Old Earth vs. Young Earth Creationism

[HeirofSalvation]

Says who?

Some of the finest and most conservative Old Testament scholars.
It talks about a record of the generations.
According to you perhaps...
According, again, to some of the finest and most knowledgeable Old Testament scholars, Theologians working alongside Archaeologists studying how headings are written on ancient tablets suggest that it is more than that.
Only God could have those.
God can't or refuses to use men in the process of inspiring the Holy Scriptures I see.....o.k.
It is the generations OF Adam, not from and BY Adam.
According to "dad1"....according to some of the finest and less ignorant minds who are expert on the topic, you are, in fact, wrong. The "OF" you are passionately emphasizing does not exist in the Hebrew text BTW. It's the direct and indirect objects in construct form.....Selah!
You have the unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption apparently.
I don't assume anything.
It's possible, I suppose, that God downloaded the book to Moses in a spectacular event not claimed by Scripture, but, some of the best minds make the more plausible argument using textual evidence to suggest otherwise.
You assume it can't be the case.
I, on the other hand, have studied some of the arguments made, and find them quite compelling.
You can give credit to some mystery man writer if you like.
They're not "mystery men"....they are men whose names are clearly spelled out they're mysterious only if
"Adam"
"Terah"
"the sons of Abraham"
"Noah"
etc.... are mysterious.

You don't seem to have actually bothered to look into the arguments you're fighting against, otherwise, you wouldn't say that.
You might want to find out what you are arguing against before you get so dogmatic.
Jesus confirmed Scripture was FROM God though and also that Moses was right.
Umm.......yeah, we know this.....
We also know that Jesus never credited any statement made in Genesis to Moses' authorship....
I guess you didn't bother to get that far into your studies of the argument you are so dogmatically denying.
Nope. Not a speck of evidence,
Yes, there is evidence.
It may be insufficient to convince you, but it is reasonably attested evidence which has convinced many a worthy student of Scripture. There is evidence worth looking into.
and the overrated guesswork of hotty tots does not amount to a hill of beans.
Why am I getting the impression that I'm merely dealing with an anti-intellectual, anti-scholarship fundamentalist here?
If that's the case....there's no point continuing to engage.
What is biblical is that there are no books mentioned or writing of any sort at all pre flood!
No, we don't know that.
What we know is that the "Toledoths" have been reasonably argued to being EXACTLY that....mentioning of specific "books" by specific authors.
If, you understood the point of view you were denying, you would know that.
Bottom line, we do not know.
You are claiming that you DO know, and that the answer is in the negative. You don't seem to know the content of others' arguments, at least know the content of your own please.
For those that need something other than a very smart and capable God that had the records in heaven
Nobody needs that.
You seem to think that your view is more pious, and reflects the "higher" view of inspiration...but you'd be wrong. Your view isn't a better understanding of inspiration...or more miraculous....it's just a more paranormal and X-files-like one.
and gave them to a man to write down,
He did, several men actually, with names like "Seth", "Abraham", "Noah" etc....
I suppose they can grasp at straws of imagination all they like!
They are grasping at solid and reasonable archaeological, textual, Biblical and historical evidences.
If that's all just so much "bunk" to you, then fine, you can't be taught.

 

[Deacon]

This thread has become quite a hodge-podge

Simple suggestions for clearing up some confusion

1. Learn the basics of Biblical Hebrew
2. Learn to separate exegesis from eisegesis – take from the text rather than adding your understanding to it (it never really is possible but we can begin to recognize when we do it)
3. Develop doctrinal discernment – doctrines associated with creation are diverse but limited, they include an understanding of God’s sovereignty, omnipotence, biblical inerrancy, etc.
4. Develop a deep relationship with the text of Scripture –

a. Learn the basics of textual criticism. The study may deepen you love of scripture and separate you from over-pious doctrinal err.
b. Compare Scriptures with Scripture
c. Read extensively from a variety of sources; develop an understanding of the diverse viewpoints associated with the topic.
​

Rob

 

[dad1]

Some of the finest and most conservative Old Testament scholars.

They do not know. So who cares what they guess?

It talks about a record of the generations.
According to you perhaps...
According, again, to some of the finest and most knowledgeable Old Testament scholars, Theologians working alongside Archaeologists studying how headings are written on ancient tablets suggest that it is more than that.

There are no tablets from pre flood. Genesis was written post flood. Nothing suggests anything if there are no tablets as you claim eh?

Only God could have those.
God can't or refuses to use men in the process of inspiring the Holy Scriptures I see.....o.k.

Yes He does of course like He used Moses. By the way do you think Mo took these mysterious tablets of books in the wilderness 40 years? Seems to me God wrote on a tablet!

It is the generations OF Adam, not from and BY Adam.

According to "dad1"....according to some of the finest and less ignorant minds who are expert on the topic, you are, in fact, wrong. The "OF" you are passionately emphasizing does not exist in the Hebrew text BTW. It's the direct and indirect objects in construct form.....Selah!

? Prove it? Show us where the bible says the generations of Adam were written by Adam? What, Adam wrote the generations of those to be born after he died in prophesy now??

You have the unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption apparently.
I don't assume anything.
It's possible, I suppose, that God downloaded the book to Moses in a spectacular event not claimed by Scripture, but, some of the best minds make the more plausible argument using textual evidence to suggest otherwise.
You assume it can't be the case.

Who cares what anyone assumes, including the folks guessing that you cite?? You do not know, they do not know, it is not known. Act accordingly.

I, on the other hand, have studied some of the arguments made, and find them quite compelling.

Too bad you can't post them.

You can give credit to some mystery man writer if you like.
They're not "mystery men"....they are men whose names are clearly spelled out they're mysterious only if
"Adam"
"Terah"
"the sons of Abraham"
"Noah"
etc.... are mysterious.

The names are no mystery, what is the mystery is the unnamed person or persons you claim wrote the books of generation for Moses rather than God.
/QUOTE]
Jesus confirmed Scripture was FROM God though and also that Moses was right.
Umm.......yeah, we know this.....
We also know that Jesus never credited any statement made in Genesis to Moses' authorship....[/QUOTE]

He chatted on the mountain with Moses. You would think that if He thought Mo was a con He would point that out.

Nope. Not a speck of evidence,
Yes, there is evidence.
It may be insufficient to convince you, but it is reasonably attested evidence which has convinced many a worthy student of Scripture. There is evidence worth looking into.

Mysterious hidden evidence you can't post? Sure.

What is biblical is that there are no books mentioned or writing of any sort at all pre flood!
No, we don't know that.
What we know is that the "Toledoths" have been reasonably argued to being EXACTLY that....mentioning of specific "books" by specific authors.

I take it you are claiming Adam wrote the generations of Adam then? Be clear.

Bottom line, we do not know.
You are claiming that you DO know, and that the answer is in the negative. You don't seem to know the content of others' arguments, at least know the content of your own please.

No. I am claiming you do not know. I suspect there was no need for writing pre flood, but I do not know that.

and gave them to a man to write down,
He did, several men actually, with names like "Seth", "Abraham", "Noah" etc....

Says you. We don't know of any men involved in the actual record of generations of Adam that Moses was given.

I suppose they can grasp at straws of imagination all they like!
They are grasping at solid and reasonable archaeological, textual, Biblical and historical evidences.
If that's all just so much "bunk" to you, then fine, you can't be taught.

Should you not have been posting that rather than blather?

 

[dad1]

This thread has become quite a hodge-podge

Simple suggestions for clearing up some confusion

1. Learn the basics of Biblical Hebrew
2. Learn to separate exegesis from eisegesis – take from the text rather than adding your understanding to it (it never really is possible but we can begin to recognize when we do it)
3. Develop doctrinal discernment – doctrines associated with creation are diverse but limited, they include an understanding of God’s sovereignty, omnipotence, biblical inerrancy, etc.
4. Develop a deep relationship with the text of Scripture –

a. Learn the basics of textual criticism. The study may deepen you love of scripture and separate you from over-pious doctrinal err.
b. Compare Scriptures with Scripture
c. Read extensively from a variety of sources; develop an understanding of the diverse viewpoints associated with the topic.
​

Rob

Yes, and when we do all that we will arrive at the conclusion that we do not know about any man or men that supposedly wrote the generations of Adam for Moses.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

They do not know. So who cares what they guess?

Those who desire to more greatly understand the origin and authorship of the foundational book of the Christian Faith.

There are no tablets from pre flood.

True, there are also no papyri or scrolls of the Pauline letters from his lifetime....Do you then insist they were all written sometime in the 4th Century?

Genesis was written post flood.

You do not know that. Period.

Nothing suggests anything if there are no tablets as you claim eh?

By your own standard, then, Moses didn't write any of the Pentateuch because you do not have any tablets of his.

By the way do you think Mo took these mysterious tablets of books in the wilderness 40 years?

He took along an entire nation of probably over a million people, and enough gold and riches to build the tabernacle and a golden calf plundered from the Egyptians.....maybe one ox-pulled cart for some tablets would not have proved impossible.
Are you actually simply arguing from incredulity here?

Seems to me God wrote on a tablet!

Maybe he did, and maybe that's so. It's possible. But you don't have that tablet from that time or any Biblical or archaeological or historical evidence of it.

? Prove it? Show us where the bible says the generations of Adam were written by Adam?

Here, in your Bible:
זֶה סֵפֶר תֹּולְדֹת אָדָם בְּיֹום בְּרֹא אֱלֹהִים אָדָם בִּדְמוּתאֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֹתֹֽו׃

What, Adam wrote the generations of those to be born after he died in prophesy now??

I do not think so, nor do I assume that. Someone else likely did. You do realize you have the same problem with Moses' death in your own theory do you not?
Deu 34:5
So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD.
Deu 34:6
And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
Deu 34:7
And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
Deu 34:8
And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.
Deu 34:9
And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him: and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as the LORD commanded Moses.
Deu 34:10
And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,
Deu 34:11
In all the signs and the wonders, which the LORD sent him to do in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land,
Deu 34:12
And in all that mighty hand, and in all the great terror which Moses shewed in the sight of all Israel

You have a rather odd sense of credulity. You can't stand the thought that God preserved eye-witness accounts which seems absurd to you, but you've no problem with God just dictating all the precise information to Moses thousands of years later......and then presumably writing about his own death, burial, and states of affairs of future prophets.
Neither one is more miraculous......but you balk at the one and are perfectly credulous with the other.

Who cares what anyone assumes, including the folks guessing that you cite?? You do not know, they do not know, it is not known. Act accordingly.

I am acting accordingly. I am not posting with certainty. As though I know with epistemic certainty what did, or did not, could, or could not have happened. I am simply pointing you to the well informed research of Biblical scholars whose arguments I find compelling. You are the one acting with complete dismissal and incredulity, not I. I'm not even dismissing your ideas. You, contra mundum, are dismissing with near certitude the arguments of many fine scholars on the topic.

Too bad you can't post them.

That's a childish statement, of course I can. Others have already pointed out some sources for you. You won't read them I guess, nor consider them, but others might.
http://intelmin.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/BiblicalCreationismLO727.pdf
The Genesis Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings
Who Wrote Genesis - Creation Studies Institute
Others have also pointed you to some sources, and of course, if you were possessed of a curious mind, you could find a plethora of sources. My guess is you don't, I hope I'm wrong.

He chatted on the mountain with Moses.

Yes, wherein he gave Moses the Law etc..

You would think that if He thought Mo was a con He would point that out.

Nobody is suggesting Moses was a con.
You are being obtuse.

I take it you are claiming Adam wrote the generations of Adam then? Be clear.

I'm not making the claims.
I am simply pointing out to those who have a teachable Spirit where they might find some answers to honest questions.

No. I am claiming you do not know.

Right, and I am not claiming to.
You seem to not have read your own posts, or understood them.
I don't know for sure, and don't claim to.
YOU HOWEVER...
Are the one who is saying that it is not possible for anyone other than Moses to have penned the texts originally. I have made no definitive statements either for or con either idea.
You have.

We don't know of any men involved in the actual record of generations of Adam that Moses was given.

You are assuming Moses being "given" some information somewhere, from some source.
Either that is from tablets handed down from eyewitnesses and likely treasured by the people of Israel as some are guessing, or they came in some paranormal event direct from God (as you seem to insist) or from something else altogether.
I find the idea that they were handed down by eyewitnesses to be credible, and well argued by many fine scholars. If you have thoroughly researched the available evidence for yourself, and find it insufficient, good for you. But don't dismiss it out of hand.

There are no tablets from pre flood.

There are none from Sinai either, nor from any period in Moses' life. So, should we rip the entire Pentateuch out of our Bibles?

Genesis was written post flood.

Evidence?
Proof?
Tablets?
Manuscripts?

Nothing suggests anything if there are no tablets as you claim eh?

Wrong. Given those standards, (essentially denying the Biblical and Orthodox doctrine of preservation) there is no reason for you to believe any verse of any text of Scripture in the entire Bible and you have no basis upon which to ground your Christian faith.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

As an aside, dad, to your *gasp!!!!* "Did Adam write of things AFTER his death!...bwaaaahaaahaaa"... scoff:

I note the third of the links I provided argues this:
" The weight of evidence suggests that the respective names attached to the toledoth represent subscripts or closing signatures. The events recorded in each division all took place before, not after, the death of the individuals so named, and so could in each case have been accessible to them."

 

[dad1]

Those who desire to more greatly understand the origin and authorship of the foundational book of the Christian Faith.

True, there are also no papyri or scrolls of the Pauline letters from his lifetime....Do you then insist they were all written sometime in the 4th Century?

We know Paul wrote them. We do not know some mystery men wrote the stuff Moses got Genesis from.

By your own standard, then, Moses didn't write any of the Pentateuch because you do not have any tablets of his.

False. Jesus confirmed Moses was cool. So his writing are of God. No mystery ghost writing men needed. You invented those.

He took along an entire nation of probably over a million people, and enough gold and riches to build the tabernacle and a golden calf plundered from the Egyptians.....maybe one ox-pulled cart for some tablets would not have proved impossible.
Are you actually simply arguing from incredulity here?

Why would I question God's word? It does not say in the bible that there was any men writing anything pre flood. The record God gave Moses post flood in no way says that there was writing before the flood.

Maybe he did, and maybe that's so. It's possible. But you don't have that tablet from that time or any Biblical or archaeological or historical evidence of it.

Jesus verified it was true.

I do not think so, nor do I assume that. Someone else likely did. You do realize you have the same problem with Moses' death in your own theory do you not?
Deu 34:5
So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD.
Deu 34:6
And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
Deu 34:7
And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
Deu 34:8
And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.
Deu 34:9
And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him: and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as the LORD commanded Moses.
Deu 34:10
And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,
Deu 34:11
In all the signs and the wonders, which the LORD sent him to do in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land,
Deu 34:12
And in all that mighty hand, and in all the great terror which Moses shewed in the sight of all Israel

No. Having God finish the book after Moses died is no biggie. That doesn't mean Moses did not receive Genesis or the rest of it. Nor does it mean that there was any need for writing pre flood.

You have a rather odd sense of credulity. You can't stand the thought that God preserved eye-witness accounts which seems absurd to you, but you've no problem with God just dictating all the precise information to Moses thousands of years later......and then presumably writing about his own death, burial, and states of affairs of future prophets.
Neither one is more miraculous......but you balk at the one and are perfectly credulous with the other.

God preserved...yes. God needed some stuff written by Adam and others for Moses to have the records...no.

I am acting accordingly. I am not posting with certainty. As though I know with epistemic certainty what did, or did not, could, or could not have happened. I am simply pointing you to the well informed research of Biblical scholars whose arguments I find compelling. You are the one acting with complete dismissal and incredulity, not I. I'm not even dismissing your ideas. You, contra mundum, are dismissing with near certitude the arguments of many fine scholars on the topic.

There is nothing informed about dreaming up co authors for God and Moses to have had the record of the generations of Adam.

That's a childish statement, of course I can. Others have already pointed out some sources for you. You won't read them I guess, nor consider them, but others might.
http://intelmin.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/BiblicalCreationismLO727.pdf
The Genesis Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of Beginnings
Who Wrote Genesis - Creation Studies Institute
Others have also pointed you to some sources, and of course, if you were possessed of a curious mind, you could find a plethora of sources. My guess is you don't, I hope I'm wrong.

Cite the relevant bit and only use a link for a reference should we need it. Don't spam links.

I'm not making the claims.
I am simply pointing out to those who have a teachable Spirit where they might find some answers to honest questions.

If the people you claim wrote stuff in the days of Genesis existed, you could do more than rattle off the word 'teachable' You have no proof at all. You seem to want gullible...not teachable since you have nothing to teach.

YOU HOWEVER...
Are the one who is saying that it is not possible for anyone other than Moses to have penned the texts originally. I have made no definitive statements either for or con either idea.
You have.

Never said that at all. I am saying there probably was no need for any writing in the days of early Genesis at all by anyone on earth. I suspect writing may have been something we started to need after Babel. So if someone claims some men wrote something IN the days of Adam, I want real evidence. God spoke directly to Moses so there is no need to invoke some mystery records that made it on the ark or whatever that were needed.

You are assuming Moses being "given" some information somewhere, from some source.

That would be..God.

Either that is from tablets handed down from eyewitnesses and likely treasured by the people of Israel as some are guessing, or they came in some paranormal event direct from God (as you seem to insist) or from something else altogether.
I find the idea that they were handed down by eyewitnesses to be credible, and well argued by many fine scholars. If you have thoroughly researched the available evidence for yourself, and find it insufficient, good for you. But don't dismiss it out of hand.

We KNOW God gave Moses info. We do not know about any written material from Adam's day here.


/quote]
There are none from Sinai either, nor from any period in Moses' life. So, should we rip the entire Pentateuch out of our Bibles?[/quote] There were tablets put into the ark of the covenant if I recall. That has nothing to do with pre flood writing.

/quote]
Wrong. Given those standards, (essentially denying the Biblical and Orthodox doctrine of preservation) there is no reason for you to believe any verse of any text of Scripture in the entire Bible and you have no basis upon which to ground your Christian faith.[/QUOTE]

False. Your failure to have any proof at all for your invented co writers of the books of Moses or Genesis in particular does not in any way mean the bible has no basis. Just you.

 

[dad1]

As an aside, dad, to your *gasp!!!!* "Did Adam write of things AFTER his death!...bwaaaahaaahaaa"... scoff:

I note the third of the links I provided argues this:
" The weight of evidence suggests that the respective names attached to the toledoth represent subscripts or closing signatures. The events recorded in each division all took place before, not after, the death of the individuals so named, and so could in each case have been accessible to them."

Point?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Dust.
Feet.
Off.
Your.
The.
Kick.

 

[dad1]

Dust.
Feet.
Off.
Your.
The.
Kick.

You can write. Now work on your claims they wrote pre flood.

 

[Calminian]

That is an unwarranted and not Biblically supported assumption on your part.
TC (and others) are attempting to show you that the BIBLICAL evidence itself is that each of those "Toledoths"...(these are the generations of statements) are of themselves testimony that they are accounts written about and likely BY the subjects themselves...
That is to say, "these are the generations of Noah"
Is a Biblical statement on the lines of.... "this is the book of Noah" or "the account of/by Noah" or something of the sort.

The evidence is within the text itself. It is engagement with the text itself, seeking to understand what "these are the generations of" means etc. which drives the theory you are dismissing.
You don't have to believe it, and can assume all you like that God simply dictated the book of Genesis word for word to Moses in a mysterious paranormal event, and maybe that's what happened, but there is no Scriptural warrant for that assumption, and no textual evidence for it.

There IS Biblical and textual warrant for the belief that the "Toledoths" are intra-textual statements about the nature of what the reader is encountering that scholars have plausibly demonstrated (if not proven inescapably) are statements about who the author of the account is and what they will speak of, and when the author of the proceeding account changes within the text.

Believe what you want, but don't convince yourself that it's in any way text-driven or Biblical.

I am not of the opinion that the argument TC (and others) are making is 100% non-disprovable and above all criticism. But it's an excellent theory well defended by the best of Biblical and Theological scholarship. You would do well to consider it and research it for yourself and educate yourself on why it is believed.

Indeed. There is a lot available on this subject.

Henry Morris pointed out:

“Visions and revelations of the Lord” normally have to do with prophetic revelations of the future (as in Daniel, Ezekiel, Revelation, etc.). The direct dictation method of inspiration was used mainly for promulgation of specific laws and ordinances (as in the Ten Commandments, the Book of Leviticus, etc.). The Book of Genesis, however, is entirely in the form of narrative records of historical events. Biblical parallels to Genesis are found in such books as Kings, Chronicles, Acts, and so forth. In all of these, the writer either collected previous documents and edited them (e.g., I and II Kings, I and II Chronicles), or else recorded the events which he had either seen himself or had ascertained from others who were witnesses (e.g., Luke, Acts).​

Many scholars are resistant to this view, however. Then again, most Genesis scholars don't take Genesis literally. We have a serious commentary crisis when in comes to Genesis. Hopefully Dr. William Barrick will finish his commentary on Genesis soon. If I'm not mistaken, it'll be the first commentary by a Hebrew scholar that takes Genesis literally in over 200 years.

Some reading on the subject. I'm partial to the Curt Sewell modification of Wiseman's theory. I'm also a big believer in the colophon theory (that the toledoth are postscripts and not titles).

The Tablet Theory of Genesis Authorship
True Origin
Curt Sewell © 1998-2001 by Curt Sewell

CreationWiki: Tablet theory

Did Moses Write Genesis?
Answers in Genesis
by Dr. Terry Mortenson and Bodie Hodge AiG–U.S. June 28, 2011

Who Wrote Genesis? Are the Toledoth Colophons?
Creation Ministries International
by Charles V Taylor, M.A., Ph.D., PGCE, LRAM, FIL, Cert. Theol.

The First Book of Moses and The ‘Toledoth’ of Genesis
By Damien F. Mackey

Tracing the Hand of Moses in Genesis
By Damien F. Mackeys

Who Wrote Genesis?
Northwest Creation Network
Excerpted from Henry M. Morris, the Genesis Record, pp. 25-30

Who Wrote Genesis?
A Third Theory
by Paul A. Hughes

New Discoveries in Babylonia About Genesis (pdf)
Original book by Air Commodor P. J. Wiseman, C.B.E.

 

[Calminian]

You can write. Now work on your claims they wrote pre flood.

Well you have motion of a book in Genesis 5:1. If that's not textual evidence I don't know what is.

 

[dad1]

Well you have motion of a book in Genesis 5:1. If that's not textual evidence I don't know what is.

Refresh my memory, what is that supposed to be evidence of?

 

[Calminian]

Refresh my memory, what is that supposed to be evidence of?

That a book was referenced in the early chapters of Genesis, where the author is speaking as one alive at that time. You'll notice the early language of Genesis, that it speaks of things existing in the present tense such as the lands around Eden and the gold on that land etc. If you believe the Bible is true, this is good evidence that men were writing accounts at that time and some got passed to Noah who took them on the Ark.

 

[1689Dave]

"contracted" - that's like a disease. Derived might be a better word.


Whole books are written to explain creationist views – it can’t be done effectively in a forum setting;
But I can touch on what influenced my thoughts.

I come from a biological science background. I followed a progressive creationist model for many years being introduced to this model after reading a book by Bernard Ramm, who coined the term and promoted the model in his classic book, A Christian View of Science and Scripture (1954).

I’ve literally read hundreds of books on the topic, always searching for better understanding, never fully satisfied.

More recently I thoroughly enjoyed a book by John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One.

Walton book progresses through a series of propositions which form a basis for how to interpret Scripture. He effectively removes the age of the earth debate from the realm of biblical truth. The book will most certainly make you think differently Scripture and its relationship to science.

I am personally satisfied with his model and finally rest comfortably in this approach to understanding Scripture and how it relates to science.

Rob

Thanks for the post. I looked into comments by Amazon readers on Walton's book. And it reminds me of something Calvin said about Hebrews 11:3.

“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.” (Hebrews 11:3) (KJV 1900)

"Not made of things which do appear." = “So that they became the visibles of things not visible,” or, not apparent." Calvin, J., & Owen, J. (2010). Commentary on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews (p. 265).

Calvin from here points to God's attributes as being the subject. But I wonder if it isn't that God's eternal decree took on time, space, and matter, just as a magnet held under a scrap of paper takes on material shape when iron shavings fall over it. That is that planets billions of light years apart became visible over the earth days of time allotted for creation?

Just a thought in search of support,

 

[TCassidy]

That is that planets billions of light years apart became visible over the earth days of time allotted for creation?

There are no planets billions of light years apart visible from earth. Even the closest planets, mere millions of miles apart, are barely visible to the naked eye, and apart from the closest (Venus and Mars) and the gas giants (Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune) are invisible from earth without a telescope.

 

[HankD]

That is that planets billions of light years apart became visible over the earth days of time allotted for creation?

Just a thought in search of support,

Did you mean galaxy?

The farthest galaxy is MACS0647-JD about 13.3 billion lights years from earth (or our galaxy - the Milky Way).

Farthest Known Galaxy in the Universe Discovered

 

[1689Dave]

Did you mean galaxy?

Probably. I'm not too keen on science. Thanks for the correction....

 

[1689Dave]

There are no planets billions of light years apart visible from earth. Even the closest planets, mere millions of miles apart, are barely visible to the naked eye, and apart from the closest (Venus and Mars) and the gas giants (Jupiter, Uranus, and Neptune) are invisible from earth without a telescope.

Thanks for the correction. I'm not to keen on science.

 

[Calminian]

This thread has become quite a hodge-podge

Simple suggestions for clearing up some confusion

1. Learn the basics of Biblical Hebrew
2. Learn to separate exegesis from eisegesis – take from the text rather than adding your understanding to it (it never really is possible but we can begin to recognize when we do it)
3. Develop doctrinal discernment – doctrines associated with creation are diverse but limited, they include an understanding of God’s sovereignty, omnipotence, biblical inerrancy, etc.
4. Develop a deep relationship with the text of Scripture –

a. Learn the basics of textual criticism. The study may deepen you love of scripture and separate you from over-pious doctrinal err.
b. Compare Scriptures with Scripture
c. Read extensively from a variety of sources; develop an understanding of the diverse viewpoints associated with the topic.
​

Rob

#2 is the definition of irony, because that's what you and Walton have fallen into.

My suggestion to you: Trust Scripture even over modern scientists and the theologians who bow down to them. If God says something and it doesn't jive with the dogmas you were taught by men in school, doubt the men, not God. Doubt your own intellect, and stop looking to your own understanding. Look for errors in man's thinking, and don't run to find alternatives readings to replace the plain straightforward accounts in the Bible.

Walton is a borderline heritic. It goes beyond eisegesis with him. It's very sad so many follow him, and even sadder a College like Wheaton would employ him. He's now in a position to mislead many kids, and some very gullible adults (though many kids are proving wiser than adults: Students at Wheaton start Young Earth Club, show Young Earth film to the dismay of faculty). You not only should doubt what he says you should run from him. He really is dabbling in heresy.

Here are some articles that could open your eyes if you're willing:

John Walton reimagines Adam and Eve

Dubious and dangerous exposition
A review of The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate by John H. Walton

And here are some good men who don't compromise on God's word when it comes to Genesis. There are many thoughtful intellectual alternatives to Walton.

Christian leaders who uphold Genesis
Modern-era theologians and prominent church leaders from around the world affirm biblical creation (historical Genesis)