Revising Genesis with Science
inquiry
Over the last couple of weeks, my friend and I have written an
updated version of the Genesis. This verison adds what we have
learned in the fields of astrophysics and mathmatics to the old
version that Moses wrote from the Jewish oral history 3,500 years
ago. Please review it and comment on the revison.
To all those in the
paracleteforum@egroups.com ,
welcome to our thread about the creation of the univers. Please tell
us what you think about it. Does anyone have any experience with
astrophysics or mathematics? Your experince would help us. Thanks in
advance!
Genesis - Updated version
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven, the earth and the universe.
Gen 1:2 And the universe was without form, and void; and darkness.
Gen 1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light
radiating from the heavenly bodies at the center of the universe.
Gen 1:4 And God saw the light, that [it was] good: and "God divided
the light from the darkness"
Note: We need help on the last part of verse 1:4. Can anyone
contribute an appropriate phrase?
Gen 1:5 And God called the light the rays from the heavenly bodies,
and the darkness he called empty space. And thus ends the first
period of creation.
Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be galaxies in the midst of the
void, and let them grow to fill the vast void.
Gen 1:7 And God made the galaxies which grew to fill the empty universe.
Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament about the one planet earth,
Heaven. And thus ends the second period of creation.
Note: the first part of Gen 1:8 is beyond astrophysics and
mathematics so we left it in as originally written.
Gen 1:9 And God said, Let the waters of this one planet be gathered
together unto one place, and let the dry [land] appear: and it was
so.
Note: Many geologists believe most if not all the continents started
out interconnected and have spread out to their present location as
the surface of the earth cooled and the geological plates spread
over the earth.
Gen 1:10 And God called the dry [land] Earth; and the gathering
together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that [it was]
good.
The remaining versus of Genesis are well beyond astrophysics so we
did not update them.
first response
The problem with Genesis is taking the very accurate Hebrew of the
text and putting it into clear English. We really aren't free to
change the basic meaning of the words to fit what we think science
says.
A good commentary will walk you through Genesis One a word and a
phrase at a time and show you possible variant meanings of some of
the words.
You can use Strong's concordance and a good Hebrew Lexicon and learn
quite a bit. But Hebrew is an entirely different language from Greek
or English. Hebrew is not suited for making scientific statements
about things the ay we do in the western world today. I have several
sets of notes on Genesis One on my web site where I tried to dig out
the meaning a bit--the text is in a sense compressed and needs to be
expanded. But I also do not know Hebrew. You would do better to find
a Hebrew speaking rabbi or pastor and have him go over the text a
verse at a time so you can get the literal sense of what the text
actually says.
During creation week the entire universe was under construction so
all the physical laws were suspended and did not apply. Creation week
was unique, it happened once and was never to be repeated. Only God
was there and He is the only one who can tells what happened in that
period. We can not understand creation week by taking present day
physics in a fallen world and working backwards to t = 0.
best regards,
first reply
Thanks for the input, but I have already done that! The
updated version of Genesis was the result of many inquires into
biblical text and other sources.
So now, all of us are able to update the Genesis of 3,500 years ago
with today's knowledge. That's an important part of free will, one
of the greatest gifts from God!
In addition, although scientists and mathematicians haven't
determined the nature of the universe at t=0, they have determined
the state of the universe at t= 10 raised to the -23 power, which is
very, very close to t=0. And yes, it is very possible to
work backwards. As a matter of fact, that's how Copernicus and
Galileo determined the earth was not the center of the universe.
They used a simple telescope and mathematics to verify their
mathematical equations with astrological observations from the past,
by postulating the future position of the planets and letting time
prove them correct. If you like, you can duplicate the work of
Copernicus and Galileo with a telescope. Simply plot the movement of
our solar system and the stars of distant galaxies, compare them to
observations of the past and you too can determine that the universe
is expanding from a central location. That's why they call it
science. It's repeatable by everyone.
So modern cosmologists and mathematicians built on the efforts of
Copernicus, Galileo plus others, worked backwards to close to t=0
and introduced the Big Bang theory. Yes, the BB theory has been
modified since originally introduced (expansion, contraction, etc.)
but it still holds that the universe was not created in 6 EARTH days.
That is also one of the reasons why man of 2001AD can send
spaceships to the moon and unmanned vehicles to other planets and
solar systems. Man of 2001AD knows much more about the nature of the
Gods' world than man of 2000BC.
Please remember that Genesis was formulated by Jewish religious
leaders as part of their ORAL history. In addition, these same
leaders also thought the world was FLAT. So there was no way to
explain the true nature of the universe, (quarks, pions,
matter/antimatter, t=0, Doppler effect, gravity waves, nuclear
fusion) to people, religious or not, with very limited knowledge of
God's world. You can only tell them in the terms they can
understand, simple terms. It was a matter of survival. The complete
truth would have crippled Genesis in the early days of it's
existence when it had to compete against the multitude of the other
creation stories circulating at the time. Especially those creation
stories that were similar in nature to Genesis. So keeping the
creation of the universe as simple as possible was critical to the
success of Genesis.
So in summary, I submit that it is not appropriate to dismiss proven
ideas solely to fit simple oral history of 3,500 years ago . In
addition, dismissing any idea based upon the unsubstantiated
assumption that "all the physical laws were suspended and did not
apply" in considerably inappropriate. It's simply a man-made
assumption which of course, is open to debate.
So what's the net result of all of this. Yes there is a God! No the
universe was not created in six earth days!
Sincerely,
second response
Thank you for getting back to me. I was curious about your approach.
Now I am even more curious. I am a physicist by profession and I read
the latest cosmological papers as soon as they are published. I do
not see how you have used the latest cosmological models to improve
our understanding of Genesis?
I have noticed that many scientific theories change every few
decades. No one in science has the last word.
But I am glad to see a man who is wrestling with the Scriptures. I
have been marvelling at Genesis (and the rest of the Bible) for 40
years and I am still amazed at what God has given us in this unique
document.
"Draw near to God and he will draw near to you."
second reply
I can't get back to you in detail to answer your query until this
weekend. So far this week has been very busy and the remainder of
the week will be very busy too!
But for now, I must tell you that I believe in God. However, I don't
believe the bible is the only word of God. In short, the old
testament is the work of men selected by the Jewish religious
leadership around 2,000 to 3,000 years ago. The new testament is a
very limited selection of the the work of men by the roman catholic
church leadership about 1,500 years ago, if memory services me
correctly.
The things that stand out to me immediately are:
1. There is a lot of moral truth in the gospels both those included
in the bible and excluded from the bible.
2. Men are fallible no matter how good, thorough, thoughtful their
intentions have been.
3. All the gospels lived their early lives as stories recited from
fallible memory of simple minds.
4. These yahoos thought the world was flat and the earth was the
center of the universe.
Therefore, I have firmly concluded and proved to myself that the
basing all of the our beliefs, especially concerning the natural
word, on the limited aspects of the bible is very foolish.
In addition, I would like you to help me on the following idea.....
I believe in my gut, that there are many other 'books of God'. Just
about anything that describes nature can be treated as one of the
'books of God'.
This idea stems from my believe that I nor anyone will ever prove or
disprove the existence of God. So I base my 'proof' of God upon the
wonders of God's world. From the start of the Big Bank to the
innerworkings of our brains and hearts. No one but a supreme
intellect and being could have designed such a successful system
like God. Not even very lucky statistics (evolution). So any book
describing such wonders may be considered a modern 'book of God'.
The 'changes' in science reflects man's fallible attempts to
describe God's world in ways we understand. Naturally, we will
change our perspective as we fallible souls grow and learn. In
short, man's efforts, whether in a science book or a gospel will
always be full of mistakes and man must continue correcting them.
As you can see, I haven't formalized this idea of mine yet, but it's
my gut feel and my future investigations may proceed upon this route.
What do you think!
Thanks,
third response
I think we both have had a busy week? I apologize for not getting
back to you sooner.
Every book depends on the author of its author. Myths and legends
tend to be handed down by oral tradition and no one insists they
represent real history.
The Book of Mormon claims to have been given by revelation from the
angel Moroni. It claims to be as much "The Word of God" as the
Bible--yet it is totally inconsistent with the Bible and is only a
couple of hundred years old. Joseph Smith was a maverick and not a
man with good credentials.
The Koran is said to have been given to Mohammed by an angel and in
a series of dreams. It is full of errors and inconsistencies.
The Bible on the other hand is backed by the authority of the man
Jesus. Furthermore, Jesus is alive today--unlike Buddha, Mohammed,
or Joseph Smith who are all dead and gone. Thus anyone can get
acquainted with Jesus personally and see if His claims pan out in
real life. You can call out to Buddha all day for help. Nothing will
happen., But if you can out to Jesus for help you will get a
genuine, real answer back.
The Bible is the most researched ancient document in the world. We
now have thousands of manuscripts and the text is 99% certain. In
contrast we have only a few poor copies of the works of Homer or
Socrates. We have no original manuscripts of Shakespeare. And on and
on...
The Bible is historically accurate. Archaeologists in Israel use the
Bible as their primary guidebook in excavation work. The Bible is
full of predictions about events before they happened. Hundreds of
Bible prophecies have come to pass with 100% accuracy every time.
As for moral truth, the actual life of Jesus was impeccable. No
flaws have been found in him. The Roman authorities and the Jewish
leaders all admitted they had crucified an innocent man.
The gospel accounts were written by credible eyewitnesses. The
accounts cross-check and are consistent. The writers were men of
integrity. Luke, for instance, was a scientist and a physician; his
Greek is excellent.
The only way you will ever see if the Bible is true in your own life
is to get involved with Jesus. If you allow Him into your life he
will gladly help you see the flaws and shortcomings of other
religions.
The message of the Bible is an announcement of God's love for us. We
are all lost sinners, guilty before God and unable to save
ourselves. Jesus has, however, died for you and me in order to pay
the full penalty for all our sins. By accepting this gift we are set
free and become new persons possessing eternal life here and now.
You will never regret opening your heart to Jesus as I did 39 years
ago. Please do this--your entire world will open up into vast vistas
and new horizons in every direction.
best regards,
third reply
I understand all of your points. However, the best statment is
"The gospel accounts were written by credible eyewitnesses. The
accounts cross-check and are consistent. The writers were men of
integrity. Luke, for instance, was a scientist and a physician; his
Greek is excellent."
So let's go over Genesis.
First, who was the eyewitness. second, how was the account
cross-checked, who originated Genesis, who wrote down Genesis.
I am focusing on Gensis and the creation of the universe. This
limited scope so that I can get to the truth.
First rule of all investigations... Everyone is suspected until eliminated...
Second rule..... never take anything at face value....
Third rule... double check all eye-witness accounts with credibel
evidence. Do not simply rely upon other eye-witnesses or anyones
opinion of an eyewitness.
So as you see, I can look very closely at the first few versus of
Genesis and come up with different conclusions.
First rule. Genesis is very suspect because it started as Jewish
oral history around 4,000 years ago, before it was written down by
Moses. Therefore, Moses' sources are suspect.
Second rule, taking the concept of creating the universe in six days
at face value violates the rule. Especially when anyone can get a
telescope and prove otherwise.
Third rule, there were no eyewitnesses. So the sources of the Jewish
religious leaders is suspect. Where did they get there version of
creation. Why is it so similiar to other creation stories
circutlating at the time.
So unless you can come up with the sources that the Jewlish leaders
used, the bibles line of evidence does not hold up under scrutiny.
In short, the world was not created in six earth days.
PS. I have already given myself over to Jesus. I have a very hard
time taking the current version of the bible literally. So I've
embarded upon my own journey to find out the truth.
Sincerely,
fourth response
First important point I would make: one can not understand the mind
of Christ, the truth about God as long as one remains outside the
family of God!
For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but
to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is
written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness
of the clever I will thwart." Where is the wise man? Where is the
scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish
the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the
world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the
folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand
signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a
stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who
are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the
wisdom of God.5 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and
the weakness of God is stronger than men. For consider your call,
brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards,
not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; but God
chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what
is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low
and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to
nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the
presence of God. He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus,
whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and
redemption; therefore, as it is written, "Let him who boasts, boast
of the Lord."
