"Faith is believing what you know ain't so" (Mark Twain).

[O'Darby]

You bring up some very good ideas that got me thinking about the subject. With the scientific advancements we've made since Moses penned Genesis, it is rather obvious that the description on how God made the universe was not written in order to conform to modern science. While our science can neither prove nor disprove Genesis 1:1, the rest of the creation story clearly does not agree with our science. As I said, trying to make it do so is a futile endeavor indeed. However, I do think those who do are sincere and are at least convinced of the inerrancy of the Bible, and for that I have to respect them for that. Bible skeptics don't even make it out of the starting gate!

Having said that, I think we may want to consider how the science of 1,000 BC agreed or disagreed with Genesis. That is after all the era in which Moses wrote, and from that perspective Genesis is in total agreement with 1st milinnial BC science.

When we in modern time visualize the universe we see something like:

View attachment 43258

This is pretty much our world view and it certainly doesn't look like anything at all in Genesis. But what was their worldview, their science? Those in Ancient Middle Universe, including the Jews, visualized the universe something like:

View attachment 43259

The verse references in this diagram align perfectly with how those folks visualized the universe. Such an image was shared, not only by the Jews, but by all those who lived in the Ancient Near East. God wrote in terms they already understood. He saw no need to bring up the big bang. Their world started in a small garden but I see the language as saying that it was God's intent that the garden should eventually spread across the entire land. And yes, as far as the Jews were concerned, the earth was flat. In fact the word "earth" is almost always translated as "land" everywhere else it is used. It is the Hebrew word "erets." We in our time see the earth as a globe which aligns with our worldview depicted in the first image above. We know that because of relatively new instruments such as telescopes. But had you and I lived in the days of Moses it would be indisputable that the land was indeed flat. We'd just have to walk outside of our tent and look around. With the scientific instruments of our eyes, it would be obvious. Case closed!

Had God communicated the scriptures last year in New York or LA, I would think Genesis would have read quite differently that it does now. Perhaps God would have mentioned atoms, quarks, Quantum Mechanics, etc. I would imagine that if God waited until the 30th century to reveal Himself, the description of the universe may well be as different from our current view as ours is from Moses' view. Speculation of course, but not out of the realm of possibility. I have little doubt that science 1,000 years from now will unlock many secrets of the universe of which we can't presently even imagine.

In general, I don't think it was God's intention to explain exactly how He brought the universe into existence. I think that what He intended was to tell mankind that it was He that brought it into existence. That of course is fully divulged in Genesis 1:1. But what was the message He wanted to convey in rest of the creation story? Without going into a lot of detail, I think it was simply that He wanted to make a suitable habitat for humans to dwell together with Him in complete harmony. As such, I think God did a great job of communicating just that, and He did it in a way that spans both time and culture. Rather ingenious in my opinion.

The walking talking snake is another interesting little tidbit in Genesis. All I'll say about that is that even we in our modern days often call some human being a "rat" or, and more to the point, a "snake in the grass." I think we all understand the message such usage of words are meant to convey. I don't know for sure how they saw it, but it was probably at least close to how we see it. In any case, I seriously doubt they spent much time in discussing how snakes used to walk and talk. Again, that is conjecture on my part, but does it really matter on way or the other when considering God's overall plan for mankind? I think not.

Thanks for the discuccion.

Excellent! And thanks for not going into the knee-jerk mode that posts such as mine merely identify me as "not a real Christian."

I do find it uncanny that the Genesis account, especially in comparison to other ancient creation myths, meshes remarkably well with modern thinking. As you note, Genesis teaches the essential truth that we live in a God-designed and God-created universe with meaning and purpose. God created from nothing by His word - which accords beautifully with modern thinking in regard to idealism, consciousness-as-fundamental and (as ID proponent William Dembski suggests) information being foundational to reality. God said let there be light - voila, energy as foundational. God created in an orderly sequence that just happens to mesh quite nicely with evolutionary theory (even though I am not a gung-ho evolutionist). Even the account of Adam and Eve expresses fundamental truths about human nature that other ancient accounts just don't capture. Indeed, the other ancient accounts, while they can be profound, would typically seem laughable if anyone insisted on taking them literally today. In that sense, then, Genesis does indeed seem divinely inspired.

The problem is when believers in 2024 try to insist that the Bible must be read in terms of the ancient cosmology and that the ancient cosmology was in fact factually correct. Few would try to argue in favor of the Ancient Middle Universe as depicted in your illustration, so they opt for kind of a half-baked literalism like a 6,500-year-old earth.

 

[ScottA]

Romans says a man (Adam) caused sin to enter into the world, and also that a man would have to redeem it from sin. Romans 5:15 says “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” Some theologians teach that only God could pay for the sins of mankind, but the Bible specifically says that a man must do it. The book of Corinthians makes the same point Romans does when it says “For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead” (1 Corinthians 15:21).

Again, that is good...unless you mean it to say that Jesus was just a man.

I have explained already how He was "I am" "before the foundation of the world", then "a man also", as an "image" of "I am" and again God having "taken His life up again", which only God can do.

 

[St. SteVen]

Unfortunately the Continuationist position is on that presents the Scriptures as not really sufficient to bring one to a knowledge of the gospel.

St. SteVen said:
How did you arrive at that conclusion? ???

The point of all such miraculous spiritual gifts was to authenticate the message of the one with such gifts. With the complete Bible, there really is nothing more needed. So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ (Rom 10:17). The word of Christ is complete in the Bible.

That's the Cessationist position. (again)
The Continuationist position makes no such claim.

The complete which is to come is Christ at His Second coming.
Are you also claiming that prophecies have ceased and knowledge has passed away?

Furthermore, it seems that you have no idea where the Bible came from.
Is that true?

/

 

[Rich R]

Excellent! And thanks for not going into the knee-jerk mode that posts such as mine merely identify me as "not a real Christian."

I do find it uncanny that the Genesis account, especially in comparison to other ancient creation myths, meshes remarkably well with modern thinking. As you note, Genesis teaches the essential truth that we live in a God-designed and God-created universe with meaning and purpose. God created from nothing by His word - which accords beautifully with modern thinking in regard to idealism, consciousness-as-fundamental and (as ID proponent William Dembski suggests) information being foundational to reality. God said let there be light - voila, energy as foundational. God created in an orderly sequence that just happens to mesh quite nicely with evolutionary theory (even though I am not a gung-ho evolutionist). Even the account of Adam and Eve expresses fundamental truths about human nature that other ancient accounts just don't capture. Indeed, the other ancient accounts, while they can be profound, would typically seem laughable if anyone insisted on taking them literally today. In that sense, then, Genesis does indeed seem divinely inspired.

The problem is when believers in 2024 try to insist that the Bible must be read in terms of the ancient cosmology and that the ancient cosmology was in fact factually correct. Few would try to argue in favor of the Ancient Middle Universe as depicted in your illustration, so they opt for kind of a half-baked literalism like a 6,500-year-old earth.

I'd never dare say who is a Christian and who isn't based on anything other than Romans 10:9-10 where it says that if one confesses Jesus as Lord and believes God raised him from the dead, that person is saved, Furthermore, according to 1 Peter 1:23, said person is born again of incorruptible seed. Going one step further, according to Ephesians 2:10 that person is God's workmanship created in Christ Jesus. Considering all of that, I think it treading on thin ice to disparage such a person.

I can empathize with you about being called, "not a real Christian." I happen to believe that Jesus is the son of God. I believe that because I see that very phrase many times in the Bible. However, considering the fact that a son can in no wise be his own father, and the fact that the phrase, "God the Son" is conspicuously absent in the scriptures, I reject the trinity or any idea that Jesus is God. So, you can imagine how many times I've heard that I'm not a real Christian. But God knows your heart and He knows mine, so I see no reason to stress out about what others may say. I'm sure they are sincere, but sincerity is no guaranteed for truth. I just love 'em anyway. Isn't that what God does?

 

[JBO]

Curious what your perspective is on 2 Corinthians 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

When was this ? “truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.”

When? Clearly it was in Paul's past that he was speaking about there.

1Co 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?
1Co 9:2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
1Co 9:3 This is my defense to those who would examine me

 

[JBO]

St. SteVen said:
How did you arrive at that conclusion? ???

That's the Cessationist position. (again)
The Continuationist position makes no such claim.

The complete which is to come is Christ at His Second coming.

The complete is the Word of God given by the NT authors under the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit

Are you also claiming that prophecies have ceased and knowledge has passed away?

Supernatural prophecies and supernatural knowledge from the Holy Spirit.

Furthermore, it seems that you have no idea where the Bible came from.
Is that true?

Why would you ask me that? Perhaps because I don't think it came from you?

 

[St. SteVen]

Why would you ask me that?

Well... this quote below proves it.

The complete is the Word of God given by the NT authors under the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit

There you go, No idea.
This might help.

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101​

https://www.bereanpatriot.com/majority-text-vs-critical-text-vs-textus-receptus-textual-criticism-101/#Corruption-of-the-Alexandrian-text-type

/

 

[VictoryinJesus]

When? Clearly it was in Paul's past that he was speaking about there.

1Co 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?
1Co 9:2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
1Co 9:3 This is my defense to those who would examine me

To me it stands out this was after Jesus was crucified and risen and revealed himself to Saul/Paul on the road. Where then afterwards even when Paul was dragged in for a questioning for claiming “He is Alive” Paul clearly speaks of Christ continuousness of mighty works of Apostleship through Paul? No?

 

[Peterlag]

Again, that is good...unless you mean it to say that Jesus was just a man.

I have explained already how He was "I am" "before the foundation of the world", then "a man also", as an "image" of "I am" and again God having "taken His life up again", which only God can do.

Nobody ever said Jesus was just a man. The son of God who was also the Messiah is not just a man. And I already responded to your thinking of "I am" and "image" and thus, they only mean something in your mind.

 

[St. SteVen]

I finally gave up dumbing-down. I tried, I really did. A considerable portion of my legal career was spent as an in-house lawyer, trying to giive advice to employees of all levels in the organization. I used to keep a little resin Buddha beside my PC as a reminder to make every piece of work, even an email, an exercise in pristine, Zen-like, plain-English clarity. Even at that, it was astonishing how many people holding really responsible positions couldn't comprehend a six-line email. It was a brutal lesson in ... something, I'm not sure what. So now I just write for O'Darby and let the chips fall where they may.

"When I learn how to spell, my boss will pay me a higher celery."



/

 

[St. SteVen]

To me it stands out this was after Jesus was crucified and risen and revealed himself to Saul/Paul on the road. Where then afterwards even when Paul was dragged in for a questioning for claiming “He is Alive” Paul clearly speaks of Christ continuousness of mighty works of Apostleship through Paul? No?

As I understand it, the Cessationist position is that the "sign" gifts ceased when the last Apostle died.
They claim that signs and wonders were only for the apostolic age. Which they somehow tie to the completion
of the "writing" of the New Testament, as if it had been written front to back in one continuous motion. - LOL
And that the Apostles perished at the moment of completion, or perhaps only the miracles. ???

They haven't considered that they make an amputee of the Body of Christ when they start removing body parts.
And they obviously have no idea where the Bible actually came from. They probably couldn't tell you how or when
the canon of scripture was assembled. What books were up for consideration, or the voting process involved.

/

 

[JBO]

Well... this quote below proves it.

There you go, No idea.
This might help.

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101​

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot

/

I have had a couple of courses in Textual Criticism. But I do admit it was quite a few years ago. Even so, I doubt seriously that much has changed.

 

[O'Darby]

Cessationist, Continuationist, Creationist, Dipensationalist, Premillenialist, Postmillenialist, Literalist, Inerrantist ... I feel a poem, or maybe a Monty Python skit, coming on. Where is Mark Twain when we need him?

 

[St. SteVen]

Cessationist, Continuationist, Creationist, Dipensationalist, Premillenialist, Postmillenialist, Literalist, Inerrantist ... I feel a poem, or maybe a Monty Python skit, coming on. Where is Mark Twain when we need him?

I wonder if "ism" is really short for schism. - LOL

/

 

[O'Darby]

I wonder if "ism" is really short for schism. - LOL

/

I left off O'Darbyist - they are the WORST.

 

[St. SteVen]

I have had a couple of courses in Textual Criticism. But I do admit it was quite a few years ago. Even so, I doubt seriously that much has changed.

Wow. Why do you have such ignorant sounding explanation for where the Bible came from?
Seems you should know better.

/

 

[St. SteVen]

I left off O'Darbyist - they are the WORST.

Good thing you don't live in Kentucky.

/

 

[Aunty Jane]

Meaning, although Jesus was born of a woman and as a man, it was not that He laid down his life during that time in history in which it is recorded, that made Him more than a man. But rather His having laid it down "before the foundation of the world." Having laid it down, at that time in history--that was just an enactment of what had already occurred, then made manifest, as a testimony to all the world. More importantly, it is then that He took it up again. Only God can do such a thing--only the I am.

This point should be particularly addressed…..
To you this implies that Jesus’ sacrifice was somehow carried out before creation….”at that time in history” and that when it actually took place, it was just an enactment of what he had already done…..nothing could be further from the truth.

If you are basing your assumption on 1 Peter 1:18-21, let’s examine it carefully with open eyes, not eyes half closed….

”For you know that it was not with corruptible things, with silver or gold, that you were set free from your futile way of life handed down to you by your forefathers. 19 But it was with precious blood, like that of an unblemished and spotless lamb, that of Christ. 20 True, he was foreknown before the founding of the world, but he was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake. 21 Through him you are believers in God, the one who raised him up from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope might be in God.”

This is the part you have misinterpreted…..”True, he was foreknown before the founding of the world, but he was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake.”

First of all the expression “before the founding of the world“ is the founding of the kosmos, or the world of sinful mankind, not the creation of the planet, as if somehow all this was planned to take place before we even got here……that is a complete denial of free will, as if none of the parties involved in the original rebellion had a choice as to their participation in the downfall of not only the human race but also the downfall of many of God’s spirit sons, who followed the first rebel into a course of opposition to their Creator. The course of action taken by God was to deal with rebellion in both realms, but the spirit rebellion was much more serious as these creatures were powerful….much more powerful than humans and could wreak havoc in God’s purpose in a more serious way than mere mortals. The Bible contains a record of their activity as a warning for us not to be deceived as Eve was….and not to make unwise choices as Adam did because of the serious repercussions that ensued.

