Adventists for Tomorrow

Our mission is to provide a free and open medium that will assist individuals in forming accurate, balanced, and thoughtful opinions regarding issues within and without the church.

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Due to a large increase in spam, I have frozen forum registration. If you are new to the site and want to register, e-mail me personally at vandolson@gmail.com. Thank you.

#1 08-10-12 11:58 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

The Genesis Debate

The Genesis Debate;

BY DESMOND FORD

Most educated people in Western countries regard Adventism as a 19th century cult because of our promoting of Ussher¹s six-thousand-year-old earth for most of our existence, and because we ignore the evidence furnished by the geological column, astronomy, continental drift and plate tectonics, radiometric, radiocarbon, and amino acid dating, etc. Among Bible scholars who do accept the Scriptures as God¹s supernaturally inspired Word we are also considered as an anachronism because of the way we interpret the early chapters of Genesis. Please note well that the issue here at stake is not the inspiration of Genesis, but its interpretation.

FOUR CATAGORIES OF INTERPRETATION

Evangelicals fall into four chief categories as regards their understanding of the first chapter of the Bible. There are those who hold "the gap theory," believing that long ages intervene between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Few scholars now teach this, as the exegetical and linguistic case is clearly against it.

A second group is concordist and regards the days as symbolic of long ages. This too has fallen into disfavor in recent decades among exegetes. It cannot reckon adequately with the successive evenings and mornings and the clear statement that the heavenly bodies were made on the fourth day.

The third view is chiefly that of fundamentalists, who hold that the literal meaning of the words is to be cherished and taught. There are practically no theologians of worldwide repute in this category.

Last, a fourth group looks at Genesis 1 as literature, semi-poetic in style, using the language of appearance so as to cater for all peoples, of all ages, in all places-despite illiteracy. The vast majority of scholarly commentaries in the last century take this position. Let us briefly consider some of the reasons why this is so.

THE MEANING OF GENESIS

The clear meaning of Genesis 1:1-2:3 is to tell of the formation of the entire universe, not just this planet. Verse 1 by its reference to "the heavens and the earth" is a merism (a presentation of two opposites making up a whole). This points to everything in existence, and, for this reason, some translators and commentators rightly render it: "In the beginning God created the universe." At the close of the creation account again we read of "the heavens and the earth." But this time we read also about "all the host of them." Genesis 1:1 and 2:1 point to each other and constitute a class for the entire narrative, and by "the host of them" is meant first of all the starry heavens. See Deuteronomy 4:19; 17:3; Nehemiah 9:6, etc.

So here is literature suggesting that the whole universe was made in less than one week! We doubt that even the fundamentalists among SDAs believe that. Confirmation of this intended meaning is found in verses 14-19 of the chapter where, not only the sun and the moon, but the stars also are set "in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth."

The accepted age among scientists for the universe is between 15 and 20 billion years, and for our solar system between 4 and 5 billion years. These figures are not guesses, but they are based on the same science that is able to place men on the moon and can bring events from the other side of the world into our lounge rooms at the very moment of occurrence. Christians who fly through the heavens in planes and speed along the earth in cars, who watch television and use electric razors, cannot fairly repudiate the conclusions of science about such matters as the age of the universe and our earth. It is true that science makes mistakes; 500 PhD dissertations were written on the Piltdown man, which turned out to be a hoax‹but science is also self-corrective. The real problem in religious circles is that an ounce of bias too often outweighs a ton of evidence.

For decades Adventism has been defending a young earth. Yet more than half of the scientists in our ranks repudiate that position. In the recent volume Creation Reconsidered, some well-known Adventist scientists and theologians speak their minds regarding the impossibility of holding the young earth doctrine. I know many of the writers personally, and I could add to the list others who stand in the foremost ranks of Adventist scientists. These would agree with the writers of this book, though originally all of them believed in a young earth and once explained the geological column by resorting to a worldwide flood in Noah¹s day. All of these men of science I greatly admire. Certain of them lost their jobs rather then surrender their integrity and allegiance to scientific truth, believing that God was as surely the author of that as he is of the truth found in Scripture. (Dr. Peter Hare is one example.)

The problem facing the church is a very urgent one. Because we have dealt with science as an enemy, and because we have not been prepared to listen to the scientists amongst us, we have ill prepared the many thousands of our young people who go to universities and learn the sciences. Far more than half of them then lose their way, assuming that the church is not to be trusted in any of its teachings seeing it is demonstrably wrong regarding its teachings on the very opening page of the Bible. Our second major problem is in evangelism. Because of our stand regarding the beginning of Genesis, we mainly reach people of the third world, or those of poor education in the Western World. We have cut off the ears, so to speak, of many intellectuals and lost those who should have become the bellwethers of the flock. We have augmented the unnecessary divide between science and revelation.

Many theologians in our ranks do not consider this a difficult problem to solve. And some of them have given their solution in the book Creation Reconsidered. Their explanation is the same as that of well-educated Christians for more than a century, including such figures as Henry Drummond (author of The Greatest Thing in the World), Charles Kingsley (author of Westward Ho), James Orr (editor of The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia), Benjamin Warfield, and a host of contemporary evangelicals such as John Stott. While not agreed on details, all of these have believed in an old universe and an old earth, and that Genesis 1 is literature, not science.

Such a conclusion should not be strange for anyone who considers the matter. Christ, the living Word, Lord of all truth, refused to disclose anything men could find out by the use of their own faculties, and so it is with the written Word. Consider how the living Word took the signs of the Aramaic language to communicate the truths of heaven and the idioms of the smallest nation on earth to express eternal verities. So it is with Genesis 1. The record‹while theocentric in another sense‹ is anthropocentric (man-centered), for it uses the language of appearance. But it is also anthropomorphic, and pictures God as seeing and speaking, and in the later chapters acting as a surgeon, a farmer, a potter, and a tailor making garments. Yet, Jesus said God is a spirit. See John chapter 4:24. God knew that for millenniums 99 percent of the inhabitants of earth would be illiterate. Even today the percentage is approximately 33 percent. As we communicate the truths of sex to children in terms less than scientifically precise, so did God with the story of creation. He was like a tall man bending low to whisper to a child.

Had Genesis 1 been written in scientific terms, which science would have been employed? Would it be that of Moses' day, Christ's day, the Middle Ages, the 19th Century, the 21st, or tomorrow¹s science? Had the chapter consisted only of the ultimate in scientific statement, probably all we would have would be an equation. However, Genesis is so written that "the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein." It is concerned with the questions of Who and Why, not How and When. "By faith we understand that the Universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible" Hebrews 11:3, NIV.

HOW OLD IS THE EARTH?

But is it quite certain that the earth is old as geologists declare? Yes, it is quite sure. Even the Geoscience Research Institute of SDAs now admits this (after denials of decades). The proofs run into scores, of which perhaps five percent are questionable. For example, under the South Downs of England lie about 800 feet of chalk. These deposits are composed of tiny organisms, which sank to the ocean floor after death, taking about 1,000 years to form one inch of chalk. Think of the White Cliffs of Dover. Every microscopic fragment of it was once living. The present color testifies that these cliffs were not the product of a catastrophic flood. Think of coral reefs, sometimes forty miles long and of great height and thickness. Think of the varves that run sometimes into millions in some geographic locations, such as the Green River district in USA. Each varve (a varve is a pair of distant layer of sediment) represents the climatic changes of a single year, and a multitude of other features of earth give the same testimony as radiometric dating. "God spoke, and it was. He commanded, and it stood fast," refers to the certainty of his creative work, not its duration. Other evidences of the earth's great age, which are almost universally accepted by specialists in the earth sciences include the following:

The multitude of oil drills in U.S. alone testifies to the reliability of accepted geological data. A fortune is regularly spent based on this research. There are literally hundreds of places around the world where the same sequence of strata appear.

The oilfields of the Great Lakes area, Texas, and Alberta were originally beneath the sea and the thousands of feet of sedimentary rock that piled up contain multitudes of marine fossils. On top of these sedimentary deposits coral reefs grew which ultimately because fossilized into limestone. Some of these are many miles long and about a thousand feet thick and required many thousands of years to develop. On top of these reefs are more layers of sediment upon beds of mud‹only after the sediments became rocks did coral edifices begin.

The Bahamas Banks are underwater mountains of sedimentary rock enormous in size and containing what has been described as ³one tremendous stack of fossil material.² These banks have steeply sloping sides, evidence that the fossils grew in place and were not deposited from elsewhere. Millions of years were required for these massive banks to grow.

Sedimentary rocks become metamorphic rock only under the combination of tremendous heat and pressure‹temperatures of about 600 degrees centigrade and pressures of 30 tons per square inch, for long ages of time.

Using the parallax method, astronomers have concluded that light from the most distant objects in the universe took about ten billion years to reach earth.

Stars are usually in groups and not scattered at random. The bigger a star is, the hotter and the faster it uses up its energy resources. The hottest blue stars have enough energy to enable them to survive for a few million years but the cool red stars have a life span several times as long. On no occasion do we find a cluster entirely lacking in the long-lived stars, which means that in those clusters the stars of shorter life spans have already burned themselves out. Millions or even billions of years are thus comprehended in each star cluster.

There are seventeen radioactive nuclides with half lives more than 80 millions years and this coincides perfectly with an estimate for the solar system of between four and five billion years of age. If the earth were only about 10,000 years old we would find radioactive nuclides with half-lives between 1,000 and 50 million years only. The Christian physicist, Alan Hayward, comments: "There are forty such nuclides that can only be made in star-interior conditions, and EVERY ONE of them is absent from the earth¹s crust." Then he adds: "the odds against this distribution [of the 17 nuclides with half-lives above 80 million years] just happening" to occur, by pure chance: are worse than a million billion to one. This means that the distribution of the radioactive nuclides provides a positively overwhelming argument for an ancient earth." Creation and Evolution p. 106.

Regarding recent creationist attacks on radiometric dating, Dr. Davis Young (both a respected professor of geology and a creationist) says: "No geochronologists will ever take seriously such arguments. It is hoped that Christian lay-people will not take them seriously either, for they are poor arguments." Ibid. p.112

Rocks of earth and rocks from meteorites and the moon agree on an age for our solar system of between four and five billion years. Such great ages as we have recognised for the universe are necessary because some of the elements necessary for life on earth had their origin in star nuclear furnaces burning through long ages until the supernova climax expelled these elements to become part of our earth and of living things.

The Bible says nothing precisely about the age of the earth. Chronologies indicate descent not a chronological line. Terms such as, "begat", and "son", do not in Scripture always have the meaning we now give them. "Begat" can mean "the ancestor of," and "son," can mean a distant descendant. Scripture begins its story of the human race at the time when both writing and civilization began (and when earth's population was much less than one percent of what it is now), and never attempts to convey supernaturally any information man himself can find out by using the gifts God has richly bestowed upon him. We see this truth best illustrated in the teachings of Christ himself, and it was his Spirit that inspired the Old Testament writings.

Continental drift with its inconceivably slow movement also demonstrates the earth's great age. Denied by scientists till after World War II, continental drift is now widely accepted.

It is estimated that ninety-nine percent of coal seams are readily explained by the burial of vegetation in tropical swamps to be ultimately metamorphosed into coal. Coal reserves equal approximately 65 pounds of coal for every square yard of the planet, and yet a whole forest of full-grown beeches can only yield a seam of about 2 centimeters. No universal flood could ever have produced the gigantic coal contents of our globe. Most coal seams are devoid of flowering plants, trees, or the pollen found in recent sediments. Most of earth¹s strata, including the coal layers are finely arranged and not at all what the destructive work of a great flood would have yielded.

The Yellowstone Fossil Forests have in one place 44 successive forest layers that are encased in rock that was formed by volcanic ash. Beneath the forests are thousands of feet of fossiliferous rock. SDA paleontologist Dr Richard Ritland, after considerable field work at the site, wrote, "The transport theory for the origin of the fossil forests of the region as suggested by Whitcomb and Morris is not in harmony with the facts." Creation and Evolution, p. 130

But what about the universality of the Deluge? Because there is no geological evidence of a worldwide deluge, most evangelical scholars believe that the Genesis Flood covered the existing civilization, not the entire globe. Others believe that the inspired writers took a well-known historical event of limited proportions and used it to teach theological truth, transcending mere history, which is never an end in itself in the Bible. When John Morris of the Creation Research Institute was asked if he had ever convinced a secular geologist regarding flood geology, he answered, "No." Furthermore, flood geology is no necessary accompaniment of belief in a universal flood.

Is the geological column an established fact? It is, and has been so since 1849, by which time correlations had been made between strata in England and European countries.

Is not the idea of long ages of creature strife before the advent of man an intolerable one for the Christian? We should remember Deuteronomy 29:29 about the secret things belonging to the Lord, and that only those things are revealed which are to help us to obedience. Romans 8:10-23 is probably the key to this problem. All of nature testifies that intelligent beings have rebelled against their Maker. We must keep in mind that this rebellion began before our solar system was formed. Spurgeon believed that the shadow of the Fall extended backwards just as does the shadow of the cross. In the beginning, God's work was declared "good," not "perfect." It is good, despite storms, earthquakes, tigers, malarial mosquitoes, etc.; good for its probationary purpose. This world was intended to be "a vale of gospel-making."

Do not evolutionary scientists reason in a circle when they date strata by the fossils and vice versa? George McCready Price, that good and learned man, taught so. But he was wrong, as almost all SDA scientists now admit. Radiometric dating and comparison of the sequence of strata in all continents have made Price¹s views untenable.

The geological column points to death long before the arrival of man. Did not death begin at the Fall? Scripture teaches that all human death began with the Fall. In a creation such as we live in, existence is protoplasmic‹that is, acting upon existing life. Otherwise, the sea would soon be solid fish, and the atmosphere a mass of insects. When Adam ate his first piece of fruit, obviously he took its life. It may help to remember, as we look at difficult questions, that God's work in creation is as mysterious as his own nature. Indeed, mystery is a key word used by many recent scientists as they discuss both the beginning of life and of humanity.

WE MAY NEVER FULLY KNOW

We may never know the full truth of our origins. No less an authority on evolution than Ernst Mayr, professor emeritus of zoology at Harvard University, former curator at the American Museum of Natural History, and avowed lifelong advocate of Darwinian evolution, has finally come to admit that the origin of our species is a "puzzle" (to use his word) that may never be solved. The link that leads directly to Homo sapiens is missing. That should not be a surprise. Such direct ³links² are not abundant in the fossil record. Gerald L. Schroeder, The Science of God, p. 127.

When G. G. Simpson wrote in Science magazine about the book The Origin of Vertebrates, by N. J. Berrill, he said: Berrill's last sentence is, "Proof may be forever unattainable, and it may not matter, for here is such stuff as dreams are made of." Then Simpson himself states: "Perhaps this is the last word on the chordate ancestry of the vertebrates. As for the ancestry of the chordates, all is left in darkness without even the dream of 60 years ago." Science, Dec. 9, 1955, p. 1144.

Even known organisms, despite all we have learned of their physiology, biochemistry, embryology and ecology are still very much black boxes, and only a fraction of their total adaptive complexity is understood. We still do not have anything approaching a complete description of even the simplest bacterial cell. See Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, p. 201.

The truth is that despite the prestige of evolutionary theory and the tremendous intellectual effort directed towards reducing living systems to the confines of Darwinian thought, nature refuses to be imprisoned. In the final analysis we still know very little about how new forms of life arise. The "mystery of mysteries"‹the origin of new beings on earth; is still largely as enigmatic as when Darwin set sail on the Beagle. Ibid. pp. 358-359.

Despite all we have said above, it must be confessed that Genesis 1 is about Science; the science of salvation. Spurgeon delighted to speak on that truth, and we offer one example.

"Furthermore, we must note that if any man be in Christ he is a new creature, and the creation of him bears some resemblance to the creation of the world. I have at other times gone through that wonderful first chapter of the Book of Genesis, which is a Bible in miniature, and I have tried to show how it sets forth the spiritual creation."

"Behold, by nature we lie like chaos: a mass of disorder, confusion, and darkness. As in the old creation, so in the new, the Spirit of God broodeth over us and moveth on the face of all things. Then the word of the Lord comes and says within us, as aforetime in chaos and old night, 'Let there be light,' and there is light. After light there comes a division of the light from the darkness, and we learn to call them by their names. The light is 'day' and the darkness is 'night.'"

"So to us there is a knowing and a naming of things, and a discerning of differences in matters which before we confounded when we put light for darkness. After a while there cometh forth in us the lower forms of spiritual life. As in the earth there came grasses and herb, so in us there come desire, hope, and sorrow for sin. By-and-by there appeared on the globe fowl and fish, and beasts, and living things, and life beyond all count."

"So also in the new creation, from having life we go on to have it more abundantly. God by degrees created all His works, till at last He had finished all the hosts of them, and even so He works on till He completes in us the new creation and looks upon us with rejoicing. Then He bringeth to us a day of rest, blessing us and causing us to enter into His rest because of His finished work. We could draw a very beautiful parallel if we had time, but you can think it out for yourselves. Christ¹s Glorious Achievements." (pp. 72-73.)

GENESIS AND THE BIBLE

When the New Testament draws from the first chapter of the Old Testament, it customarily links it to the new creation made possible by Calvary. See John 1:1; Mark 1:1; Luke 1:1; Matthew 4:17; 2 Corinthians 4:6; 5:17; 1 Peter 2:9. We should do the same. This cannot be overemphasized.

But can we really be certain that the Genesis narrative is inspired? Certainly: There exists in Scripture, particularly in its introductory passages, what has been called "the seal of seven." The first sentence of the Bible has 7 Hebrew words and 4 x 7 Hebrew letters. The three nouns: God, heaven, and earth a have number value of 777. (Each Hebrew letter stands for a number‹see any Hebrew Grammar). There is one Hebrew verb, "created," and its numeric value is 203 = 7 x 29. According to some researches there are at least 30 different numeric features in this verse. Statistically, the chance of this is 1 in 30 trillion. I have checked out at least one dozen of these from my Hebrew Bible, but I do not endorse the extremes of Ivan Panin.

The second verse of Genesis 1 has 7 x 2 words and the last paragraph of the creation story (Genesis 2:1-3) is constructed similarly, including 3 statements of 7 Hebrew words each, with the word for seventh in the center. The first genealogy of the Bible is the genealogy of the heavens and the earth, and it is divided into 7 divisions. The next genealogy is found at the end of Genesis 4 and has 7 names. The seventh man in this genealogy, Lamech, utters an oath embracing the number 7 three times. The years of the later Lamech (Genesis 5) are 777.

The next genealogy is Genesis 5, and here the seventh man is so close to God he does not die but is taken to heaven for eternal rapturous rest. The numbers in this chapter are based on the Babylonian sexagesimal system (60s); each given age is a multiple of five years = 60 months. Wherever there is an exception to this, it is because a seven has been added. The total ages of the antediluvians comes to 8,575, which is 7 x 1,225. The ages from the Flood to Abraham come to 2,996, which is also a multiple of seven. A similar listing of kings was well-known long before the days of Abraham, but the ages transcend those of Genesis 5 by far.

In Genesis 46:8, the sons of Jacob are listed. The seventh son is Gad (whose numerical number from the Hebrew letters of his name is 7), and he has 7 sons. Genesis 46:70 says, 70 people went into Egypt. All this reminds us of the first NT genealogies. Matthew has 3 lots of 14 in chapter 1, i.e. three lots of 7 x 2. Luke has 77 generations. His whole book revolves around 7 pericopes, beginning each time with reference to the seventh-day, the Sabbath. (Most of this can be found in such learned tomes as Umberto Cassuto¹s Commentary on the Pentateuch, part one, and L. R. Bailey¹s Genesis, Creation, and Creationism).

We have only touched the fringes of the topic, but what uninspired human being could ever duplicate those fringes, indeed, even that wonderful first verse of the Bible? Consider how many heresies are challenged by the first 7 Hebrew words of Scripture. Polytheism, animism, pantheism, deism, atheism, agnosticism, secularism, materialism, etc. This approach is but one of many to show the supernatural nature of Genesis. The Jews who learned its lessons gave civilization its most beneficent features: monotheism, science, education, freedom, democracy, worship, and morality. See the book The Gifts of the Jews, by Thomas Cahill.

In pagan religions, time was cyclical, leading to the philosophy of eternal recurrence and inevitable resulting gloom, depression, and enervation. The pagans never successfully linked ethics with religion but the readers of Genesis did, to the benefit of us all.

One other approach that recommends itself to most thoughtful people is the fact that the book which gives but one chapter to creation and five to millenniums of human history, yet dedicates 13 chapters to the life of one man. This man, one of the very few against whom no sin is recorded, becomes the Savior of the world with the bread of life, after having been falsely accused, betrayed and sold for pieces of silver to a foreign nation. And all this was done by his own Jewish brethren. In those thirteen chapters are approximately four score parallels with the life of Christ, as recorded in the four Gospels. Sometimes the very words of the evangelist are set forth. Such phenomena are beyond mere human ability.

Genesis can be viewed as infallible in all it intends to teach; the good news about God and his gracious offer of redemption through Christ. Read and believe John 20:31: "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." Consider also John 5:46: "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say."

IS GENESIS INSPIRED?

There is clear evidence of the supernatural inspiration of Genesis. Not only the miraculous interweaving of the number seven from the first verse onwards, but also the prophetic statements of the book. We will mention just one of these, which should be convincing to any open mind. Genesis 12:1-3 predicts that an obscure Bedouin sheik would become the most respected man in the world. This sevenfold prophecy is clearly supernatural.

Who among us before the days of media could ever have pointed to an unknown figure among the millions of earth and say that one day his name and memory would tower above all others? For over 14 centuries, the millions of Jews, Mohammedans, and Christians, have claimed Abraham as their spiritual father. And from Abraham came the chosen race who guarded the oracles of God, brought forth the Messiah, and the Book which has blessed civilization above all others combined. Nevertheless, unbelief can reason away the most positive evidence because it prefers evil. Skepticism is not the result of lack of evidence but springs from the choice of evil (John 19:21).