....But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God
decreed before the ages for our glorification. None of the rulers
of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have
crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, "What no eye
has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God
has prepared for those who love him," God has revealed to us
through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the
depths of God. For what person knows a man's thoughts except the
spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the
thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not
the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we
might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart
this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit,
interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The
natural man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for
they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because
they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges all
things, but is himself to be judged by no one. "For who has known
the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But we have the mind of
Christ. (from 1 Cor. 1-2)
The second point is that "believing is seeing" not the other way
around. God reveals Himself and His truth to us AFTER we submit to
His authority, not before.
To invite Jesus into one's life means to give Him permission to be
your Lord. Accepting the authority of the Bible goes hand in hand
with that--Jesus lived by the same authority.
see http://pbc.org/dp/stedman/misc/authword.html
I am of course delighted to your receptivity towards Jesus. Now if
you will allow His word to also have authority in your mind and
heart, you will be given authority and the insight you seek.
"Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and
it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he
who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what
man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone?
Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who
are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much
more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who
ask him! So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to
them; for this is the law and the prophets. "Enter by the narrow
gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to
destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is
narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find
it are few." (Matthew 7:7-14)
I am praying for you.
fourth reply
The main point I'm trying to make is that the bible is not the
literal word of God. It was told by men (of integrity) and finally
written down. So it is suspect in terms of accurracy.
Also, I can certainly see God w/o accepting every point in the
bible. It's called free will, that gift from God if you remember.
No back to your points. You said that every part of the gospel has
been cross - checked, etc. etc, etc..
Well, it's time to put up or shut up. Can you address my chalange to
your statements w/o nonsense? Point by Point!
That is
First, who was the eyewitness. second, how was the account
cross-checked, who originated Genesis, who wrote down Genesis.
And for once don't drift off from a conversation. I get tired of
asking a question only to read non related crap.!
Frustrated by non-answers.
fifth response
You are certainly having a real struggle with pride. (Pride lies at
the heart of all our sin and rebellion against God). I remember well
how I had the same problem, but much more than you, before I came to
know the Lord.
It would be good to sit down with you in person as I am sure we could
cover more ground quickly that way.
My I suggest you read Josh McDowell's book, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict."
I regret that do not have time to go over each of your questions with
you point by point. One thing I learned awhile back is that you CAN
ask God directly and He is always happy to explain Himself to those
who are seriously seeking Him. I wish I could devote time to helping
you step by step.
Take a look at my friend Glenn Miller's web site,
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/. You will find a huge wealth of
information there.
I am sending this along to my email team. My own volume of email is
large and very often one of them has time to answer questions--and
generally any one of them can do a better job that I can anyway.
Sincerely,
fifth reply
It's not pride, it's intellegence. Stop skipping around the question.
Once again, YOU SAID
""The gospel accounts were written by credible eyewitnesses. The
accounts cross-check and are consistent"
Ok, now you have to practice what you preach! So specify....
First, who was the eyewitness. second, how was the account
cross-checked, who originated Genesis, who wrote down Genesis.
sixth response
I am one of the associates on the Paraclete Forum. I am responding
to some of your questions you posed in some of your your recent
e-mail exchanges.
I think that it is good for you to wrestle with God. Many just walk away
from this challenge and decide to live their own lives as they see fit. As
you are one who has made a confession of Christ as Lord, then I am sure that
you will agree that, as Paul wrote, "you are not your own, you are bought
with a price." My point here is that you are willing to ultimately submit
to God when you know that it is He that speaks. So, I am convinced that
given this attitude that God will fulfill His promise of:
"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it
will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks
finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened" (Matt 7:7-8).
So wrestle away: ask, seek, and knock!
That said, let me address your question obout Genesis 1.
Once you really look into the matter you discover that modern science is
really quite interpretive. A well known forensic scientist, Zakaria
Erzinclioglu, writes in his recent book Every Contat Leaves a Trace:
"Contrary to some popular beliefs, science is a highly uncertain endeavour.
It does not deal in certainties, but probablilities...Scientists seek to
explain why things are the way they are. Such explanations (or hypotheses)
are put forward, and tested as rigorously as possible and, if they withstand
these tests, they are accepted as theories, until such time as they are
shown not to work. In other words, scientists do not seek to 'prove'
theories - they do not believe they can do such a thing - rather, they fail
to disprove them. Having bombarded an idea with arguments and experiments;
and if the idea emerges unscathed, then it is accepted - for the time
being." (p.30).
Now consider the Schrodinger equation, which is central to modern quantum
mechanics. It is as central to modern physics as Newton's laws were to
classical physics. Hollas of the University of Reading writes concerning
it:
"The Schrodinger equation cannot be subjected to firm proof but was put
forward as a postulate, based on the analogy between the wave nature of
light and of the electron. The function was justified by the remarkable
successes of its applications." (Modern Spectroscopy, 2nd Ed., J. Michael
Hollas, p9).
And, Atkins, a physical chemist of Oxford, states that:
"the Schrodinger equation...has an infinite number of solutions...the next
step of the arguement is to put an interpretation on Psi [Psi is the symbol
for the wavefunction]...The interpretation of Psi is based on a suggestion
by Born." (Physcial Chemistry, 2nd Ed, P.W. Atkins, p399).
Schrodinger himself had four different interpretations of his equation
throughout his lifetime. My point here is that interjecting theory too much
into Scriptures, such as Genesis, could lead you to the same error that the
Church of Galileo's time. As you probably know, in Galileo's time the
prevailing scientific theory was that the Earth was at the center and the
Sun and everything else revolved around it. For some strange reason the
assumption many people have is that the Bible taught this. Actually it was
a Greek theory put forth by Ptolemy. Nevertheless, the mistake the Church
in Galileo's time made was interjecting the prevailing scientific theory
(i.e, Ptolemy) into the Scriptures. I hterfore caution you about making a
similar mistake. Having read your revision of Genesis I suspect that you
may be on that same line of error. I can't say that your version is a very
accurate representation of the Hebrew.
But now more specifically about the reliability of Genesis 1. I was once a
skeptic and atheist. I was very skeptical of the idea of God creating the
universe in six days and all the rest. But I did not become a Christian
because I was proven wrong about Genesis 1. Rather, I became convinced that
Christ was whom He said He was - that is, God who dwelt among us in flesh
and has defeated death. This is as Paul wrote, "if Christ has not been
raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins" (1 Cor 15:17).
I trust Jesus. And because I trust Him I trust what He said about God.
Jesus had full confidence in the Hebrew Scriptures as an accurate
representation of God and His activity in the universe and with mankind in
particular. For me to prove Genesis wrong I would first have to prove that
Jesus isn't who He said He was. We have quite a bit of evidence that the
Hebrew Scriptures that we have in our possession today are what Jesus
referred to.
You have made the assumption that the Bible cannot be the accurate word of
God because no man was there to observe the Universe being created. Because
there were no witnesses to this event, except God, then anything He says on
the matter is therefore suspect. Certainly you realize that the only way we
could ever know anyhing about the creation event would be by revelation
since, by definition, there would be no other witnesses besides God.
Now let me address some of your other questions.
I disagree with your assessment of the ancients as simple minded including
the idea that they believed that the Earth was flat. Actually, the ancients
did not believe that the Earth was flat. This is a myth that has been
perpetuated in our elementary schools for decades in their "Christopher
Columbus" lesson. Also the ancients were really quite sophisticated in
their use of words and stories. We tend to think of them as rather simple
because they did not have the technical gadgets and education that we have.
But they were just as intelligent as we are though they put their minds to
other things than we. After all, it was not uncommon in Classical Greece
for individuals to have memorized the Illiad. For us today this is a
remarkable feat. But the average person back then did not have the sort of
entertainments we have and many spent their time devising amazingly subtle
and complex narratives and poetry with intricate word play. Further, modern
engineers still can't figure out how some of the huge stone slabs were put
in place that made up the retaining wall of the Jewish Temple in Herod's
time. You can still see them in the "wailing wall" in Jerusalem. The
blocks are so massive that even modern cranes could not move them. There
are many other engineering marvels that the ancients devised. So, given the
materials and techniques available do you think any modern engineer could do
any better given the same circumstances?
Another item you mentioned was the forming of the New Testament. One
misconception is that the canon was established by a group of men at a
council choosing the books. Rather, what really happened was they merely
recognized the books that were already accepted by the majority of churches.
For example, the author of Hebrews was unknown, yet it was widely accepted
by the early Church and was thus included. And yet there are many fine
documents written by other early Christians, such as Polycarp, that didn't
receive the status of Scripture because their acceptance was too limited.
The criterion was that it is better to be too conservative than not. So,
"if in doubt, throw it out."
Feel free to write back if you feel inclined.
Your servant in Christ,
sixth reply
Thank you,
I must congratulate you for your direct responses.
However, let's get back to my main point.
First, from what I have learned from a variety of religous sources, is that
the bible is man's interpreation of God's word.
Second, yes these people had limited scientific knowledge. They lived 4000
years ago.
Third, both the bible and sciences are interpretive works.
So what is the truth.
My friend and I compared two so called 'competing works' of God to
each other and came up with a combination of both that fits our
current knowledge in religion and science. Please take a look at it.
Advantages of astrophysics.
Detailed explanations of cosmic events from the begining of (our) time
through the formation of the earth.
Most conclusions are verified via mathmatics and duplicated measurements by
scientists over the centuries.
New concepts are continuously developed to refine the science.
Disadvantages of astrophysics.
Very, very, very hard to understand the details.
Very, very, very boring to the general public.
Still does not prove or disprove the existence of God.
Does not cover the creation of man.
Advantages of Genesis
Generalized and easily understood explanation of events from the begining
of
(our) time through the formation of the earth AND people.
Very, very acceptable to people throughout the ages, especially 1,500 B.C.
Asserts the existence of God.
Disadvantage of Genesis
Originated as part of Jewish oral history. Commited to paper hundreds of
years later. Credibility on details and conflict in doubt.
The exact creation of man is dubious.
So I put the advantages of both together and end up with a rational
explanation of the creation of the universe.
God created the universe in the stages as described in Genesis and verified
by astrophysics.
God created the universe in the time scale described by astrophysics.
God still has many scientific mysteries for us to unravel as to the
creation
of the universe (New concepts are continuously developed to refine the
science).
The combination of Genesis and astrophysics is relatively easy to
understand
in today's culture educated in the discoveries that have occurred over
3,500
years. In short people in today's culture are accustomed to rapid change
due
to science, economics and other drivers. Therefore, they can easily
understand and accept creation of the universe using the combination of
Genesis and astrophysics.
In short, we no longer have to accept either Genesis or astrophysics as
demanded by some people. We can chose the middle ground that has many more
answers!
seventh response
Many have the impression that the Bible we have today was transmitted
through oral stories, re-written, translated into other languages, and then
re-written again, to produce the Bible we have today. This is not correct:
"Writing is first attested in southern Mesopotamia in the half millennium
before 3000 BC…The earliest writing from Uruk [Biblical Erech]…"
(Babylonians, H.W.F. Saggs (University of California Press: Berkeley, 2000)
p.46).
In 2500 BC we have records of school children practicing writing (e.g., the
Gilgamesh epic) and even have notes that these students wrote to their
parents. This is the region from which Abraham came. So it is very
probable that Abraham could read and write. In turn, Abraham likely
transmitted this skill to his children such that it continued all throughout
the history of the Jews. In fact, many of the stories could have easily
been written down long before Abraham's time. Many scholars think that Job
was from Abraham's time. Given the overlapping dates of some of the sons of
Noah we could even have records written by them. But in any case, we are
not dependent upon an oral tradition for the transmission of information
from generation to generation at the time of Abraham. So why do you assume
that nothing was written down and that oral tradition was the only means of
information transmission?
I am very hesitant about interjecting any current scientific theory into
Scripture for the reasons I previously discussed (e.g., Ptolemies
Earth-centric view). Let me further illustrate the limitations of doing so.
In National Geographic (Dec 2000) is an article entitled "Hunt for the
First Americans." Following are a few quotes from that article:
******************************************************
******************************************************
...I wondered why some archaeologists seemed so cautious about dynamic new
ideas. When I asked Haynes [a geologist preeminent in the study of
stratification at archaeological sights] about that, he told a story of his
own experience.
In the late 1950s Haynes worked on a dig in Nevada called Tule Springs,
which reportedly predated Clovis sites [the oldest archaeological sites in
North America]. There prehistoric animal bones were associated with
apparent hearths dating back 28,000 years.
What Haynes found instead was that the charcoal in the hearths wasn't
charcoal at all but decaying vegetation on its way to becoming coal. The
dates were right, but there had been no hearths - and no humans.
"That was a real learning experience for me," Haynes said. "It makes you
cautious. You begin to see how easy it is to misinterpret things."
(pp 51-52)
--------------------
...a Canadian archaeologist had told me. "We are a discipline, not an exact
science," she said. "We shouldn't pretend we are. Everything is subject to
interpretation."
...Although parts of archaeology are based on hard science, such as carbon
dating, archaeological fact is never more than consensus based on relatively
few samples. Today, in spite of increasingly rigorous research, consensus
on some critical issues appears far off.
"It's chaos," more than one archaeologist told me.
(p53)
******************************************************
******************************************************
If the state of pre-historic archaeology in something as "recent" as the
first people in the Americas is "chaos" then how can prehistoric
anthropologists dealing with events of hundreds-of-thousands to millions of
years ago have as much certainty as they have? In this light evolutionary
theory is exceedingly arrogant and presumptuous. So to re-interpret
Scripture through the lens of evolution, for example, would be fallacious.
Consider the foundations upon how we know how distant various heavenly
bodies are. What are the assumptions being made? Are those assumptions
valid? Are interpretations being put into the data to fit what I want? For
example, many think that the universe will collapse back onto itself and
produce another "big bang." Even though the physical evidence for the
required amount of mass is missing they have proposed "dark matter" that is
not yet detected to make up the difference. Why? Is there some underlying
predisposition that will not allow them to accept a cold forever expanding
universe?
So what is truth, then? How can one really know anything? Many say that
the Bible is only man's interpretation of God and that it is not necessarily
true. How do they know that? Logic and the scientific method are incapable
of discovering or knowing God or His will (see I Corinthians 2:21a). This is
because God is sovereign and does not have to subject Himself to analytical
examination as one could do to a rock or animal specimen. Hence, He would
not necessarily be discoverable by us and it would be completely up to Him
to reveal Himself to us. But if He did choose to reveal Himself to us then
this revelation would be completely under His sovereign direction. Is it
not possible for the various writers of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures
to be under His direction? This is where a good investigation of the
material comes in to see if this is probable or not. The book that Lambert
mentioned, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, by Josh McDowell, goes through
some of this to provide evidence for you to judge for yourself.
first comment
The problem with Genesis is taking the very accurate Hebrew of the
text and putting it into clear English. We really aren't free to
change the basic meaning of the words to fit what we think science
says.
A good commentary will walk you through Genesis One a word and a
phrase at a time and show you possible variant meanings of some of
the words.
You can use Strong's concordance and a good Hebrew Lexicon and learn
quite a bit. But Hebrew is an entirely different language from Greek
or English. Hebrew is not suited for making scientific statements
about things the ay we do in the western world today. I have several
sets of notes on Genesis One on my web site where I tried to dig out
the meaning a bit--the text is in a sense compressed and needs to be
expanded. But I also do not know Hebrew. You would do better to find
a Hebrew speaking rabbi or pastor and have him go over the text a
verse at a time so you can get the literal sense of what the text
actually says.
During creation week the entire universe was under construction so
all the physical laws were suspended and did not apply. Creation week
was unique, it happened once and was never to be repeated. Only God
was there and He is the only one who can tells what happened in that
period. We can not understand creation week by taking present day
physics in a fallen world and working backwards to t = 0.
best regards,
second comment
Thank you for getting back to me. I was curious about your approach.
Now I am even more curious. I am a physicist by profession and I read
the latest cosmological papers as soon as they are published. I do
not see how you have used the latest cosmological models to improve
our understanding of Genesis?
I have noticed that many scientific theories change every few
decades. No one in science has the last word.
But I am glad to see a man who is wrestling with the Scriptures. I
have been marvelling at Genesis (and the rest of the Bible) for 40
years and I am still amazed at what God has given us in this unique
document.
"Draw near to God and he will draw near to you."
third comment
I think we both have had a busy week? I apologize for not getting
back to you sooner.
Every book depends on the author of its author. Myths and legends
tend to be handed down by oral tradition and no one insists they
represent real history.
The Book of Mormon claims to have been given by revelation from the
angel Moroni. It claims to be as much "The Word of God" as the
Bible--yet it is totally inconsistent with the Bible and is only a
couple of hundred years old. Joseph Smith was a maverick and not a
man with good credentials.
The Koran is said to have been given to Mohammed by an angel and in
a series of dreams. It is full of errors and inconsistencies.
The Bible on the other hand is backed by the authority of the man
Jesus. Furthermore, Jesus is alive today--unlike Buddha, Mohammed,
or Joseph Smith who are all dead and gone. Thus anyone can get
acquainted with Jesus personally and see if His claims pan out in
real life. You can call out to Buddha all day for help. Nothing will
happen., But if you can out to Jesus for help you will get a
genuine, real answer back.
The Bible is the most researched ancient document in the world. We
now have thousands of manuscripts and the text is 99% certain. In
contrast we have only a few poor copies of the works of Homer or
Socrates. We have no original manuscripts of Shakespeare. And on and
on...
The Bible is historically accurate. Archaeologists in Israel use the
Bible as their primary guidebook in excavation work. The Bible is
full of predictions about events before they happened. Hundreds of
Bible prophecies have come to pass with 100% accuracy every time.
As for moral truth, the actual life of Jesus was impeccable. No
flaws have been found in him. The Roman authorities and the Jewish
leaders all admitted they had crucified an innocent man.
The gospel accounts were written by credible eyewitnesses. The
accounts cross-check and are consistent. The writers were men of
integrity. Luke, for instance, was a scientist and a physician; his
Greek is excellent.
The only way you will ever see if the Bible is true in your own life
is to get involved with Jesus. If you allow Him into your life he
will gladly help you see the flaws and shortcomings of other
religions.
The message of the Bible is an announcement of God's love for us. We
are all lost sinners, guilty before God and unable to save
ourselves. Jesus has, however, died for you and me in order to pay
the full penalty for all our sins. By accepting this gift we are set
free and become new persons possessing eternal life here and now.
You will never regret opening your heart to Jesus as I did 39 years
ago. Please do this--your entire world will open up into vast vistas
and new horizons in every direction.
best regards,
fourth comment
First important point I would make: one can not understand the mind
of Christ, the truth about God as long as one remains outside the
family of God!
For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but
to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is
written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness
of the clever I will thwart." Where is the wise man? Where is the
scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish
the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the
world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the
folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand
signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a
stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who
are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the
wisdom of God.5 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and
the weakness of God is stronger than men. For consider your call,
brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards,
not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth; but God
chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what
is weak in the world to shame the strong, God chose what is low
and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to
nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the
presence of God. He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus,
whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and
redemption; therefore, as it is written, "Let him who boasts, boast
of the Lord."
....But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God
decreed before the ages for our glorification. None of the rulers
of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have
crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, "What no eye
has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God
has prepared for those who love him," God has revealed to us
through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the
depths of God. For what person knows a man's thoughts except the
spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the
thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not
the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we
might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart
this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit,
interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The
natural man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for
they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because
they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges all
things, but is himself to be judged by no one. "For who has known
the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But we have the mind of
Christ. (from 1 Cor. 1-2)
The second point is that "believing is seeing" not the other way
around. God reveals Himself and His truth to us AFTER we submit to
His authority, not before.
To invite Jesus into one's life means to give Him permission to be
your Lord. Accepting the authority of the Bible goes hand in hand
with that--Jesus lived by the same authority.
see http://pbc.org/dp/stedman/misc/authword.html
I am of course delighted to your receptivity towards Jesus. Now if
you will allow His word to also have authority in your mind and
heart, you will be given authority and the insight you seek.
"Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and
it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he
who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what
man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone?
Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who
are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much
more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who
ask him! So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to
them; for this is the law and the prophets. "Enter by the narrow
gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to
destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is
narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find
it are few." (Matthew 7:7-14)
I am praying for you.
