Piper and Keller on Creationism. A Couple Interesting Audio Clips

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm interested in any references you can provide detailing this sophisticated science that is currently developing around ID.

Discovery Institute has many peer reviewed writings, books, and articles from an ID standpoint.

trueorigin.org has some good material as well.

---------- Post added at 08:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:19 PM ----------


"In the beginning" simply means before time, at a point in the forever preexisting life of God prior to Creation, God created time, space, and matter.

No, "Before the beginning" means before. "In the beginning" refers to the beginning.
 

I don't subscribe to any ruin/reconstruction theory. I just want to point out that we are not told that the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe was created on any of the Six Days.

Interesting about Chalmers, who was at the beginning of the FC of S. I thought he had been behind the gap theory.

Lots of folks think that same thing. That is why George made the post. He wanted to clear it up.
 
The unformed and unfilled Heavens and Earth had to be created even five minutes before Day One, because Days One to Six do not deal with their creation.

Um, what Bible are you reading?

"Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.


The text above clearly says "In the Beginning" (that is, on the first day ever), God "created the heavens and the Earth", and made light and separated it from the darkness. So yes, Day one deals with their creation.

So you're saying that not only light was made on the First Day but also the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe.

The accounts of creation I've read miss out the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe. It was light alone that was created on the First Day. How can you have a Day without light and darkness? God created the First Day on the First Day, so He could have days to work on. We're not told when He created the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe but it must have been before the First Day because there is no mention of Him creating and dividing anything but light on the First Day.

"In the Beginning" is not the "First Day", but before, because we're told what God created on the First Day and that was light.

I am not saying that the Earth was made on the first day; the text says it!

By your logic, God did not necessarily create Light on the first day either. You are allowing verse divisions, among other things, to effect your interpretation.

If I say "I made a cake. In the beginning, I got the pan and and sprayed it with oil. But it was empty. Then I turned on the oven and let it preheat. That was the first ten minutes," the phrase "first ten minutes" necessarily includes everything, including "the beginning." The "beginning", by definition in Genesis, is the beginning of the first day.

Nothing in the verses themselves, would hint at any kind of division there. In fact, the use of the Vav consecutive in verse 2, unequivocally links verse 1 with the following 4 verses. God created the earth, (and) the light (and) divided the light from the darkness, this was one day. That is how it reads. No division.
 
Here recently, I started a thread on the age of the earth. Since then I've been doing some sniffing around, trying to locate resources. Along the way, I stumbled across a couple perspectives the good folks here at the PuritanBoard might enjoy discussing.

First, check out Piper's position on Creationism. It's interesting. Go to www.soundofdoctrine.com (I've posted the relevant threads there).

Second, is anyone familiar with Sailhamer's view? It's Piper's view. What are your thoughts? I'm just starting to chew on it.

Third, any thoughts on Keller's perspective?

Austin, what I've read so far on Sailhamer (and Perman's) view is extrememly interesting. Many thanks. I look forward to finishing the read as time allows. As to Keller I would first admit that he is my favorite contemporary author/preacher. And his stance on our subject is very sound. He definitely argues against secular naturalism. And He believes the Gospel is the best argument against SN rather than science disproving evolutionism as a means of proving the existance of God. However, he does seem somewhat sympathetic to the "evidences" of evolutionary biological processes and their use by God in creation. Now, I fully recognize the mechanisms of natural selection within the kinds. But, I think Dr. Keller allows for more than that, although he's careful to point out that whatever mechanisms got us to where we are today were authored and controlled by God. I really think his motivations are to keep the secularists and evolutionary biologists interested in the conversation with evangelicals. Anyway, that's how I read him, I could be wrong.

I lean toward Keller's position also. He will no doubt tease it out more in the years to come.
 
Evolution and Science | Redeemer Sermons

keller on evolution, since everyone is referencing him.

(Keller has some insightful things to say in this talk... 1) that people my age don't discount miracles right off the bat. 2) that they have a perception that in order to be a Christian one must accept creation science and that is what leads them to not even consider the Christian faith.)

As for the "in the beginning" aspect that may lead to an old earth view, that's really interesting, as I had just gone searching through the Oxford Annotated Bible (which is the NRSV) and saw an explanation for why Genesis 1 was slightly different:

"In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters."

this slight difference being "when"...

There is also the NJPS:

“When God began to create heaven and earth—the earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep and a wind from God sweeping over the water—God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light” (Gen 1:1–3, NJPS).

I was looking for the source on why they had done this, and I couldn't really find it but I found this article which resolves some things:
Translating Genesis 1:1: Aristotle or the Big Bang? Part 1 (of 2) | Reasons To Believe

I think its a bad idea mainly because it suggests that time existed previously, perhaps even that God has always existed in time... that obviously does not cohere with our faith.
 
So God created the unformed and unfilled Earth and Heavens on the First Day as well as light!

