger NO. 5… The Doctrine of God's Incarnation is Undermined
The incarnation of God through His Son Jesus Christ is one of the basic teachings of the Bible. The Bible states that, “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), “Christ Jesus… was made in the likeness of men” (Philippians 2:5-7).
The idea of evolution undermines this foundation of our salvation. Evolutionist Hoimar von Ditfurth discusses the incompatibility of Jesus' incarnation and evolutionary thought: “Consideration of evolution inevitably forces us to a critical review… of Christian formulations. This clearly holds for the central Christian concept of the 'incarnation' of God… "
Danger NO. 6… The Biblical Basis of Jesus' Work of Redemption Is Mythologized
The Bible teaches that the first man's (Adam) fall into sin was a real event and that this was the direct cause of sin in the world: “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” (Romans 5:12).
Theistic Evolution does not acknowledge Adam as the first man - nor that he was created directly from “the dust of the ground” by God (Genesis 2:17). Most Theistic Evolutionists regard the creation account as being merely a mythical tale, albeit with some spiritual significance. However, the sinner, Adam, and the Savior, Jesus, are linked together in the Bible (Romans 5:16-18). Thus any view which mythologizes Adam - undermines the Biblical basis of Jesus' work of redemption.
Danger NO. 7… Loss of Biblical Chronology
The Bible provides us with a time scale for history and this underlies a proper understanding of the Bible. This time scale includes:
The time-scale cannot be extended indefinitely into the past, nor into the future. There is a well defined beginning in Genesis 1:1, as well as a moment when physical time will end (Matthew 24:14).
- The total duration of creation was six days (Exodus 20:11).
Galatians 4:4 points out the most outstanding event in the world's history: “But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son.” This happened (just over) 2,000 years ago.
- The age of the universe may be estimated in terms of the genealogies recorded in the Bible (but note that it cannot be calculated exactly). It is of the order of thousands of years, not billions.
The return of Christ in power and glory is the greatest expected future event.
Supporters of Theistic Evolution (and Progressive Creation) disregard the Biblically given measures of time in favor of evolutionist time scales involving billions of years both past and future (for which there are no convincing physical grounds). This can lead to two errors (of thinking):
- Not all statements of the Bible are to be taken seriously.
Danger NO. 8… Loss of Creation Concepts
- Vigilance concerning the second coming of Jesus may be lost.
Certain essential Creation concepts are taught in the Bible. These include:
- God created matter without using any available material (ex nihilo).
- God created the earth first, and on the fourth day He added the moon, the solar system, our local galaxy, and all other star systems. This sequence conflicts with all ideas of “cosmic evolution,” such as the “big bang” cosmology.
Danger NO. 9… Misrepresentation of Reality
- Theistic Evolution ignores all such Biblical Creation principles and replaces them with evolutionary notions, thereby contradicting and opposing God's omnipotent acts of creation.
The Bible carries the seal of truth, and all its pronouncements are authoritative -- whether they deal with questions of faith and salvation, daily living, or matters of scientific importance.
Evolutionists brush all this aside, e.g. Richard Dawkins says, “Nearly all peoples have developed their own creation myth, and the Genesis story is just the one that happened to have been adopted by one particular tribe of Middle Eastern herders. It has no more special status than the belief of a particular West African tribe that the world was created from the excrement of ants.”
If evolution is false, then numerous sciences have embraced false testimony. Whenever these sciences conform with evolutionary views, they misrepresent reality. How much more then a theology which departs from what the Bible says and embraces evolution?
Danger NO. 10… Missing the Purpose
In no other historical book do we find so many and such valuable statements of purpose for man as in the Bible. For example:
- Man is God's purpose in creation (Genesis 1:27-28).
- Man is the purpose of God's plan of redemption (Isaiah 53:5).
- Man is the purpose of the mission of God's Son (1 John 4:9).
- We are the purpose of God's inheritance (Titus 3:7).
Conclusion: The doctrines of Creation and (Darwinian) Evolution are so strongly divergent that reconciliation is totally impossible. The Theistic Evolutionists attempt to integrate the two doctrines; however such syncretism reduces the message of the Bible to insignificance.
- Heaven is our destination (1 Peter 1:4).
The conclusion is inevitable: There is no support for Theistic Evolution in the Bible.
So, O No, and all my Religion Forum Friends, I pray that you see that there can only be one understanding of God's Creation. And, that is the one taught in Genesis, that, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Genesis 1:1) - clarified and emphasized in Genesis 1:5, "And there was evening and there was morning, one day" (evening and morning can only apply to a lunar day) - and confirmed in Exodus, "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them. . ." (Exodus 20:11). Any other teaching denies the authority of the Bible and it denies our omnipotent, all powerful, God who created us.
God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,
Bill
Click on the image to enlarge:
No comments:
Post a Comment