# This Genesis issue caused me problems.



## TannedIrishman (May 14, 2014)

I'm kind of bothered by Genesis 1. I don't know how to interpret it anymore. Some say it's not even dealing with the issue of how God created but is simply a story used to help the Israelites. I've no problem with OEC or YEC but OEC looks like you really need to stretch things. Any thoughts? If OEC is true I would wonder why God had Genesis written in such a way that wouldn't make it obvious. I feel kind of tricked (I know God doesn't trick us).


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (May 14, 2014)

Death did not enter into the world until Adam sinned. I don't see how oec could be possible.


----------



## TannedIrishman (May 14, 2014)

I've read psalm 104 which doesn't seem to treat animal death as evil, though it may not be perfect. I think Adams death was only to Humans. God warned him and said that he would die. That's why for me it's now open.


Josh,
Practically-A-Presbyterian

A simply-complex Jesus follower from Ireland who likes pancakes and can play the triangle.
Check out my blog "Creverlasting: Where Creativity and Life Never End." http://yoshuascribes.wordpress.com

"Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.
My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever."
(Psalm 73:25-26)


----------



## au5t1n (May 14, 2014)

It sounds to me like if you had never been introduced to OEC interpretations, you'd have had no trouble understanding what the passage means. All your confusions arise from those wanting to convince you to read the passage in an OEC light. I believe your mind is correctly perceiving the incompatibility of OEC with the passage and the plain truth it teaches. Compare with Exodus 20:11.

Sent from my XT557 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## TannedIrishman (May 14, 2014)

I'm quite acquainted with both, but I see the YEC as more natural. Though certain aspects of the traditional views can change


Josh,
Practically-A-Presbyterian

A simply-complex Jesus follower from Ireland who likes pancakes and can play the triangle.
Check out my blog "Creverlasting: Where Creativity and Life Never End." http://yoshuascribes.wordpress.com

"Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.
My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever."
(Psalm 73:25-26)


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (May 14, 2014)

TannedIrishman said:


> I've read psalm 104 which doesn't seem to treat animal death as evil, *though it may not be perfect.*


And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.


----------



## arapahoepark (May 14, 2014)

What else do you have problems with?
Here is Dr. Bob Gonzales on the animal death issue::Good But Not (Yet) Tame: A Theodicy for Animal Death Before the Fall » It Is Written


----------



## Pilgrim Standard (May 14, 2014)

Words really begin to lose their meaning when placing a gap of a vast extended amount of time between Gen 1:1 and the following verses. Animals were not yet created, however the gap theory claims animals and their deaths prior to their biblical account of creation. It is an attempt at placing the theory of man above the truth of the scripture.



TannedIrishman said:


> Some say it's not even dealing with the issue of how God created but is simply a story used to help the Israelites.


When the account of Genesis creation is thought to be "just a story" then one must have a valid foundation for where the story ends and the actuality begins. Otherwise the Sabbath is not longer a true creation ordinance, Adam becomes a myth, federal theology is crushed without an original federal head, original sin has no true origin, the curse of the serpent was never laid out upon the actual serpent and the messianic seed was never promised to our actual first representative, the covenant of works dissolves, the covenant of grace has no foundation, imputation becomes the height of unjustice, etc. etc.


----------



## KMK (May 14, 2014)

Here is a good thread from a while back.

http://www.puritanboard.com/f40/genesis-narrative-metaphor-24920/index2.html


----------



## TannedIrishman (May 14, 2014)

My question is less scientific and more hermeneutical. If genesis 1 is a historical narrative or if it's meant to be poetic. Though I don't get how you go from poetic to narrative just like that in the next chapter, makes no sense. As some would argue that OEC and YEC (Concordism) is missing the point all together. Once I rule that out, im fine with either one of OE or YE but then I need to know what is scripture and though the OE as you put it makes sense, I would wonder what from the scriptures alone would make us want to believe this? Or are we meant to take general revelation into account, but really, which is the final authority then 


Josh,
Practically-A-Presbyterian

A simply-complex Jesus follower from Ireland who likes pancakes and can play the triangle.
Check out my blog "Creverlasting: Where Creativity and Life Never End." http://yoshuascribes.wordpress.com

"Whom have I in heaven but you?
And there is nothing on earth that I desire besides you.
My flesh and my heart may fail,
but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever."
(Psalm 73:25-26)


----------



## Jerusalem Blade (May 14, 2014)

Josh, a lot of people say a lot of stuff, especially re Genesis 1! It and Gen 2 are probably the most contested parts of the Bible. The traditional understanding (YEC) stands upon the plain reading of Scripture; nor is it poetry as some opine, but spare historical record. A good little booklet with respect to historical-grammatical analysis, and hermeneutical approach is E.J. Young’s classic, _In the Beginning: Genesis 1-3 and the Authority of Scripture_.


Trent, Dr. Bob’s view of animal death before the Fall is a new one for me, though I see it has been around, reading his article.

Although he presents it well enough, and it seems feasible at first sight, upon examination I do not think it holds in light of Scripture. Some preliminary thoughts:

In Romans 8:19-23 we have a picture of the “subhuman” creation groaning from “the bondage of corruption”, into which it had been consigned by God by virtue of its lord’s (Adam’s) consignment to corruption, decay, and death for his sin. It does not seem there was “corruption” before Adam. Neither is “corruption” “good” (as in, “and God saw that it was good”). Adam, as God’s regent and lord over all creation – i.e. it was in his power and under his authority – brought that which he was over along with himself into the state of corruption and death.

In Genesis 1:29, 30, it is written,
“And God said, Behold, I have given you [Adam and Eve] every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.”​ 
It appears from this record that to both humans and to all non-human creatures were given herbs and fruit for food (there is also much marine plant life in the seas as well), but it is not written that blood would be shed and flesh torn for food before the fall.

It is also written in Genesis 2:19, that “every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air . . . [God] brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them”, and thus we cannot infer from this they were in a wild / savage state, but were docile in Adam’s presence.

I do not think the pre-fall animal death theory is able to overturn the Scripture at Romans 5:12: “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin”. The clear implication is that death entered into the world at the same time, nor exclusively upon “man in the world” but “into the world” generally. When it is further stated in that verse, “and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”, this shows that all humankind – as in Adam – partake of his curse and his fallen nature (none exempted), not to show the excluding of the subhuman creatures.


----------



## au5t1n (May 14, 2014)

TannedIrishman said:


> My question is less scientific and more hermeneutical. If genesis 1 is a historical narrative or if it's meant to be poetic.



In discussions of that nature, it is usually pointed out that the frequency of the vav-consecutive in Genesis 1 indicates its narrative nature, as that is a characteristic of Hebrew narrative.


----------



## Free Christian (May 16, 2014)

I read an article once that showed clearly that Genesis 1 is/was written as an historical account of creation. That 1 day as described in it was meant clearly to be 1 of our days, 24hrs. So often we try, mankind, to make things logical or understandable to our minds.
The old earth creationists believe they have a God who made everything there is out of nothing. As do Young Earther's. 
But they also think that even though our amazing all powerful God did make all that is out of nothing, nothing so to speak as we count nothing being there was nothing till God said so, that God needed millions upon millions of years to make that something or allow that something to evolve and shape. If God is the author, and He is, of all, then God is also the author of time and can do with it whatever pleases Him. What we see today working, as we see it slowly say the formation of a new island, why could not the author of time and all existence as we know it do it instantly? When God destroys the heavens and earth as we know it with His coming at the end, will that too be done in a slow millions of years way or in the instant or time frame God says it is to be so. God is everything, and all that is His is His to do as He pleases. If God in an instant wants to make a mountain range then in an instant it will be.
Its peoples inability, the false teachers of Old Earth, to fully grasp the actual incredible power of our God and Creator that leads them to look upon Him with a weaker view than He really should be attributed with. 
It is also the inability of Old Earther's to understand that God is so far above us that we become as invisible in comparison, no, almost as non existent, that leads them to place upon Him such weakening confines as to be unable to create in an instant or a mere "day" what they believe must take millions of years through their own minuscule in comparison intelligence.


----------



## fralo4truth (May 16, 2014)

_"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which *made them at the beginning *made them male and female," (Matt. 19:4)_

This passage has always been one of my proof texts. Unless we are to understanding this to mean AFTER the beginning, or that X number of years after the initial creation is still part of "the beginning", then the text is clear. Adam and Eve were made at the beginning, and the old earth view is simply not possible.

If a "fact" from science is presented as rebuttal, I reply that it must be interpreted in the light of Jesus' statement, for He cannot lie.

Exodus 20:9-11, mentioned above, is also helpful. Were the Hebrews supposed to work for millions of years and then rest on the Sabbath Day?


----------



## earl40 (May 16, 2014)

fralo4truth said:


> _"And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which *made them at the beginning *made them male and female," (Matt. 19:4)_
> 
> This passage has always been one of my proof texts. Unless we are to understanding this to mean AFTER the beginning, or that X number of years after the initial creation is still part of "the beginning", then the text is clear. Adam and Eve were made at the beginning, and the old earth view is simply not possible.
> 
> ...



Jesus is not teaching the age of the earth but stating that from, or at, the begining of the creation of humans they were male and female, The context of this passage is teaching marriage between a wife and husband which shall not be put assunder.


----------



## VictorBravo (May 16, 2014)

fralo4truth said:


> This passage has always been one of my proof texts.



That passage was instrumental in my conversion, as was Heb 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."

I was one of those folks who thought Christ a real person, a good man, and wise teacher, etc. But when I first saw that Jesus took Genesis seriously and plainly, it was the beginning of the undoing of my rebellious world-view.


----------



## Christusregnat (May 16, 2014)

The age of the earth is critical in various points:

1. The biblical reckoning of the age of the earth refutes various heathen speculations about the eternity of matter, forms of evolution, etc.;

2. The fullness of the times was when Christ came, according to the age reckoned in the genealogy and not before nor later;

3. The narrative of Scripture is to be read in light of itself, and not in the light of ANE cultural artifacts, or other empirical speculations.


Modern methods of interpreting Scripture generally start with the assumption that the Bible is not the Word of God in its entirety, but (at best) is a mixture of both divine and human inspiration. From this starting point, all sorts of impious blasphemies are heaped on the sacred Text, imputing ignorance to the human authors, or to subtle tricks, not revealing, but hiding their true intention with a series of lies.

The imposition of a myth reading on Genesis 1-2 is not a byproduct of faith in the God of Scripture, but rather of faith in the wisdom of unbelieving scholars; scholars who presuppose that the Bible can't be a historical narrative because of all the supposed historical errors they want to find in it.

I hope that helps.

Cheers,


----------



## TannedIrishman (May 17, 2014)

Thank you everyone for your input, it has been really helpful and I will read the links. Some of you mentioned "in the beginning" when Jesus was talking. I also wonder if that is simply talking about Adam and Eves marriage or actually the beginning or both, could you discuss that?


----------



## Peairtach (May 17, 2014)

I've always been highly cynical about attempts to make the days long or take the passage as a literary structure. 

God made day and night on Day One. It seems a bit strange to make the metaphor or literary structure on the first day. Does that mean that the things that are made on the subsequent days are metaphors or literary structures?

There might be room for a gap at the beginning when the earth and heavens were created but as yet unformed and unfilled. The Book of Job indicates that the angels were around when the Lord started work on the earth.

The scientists will have to catch up, eventually.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## earl40 (May 17, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> The Book of Job indicates that the angels were around when the Lord started work on the earth.
> 
> The scientists will have to catch up, eventually.
> 
> Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2



So angels are outside of time?


----------



## Peairtach (May 17, 2014)

earl40 said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> > The Book of Job indicates that the angels were around when the Lord started work on the earth.
> ...



They aren't. They're creatures.


----------



## earl40 (May 17, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > Peairtach said:
> ...



I see we agree though I suspect the angles were created on the first day the God created the earth. Angels before earth, earth then angles, angels on the head of a pin.  Now that serpent of "old" was created when the earth was created. Now here is a parallel many may want to discus, old serpent yet young earth.


----------



## Free Christian (May 18, 2014)

Hello Earl. How does the reference to "the old serpent" in Revelation 12 v 9 and 20 v 2 cause a problem with a young earth? Old is used merely to denote he has been around a long time. When the term 'the old serpent" is used it is in Revelation, a long time after the creation of the earth. There is no connection whatsoever between that verse and using it for belief in an old earth! Is there another verse somewhere in the Bible where you see a connection?


----------



## One Little Nail (May 18, 2014)

Angels are part of the spiritual realm so were most likely created before the heavens & the Earth were as these are part
of the material world, when I say Heavens, I mean the first & second heavens as the third heavens, were Paul was caught up to is of the spiritual realm & is were God's throne is, His spiritual creation, angels, were His attendants. 

If lucifer aka satan who rebelled, was in existence before the creation at 4004bc Usshers chronology, then it could be
rightly said of him that he is that old serpent. 

just as a side note if the earth is approx 6000 or so years in age that would make it an old earth in my estimation


----------



## earl40 (May 18, 2014)

One Little Nail said:


> Angels are part of the spiritual realm so were most likely created before the heavens & the Earth were as these are part
> of the material world, when I say Heavens, I mean the first & second heavens as the third heavens, were Paul was caught up to is of the spiritual realm & is were God's throne is, His spiritual creation, angels, were His attendants.
> 
> If lucifer aka satan who rebelled, was in existence before the creation at 4004bc Usshers chronology, then it could be
> ...



It is generally accepted that time began when heaven and earth was created which should include YEC and OEC. Now if God is the only being outside of time (He is) the angles were not created before time.


----------



## earl40 (May 18, 2014)

Free Christian said:


> Hello Earl. How does the reference to "the old serpent" in Revelation 12 v 9 and 20 v 2 cause a problem with a young earth? Old is used merely to denote he has been around a long time. When the term 'the old serpent" is used it is in Revelation, a long time after the creation of the earth. There is no connection whatsoever between that verse and using it for belief in an old earth! Is there another verse somewhere in the Bible where you see a connection?



I hear you. I guess my point is that if the earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old one can call it "old" also as much as if the earth was 14 billion years old. I just happen to believe one not need to use Ussher chronology to guess the age of the earth. There are other battles to be fought on this discussion and being a person who believe in a very old earth I have realized the battle in Genesis is over the historicity of Adam and the fall. The fight over the age of the earth needs a lot of charity from both sides. The YEC need to check if the OEC believes in Adam and the fall and fight that battle. The OEC needs to do the same to the YEC. Most of the YEC I know do not really believe how far Adam fell when he sinned and that we also died in Adam at the fall.


----------



## One Little Nail (May 27, 2014)

earl40 said:


> It is generally accepted that time began when heaven and earth was created which should include YEC and OEC. Now if God is the only being outside of time (He is) the angles were not created before time.



Angels are spiritual beings & do not belong to our world, the created material universe, time as we know it belongs to our material realm.
as for the angels they are in the spiritual realm, though only God is eternal, in all places at all times, no beginning or end,
The angels had a beginning, so they must be subject to some sort of "lineal time" or whatever it is called in their realm, as such


----------