First I've heard of it, but it may be right enough. When were the Heaven of Heavens and the Angels created and when did the Angelic Fall happen? Remembering that Heavenly time is co-ordinated to Earthly time because Earth is more central to God's plan than Heaven.

Quote from Damon
I am not saying that the Earth was made on the first day; the text says it!

By your logic, God did not necessarily create Light on the first day either. You are allowing verse divisions, among other things, to effect your interpretation.

If I say "I made a cake. In the beginning, I got the pan and and sprayed it with oil. But it was empty. Then I turned on the oven and let it preheat. That was the first ten minutes," the phrase "first ten minutes" necessarily includes everything, including "the beginning." The "beginning", by definition in Genesis, is the beginning of the first day.

Nothing in the verses themselves, would hint at any kind of division there. In fact, the use of the Vav consecutive in verse 2, unequivocally links verse 1 with the following 4 verses. God created the earth, (and) the light (and) divided the light from the darkness, this was one day. That is how it reads. No division.

What about the fact that each of the days start with "And God said..."? Nothing to do with verse divisions which are not inspired.

Quote from Joy
I think its a bad idea mainly because it suggests that time existed previously, perhaps even that God has always existed in time... that obviously does not cohere with our faith.

It doesn't need to suggest this, as it says there was a beginning without saying that God had a beginning.
I'm not here defending the Big Bang or any other scientific theory, by the way. Just trying to ascertain if the text says the unformed and unfilled Earth and Heavens - "the blank canvas" - was made on Day One or before Day One.

I've ironically heard standard Six Day Creationists take a literary approach to getting round the first two verses to shoe-horn the creation of the blank canvas into Day One or Day One to Six.

E.g. http://www.puritanboard.com/f60/modified-gap-theory-49879/
 
Last edited:
The unformed and unfilled Heavens and Earth had to be created even five minutes before Day One, because Days One to Six do not deal with their creation.

Um, what Bible are you reading?

"Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.


The text above clearly says "In the Beginning" (that is, on the first day ever), God "created the heavens and the Earth", and made light and separated it from the darkness. So yes, Day one deals with their creation.

So you're saying that not only light was made on the First Day but also the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe.

The accounts of creation I've read miss out the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe. It was light alone that was created on the First Day. How can you have a Day without light and darkness? God created the First Day on the First Day, so He could have days to work on. We're not told when He created the unformed and unfilled Earth and Universe but it must have been before the First Day because there is no mention of Him creating and dividing anything but light on the First Day.

"In the Beginning" is not the "First Day", but before, because we're told what God created on the First Day and that was light.

I am not saying that the Earth was made on the first day; the text says it!

By your logic, God did not necessarily create Light on the first day either. You are allowing verse divisions, among other things, to effect your interpretation.

If I say "I made a cake. In the beginning, I got the pan and and sprayed it with oil. But it was empty. Then I turned on the oven and let it preheat. That was the first ten minutes," the phrase "first ten minutes" necessarily includes everything, including "the beginning." The "beginning", by definition in Genesis, is the beginning of the first day.

Nothing in the verses themselves, would hint at any kind of division there. In fact, the use of the Vav consecutive in verse 2, unequivocally links verse 1 with the following 4 verses. God created the earth, (and) the light (and) divided the light from the darkness, this was one day. That is how it reads. No division.


I don't know the answer, but I know that this is a legitimate question for many: Is Genesis 1:1 an announcement or a part of day one? Or something else?
If it is a part of day one, we might be confused, because he created the heavens, the earth, and light all on day one?
Or, did God create the heavens and the earth in the beginning, before day one? And the six days goes on to explain what he added to whatever was there since the beginning?
Or, does "In the beginning" act as the chapter title. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. This is how he did it. Day one, light. etc.

You see why this is hard to understand exactly what Gen. 1:1 is doing?

Your cake analogy does not sound completely kosher to me, but I am not smart enough to figure out why. Or it is kosher, and I am not smart enough to see it.

Maybe the analogy needs to be:
In the beginning, I made cake and ice cream. The cake was without form. And I said, let me use flour (which I had to grind myself--ex nihilo). That was the first day.

I feel like this is saying that I ground flour the first day, not that I made the cake the first day. I just definitely made the cake before the time when we didn't have cake.



"Gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.
Gen 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
 
Hi:

I am not at all a fan of John Piper, and I believe that his mixing of Hedonism with Christian Theology is gross idolatry. There is, however, a very interesting answer to the problem of the day-age theory given by Dr. Russell Humphreys in his book, Starlight and Time. His Time-Dialiation/White Hole Theory is consistent with Einstein's General Relativity as well as the observed data of the universe. Dr. Humphreys' theory has been given some recent attention in Dr. John Hartnett's book, Starlight, Time and the New Physics.

In short Dr. Humphreys demonstrates how 6 literal 24 hour days can expire on Earth while millions of years transpire in the universe.

The books and DVD's are available on Amazon.

Blessings,

Rob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top