Genesis is a marvelous document inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is unlike all merely human documents. Observe, for example, that the theme of Genesis 1 is God himself. He appears in this opening narrative 50 times. He is the subject of every paragraph. Gordon J. Wenham in his Commentary on Genesis quotes Procksch who declared: "The first subject of Genesis and the Bible is God." Indeed, his name is the chief noun of significance in the entire Old Testament. Wenham concludes his introduction to Genesis with these words:

"Though historical and scientific questions may be uppermost in our minds as we approach the text, it is doubtful whether they were in the writer¹s mind, and we should therefore be cautious about looking for answers to questions he was not concerned with. Genesis is primarily about God's character and his purposes for sinful mankind. Let us beware of allowing our interests to divert us from the central thrust of the book, so that we miss what the Lord, our creator and redeemer, is saying to us." Word Biblical Commentary; Genesis 1-15, p. liii.

WHAT ABOUT THE FLOOD?

Most scholarly commentaries point out that Genesis 1-11 refutes the idolatries of Israel¹s neighbors by drawing upon well-known legends, transforming them into inspired theological truth. The Epic of Gilgamesh, for example, has the famous narrative about the time when the gods determined to destroy the world by a great flood. One man found grace in their eyes and, because of him, others were saved to begin a new civilization. His ark contained the seeds of the new world by taking aboard animals as well as human. After the flood, this hero offered sacrifice following his sending out of successive birds (including a dove and a raven) to see if it was safe to leave his haven. And the gods were appreciative of the sacrificial offering of the head of the new race and gave him immortality. The biblical narrative compares with this ancient epic as the Chrysler building does to a chicken coop, but there can be no denying the similarities to be found. Dr Frederick J. Harder has a warning for us:

"It is a fallacy to elevate the Deluge narrative to the level of a Bible doctrine, or to suggest that any doctrine is dependent upon it. When we use the Noachian flood to explain stratification or the presence of fossils, we are theorising, not interpreting, Scripture. The significance of the flood chronicle is its assurance that the wages of sin is death and that only by finding 'grace in the eyes of the Lord' as did Noah can mankind, or any part of creation, be spared destruction. (Genesis 6:8) Creation Reconsidered, p. 286.

As regards Noah¹s flood, we can choose between two options: it is a history of a local flood long before the early kingdoms of Egypt, or it is an inspired parable drawing upon some ancient memories of a diluvial catastrophe.

It might help us in making our choice to recognize that the Old Testament draws upon ancient myths and symbols. See Isaiah 27:1; 51:9, 10; Psalms 74:13, 14. None of us today believe in any monster with several heads, but it was a widely-known symbol in the days of Israel. Another well-known symbol mentioned in Scripture is the center of the world and the navel stone, thought of as the umbilicus (belly button) of the universe. The idea of a navel stone in association with a temple is found in many locations and cultures in the world and is echoed by Daniel 2:44, 45 and other Scriptures.

Also of help in our endeavors to rightly interpret Scripture is Bible astronomy. In the constellations, which were first named more than 4,000 years ago, we find echoes of the dragon myth found in the Bible, and indelible memories of God¹s first promise of redemption (Gen 3:15); and the latter covenant promise following the Flood (Gen 9:8-17). See the article on "Astronomy" in The International Bible Encyclopedia (ed. James Orr, Eerdmans, reprinted 1984, vol. 1, 309).

Henri Blocher, on p. 37 of his In the Beginning, says:

"Scripture, as has been pointed out by the evangelical scholar J. A. Thompson and by Father A. M. Dubarle, abounds in examples of mixed genre. It frequently recounts the passage of history in the categories of parable or allegory, and expresses the facts it recalls in images and symbols."

Some of the best examples include Matthew 21:33-41 (where Jesus puts over a millennium of history into a short story), 2 Samuel chapters 11 and 12, where we have in one case transcription, but in the other translation into parable. Compare also Ezekiel 16 with chapter 22, and chapters 23 and 20. Jesus himself could even use an erroneous tradition about death and hell to convey theological truth. See Luke 16.

Are we then to ignore Genesis 1:26, 27 about the creation of our first parents and adopt the theory of natural selection? Stephen Jay Gould, paleontologist of Harvard, recently deceased, said that Darwinism was dead. Many other scientists have agreed. But Gould's theory of punctuated equilibrium, his substitute for natural selection, has also been punctured. It has not worn well. Ellen White wrote long ago that "God's created works are just as mysterious as God himself." That wise and good woman also told us that the Bible was given for practical purposes and that, like Jesus, it is a combination of the human and the divine. If we take her seriously we will also recognize that her writings are not meant to set forth science, though they may help us to cease unnecessary warring against genuine truth discovered by scientific research.

TIME TO FACE THE FACTS

When Adventist scientists were polled in 1994, more than half rejected the literal reading of Genesis 1. One third denied that the geological strata and its fossils can be explained by Noah¹s Flood; and almost one in five assented to theistic evolution. See Darwinism comes to America, Ronald Numbers, Harvard University Press, p. 109.

Probably most Adventist scientists versed in geology, can be classified as progressive creationists, believing in God¹s creative interventions over long eras of time. But it is certain that most well-read Adventists have moved well beyond George McCready Price. When William Jennings Bryant cited Price as a respected scientist at the famous Tenessee Scopes trial, Darrow responded: "You mention Price because he is the only human being in the world so far as you know who signs his name as a geologist who believes like you do. Every scientist in this country knows that he is a mountebank, a pretender, and not a geologist at all."

There are two main barriers, which have led to the church's unpaid debt to science and its own scientists. On the part of leadership, it is the fear of confessing that we have been wrong. The smaller the group, the greater the felt necessity of infallibility. Second, like all other people we are shackled by cognitive dissonance. That is to say, we all carry a sieve to separate from our minds all that we hear or read that doesn¹t fit with our preconceptions. The human mind typically functions in terms of comfortable grooves of thought. But real truth shocks this tendency. It is a realistic immoveable rock upon which our comfortable theories are often shattered. Much of reality to all of us is a vast unknown.

Consider just one or two items. There is a subatomic particle, the neutrino, which can pass through a lead block many light years thick. Second by second, six hundred billion of these pass through every centimeter of every human body, and we remain completely unaware. Consider also that were all the spaces taken out of us, the solid matter remaining for every human being would be the size of a pin head. There are indeed more things in heaven and earth than dreamt of in our philosophy, and, thus, true humility becomes us rather than the arrogance characteristic of fundamentalism.

Remember the words of Oliver Cromwell. "I beseech you, by the heart of Christ, consider that you may be mistaken." Should anyone stand on their head for long enough, they will surely conclude that everybody else in the world is upside down. It is important that we see that the human mind is like a parachute, it only functions properly if it is open. Though a bright light be shone in a blind man¹s eye he will see nothing. Wise men change their minds sometimes, but fools never. To say that one has changed one¹s mind is to say that one is wiser today than yesterday.

The Bible gives certain conditions for the ascertainment of truth. Pontius Pilate once asked: "What is truth?" and Truth was standing before him quite unnoticed. Similarly, it is possible to read the Bible over and over, and yet not find its truth. Jesus said: "He who is willing to do his will, he shall know." (John 7:17). He also told us: "The pure in heart shall see." Those who are in love with Christ may see through a glass darkly, but they do see.

Dr. Desmond Ford

Offline

#2 04-27-15 2:31 pm

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: The Genesis Debate

NEW BOOK, by Dr. Ford!

Genesis Versus Darwinism: by Dr Desmond Ford
Abridged Version Especially for Adventists Paperback – 228 pages
February 9, 2015,

This book answers the objections of unbelievers to the early chapters of Genesis and sets out in clear detail the scientific evidence that discredits the influential teaching of Charles Darwin. The everlasting gospel proclaimed in Scripture is central to this book, and readers will be challenged and edified by these pages. There is no other volume in print that covers so much ground, and yet it is easy reading. This abridged version has eight added articles especially for Seventh-day Adventists.

“I believe in Heaven, nothing else makes sense of Earth.”

http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Versus-Da … 1507849931

Tom Norris said:  This is a much needed book for the Adventist Community.  I like the way Dr. Ford has simplified such a complex and confusing topic.  The chapter Summaries are also be helpful to the reader. 

Dr. Ford said:

In my teens in the 1940s, like most other Christians, I believed the earth to be about 6,000 years old. Twenty years later I fellowshipped with a very wonderful Christian, Dr. Eric Mag¬nusson, who had two Ph.Ds. in science, and I learned my error. After another forty years I walked Florida beaches with Dr. and Mrs. Peter Hare and learned much more. It was also my privi¬lege to be in the home of Dr. Richard Ritland and listen to him. These scientists (each of whom had once believed as I did as a teenager that the earth was about 6,000 years old) encouraged me to study much further on these issues. When challenged to a debate with a professor from the University of California, Sac¬ramento, I spent over a hundred hours preparing for that event. Many of my views were then consolidated. They are represented in this book.

Desmond Ford

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forward:

This maybe the most important book you have ever read. The title may sound abstract but the substance is actually about you. From morning to night we make decisions, and the important ones depend on what we think is true about our world—particularly its origin. If you decide that everything came about by chance it obvi¬ously is not going to matter much whether you decide one way or another. After all, you are only here a little while, the toy of chance and circumstance, and soon by accident or sickness your life will be over. And that’s that.

On the other hand, if you believe that this world is not a chance product but one carefully designed for you and all others, your de¬cision is going to be different. There could be a reckoning day after death, and maybe right now there is a Supreme Being with his eye on you, who loves you despite your weaknesses and follies. And so, that’s what this book is about.

This book is an abridgement of a very much larger volume, one filled with quotations from scientists and philosophers. But I have been asked to write a small book without too many learned quotes. If you want those which substantiate the views here offered read the larger book. There will be some key quotes here, but only a few compared to the large version.

Here are some basic facts that every intelligent person must take into account. Scientists affirm that the universe is nearly 14 billion years old and this planet about 4-and-a-half billion. The history of our world is found in what is known as the Geologic Column—earth’s strata, layered one on top of another, with the most recent last. The succession is the same all over the world though earthquakes and other upheavals can at times change part of the sequence. These strata contain fossils most of which are from creatures no longer living in our world.

As we near the top of the column we find fossils of creatures with which we are familiar, but no humans until we are almost at the top. Radiometric dating (based on radioactive decay of elements like uranium) reveals the age of each strata and therefore also the age of the creatures whose skeletal remains are embedded in these strata. Radiocarbon dating can only extend accurately to 50,000 years, so for the rocks geologists choose radiometric dating.
There are over fifty different methods of calculating the age of this earth. And they agree. Only the ignorant dispute this. But if you ever went to Sunday School you may have some questions. If you are like me, you were taught that the earth is about 6,000 years old as is inscribed in the margin of some King James Version Bibles. Further¬more, if you knew anything about the Geologic Column, you might have been told that its contents belong to one generation, that of Noah’s Flood.

In addition there are some rather strange things you may remember from Sunday School—like the early men who lived to nearly one thousand years, and the giants of Noah’s day, and the Tower of Babel which aimed at heaven. It’s all rather puzzling. Maybe you are a confirmed Christian, and the more you learn about scientific conclu¬sions the more bewildered you are with these ‘strange anomalies’ in the Bible.

If you are still in your twenties or younger and you go to university, you will find any trust you have in the Bible assaulted there. The likelihood is very considerable that you will decide to grow up and abandon your “childish” beliefs.

But what most of your university teachers will not tell you is that there are many very gifted and highly educated people who still trust in the Bible and who do not believe that the Geologic Column is the result of either Noah’s Flood or Darwin’s theory of evolution. Almost certainly you will not be informed that now there are thou¬sands of scientists who are not Christians who also reject much that was taught by Charles Darwin.

If you want to test this out quickly, buy (or procure a copy through inter-library loan), Evolution: a Theory in Crisis by molecular scien¬tist Michael Denton. The book has been challenged on the basis of philosophical vagaries, but not successfully countered with scientific objections. Get it and see. It is the best book on the topic. The next best is Creation or Evolution by physicist Alan Hayward.

Should you run into one of these many Christian scholars who object to the popular teachings about evolution they may also refer you to books like Old Testament Survey by Lasor, Hubbard, and Bush. This book explains what most scholarly Christians know, that Genesis chapters 1-11 is full of allusions to ancient realities, but they are pre¬sented in parabolic form under divine inspiration for excellent reasons.

But perhaps you are not sure the Bible should be bothered with. Let me offer you a few facts about that. The Bible is the most unique book in the world—a library with many types of literature ranging over about fifteen centuries. It has been the inspiration of countless multitudes of people who have made our world a better place. Its central figure is Jesus of Nazareth, who on the last Tuesday of his life, declared, “Heaven and earth, will pass away, but my words will never pass away” (Matt. 24:35). Out of the approximately ten billion people who have lived on this planet Christ is the only one who has made such a remarkable claim. And twenty centuries have con¬firmed the likelihood of its complete fulfillment.

When a loving follower anointed his feet a few days before his cru¬cifixion Christ predicted that her act would be known throughout all coming days and rehearsed wherever his gospel was preached. See John’s Gospel chapter 12. He also foretold that the time would come when his gospel would go to the whole world in the last generation. See Matthew 24:14 and Acts 1:8. Remember there were no print¬ing presses then, and no TV, no computers or Internet. Again Jesus claimed to be “the Light of the World” (see John 8:12). It is a certain fact of history that no other person has ever shed so much light on the meaning of life and the way to immortality.

This same Galilean, after three days in the tomb, appeared to his dis¬illusioned followers. Five hundred saw him all at once, and he tarried among them for forty days. See l Corinthians 15 and Acts chapter 1.

Now, you can explain a puddle in the road by talking about a sum¬mer shower, but you cannot explain the Gulf Stream that way. What on earth could have transformed brokenhearted people and turned so many into missionaries and martyrs?

Of course it had all been predicted centuries ago. Read Isaiah 52:12 to the end of chapter 53, which tells of the coming Messiah whose life would be “cut off” and yet who would “prolong his days.” It had been typified by the rising of Isaac from the altar on Mount Mori¬ah two thousand years earlier, and by Jonah’s deliverance from the whale’s belly after three days.

If you doubt the Bible just read Genesis 12:1-3 which predicts that a wandering Bedouin in the ancient near east would one day be reverenced by all the nations of the world. And so it has happened. Muslims, Jews, and Christians in every land look to Abraham as their spiritual father. What are the chances of that prophecy being fulfilled?—about one in billions.

Do not neglect the prophecies. I have written commentaries on Daniel and Revelation that you may one day read. In the meantime just read Daniel 9:24-27, which forecasts the coming of Christ with¬in approximately five centuries from the rebuilding of the ruined Jewish temple. More than that—this passage also says he would be put to death and that one of the results would be the desolation of the famous temple worshipped by those responsible for his death. And don’t fail to note that it is also said that those who rejected him would experience desolation until the end of time.

There are hundreds of other prophecies, but what I have referred to can make a good start. If God made the world, would you not expect that he would tell us about it and confirm his words by things out of the ordinary? That is exactly what has happened.

Have you heard of the Anthropic Principle? About forty years ago a scientist from Oxford told a famous gathering of scientists that the evidence is now overwhelming that every law of physics was the result of minute crafting for the purpose of making our universe and us. There are lots of books and articles on that topic and it proves the reality of God. Had certain physical laws been different by a mil¬lionth of a millionth, neither you, nor the universe, would be here. Professor Antony Flew, the most famous atheist of the twentieth century, was converted a few years ago by studying this principle and thousands have followed in his wake.

That’s a start. Now I intend to dig deeper and challenge you to think in the same direction. If you have a college degree you didn’t get it by going to the movies or by sleeping. You had to think and meditate a lot. What you are now engaged upon is a thousand times more im¬portant than your college degree and it will take similar application. But it is worth the effort. It could mean eternal life and joy for you and your family. What follows, remember, is only an abridgement of a much larger work that I hope you will one day read.

This Abridged Version also contains at the end seven articles that are written particularly for Seventh-Day Adventists.

Adventists have been involved since their early days in the debate over creationism versus evolution and the question of the Age of the Earth. The subject is implied in their name “Seventh-day Adventist,” which focusses on the seventh-day Sabbath instituted in creation week and their belief in an imminent Second Coming of Christ. Their founder, Ellen G. White, believed in a 6,000-year creation and later acolytes, such as George McCready Price, have played a key role in fostering interest in the subject in fundamentalist Christian churches in America. Hence it seems appropriate to address some questions specific to Adventism.


Table of Contents:

1 God speaks, who will listen? 1

2 The most important sentence ever written 7

3 The fight of faith 13

4 The seal of seven 16

5 The gospel pattern through Genesis and beyond: 21 Part one: The gospel in Genesis chapters 1-3

6 The gospel pattern through Genesis and beyond: 29

Part two: Calvary prefigured

7 The gospel pattern through Genesis and beyond: 40 Part three: The four Gospels anticipated

8 The gospel pattern through Genesis and beyond: 46

Part four: Moses, Christ, and the oratorio

9 Was Noah’s flood universal?: The history of interpretation 51

10 Was Noah’s flood universal?: The exegetical 58

problems and light from God’s other book

11 How old is the earth? The evidence 61

12 Suffering, the Geologic Column, and the Cross 67

13 Ussher’s Chronology, the age of the Earth, the date of the 71

Flood, the date of the Tower of Babel, and the
six days of Genesis chapter 1

14 The mysteries of Genesis 1-11: Part one: 74

chapters 1-11 are a different genre to chapters 12-50.

15 The mysteries of Genesis 1-11:

Part two: Interpretation 80

16 The mysteries of Genesis 1-11: Part three: Clues 83

17 Creation or Darwinism? Part one: 88

Naturalism and nature’s denial

18 Creation or Darwinism? Part two: 94

Dissatisfaction of scientists with neo-Darwinism

19 Creation or Darwinism? Part three: 98

The evidence from paleontology—1

20 Creation or Darwinism? Part four:

The evidence from paleontology—2 103

21 Creation or Darwinism? Part five: 107

The evidence from paleontology—3

22 Creation or Darwinism? Part six: 110

Chance? Sovereign Lord or fable?

23 Creation or Darwinism? Part seven: 116

Hominids and Homo sapiens

24 Creation or Darwinism? Part eight: 126

The conclusions of paleontologists

25 The historicity of Adam—the First Man 131

26 Progressive Creationism 138

27 The First Adam’s descendants 146

SUMMARY ARTICLES:

Especially for Adventists 156

Art. 1 Our present crisis and a simple solution 156

Art. 2 Genesis 1-11: A different genre—Let’s tell the truth 163

Art. 3 Darwin under scrutiny 172

Art. 4 Answer me—Where are the myriads of living 178

intermediate fossils?

Art. 5 Adventism and Antichrist 184

Art 6 Ellen G. White, George McCready Price and the 190

6,000-year age of the earth

Art. 7 Exodus 20:11 and the phrase “For in six days the Lord made the Heavens and the Earth” 197

Art. 8 Christ and Calvary: Past, Present, Future— 199

End

Offline

#3 06-22-15 10:32 am

tom_norris
Adventist Reform
From: Silver Spring, Md
Registered: 01-02-09
Posts: 877
Website

Re: The Genesis Debate

A Review of Desmond Ford's "Genesis Versus Darwinism" (Spectrum)

In several ways "GENESIS versus DARWINISM: The Demise of Darwin's Theory of Evolution" is a very unique book, beginning with the author, Desmond Ford, who is a theologian, not a scientist. That someone with his background would write a book attacking Darwinism is not unique; what is unique is his honest engagement with the science and uncommon objectivity as a nonscientist. Most theologians who write books that are pro-creation and anti-Darwinist consistently refute scientific facts on the slimmest of evidence—the “evidence” itself often being based on a misunderstanding of the science, or at best, on a very narrow facet of the scientific evidence that is problematic, as if any hard-to-explain evidence from science proves that science has failed to properly interpret the natural world.

Ford succinctly states the book's purpose in the Foreword:

“The traditions I refer to have to do chiefly with the early chapters of Genesis. University professors usually ridicule the creation story of Genesis chapter 1 and the stories concerning Adam and Eve, the serpent, and the Fall. But these chapters are the foundation of the whole Bible, and if they go the whole edifice of revelation crumbles. When that happens, for most, life threatens to become a meaningless affair based on chance. . . “



“This book is an attempt to help parents and young people with these tremendous issues. It discusses Genesis chapters 1–11 in considerable detail and also the challenge of Darwinism—that scientific giant which often threatens young Christians—and a Goliath calling upon them to surrender their faith. And this, despite the fact that the most well-known evolutionist of the twentieth century, Stephen Jay Gould, declared that neo-Darwinism is ‘effectively dead.’”

Ford appears to have carefully considered his audience, which will most likely be laypeople concerned about the inroads that Darwinism has made into Christian beliefs about creation. He spends the first part of the book emphasizing the theological importance of the creation story in Genesis, including the theological significance of the Noachian flood narrative. I doubt that most fundamentalist believers would find much problem with this section, since Ford effectively ties the Genesis narratives together with the Plan of Salvation, showing how many of the details in these stories foreshadow Gospel truths not made clear until the New Testament narratives make them more explicit.

He also vigorously defends the 7th-Day Sabbath, while at the same time laying the groundwork for its theological imperative, regardless of whether the days of creation in Genesis are literal or not. He also spends considerable space reviewing the significance of the occurrence of the number seven throughout Genesis and elsewhere, showing how carefully constructed these narratives are:

“There is a marvelous precision in Genesis one. It is characterized by what some have called “the seal of seven.” The first sentence has seven Hebrew words and four times seven Hebrew letters. The three nouns: “God,” “heaven,” and “earth” have a combined numeric value of 777. (Each Hebrew letter stands for a number—see any Hebrew Grammar). There is a Hebrew verb “created,” and its numeric value is 203—seven times twenty-nine. According to some researchers there are at least thirty different numeric features in this verse.”

At times, Ford’s enthusiasm for compiling the numerical references and other parallels in Genesis with Christ’s life and role in our salvation gets tiring, but I think he has a point in doing this. He shows a great reverence for the text and its embedded meanings. This should serve as a reminder to the reader that as Ford progresses through the book revealing what Genesis has to tell us, in light of modern scientific findings, He considers the Bible an inspired document, and its theological truths must be taken seriously…

http://spectrummagazine.org/article/201 … -darwinism

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB