Genesis – Page 2 – Scripture Thoughts

Tag: Genesis (page 2 of 3)

Was Adam Literal?

Science indicates Adam was not a literal man as revealed in Christianity Today, “The Search for the Historical Adam,” by Richard Ostling, June 8.2011. This is not to say that this Christian magazine is advocating this view, but rather it is showing what “science” claims. I put the word science in quotation marks because this segment of the scientific community is simply voicing opinions based on what they believe from current data. I maintain that their interpretations are in serious error. Not all scientists agree on this issue. You might want to read the article first before reading further: The Search for the Historical Adam – Christianity Today

It is so sad to see men “out thinking” the Holy Scriptures. When they made their points, they quoted scientists. When a literal Genesis view was presented, they quoted pastors. From a scientific viewpoint, how fair is that? They never included scientists who believe in a literal Adam, and I have a long list of those who do, and they all work at major universities such as Cornell, Penn State, Princeton, and many more. (see http://www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/100ScientistsAd.pdf). LINK UNAVAILABLE

There are plenty of these people from which to choose. One comment in this article was, “there is nothing that insists on a literal understanding of Adam in a passage (Gen. 1-3).” Really?! What about Jesus talking about Adam as being a literal person? They talked about Paul perhaps “not understanding the scientific knowledge of today,” but they dared not include Jesus with that arrogant statement. The truth is that scientists are just scratching the surface with this new human gnome DNA research, and to draw these outlandish conclusions (to usurp the authority of Scripture) is not only arrogant, but foolish and extremely short-sighted. In ten more years, they will know more about the history of human DNA, and what they’ve prematurely concluded now may very well be abandoned then. God’s creation is so complex, but knowledge does puff up and these guys think they know so much when they don’t. So much of science today is adulterated with man’s own thinking and spiritual biases. The scientists do see facts, but they have their own spin put upon those facts, and they falsely call it knowledge (1 Timothy 6:20-21). These modern-day interpreters of Scripture should go back and read God’s rebuke to Job about his apparent lack of scientific knowledge about how and why God made things.

Ironically, science has come up with a “Mitochondrial Eve.” This refers to the matrilineal most recent common ancestor of modern humans. She was the most recent woman from whom all living humans today descend, on their mother’s side, and through the mothers of those mothers and so on, back until all lines converge on one person. In other words, science is thinking that evidence exists that strongly indicates that all humans can be genetically traced backward in time to one woman.

The Bible claims that the fool in his heart says there is no God (Ps.14:1-3). But the devil is no fool (Gen.3:1). He believes in the one true God and trembles (James 2:19). But he knows how to deceive (2 Cor. 2:11). If he can wipe out a literal Adam from modern minds, then what happens to original sin? That’s gone as well. If that is gone, what is the meaning of the Cross? Not much. The spirit behind evolutionary thought is to first undermine the very core of Christianity, and many believers have not looked seriously into this issue unfortunately. The more we ignore it, the more ground it can gain.

Consider these quotes:

“Anything that we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done and may in the end be our greatest contribution to civilization.” – Dr. Steven Weinberg, The First Three Minutes, 1977. This resembles something that Screwtape would say to Wormwood (if you are familiar with C.S. Lewis’ classic book).

“Christianity will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly the very reason for Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. Destroy Adam and Eve and original sin, and in the rubble you will find the remnants the son of god. Take away the meaning of his death (if Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means), then Christianity is nothing.” – G. Richard Bozarth, “The Meaning of Evolution,” American Atheist, p. 30, 9/20/79.

“You are an animal and share a common heritage with earthworms,” – Biology: Visualizing Life, Holt, 1994. This is a typical statement in all government-run high school science textbooks. Notice how it is stated as a scientific fact despite evolution being only a theory. This is indoctrination and suppresses critical thinking skills. Our tax dollars support this.

