DOCSLIB.ORG

A Theological Evaluation of Ten Major Creation Theories

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Theological Evaluation of Ten Major Creation Theories A THEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF TEN MAJOR CREATION THEORIES by Thomas Patrick Arnold B.A., Wheaton College, 1968 M.R.E., Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary of Cornerstone University, 1992 M.A., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School of Trinity International University, 1992 Th.M., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School of Trinity International University, 2001 A doctoral thesis submitted in accordance with the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Faculty of Systematic Theology, Department of Theology at the Universiteit van die Vrystaat Bloemfontein September 2007 _______________________________ Professor Dr. Pieter Verster, Promoter _______________________________ Professor Dr. Fanie Riekert, Co-Promoter 2 ABSTRACT A THEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF TEN MAJOR CREATION THEORIES What does the Bible say God did when He created the heavens and the earth? The study begins by investigating genres of creation texts and stating hermeneutical principles. The claims of ten creation theories are evaluated by Bible creation texts. The ten creation theories investigated are: pre-creation chaos, initial chaos, title or summary, young earth scientific creationism, theistic big bang, old earth day-age progressive creation, literary framework, creation revealed in six days, gap or ruin-restoration, and historical land (Eden/Promised Land) creationism. The most exegetically supported claims of the ten theories suggest a combined eleventh theory. Four diagnostic questions sort all eleven theories into groups. The questions are: Does the Genesis 1 text indicate the days were six daylight-evening-nighttime-morning-cycle days, or six long day-age geologic eras? Did God create orderly cosmos and unfinished earth during the beginning, or was there chaos God transformed into cosmos in the six days? Were the stated life kinds created once, or twice? Did God create the heavens and earth in the beginning, or in the six days? The eleven theories are evaluated by Bible creation texts related to the question, and theories with claims counter to the creation texts are progressively eliminated. Only the eleventh combined theory emerges. Finally the most exegetically supported claims of the ten theories are correlated into a fully described eleventh combined creation theory—two-stage Biblical creation (2SBC). Stage one: In the beginning time (rē'shît inherently means a time period) God created the heavens and the earth; but at the end of that time, earth was declared uninhabitable, uninhabited, and darkened. The perspective of the apparent Narrator of stage two was established. Stage two: By eight command units involving six day-night-cycle workdays God made planet earth lighted, habitable, and inhabited. (The Bible neither explicitly affirms nor explicitly denies time passage between the days, so caution is urged with Payne’s proposal.) The tôledôt (colophon?) in Genesis 2:4a ends the two-part narrative. Since the length of the beginning time is unstated by the Bible, two-stage Biblical creation claims a Biblically undated universe and earth creation (UEC). Key Words: creation, Genesis, bara, hermeneutics, chaos, yom, day-age, young-earth, old- earth, Waltke, Sailhamer, Morris, Ross 3 Opsomming ‘n Teologiese evaluering van tien belangrike skeppingsteorieë Wat het God gedoen toe Hy volgens die Bybel hemel en aarde geskape het? Die studie neem ‘n aanvang deur die genres van skeppingstekste te ondersoek en ook die hermeneutiese beginsels neer te lê. Die aansprake van tien skeppingstekste word in die lig van Skrifgegewens ontleed. Die tien teorieë wat ondersoek word is: die sogenaamde pre- skeppings chaos, aanvanklike chaos, titel of opsomming, jong aarde wetenskaplike kreasionisme, teïstiese groot ontploffingsteorie, ou aarde dag-ouderom progressiewe skepping, literêre raamwerk skepping geopenbaar in ses dae, gaping of ruïne herstel en historiese land (Eden/beloofde land kreasionisme). Volgens die kandidaat doen die aansprake wat eksegeties die beste ondersteun is ‘n gekombineerde elfde teorie aan die hand. Al elf teorieë is met behulp van vier diagnostiese vrae in groepe ingedeel. Die vrae is: verwys Genesis een na dae en nagte wat aangedui kan word as dag/nag/ oggend/aand siklusse of verwys dit na ses lang dag tydperke van geologiese tydperke? Het God ‘n ordelike kosmos daargestel en onvoltooide aarde aan die begin of het daar reeds chaos bestaan wat God gevorm het in die kosmos in die ses dae? Is die betaansoorte twee keer geskape of slegs een keer? Het God hemel en aarde in die begin geskape of in ses dae? Hierdie groepe is daarna met behulp van Bybelse skeppingstekste, wat met elke vraag verband hou, geëvalueer. Teorieë met aansprake wat met die skeppingstekste bots, is progressief geëlimineer. Die aansprake wat eksegeties die beste ondersteun is, is daarna in ‘n volledig beskryfde, gekombineerde elfde skeppingsteorie byeengebring – tweefase Bybelse skepping (2FBS). Fase een: In die begintyd (rē'shît beteken ‘n periode van tyd) het God hemel en aarde geskape, maar aan die einde van tyd het hy die aarde as onbewoonbaar, onbewoon en duister verklaar. Die perspektief van die implisiete verteller is vasgestel. Fase twee: Deur agt bevele wat ses dag/nag siklusse in werksdae veronderstel het God die aarde verlig en bewoonbaar en bewoon gemaak. (Die Bybel bevestig nie, maar ontken ook nie, tydspronge tussen die verskillende dae nie, daarom moet versigtig omgegaan word met Payne se voorstel.) Die tôledôt in Genesis 2:4a beëindig die tweeledige narratief. Aangesien die tydsduur aan die begin nie vasgestel is in die Bybel nie, veronderstel twee-fase Bybelse skepping ‘n ongedateerde Bybelse heelal en aardse skepping (OBS) Kernbegrippe: Skepping, genesis, bara, hermeneutiek, chaos, yom, dag-ouderdom, jong aarde, ou aarde, Waltke, Sailhamer, Morris, Ross. I declare that the dissertation/thesis hereby submitted by me for the Ph.D. in theology degree at the University of the Orange Free State is my own independent work and has not previously been submitted by me at another university/faculty. I cede copyright as a dissertation/thesis in favour of the University of the Free State. Signed____________________________________ 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART ONE—QUESTIONS AND APPROACH 8 1. The Question Being Investigated and the Approach Being Taken 9 a. The Question Being Investigated 9 b. Questions Not Being Investigated 10 c. Pre-understanding of the Bible as Source of Creation Data 10 i. Real Communication about the Real Creation 10 ii. Not Necessarily Easily Interpreted 14 iii. Complementary Real Natural Revelation 15 iv. Pre-Understandings within the Hermeneutical Spiral 15 d. Entering the Corporate Hermeneutical Spiral 16 e. The Approach Being Taken 16 PART TWO—GENRES AND HERMENTEUTICS 18 2. Taking the Genre of Each Creation Text Seriously 19 a. The Genre of Genesis 1:1–2:4a 19 i. Twelve Genres in Genesis 19 ii. Difficulties Determining the Genre of Genesis 1:1-2:4a 23 iii. Narrative—the Broad Genre of Genesis 24 iv. Generational Annals—the Specific Genre of Genesis 1:1-2:4a 25 1. Succinct Annals 25 2. Etiological 26 3. Generational 27 4. Fusion of Poetry and Prose in a Geschehensbogen 29 5. Historical and Chronological 29 6. Theological 30 7. Summary of the Genre of Genesis 1:1-2:4a 30 b. The Genres of Job 26 and 38 31 c. The Genre of Psalm 104 33 d. The Genre of Proverbs 8 34 e. Various Genres of Over One Hundred Shorter Creation Texts 34 f. A Balanced Approach to Genre 35 3. Twelve Hermeneutical Practices 36 a. Twelve Practices 36 i. Author 37 ii. Author’s Perspective 40 iii. Implied or Stated Author’s Purpose 41 iv. Semantics 42 v. Avoid Semantic and Conceptual Anachronisms 45 vi. Syntax in Sentences 48 vii. Literary Context 50 viii. Historical Context 51 ix. Genre 52 5 x. Hebrew Repetitive Stylistic Patterns 53 xi. Chronological Narrative Markers 54 xii. Indicated Miracle or Directed Process by Divine Laws 56 xiii. Distinguish Explicit Statements from Implications from Silence 61 b. Four Double Checks on Interpretation 62 i. Analogia Scripturae 62 ii. Analogia Fidae 62 iii. Reproducible Exegesis 63 iv. Cautious Possible Error Detection by Archeology and Science 64 PART THREE—DIAGNOSTIC QUESTIONS AND TEN CREATION THEORIES 65 4. Diagnostic Questions and Summaries of Creation Theories 66 a. Four Pairs of Diagnostic Questions 66 i. Day-Night-Cycle Days or Day-Age Geologic Eras? 66 ii. Creation of Cosmos and Unfinished Earth or Chaos? 66 iii. Life Created Once or Twice? 66 iv. Creation of Heavens and Earth in the Beginning or in Day One? 66 b. Summaries of Ten Creation Theories 67 i. Pre-Creation Chaos Theory 67 ii. Initial Chaos Theory 67 iii. Title or Summary Theory 68 iv. Young Earth, Scientific Creationism Theory (with Flood) (YEC) 68 v. Theistic Big Bang Theory 68 vi. Old-Earth, Day-Age, Progressive Creationism Theory (OEC) 69 vii. Literary Framework Theory 69 viii. Creation Revealed in Six Days Theory 69 ix. Gap, Reconstitution, Recreation, or Ruin-Restoration Theory 69 x. Historical Land Creationism Theory 70 xi. Proposed Combined Theory—Two-Stage Biblical Creation (UEC) 70 c. Investigating the Theories 70 5. The Claims of Each of the Ten Theories 74 a. Pre-Creation Chaos Theory 74 b. Initial Chaos Theory 83 c. Title or Summary Theory 88 d. Young Earth Scientific Creationism Theory (with Flood) (YEC) 92 i. A Variation of Six Twenty-Four Hour Days Creationism Theory 130 e. Theistic Big Bang Theory 137 f. Old-Earth Day-Age Progressive Creationism Theory (OEC) 156 g. Literary Framework Theory 186 h. Creation Revealed in Six Days Theory 208 i. Gap, Reconstitution, Recreation, or Ruin-Restoration Theory 223 j. Historical Land Creationism Theory 247 k. Proposed Combined Theory—Two-Stage Biblical Creation (UEC) 271 6. Minor Creation Theories 272 6 a. Early Versions of Two-Stage Creation (UEC) 272 b. Undated Universe and Earth; Young Biosphere 273 c. Vision Theory or Pictorial Day Theory 276 d. Antedate Sabbath Theory 276 e. Myth or Legend Theory 277 f.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eve's Answer to the Serpent: an Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology
    Calvin Theological Journal 33 (1998) : 399-420 Copyright © 1980 by Calvin Theological Seminary. Cited with permission. Scholia et Homiletica Eve's Answer to the Serpent: An Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology P. Wayne Townsend The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, `You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die. "' (Gen. 3:2-3) Can we take these italicized words seriously, or must we dismiss them as the hasty additions of Eve's overactive imagination? Did God say or mean this when he instructed Adam in Genesis 2:16-17? I suggest that, not only did Eve speak accu- rately and insightfully in responding to the serpent but that her words hold a key to reevaluating the doctrine of original sin and especially the puzzles of alien guilt and the imputation of sin. In this article, I seek to reignite discussion on these top- ics by suggesting an alternative paradigm for discussing the doctrine of original sin and by applying that paradigm in a preliminary manner to various themes in the- ology, biblical interpretation, and Christian living. I seek not so much to answer questions as to evoke new ones that will jar us into a more productive path of the- ological explanation. I suggest that Eve's words indicate that the Bible structures the ideas that we recognize as original sin around the concept of uncleanness.
    [Show full text]
  • Talbot OT Department
    TOP PICKS OF OLD TESTAMENT RESOURCES By Owen Smiley Featuring the Recommendations of the Faculty of Talbot School of Theology, viz. Ken Way, Tom Finley, John Hutchison, and Ron Pierce Copyright ©2011 by Owen Smiley. All rights reserved. ii . To Molly & Ella iii Acknowledgments: This work would not have come to pass without the aid and grace of several people. Ken Way provided faculty supervision of the project, giving valuable insights, helpful feedback, encouragement, and lots of source suggestions. Other faculty of Talbot School of Theology, most notably John Hutchison and Tom Finley, answered the call to recommend sources. The Biola University Library circulation, Link+, and Interlibrary Loan departments helped track down innumerable sources. Deserved recognition also goes to my students in Biblical Studies Research Seminar, who took my requests for editing help seriously. Finally, the Talbot Associated Students printed the final copy for editing. Molly, my bride, displayed grace upon grace as at least six hundred volumes passed through our living room over ten months. I am indebted to her patience and support. Ella, my daughter, was born a little more than two months into this project, and is more beautiful than my work will ever be. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction ........................................................................................................1 a. Surveying The Field: Tips on Evaluating OT Scholarship ..........................1 b. Notes on Using This Guide ..........................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Victorian Popular Science and Deep Time in “The Golden Key”
    “Down the Winding Stair”: Victorian Popular Science and Deep Time in “The Golden Key” Geoffrey Reiter t is sometimes tempting to call George MacDonald’s fantasies “timeless”I and leave it at that. Such is certainly the case with MacDonald’s mystical fairy tale “The Golden Key.” Much of the criticism pertaining to this work has focused on its more “timeless” elements, such as its intrinsic literary quality or its philosophical and theological underpinnings. And these elements are not only important, they truly are the most fundamental elements needed for a full understanding of “The Golden Key.” But it is also important to remember that MacDonald did not write in a vacuum, that he was in fact interested in and engaged with many of the pressing issues of his day. At heart always a preacher, MacDonald could not help but interact with these issues, not only in his more openly didactic realistic novels, but even in his “timeless” fantasies. In the Victorian period, an era of discovery and exploration, the natural sciences were beginning to come into their own as distinct and valuable sources of knowledge. John Pridmore, examining MacDonald’s view of nature, suggests that MacDonald saw it as serving a function parallel to the fairy tale or fantastic story; it may be interpreted from the perspective of Christian theism, though such an interpretation is not necessary (7). Björn Sundmark similarly argues that in his works “MacDonald does not contradict science, nor does he press a theistic interpretation onto his readers” (13). David L. Neuhouser has concluded more assertively that while MacDonald was certainly no advocate of scientific pursuits for their own sake, he believed science could be of interest when examined under the aegis of a loving God (10).
    [Show full text]
  • The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment Free Download
    THE DIVINE WITHIN: SELECTED WRITINGS ON ENLIGHTENMENT FREE DOWNLOAD Aldous Huxley,Huston Smith | 305 pages | 02 Jul 2013 | HARPER PERENNIAL | 9780062236814 | English | New York, United States The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment (Paperback) Born into a French noble family in southern France, Montesquieu practiced law in adulthood and witnessed great political upheaval across Britain and France. Aldous Huxley mural. Animal testing Archival research Behavior epigenetics Case The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment Content analysis Experiments Human subject research Interviews Neuroimaging Observation Psychophysics Qualitative research Quantitative research Self-report inventory Statistical surveys. By the decree of the angels, and by the command of the holy men, we excommunicate, expel, curse and damn Baruch de Espinoza, with the consent of God, Blessed be He, and with the consent of all the Holy Congregation, in front of these holy Scrolls with the six-hundred-and-thirteen precepts which are written therein, with the excommunication with which Joshua banned The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment[57] with the curse with which Elisha cursed the boys [58] and with all the curses which are written in the Book of the Law. Huxley consistently examined the spiritual basis of both the individual and human society, always seeking to reach an authentic and The Divine Within: Selected Writings on Enlightenment defined experience of the divine. Spinoza's Heresy: Immortality and the Jewish Mind. And when I read about how he decided to end his life while tripping on LSD I thought that was really heroic. Miguel was a successful merchant and became a warden of the synagogue and of the Amsterdam Jewish school.
    [Show full text]
  • POSTMODERN OR PROPOSITIONAL? Robert L
    TMSJ 18/1 (Spring 2007) 3-21 THE NATURE OF TRUTH: POSTMODERN OR PROPOSITIONAL? Robert L. Thomas Professor of New Testament Ernest R. Sandeen laid a foundation for a contemporary concept of truth that was unique among evangelicals with a high view of Scripture. He proposed that the concept of inerrancy based on a literal method of interpretation was late in coming during the Christian era, having its beginning among the Princeton theologians of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He ruled out their doctrines related to inspiration because they were based on rational thinking which he taught was absent from earlier Christian thought. Subsequent evaluations of Sandeen’s work have disproved his assumption that those doctrines were absent from Christianity prior to the Princeton era. Yet well-known Christian writers have since built on Sandeen’s foundation that excludes rationality and precision from an interpretation of Scripture. The Sandeenists criticize the Princetonians for overreacting in their response to modernism, for their use of literal principles of interpretation, for defining propositional truth derived from the Bible, and for excluding the Holy Spirit’s help in interpretation. All such criticisms have proven to be without foundation. The Princetonians were not without fault, but their utilization of common sense in biblical interpretation was their strong virtue. Unfortunately, even the Journal of the inerrantist Evangelical Theological Society has promoted some of the same errors as Sandeen. The divine element in inspiration is a guarantee of the rationality and precision of Scripture, because God, the ultimate author of Scripture, is quite rational and precise, as proven by Scripture itself.
    [Show full text]
  • PAPER VI UNIT I Non-Fictional Prose—General
    PAPER VI UNIT I Non-fictional Prose—General Introduction, Joseph Addison’s The Spectator Papers: The Uses of the Spectator, The Spectator’s Account of Himself, Of the Spectator 1.1. Introduction: Eighteenth Century English Prose The eighteenth century was a great period for English prose, though not for English poetry. Matthew Arnold called it an "age of prose and reason," implying thereby that no good poetry was written in this century, and that, prose dominated the literary realm. Much of the poetry of the age is prosaic, if not altogether prose-rhymed prose. Verse was used by many poets of the age for purposes which could be realized, or realized better, through prose. Our view is that the eighteenth century was not altogether barren of real poetry. Even then, it is better known for the galaxy of brilliant prose writers that it threw up. In this century there was a remarkable proliferation of practical interests which could best be expressed in a new kind of prose-pliant and of a work a day kind capable of rising to every occasion. This prose was simple and modern, having nothing of the baroque or Ciceronian colour of the prose of the seventeenth-century writers like Milton and Sir Thomas Browne. Practicality and reason ruled supreme in prose and determined its style. It is really strange that in this period the language of prose was becoming simpler and more easily comprehensible, but, on the other hand, the language of poetry was being conventionalized into that artificial "poetic diction" which at the end of the century was so severely condemned by Wordsworth as "gaudy and inane phraseology." 1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • God Made Eve and Ordained Marriage
    GGOODD MMAADDEE EEVVEE aanndd oorrddaaiinneedd mmaarrrriiaaggee Several thousand years have passed since Adam and Eve became man and wife, but God hasn’t changed what he first instructed mankind regarding marriage in the Bible. Did you know that God was the One who decided that man and woman should marry? In Genesis 2 we find part of the wedding service spoken in many wedding ceremonies today. Men and women and marriage and children are very important to God. Marriage is not just a good idea… it’s a “God Idea”! But some people don’t know or don’t believe what God says about marriage. They say that marriage is something to be tried out to see if it will work—depending upon how you feel about it. Many folks are even suggesting that the idea of marriage is outdated. But what does the Bible say about marriage? Let’s take a look and find out! God decided that Adam needed a wife to help him and to be his companion. Genesis 2:18 The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.” God decided that Adam should not live alone. - God was his Creator and knew what was best for him. - God didn’t ask Adam what he wanted or thought best. - God made the decision to make a wife for Adam. God loved Adam and wanted him to be complete. - God knew that Adam wouldn’t continue to be happy if he remained alone. - Because God loved Adam and wanted what was best for him, he decided to make a wife for him.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Look at Cain: from a Narrative Perspective
    신학논단 제102집 (2020. 12. 31): 241-263 https://doi.org/10.17301/tf.2020.12.102.241 Another Look at Cain: From a Narrative Perspective Wm. J McKinstry IV, MATS Adjunct Faculty, Department of General Education Presbyterian University and Theological Seminary In the Hebrew primeval histories names often carry significant weight. Much etymological rigour has been exercised in determining many of the names within the Bible. Some of the meaning of these names appear to have a consensus among scholars; among others there is less consensus and more contention. Numerous proposals have come forward with varying degrees of convincing (or unconvincing as the case may be) philological arguments, analysis of wordplays, possi- ble textual emendations, undiscovered etymologies from cognates in other languages, or onomastic studies detailing newly discovered names of similarity found in other ancient Semitic languages. Through these robust studies, when applicable, we can ascertain the meanings of names that may help to unveil certain themes or actions of a character within a narrative. For most of the names within the primeval histories of Genesis, the 242 신학논단 제102집(2020) meaning of a name is only one feature. For some names there is an en- compassing feature set: wordplay, character trait and/or character role, and foreshadowing. Three of the four members in the first family in Genesis, Adam, Eve, and Abel, have names that readily feature all the elements listed above. Cain, however, has rather been an exception in this area, further adding to Genesis 4’s enigmaticness in the Hebrew Bible’s primeval history. While three characters (Adam, Eve, and Abel) have names that (1) sound like other Hebrew words, that are (2) sug- gestive of their character or actions and (3) foreshadow or suggest fu- ture events about those characters, the meaning of Cain’s name does not render itself so explicitly to his character or his role in the narrative, at least not to the same degree of immediate conspicuousness.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution Education Around the Globe Evolution Education Around the Globe
    Hasan Deniz · Lisa A. Borgerding Editors Evolution Education Around the Globe Evolution Education Around the Globe [email protected] Hasan Deniz • Lisa A. Borgerding Editors Evolution Education Around the Globe 123 [email protected] Editors Hasan Deniz Lisa A. Borgerding College of Education College of Education, Health, University of Nevada Las Vegas and Human Services Las Vegas, NV Kent State University USA Kent, OH USA ISBN 978-3-319-90938-7 ISBN 978-3-319-90939-4 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90939-4 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018940410 © Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.
    [Show full text]
  • Omphalos, Miracles, and Occam's Razor
    OMPHALOS, MIRACLES, AND OCCAM’S RAZOR Bruce S. Bennett Abstract ___________________________________________________________________________ Philip Gosse’s Omphalos (1857), which attempted to reconcile Genesis with science by proposing that the pre-Adamite stage of the world existed only as a Platonic idea, has usually been criticized as violating Occam’s razor and being unfalsifiable. It is argued here that this is faulty, because Gosse makes different assumptions about the data to be explained. The theory was rejected by Christians not because of logical problems but because of its theological meaninglessness. In this it differs from miracles, which also involve the introduction of extra data. Key words: Omphalos, miracles, Occam’s razor, parsimony, Philip Gosse, Incredulous Stare, creationism, science, religion. ___________________________________________________________________________ In 1857, the respected naturalist Philip Gosse, a Fellow of the Royal Society, published Omphalos,123 which attempted to reconcile scientific evidence of geological time with a literal reading of Genesis. The book was published before Darwin’s Origin of Species and, although well-informed scholars such as Gosse were aware of new ideas, the conflict was being expressed more in terms of geology. The account in Genesis seemed to be inconsistent with the evidence, which implied huge periods of time. Many were seeking some reconciliation of the two,124 though it would not be long before the quest was abandoned by scientists. It is important to note that Gosse was not a theologian but a scientist, not only “the finest descriptive naturalist” of his time125 but “the David Attenborough of his day”,126 noted for his popular works and public lectures. He was a pioneer of the aquarium and indeed seems to have invented 123 Philip Henry Gosse, Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot: With Fifty-six Illustrations on Wood (London: John Van Voorst, Paternoster Row, 1857).
    [Show full text]
  • Adam and Eve—Community: Reading Genesis
    last day of creative work. In the second account, however, Man is created before anything else.2 Of course, it is not to be denied that the text did not spring up ex nihilo, created by a Volume 1, Issue 1 | Fall 2003 writer without reference to previous texts. The redactor undoubtedly had a number of Adam and Eve—Community: texts to which he could refer in creating the Reading Genesis 2-3 Genesis text, and he undoubtedly used works already familiar to him as sources. Or James E. Faulconer it is conceivable that there was no individual Brigham Young University redactor or set of redactors, but only the egin thinking about human community solidifying of an oral tradition. For our B and its possibility at the beginning, or purposes, it does not matter. In either case it almost at the beginning, one step after the is too much to assume that the final text is immemorial beginning.1 The biblical story merely contradictory. There may be of the creation of Man (’adam) and Woman contradictions within the text, but the more (’isha) and their expulsion from the garden obvious those contradictions are, the less places humans in the world in a particular likely it is that they are contradictions that way; it creates a habitation for human life so undo the text. It is too much to assume that that the history shared by humans and the the redaction of Genesis was a product of story that manifests community includes the blindness. A considerable amount of “cut possibility of gathering together all humans and paste” work was surely involved in the as unique individuals rather than simply as creation of the Genesis story, but unless we members of a collective.
    [Show full text]
  • How Do Christians View the Creation of the World? (Leader''s Guide and Participant's Guide)
    Digital Collections @ Dordt Study Guides for Faith & Science Integration Summer 2017 How Do Christians View the Creation of the World? (Leader''s Guide and Participant's Guide) Channon Visscher Dordt College, [email protected] Ashley Huizinga Dordt College Lydia Marcus Dordt College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/faith_science Part of the Adult and Continuing Education Commons, Life Sciences Commons, and the Practical Theology Commons Recommended Citation Visscher, C., Huizinga, A., & Marcus, L. (2017). How Do Christians View the Creation of the World? (Leader''s Guide and Participant's Guide). Retrieved from https://digitalcollections.dordt.edu/ faith_science/34 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Collections @ Dordt. It has been accepted for inclusion in Study Guides for Faith & Science Integration by an authorized administrator of Digital Collections @ Dordt. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Leader’s Guide to How Do Christians View the Creation of the World? A Study of Christian Perspectives on Creation Dr. Channon Visscher, Ashley Huizinga, Lydia Marcus Dordt College, Sioux Center, Iowa Summer 2017 1 How to Use This Material? This study of the perspectives that Christians hold on the creation of the world is composed of eight modules. The 1st through 3rd modules address the basic three Christian perspectives on creation, using articles and other websites as source material. The 4th-7th modules address these perspectives in more detail, delving into distinguishing concordist and non-concordist interpretations of Scripture using Haarsma and Haarsma’s book Origins: Christian Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design.
    [Show full text]