There was no reason for God to implement a plan of action when no sin had been committed. It was only AFTER sin had entered the world (through Adam’s disobedience) that God gave the first prophesy about the downfall of the devil and the activity of his Christ in dispatching him….to the serpent God said…
”And I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will strike him in the heel.” (Gen 3:15)

This prophesy was given just after the fall, but it’s significance and meaning were not fully known until Jesus came as God’s anointed. Only then were the players in this prophesy correctly identified.
The “woman” is not Eve because Jesus is not a son of Adam and Eve.
The offspring of each are identified by their conduct…
”The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Whoever does not practice righteousness does not originate with God, nor does the one who does not love his brother. 11 For this is the message that you have heard from the beginning, that we should love one another; 12 not like Cain, who originated with the wicked one and slaughtered his brother. And for what reason did he slaughter him? Because his own works were wicked, but those of his brother were righteous.”

The timeframe here is important because the “founding of the world” of mankind had not yet taken place when the prophesy was given….this was when the first child of Adam and his wife was born…the first human to inherit the sin nature that had come upon them as those now alienated from God.

Cain was born outside of the paradise they used to call home. His life would be very different to the one God originally purposed for the human race…he became the first murderer when he took the life of his brother, Abel in an act of cold and calculated bloodshed, spawned by jealousy. Premeditated murder carried a much harsher penalty than that of an accidental manslayer….i.e. one who took life without intention to kill….perhaps in a fit of anger.

But since there were too few humans in existence at that point, he simply sent Cain away with a warning to anyone who might take his life. (Gen 4:13-16)
Imagine! Just one generation away from sinless perfection, a murderer was produced…such is the power of sin.….which is why we need God’s guidance and direction in order for it not to dominate in our lives. God teaches us through his son, how to deal with our sinful tendencies.

This all goes to show that if you make a mistake in comprehension early in the piece, everything you build on it will also be false.

 

[St. SteVen]

Good thing you don't live in Kentucky.

/

You've heard of the Kentucky O'Darby, right?



/ @O'Darby

 

[Aunty Jane]

More importantly, it is then that He took it up again. Only God can do such a thing--only the I am.]

This too should be addressed….what God did and what Christ did are two different things.
God “sent” his son to offer his sinless life for the sinless life that Adam lost for all his children. We need to know both of them if we want the salvation that God offers to all. (John 17:3)

God did not ‘send’ himself. His firstborn son willingly sacrificed himself to redeem fallen humanity because they were plunged into sin through no fault on their part. An immortal God cannot sacrifice himself as a human because immortals cannot die. The son was not immortal and so could offer to do what had to be done to rescue Adam’s children. He did so willingly, out of love.

Meanwhile we are shown some “behind the scenes” activity between God and the devil who managed to attract a third of his heavenly brothers into rebellion with him. Their activities intensified as Christ walked the earth, for obvious reasons. Those possessed by demons were given relief when they were expelled by Jesus and his apostles.

As Jesus is about to return, they have again intensified their efforts to mislead mankind down the wrong path. The world is now saturated with violence, immorality and supernatural interference, especially by way of human entertainment. Try to find any TV shows or movies or computer games that are not filled with these abhorrent things that the devil promotes in his world. (1 John 5:19) Have we been drawn into them? Have we become immune to their evil influence so that we now accept foul language and graphic sex and violence in these things, as a normal part of life?

At this juncture there are only two roads, and two categories of people in the world…..(Matt 7:13-14; Matt 25:31-33) From God’s perspective, he doesn’t see the kinds of religious divisions that man sees, but sees only true worship and false worship, no matter who renders it or why…..the devil is the author of all false worship, including false or counterfeit “Christianity”. He will take as many down with him as he can deceive…at this “time of the end” there are only “sheep and goats”…so all of us will be in either one category or the other from the standpoint of God’s appointed judge.

Where we end up is largely a matter of who we are, rather that who we “think” we are.
The majority of mankind will not pass the final judgment on this world because of their choices……their free willed choices…..and God will not interfere with who we choose to be and what we choose to do any more than he interfered with the choices of the the first rebels…..we will all be caught in the act of being ourselves….the person God sees.

There is only “one God”, and there is only one ”only begotten son of God”…and if we do not know the difference, then the majority who falsely believe that God is three, will not make it through the final judgment…..it is a salvation issue. We have to “know” the God we worship, AND the one he “sent”. (John 17:3) There is no threesome there….there is just two…and only one of them is “the only true God”….Yahweh/Jehovah.