I did like South Carolina pastor Phillips’ comment at the end of the article: “Can the Bible’s theology be true if the historical events on which the theology is based are false? If science trumps Scripture, what does this mean for the virgin birth of Jesus, or his miracles, or his resurrection? The hermeneutics behind theistic evolution are a Trojan horse that, once inside our gates, must cause the entire fortress of Christian belief to fall.”

In conclusion, I am thankful for what Jesus told us – “…I will build My church and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it” (Matt.16:18). Some believers, however, may simply sit back in peace with this knowledge, but there is an ongoing war for the souls of people and there is a “Goliath” here strutting arrogantly in front of us ridiculing our God with the same demonic spirit in that ancient Philistine. Rather than just resting in the knowledge that Christ will triumph in the end, we should also heed 1 Peter 3:15 – “…but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence….” Sooner of later, the subject of evolution will confront you. My advice to you is to first repent of the fear of man (which I had to do and still battle to this day). Second, embrace this motto – “It is not about us, it is about Him.” Third, depend on the Holy Spirit to give you the right words.

Feedback so far:

NF – You are so right on Dave—it’s all about Jesus living in your heart –trusting and believing and letting the Holy Spirit speak the needed words to say when meet such folks–glory to His Holy Name forever!

GR – Brother Dave, when will man, atheists, amateur theists, pastors, etc STOP trying to manipulate, change, analyze, question the Word of God. REALLY! If people would stop trashing the Word of God and READ the Word of God and LIVE by the Word of God, all the problems in the world would be gone. I guess its just too easy and man’s PRIDE always gets in the way.

CL – I tried reading all the way thru the Christianity Today article but I couldn’t even finish it – not worth the time I even spent! I would love to be able to see the faces of the “scientists” when they die and meet the One True God…or maybe even Adam (or Eve).

AR – I agree with CL – that article is ridiculous! However, I’m sure some who read it could have been swayed if they didn’t do as GR suggests READ and LIVE by the WORD.

Dinosaurs

October 30, 2017 / dscheer / 0 Comments

Melissa H. – This last QA reminded me of a question my dad had asked me several weeks ago about whether dinosaurs did exist. My response was that they did, but I was only basing my reasoning on the skeletons I’ve seen in the museums (I haven’t really researched it). For your study on Genesis 1, you said that birds came before dinosaurs, thus, stating dinosaurs did exist. Dinosaurs were created before man; however, only by one day. So man and dinosaurs were living together on the earth?

Dave – Thanks for your question. If the history of the earth is only 6,000-10,000 years, then man and dinosaurs did co-exist. This is a difficult sell to our society today because it has been thoroughly evolutionized in its thinking rather than what the Bible says. Many think that science has proven beyond any doubt that evolution is true and that earth is billions of years old. We hear this propaganda every where from Barney the kids’ dinosaur to Nova to public schools, Bill Nye, the late Carl Sagan, and unfortunately, many Christian colleges. Indeed, the mantra of “billions of years ago” permeate the very fabric of our society…and it is dead wrong.

For those open-minded enough to see it, there is good evidence for man and dinos living at the same time. In Peru, there are thousands of works of pottery that have pictures of dinosaurs interacting with man. Indian tribes that lived in western US have described the “piasaw” bird and being a pterodactyl. These have been seen in parts of Africa today. “Loch Ness monsters” have been spotted worldwide for many years and I have concluded, based on the consistency of those descriptions, they are plesiosaurs. Young-earth creationists do not have a problem with this issue as do the evolutionists. In recent years, evolutionists were embarrassed when a coelacanth fish, long assumed to be extinct for 70 million years, was caught alive off the coast of Madagascar. If the earth is only thousands of years old, evolution collapses totally, so they will fight to their death maintaining the billions of years paradigm.

Many reptilian “sea monsters” were seen by sailors before the invention of the motor. Sailing ships could approach these dinosaurs quietly, but motors make too much noise, especially through water. I assume sightings were cut sharply once motors took over is due to the noise factor. The things can hear boats coming miles away and get scared off. In addition, most ships know where the sea currents are and now travel in those “lanes.” So modern ships do not even travel in many places of the oceans now. In other words, there is plenty of room for plesiosaurs to frolic and thrive without being detected by humans.

The Bible itself yields fantastic evidence that man lived with dinosaurs. The description of the beast called behemoth in chapter 40 reminds us of the appatasaurus, not an elephant or a hippo as some Bible translators, who had been evolutionized, maintain. The biblical description is so specific, especially the tail, that there is no way it is describing any common animal seen living today. Behemoth was a creature that God said Job could see. It was not some fairy tale He was telling him.

We do not find the term “dinosaur” in ancient historical accounts because the word was not coined until 1841 by Sir Richard Owen. There are many accounts of dragons and sea monsters, however. While some may be folklore and not based on fact, others have credibility.

Finally, in 2005 evolutionist researcher Dr. Mary Schweitzer found soft tissue in a T-Rex thigh bone. She kept on saying she could not believe what she was seeing! If that Dino died millions of years ago, there is no way under the sun that any soft tissue would remain. If it died thousands of years ago, some soft tissue could be found. Evolutionists, however, MUST cling to billions of years because if they don’t, evolution is out and creationism is the only alternative to gravitate toward…and for some scientists that is unthinkable.

I think it is safe to say that most dinosaurs are extinct, but some were able to survive the drastic climatic changes following the Flood of Noah. When the animals got off the Ark, God told Noah that He would put the fear of man into those animals and that mankind could now kill animals for food. So this was probably God’s way of protecting the animals from instant annihilation at the hands of the next couple of human generations. It also could explain why modern sightings are not as common place as we would think. The Congo, the example, has a swamp the size of Florida. Over the years several people have seen what seems to be a smaller version of the appatasaurus. Dr. Roy Mackel, retired professor at the University of Chicago, found footprints that would substantiate this claim. This swamp is so perilous for humans that few venture into it which creates a nice human-free zone for these creatures. In my seminars, I give a lot more time and detail on this issue. It is one that I hesitate to bring up with people who do not believe in the Bible, however. It’s just too far out on the limb for them to accept.

Feedback:
Nels F. – Very interesting thanks for showing me things I didn’t know or understand before–God bless ya!

Alona R. (12/4/13) – Thank you for the concise information. And just in the last few weeks there have
been 2 famous catches that were huge and almost indescribable in terms of any other sea creatures!

Q & A: What was the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden?

September 4, 2017 / dscheer / 0 Comments

Tim L. – What was the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden? What might have happened if Adam and Eve had opted to eat from the Tree of Life instead of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil? Or, eaten from the Tree of Life first and then consumed the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?

Dave – Great questions, Tim. Thanks for sending them. First, let me say that I think that the meaning behind those two trees runs deep, and we may never understand their fullness until we pass from this realm.

My pastor, Mark DuPre, likes how the Jamieson, Fausett and Brown commentary describes the Tree of Life: “…so called from its symbolic character as a sign and seal of immortal life. Its prominent position where it must have been an object of daily observation and interest, was admirably fitted to keep man habitually in mind of God and futurity.” (Bible Study Tools)

I think the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden was Jesus Christ Himself perhaps in some different form. It represents faith and grace. I believe contained within that Tree was freedom, grace, eternal life, goodness of God, and the idea that God is merciful, forgiving, and not judgmental. If Adam and Eve just ate from this Tree, sin would have never entered their souls and they would have continued to live forever in peace with no aging-to-death process. Notice that God did not offer a formal option to them. In other words, He did not say, “There are two Trees here. One is life the other is death, take your pick.” Instead, He commanded them not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. In this way, disobedience was quickly established.

Pastor Mark does not believe that the Tree of Life was Jesus Christ in a different form. He does agree that it represents faith and grace, but in his mind, it is mostly eternal life. He further believes it stood for many things, as I have said, but that it mainly stood as a promise of eternal life and the call to be like God (in the right way, like Jesus Christ).

We’ll obviously never know what WOULD have happened had Adam and Eve been obedient. I’ve read that some folks believe ultimately God would have led them to eat of the tree of life. But we’ll never know until heaven.

In the long run (God’s Plan A), I think God allowed sin to enter humans for the greatest cause possible. Namely, to eradicate sin forever. When Lucifer’s pride caused his fall (and many angels with him), God never wanted this to be possible again throughout eternity. He could have made more angels, but because they can see God, it would not take any faith to redeem them if they fell like Lucifer and his cohorts. Hence, He designed a life form that was lower than angels that could and would separate themselves from God so He could enter the sin-filled realm Himself and annihilate it. Scripture does say that His love is perfected in us (1 John 4:12-19). I think this means that God not only declared He loved us but He demonstrated it via the Cross (Romans 5:8). Furthermore, His love expanded to the nth degree because we were unlovely and not even seeking Him. Not only did God accomplish this great feat, but at the same time He also created a Bride for Himself. Not bad, eh?

Pastor Mark is not sure he can agree with my speculation at this point because he does not see solid Biblical evidence about the motivations of God on this issue. He thinks the love of His people and the creation of a Bride are more clearly painted in Scripture than any “conquering sin-plan.” He also thinks that I could be right, but would need to see something more solid Biblically to feel that someone could describe God’s motivations. “God so loved the world…” is probably the most sublime expression he can find which is a good point. Mark further believes that God “absorbed” and judged sin in the person of His Son and thinks the love motivation comes first. Then comes the specific judgment tactics against sin. He concludes that God could have chosen any way He wanted to judge and to destroy the effects of sin forever. He happened to choose a way that demonstrated a love that we can barely comprehend.

If Adam first ate from the good tree and then later the bad one, what would have happened? The horrors that this bad tree leads to are bondage, The Law which cannot be satisfied, death, making us view God only as being judgmental and condemning. I think the same thing that happened in Genesis would happen here, unless the good tree somehow would make him immune to choosing disobedience for eternity?

Pastor DuPre has often wondered if man would have been “locked-in” to choosing obedience if he’d eaten of the tree of life first. He thinks many Bible commentators think that, but no one knows what God’s criteria would have been for that, and no one knows what the results would have been.

Another question we can ask is, “What would have happened if Adam ate from the Tree of Life after eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?” Once Adam sinned, God put an angelic guard and a “flaming sword which turned in every direction” to guard the way to the Tree of Life. So God did not allow this to happen, and I think this “spiritual guard” continues to this day preventing anyone from eating from it. But why? Perhaps this prevents anyone from gaining eternal life apart from the Messiah’s cross? In addition, to live forever in a sinful state is not good when eternal perfect life is possible.

In conclusion, I would say that your questions are difficult because the Bible does not give us much insight to determine sound doctrines. The above answers are, of course, speculations by Pastor Mark and myself, but I hope they provide some insights or good follow-up questions, however.

Feedback:

Nels F. – Very interesting I never thought about these things before!

Cindi L. – Interesting!

Tim L. (question sender) – Great discussion – one of those topics that is fun to ponder (deeply), but of course we will never know the answers for sure until heaven. I too think of Jesus when I read about the Tree of Life – drink this water and never thirst again (John 4:13).

It does seem God provided both options for man to pick from – eternal life without sin or knowledge – with the baggage of sin. Probably knew temptation would cause a bad pick, but man was given both options.

And you highlight a good point – after the fall – the tree of life was no longer an option unless you want to play laser tag with an angel. I suppose if man had consumed from the tree of knowledge and then the tree of life – if man wouldn’t have just been – the fallen angels part II. God was going for a free-will answer to disobedience. I wonder if perhaps there had been another God and Satan debate (as with Job) with Satan assuring that man would make bad choices and never freely opt to reconcile with God.

Scripture Thoughts

Tag: Genesis (page 2 of 3)

Was Adam Literal?

Dinosaurs

Q & A: What was the Tree of Life in the Garden of Eden?

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts