abiogenesis or special creation?

[BobRyan]

The point of this thread however is to point out the "extremes" of atheist darwinist "Abiogenesis" imaginings vs the actual dictates of God's Word --

The result was shown to us by Rew_10

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost...8&postcount=38
Although I keep holding Rew_10 accountable for not knowing his Bible and not thinking through the issues raised based on the actual information in God's Word -- I have to give him credit for a few things.

#1. Given the atheist darwinist view of origins and creation and life and the origin even of our species -- the logical conclusion is that the Bible is corrupt rather than reliable and accurate. You could not possibly know what to believe just by reading the Bible. You would have to consult texts on atheist darwinism first.

#2. The "God of the Bible" then no matter how well intended would still be responsible in some way for His own Word - His own corrupt text. And if He can not manage to get His own Word right - accurate, reliable, dependable then HE himself is not "perfectly" reliable, dependable, consistent. He becomes at least as corrupt as His word since either He CAN NOT make it reliable or He corruptly chooses not to uphold the standard of His own Word.

#3. In 2Cor 4:4 we are told that the "god of this world has blinded their eyes" - and in Eph 2:1-3 we find that the lost operate according to the dictates of the "prince of the power of the air". This means that for many (in fact most according to Matt 7) Satan has a dominate role in how they view life, and God and the Bible. It is not surprising that he would promote a view of himself and his practices as though that is the way that God actually acts. In 2Thess 2 we find that he "presents himself sitting in the seat of God as though he IS God".- Hence a "corrupt god"

The argument that a corrupt god with a corrupt Word of God -- is a good match for humanity that is itself sinful, corrupt and depraved -- is one that I think fits perfectly with the "god of this World" perspectives given by God's Word speaking about the way that Satan controls the minds of humanity.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Faith alone]

Bob,

One problem... "made" is not there. It's just, "...the stars." That's why it is not in blue and listed above. (I put it in red to make it clear.) It simply says, "God made two great lights. The greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night. ...the stars also."

Now, is this saying that he made the two great lights... and the stars also? Or does it mean that he made the greater light to govern the day and the lsser light to govern the night, the stars (to govern the night) also?

It could be that he means that the stars also shine at night but since this is the description of God "making" things over a 7 day period of time - it seems reasonable to conclude that the text is arguing for God as creator of the stars. In John 1 we are told that "nothing has come into existence" apart from Christ making it.

However the fact that the number of things "made" on Day 4 is "two" and not "A zillion and two" leads me to conclude that the making of the stars had happened at some other time.

in Christ,

Bob

Bob,

This is the account of God creating an environment for man - who was created in God's image. It introduces the plan for salvation. I think either option could be argued effectively. But just because it may mean that Christ "placed them in the visisble sky" - having been created much earlier - does not mean that this would at all be a contradiction of John 1 ("...nothing had come into existence apart from the Word") since God would have brought it into existence earlier.

So I agree that it is more likely that the galaxies and stars were created before the 6 days of creation. The Bible Knowledge Commentary allows for that possibility:

1:14-19. Day four included the sun to rule (govern, v. 16) the day and the moon and the stars to rule the night. Either these were created with apparent age, or they had been previously created and were then made visible on the earth on days one and two when God separated light from darkness and waters above from water below.
These heavenly bodies were to serve as signs for seasons and days and years (v. 14). These terms, as well as “day” and “night” in verse 5, are meaningless without the existence of the sun and the rotation of the planets.
In astrology unbelievers use stars and planets for guidance, but the Bible says they merely display the handiwork of God (Ps. 19:1)...
Walvoord, John F., and Zuck, Roy B., The Bible Knowledge Commentary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Scripture Press Publications, Inc.) 1983, 1985.

A couple of relevant CRefs:

Psalm 136:5-9 who by his understanding made the heavens, His love endures forever. who spread out the earth upon the waters, His love endures forever. who made the great lights-- His love endures forever. the sun to govern the day, His love endures forever. the moon and the stars to govern the night; His love endures forever.

So both the moon and the stars were to govern the night.

Psalm 8:3, 4 When I observe Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You set in place, what is man that You remember him, the son of man that You look after him?

Here the focus seems to be setting the moon and the stars in place in the sky.

Interesting.

FA

 

[BobRyan]

I agree - God MAde THE STARS - but that probably took place before Gen 1:2.

However - on Day 4 "HE MADE TWO great lights".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Faith alone]

I agree - God MAde THE STARS - but that probably took place before Gen 1:2.

However - on Day 4 "HE MADE TWO great lights".

In Christ,

Bob

Sounds reasonable. I'm not so sure that the "made" needs to disallow the possibility that the sun and moon were also created previously, or that the earth was not re-created. Perhaos thatwas true of all 3.

FA

 

[BobRyan]

God "MADE" TWO not a zillion and two. But IF a zillion and two ALREADY existed (as in stars already there AND Sun and MOON already there) then "MADE TWO" does not make much sense. Furthermore historically it is well accepted that this text was used to describe the making of the Sun and the moon.

Exegesis demans that we admit to the primary and clear meaning the words of Moses had for his intended readers. He intended to convey the meaning that God MADE the sun and the moon on day 4 (at the very least).

So what you are really left with is the argument that God intended to mislead if in fact it is NOT true that He MADE the TWO lights the sun and the moon on day 4.

In Christ,

Bob