Unknown's avatar

About ApoloJedi

Reading and healthy competition. People. Sharing the Good News!

Genesis – What was the writer’s intent?

It is fair to ask the question, “How did the writer intend his audience to read the content?” Genesis is written as history, and is not poetic like Psalms. The writer intended his audience to see the contents of his writings as having actually happened. The form of writing is distinctly different from Psalms, in which there are many allegorical and metaphorical components. It has become a recent fad for some scholars to reinterpret the writings of Genesis based on Egyptian cosmology or the perceived framework parallels. But what did the writer of Genesis intend his audience to understand? Hebrew scholars are nearly unanimous in their view that the writer intended his audience to see his writing as a historical account in which God created the universe in six literal days.

Should one erroneously claim “The first 11 chapters of Genesis are mythological“, I would ask them:

  • What contextual clues make you think that the first 11 chapters are mythological and the rest of Genesis is historical?
  • Why do you arbitrarily choose to assign mythological genre to the first 11 chapters when it is written with in same style as the rest of Genesis?
  • Which of the Christian doctrines in the first 11 chapters now have no basis because you choose mythology for Genesis?
    • God is the Creator
    • God created a good creation that was frustrated in corruption by man’s sin
    • Marriage between one man and one woman
    • The curse of sin is death, suffering, and corruption
    • The promise of redemption from the curse
    • Blood lineage of Jesus to Adam/Eve so that Jesus could be a kinsman redeemer of all mankind
    • God’s covenant never to flood the earth again
    • Making of the nations at Babel

Further Research:

http://creation.com/hebrew-scholar-affirms-that-genesis-means-what-it-says-ting-wang

http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/young_days1a-wtj.pdf

http://creation.com/is-genesis-poetry-figurative-a-theological-argument-polemic-and-thus-not-history

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1538-is-the-genesis-creation-account-poetry

Back to the Creation Manifesto Outline

Creation Manifesto

Tell me if you’ve heard this before, “Could God have used evolution as his creative mechanism?”

I have had several friends tell me that the evolutionary origins story is compatible with the whole biblical narrative and that there is no need to reject the evolutionary story. I would like to take on that claim and analyze it against God’s Word and later against some scientific observations.

The purpose for writing this manifesto is this:

  1. Define evolution and look at its history / intent
  2. Look at scripture to see if (as a whole) it can accommodate evolution. If not, what are the implications of trying to dissolve evolution into the biblical narrative?
  3. Look at the scientific reasons why evolution might not be on as solid ground as we’ve been led to believe.

Introduction

  1. Disclaimer
  2. Wrong Information
  3. Definitions
  4. History of Deep Time
  5. Did Darwin embrace Christianity?
  6. Evolutionary Mechanism
  7. Quotes

Not only is the acceptance of evolutionary thought unnecessary for Christians, but it is dangerous. The acceptance of the evolutionary origins story within the Christian church will erase the conviction of the historicity/truth of God’s Word. If the foundations of scripture (established in Genesis) can be marginalized as mythical or poetic, why should we not also be able to reinterpret doctrinal and historical scriptures to match the latest cultural/societal/scientific paradigms? For example, as homosexuality becomes more and more acceptable in today’s culture, it is feasible (seeing how pliable Genesis has been redefined) to expect Christian churches to ordain homosexual ministers. This is already happening in Episcopal, Presbyterian (PCUSA), and Anglican churches. So the battle for the integrity of God’s Word is not just about Genesis, but about the historicity/veracity of the Bible.

The battle of creation/evolution has been waged on many fronts and in many forums. Can my entry into the fray make a difference? My tiny blog may not turn the tide of the many battles, but for those who get a chance to read the following Manifesto, I hope that:

  1. Non-Christians come to faith in Jesus because they see that they can trust God’s Word.
  2. Christians are encouraged to trust God’s Word as cohesive and foundational.
  3. Christians are persuaded not to compromise the clear teachings of scripture simply to accommodate the currently popular paradigm and avoid falling into apostasy.
  4. Everyone is encouraged to study God’s Word for themselves and grow closer to the Creator.

4115-1231

The intended audience of this manifesto is brothers and sisters in Christ who are unsure of the Biblical teachings regarding origins, Christians who purposefully incorporate the evolutionary story into their worldview, and non-Christians who have categorically dismissed the teachings of the Bible because of the belief that the Bible conflicts with the modern academic paradigm. I have sincerely tried to remove wording that would be inflammatory, and my hope is that this presentation will instead be persuasive in order to help bring unity to Christians.

  1. Biblical reasons to exclude evolution in preference of a biblical creation model
    1. Genesis – Writer’s intent
    2. Literal days leave no room for metaphor
    3. God called his creation good
    4. Chrono-genealogies
    5. Adam and Eve were truly the 1st humans
    6. Death came by sin not before
    7. Jesus is not mythical, so neither is Adam
    8. Is there a gap?
    9. Like the Creator did, work six days and rest on the 7th
    10. At the beginning of creation God made them male and female
    11. Worldwide Flood
    12. Deep Time in scripture? Where?
    13. Can we help?
    14. Why not question scientific principles of other miracles?
    15. Is there a better way?
  2. Scientific reasons to exclude evolution
    1. Cosmological
      1. Short term comets
      2. Decaying Magnetic fields in planets, heat on planets/moons
      3. Faint Young Sun Paradox
      4. Super nova Remnants
      5. Laws of Thermodynamics
    2.  Geological
      1. Worldwide flood
      2. Polonium halos
      3. Erosion rates
      4. Hydrogen in Zircons
    3.  Biological/Genetic
      1. Human population growth
      2. DNA in fossil dinosaur bones
      3. Human mutational decay rate
      4. Mitochondrial Eve/Y-chromosome Adam
      5. Information Theory
      6. Living Fossils/stasis
    4. Misconceptions, Misinformation
      1. Junk DNA
      2. Chimp/human similarity
      3. Radiometric dating
      4. Geologic Column
      5. Evidence for evolution
        1. Antibiotic resistant bacteria
        2. Homology
        3. Horse evolution
        4. Whale evolution
      6. Convergence
      7. Missing Links
      8. ALL scientists believe in evolution

Thou Shalt Have No Other gods Before Me

This clear instruction from the Creator was given to Moses when he received the Ten Commandments. In the modern American culture it is not common for people to worship other deities (Baal, Molech, Zeus, Sun god…) But I would propose that people in America worship things intended to usurp the Creator:

  • Money
  • Comfort
  • Scientists
  • Sex
  • Sports
  • Their own children
  • Mother Earth
  • Deep Time (billions of years)

Do you find yourself worshiping at the altar of one of these false gods? Jason Lisle writes a good article encouraging Christians not to be lead astray by the false god of Deep Time.

Consider the Israelites.  Their main struggle was not with giving up God completely, but with adding other gods.  They wanted to merge their beliefs with the pagan practices of the day, and worshiped and served the gods of Canaan.  This was totally inappropriate, not only because the Canaanite gods are fictitious inventions of the mind, but because God alone deserves our worship and does not tolerate idolatry.  In the First Commandment, God states that “You shall have no other gods before Me.”  The phrase translated “before Me” has the meaning of “in my presence.”  Scripture is clear: God alone is to be worshiped as God (e.g. Matthew 4:9-10)

But according to his disciples, nothing is too difficult for Deep Time!  He is able to do any miracle!  Consider this famous quote from Dr. George Wald, “Time is the hero of the plot. … Given so much time, the impossible becomes possible, the possible becomes probable, the probable becomes virtually certain.  One only has to wait; time itself performs the miracles.”  Yes, the gradual evolution of dust into people may seem impossible.  But with Deep Time, all things are possible!  He is the “hero of the plot!”  Compare this with the characteristics associated with the biblical God (Matthew 19:26, Jeremiah 32:17).

Devotees take their religion very seriously.  Deep Time must not be questioned.  That would be sacrilege!  Those who fail to worship at the altar of Deep Time are ridiculed, and face being expelled from the classroom.  Textbooks that fail to acknowledge the supreme lordship of Deep Time are not likely to be used, or even published.  Those who wish to work as professors must swear allegiance to Deep Time and His servant Evolution if they want to be hired.

You can trust God’s revealed Word, the Bible in matters of history. Therefore, we can trust his Word when he promises our future hope.

The Problem of Evil

…is only a problem for non-Christians. It has been said countless times on internet forums (85,500,000 Google results for “Problem of Evil”) and by pop atheists that the existence of evil is proof that God does not exist.

skull

Photo by Mitja Juraja on Pexels.com

The skeptic’s argument goes something like this:

  1. God is good and all powerful
  2. God would not allow unjust suffering
  3. Evil/suffering exist

Conclusion:

  • Either God is not good
  • Or God is not all powerful
  • Or God does not exist

One of the problems with the argument is that it leaves out the fact that God originally created mankind upright and that God’s creation was originally free of evil. The original pair of humans (Adam and Eve) rebelled against God’s 1 law, and this rebellion brought death, suffering, and destruction into reality (Romans 5 & 8) and onto their descendants. Even creation was affected by sin (Genesis 3:17-18, Romans 8:19-23), therefore it is not unexpected for the Christian to endure earthquakes, famines, and disease.

In addition to this reason, those who think the problem of evil is for Christians, ignore God’s purpose. God has sufficient reason to allow temporary evil for eternal glory. All of creation is intended to honor God and God would be justified in condemning everyone for their inherited guilt as well as their rebellion against His laws. But praise God that He has chosen to give mercy to the undeserving for His ultimate glory!

Here’s the catch for the skeptic: By the very fact that humans recognize the difference between evil/suffering/sadness and good/redemption/joy we have an ultimate standard: God.

The following video helps lay this out with great clarity.

If there were no God and everything proceeded forward from the Big Bang to stellar formulation to the concretion of the earth to chemical evolution of DNA to progression of the “Tree of Life” to humans by means of natural selection acting on random mutations, would humanity even be able to recognize evil/suffering/sadness? In that scenario death, pain, theft, rape, assault, fraud, and loss would never even be noticed because that would be the natural way of things. If humans are simply the a collection of chemicals that have become highly organized over the course of billions of years of pain, death, theft, rape, assault, and fraud, then why do we acutely feel the affects of these things when they happen to us? Why do we recognize them with anger and sadness as injustice when someone assaults us or steals from us or lies to us? We immediately understand that we have been WRONGED because someone has been evil to us. Do we not all recognize that the Nazi Holocaust was the result of people being evil to the Jews? Again, if we’re only the culmination of star dust, why do we recognize this evil as something wrong?

We only recognize evil because God exists and has set the standard for behavior. He allows evil because his purposes are higher. His purpose is love and for us to experience loving Him. If we were only created with the capacity robotically do right and love God then we would be mechanic. People have chosen evil…all of us, and that is why we need the love of God. He had his own Son punished for our evil, so that we would not have to face the wrath of the Eternal Creator if only we cry out to Him in repentance. Check out Romans 10:9-10

That if you will confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.

The Price is Right

It appears that the “Prince of Reason” is merely a charlatan celebrity. His books and arguments have been shown to be completely refuted in The Greatest Hoax on Earth and The Irrational Atheist making him a charlatan.

But to qualify as a celebrity, he now charges between $100,000 and $500,000 to meet the “glorious one.”

But the $85 a month just touches the hem of rationality. After the neophyte passes through the successively more expensive ‘Darwin Circle’ and then the ‘Evolution Circle’, he attains the innermost circle, where for $100,000 a year or more he gets to have a private breakfast or lunch with Richard Dawkins, and a reserved table at an invitation-only circle event with ‘Richard’ as well as ‘all the benefits listed above’, so he still gets a discount on his Richard Dawkins T-shirt saying ‘Religion — together we can find a cure.’

I love the fact that after paying $100,000, you get a discount on their website to buy t-shirts.

Can Christians Disregard the Bible?

Recently, Michael Gungor, the lead singer of a group that calls themselves a Christian band, made this startling claim:

Do I believe that God literally drowned every living creature 5,000 years ago in a global flood except the ones who were living in a big boat? No, I don’t.

Why don’t I?

Because of science and rational thought.

It sounds like he would rather trust the naturalistic presuppositions of atheists as the ultimate authority over the truth revealed in God’s word.

Despite the obvious scientific evidence of a worldwide flood, he disregards the historicity of the Biblical account because of what he calls science and rational thought. The science is strongly on the side of confirming a worldwide flood. As far as his claim that he can disregard the Biblical account because of rational thought, it is quite irrational to throw away the foundation of logic, reason, and morality in the name of “rational thought.” It is only reasonable to stand strong on the rock of an unchanging foundation: God’s Revealed Word. Astrophysicist, Jason Lisle explains this in detail here:

What is the difference between a rational person and an irrational one?  A rational person has a good reason for his or her beliefs.  An irrational person does not.  But what we have seen above is that only the Christian worldview can allow us to have good reasons for our most basic beliefs – our presuppositions.  Apart from the Christian worldview, any reason that we offer for any belief cannot be ultimately justified.  It would appear that there are only two options for a person to hold.  One can either be a consistent Christian, or one can be irrational.

If Gungor wants to call themselves a Christian band, it makes sense that they would embrace the Bible as God’s revealed word, but if they are going to instead elevate the atheistic presuppositions above scripture, then they should cease calling themselves a Christian band.

sawing_branch

Amazing Mistakes

My job requires me to write complex code to extract data, compile it into useful information, and build reports to display it in a format that decision-makers can utilize for the benefit of the company. Sometimes, I have to take computer code that was written by someone else and modify it to meet the current standards or add functionality. All of this has to be done under time constraints.

It would sure be interesting to copy the code back and forth to different computers over and over millions of times and test the resulting copies to see if new code had mistakes in it. Those mistakes would inevitably lead to new features and complexities that the decision-makers could use to provide sound direction for the company. I would even expect old code that is inefficient or obsolete to be removed automatically with the right amount of time-restraints added.

Sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? Copying mistakes and time restraints automatically leading to new code that fixes problems and complements existing code…riiiiiiight.

That’s exactly what we are told to believe when evolutionists tell us that random mutations (copying mistakes) and natural selection (restraints/pressure) are applied to DNA (code). Humans (and every other life form) are here because of an aggregation of copying mistakes…really?

The real story can be found in the Bible. The Ultimate Programmer said, “Let us make man in our image and in our likeness…And he formed the man out of the dust and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils.” Human beings have value not because we are the pinnacle of an accumulation of mistakes but because we are created in the Almighty’s image.

 

Calibration Conundrum

If you have a watch that runs too fast or too slow, how do you know? One of the best ways is to compare it to some standard time like your phone’s time…a time that has been calibrated correctly.

But if you happen to be on a Caribbean cruise or a camping trip or in the Amazon jungle where you do not have access to a correctly calibrated time piece, how can you determine if your watch is displaying the correct time?

I would contend that this second situation is what happens with measuring time from the deep past. Now the Bible as a historical document contends that the Earth is about 6000 years old, but we have been told that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, but the time measuring tools used to calculate this 4.5 billion years has never been calibrated with actual time passage on the scales about which they are claimed to provide accurate accounts. These tools are assumptions and extrapolations mixed with measurable calculations that sound like science.

One of the tools used is radiometric dating, and while there are numerous types of radiometric dating, they all have the same faulty assumptions:

  1. The original amount of radioactive element is not known
  2. The rate of decay is assumed never to have changed.
  3. The original amount of stable/daughter element is assumed to have started at zero

Another tool that has been used to “prove” that the earth is older than the Bible claims is Ice Cores from Greenland and the Antarctic. The cores have distinct layers in them, and it is assumed that each of these layers are annual layers. But these layers are clearly not annual layers since airplanes buried in 1942 were retried in 1990 after being buried under hundreds of layers over 250 feet of ice. The calibration for millions of years of ice cores is wrong.

To get the billions of years that scientists need to discredit the Bible as a historical document, they have to assume that the years took place in the calculations. But the calibration is faulty. It’s a conundrum for them.

Not By Works

It’s dreadfully sad how quickly works-based gospel can creep into the thinking of committed Christians. I’ve really enjoyed reading some of the articles on ApologeticsPress.org. They’ve got some good apologetics articles. 

When I was reading their review of the movie, God’s Not Dead, I ran across this near the end of the article (WARNING – spoilers) :

Furthermore, the movie completely misrepresents how God has commanded people to be saved. The clearest example of this false teaching comes at the end of the movie. In a tragic accident, the atheistic professor is struck by a car and is about to die. It just so happens that a denominational minister is on the scene. The minister begs the atheistic professor to call on the Lord, say a version of the “sinner’s prayer,” and receive Jesus into his heart. Yet such teaching is never found in the Bible (Lyons, 2004; Jackson, 2014). God requires faithful obedience to the Gospel plan of salvation in order to receive the gift of salvation

 

After reading a little further into what Lyons considers the requirements for receiving the gift of salvation, he is apparently only including the obedience of baptism…not works as is sometimes understood.

In truth, it would be possible to go to any number
of verses and pick out a single thing that the verse says
saves a person. According to the Bible, love, repentance,
faith, baptism, confession, and obedience are but a few
examples of the things that save. However, it would be
dishonest, and poor Bible scholarship, to demand that
“only” repentance saves, or “confession alone” saves,
or that “baptism by itself” has the power to save. In the
same sense, one cannot (justifiably) pick the verses that
mention faith and belief, and demand that a person is
saved by “faith only” or “belief alone.”

Growing up, I went to a southern baptist church, and the idea of salvation was complete with confession, repentance, and faith in the saving sacrifice of Jesus. Baptism was seen as the first step of obedience of a new Christian. Now we attend an independent Christian church, and one of the central teachings is that water baptism is point at which a person receives the gift of salvation.

Scripture is clear on the issue of whether a person can be saved by works. Ephesians 2:8-9 says, “For by grace are you saved through faith, and that not of yourselves. It is the gift of God, so that no one can boast.”

So the question is whether baptism is part of “Calling on the name of Lord Jesus Christ” or is it the first step of obedience that a Christian does to publicly show that his faith is genuine. My own story is that I confessed and repented at age 10, but I was baptized at age 18 in recognition that it was part of my Christian obedience. 

While I’m not convinced that baptism is the saving action, it is clear that one cannot receive the gift of salvation by good works or by being good enough. 

 

Jesus Was NOT a Good Man

History’s greatest character was not a good man. It is simply not an option. Jesus could not be a good man, because he claimed to be Almighty God. That’s a pretty big claim, and this assertion carries big repercussions with it. So did Jesus really claim to be God? Let’s see…

Who is Elohim (God)? Genesis 2:4 identifies the Creator God as Yahweh. In verse 7 and 22 of the same chapter, Yahweh created the first man and woman respectively along with the rest of creation. Yahweh is the Creator

Moses writes of his first encounter with God Almighty in Exodus 3. When at the burning bush, Moses asks the Almighty how the Israelites will know that Moses speaks on God’s authority, God replies, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you…Say this to the people of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your ancestors–has sent me to you.”

So, we’ve got a pretty good picture of who God is through the words of Moses. Moving forward 1500 years to Jesus’ claims in John 8:58, we read, “Before Abraham was, I AM.” The Jews knew that Jesus was identifying himself as the Creator God, and “they picked up stones to stone him.” Jesus didn’t just claim to be a prophet or rabbi or just a good man with good teachings. He claimed to be the same Elohim, who 1) created Adam and Eve, 2) made a covenant with Abraham, and 3) spoke to Moses. 

So the claim is there, and now there are only three options for us today. 

  1. We can believe that Jesus claims are true. He is the Creator God.
  2. We can believe that Jesus lied. Jesus knew he was not the Creator God, but he wanted other to believe it.
  3. We can believe that Jesus was loony. Jesus only thought he was the Creator God.

Jesus was NOT just a good man. He was and is the Creator God. He was either a liar or a lunatic, which would have made him unqualified as a good man…or he was the Creator God. Don’t get me wrong about his human form. He lived this earthly life as a man, and as a man he lived in perfect harmony with the Father. And as a man, he died the most cruel death in history. Living as a man was the only way that he could have served as a kinsman redeemer for mankind.

In the end, he validated his claim as the Creator God by coming back to life after being crucified. He fulfilled hundreds of old testament prophesies about his existence and life. He lived before Abraham, and he lives today in the lives of who invite him into their lives. Those who believe option one (John 3:16), who repent of their sin (2 Peter 3:9), and invite Jesus to be Lord of their life (Romans 10:9-10) will be saved from eternal death.