• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

  • The rule regarding AI content has been updated. The rule now rules as follows:

    Be sure to credit AI when copying and pasting AI sources. Link to the site of the AI search, just like linking to an article.

interpretations of creation

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

envision1

Guest
I was wondering if anyone knows of any good online or other resources that talk about creation. I am looking for different interpretations from various sources. In my liberal arts class I am writing a paper on the intepretations of creation and I know many people here may be able to give me some good references. Thanks in advance!
 

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I was wondering if anyone knows of any good online or other resources that talk about creation. I am looking for different interpretations from various sources. In my liberal arts class I am writing a paper on the interpretations of creation and I know many people here may be able to give me some good references. Thanks in advance!

There's a three views book that might be valuable for such a project. The Genesis Debate : Three Views on the Days of Creation.

The most well known young earth creation website is Answers in Genesis. The most well known progressive creation website is Hugh Ross's Resons to Believe. I don't have a resource for theistic evolution. Hope that helps.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There is a list of Theistic Evolution books and websites here:
http://www.christianforums.com/t313...ks-or-websites-by-christians-crossposted.html
Is that what you are looking for, various Christian approaches to Genesis and the creation of the world?

Or are you thinking further afield? Such as:
Creation is an illusion, Hinduism
Creation is evil, the work of a lesser deity, Gnosticism
Creation wasn't, Atheism
 
Upvote 0

linssue55

Senior Veteran
Jul 31, 2005
3,380
125
76
Tucson Az
✟26,739.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
I was wondering if anyone knows of any good online or other resources that talk about creation. I am looking for different interpretations from various sources. In my liberal arts class I am writing a paper on the intepretations of creation and I know many people here may be able to give me some good references. Thanks in advance!

Do you want the truth? (from the word of God), or from what man say's?
 
Upvote 0

linssue55

Senior Veteran
Jul 31, 2005
3,380
125
76
Tucson Az
✟26,739.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Man wrote the Bible and humans interpret it. That doesn't make it truth.

All of the writters were filled with God the Holy Spirit. God the Holy Spirit never makes an error. Man CAN interpret the bible correctly IF they want to learn the originals, systematic theology, exegetics, isogogis, and hermenuetics. But most christians are way to lazy and rather interpret it their own way, from their own personal prejudices.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That still leaves us having to decide which are the scholarly non lazy interpretations and which are the sloppy lazy ones. And we are still left looking at what men say, human interpretations.

You profile describes you as Old Earth Creationist. Do you read the flood as global or local, and do you think evolution is contradicted by God's word?
 
Upvote 0

rmwilliamsll

avid reader
Mar 19, 2004
6,006
334
✟7,946.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
God the Holy Spirit never makes an error.

If this is true, then how can two people each claiming to be full of the Holy Spirit differ?
let alone the thousands of conflicting denominations that all claim to be Christian and all teach conflicting doctrines.
 
Upvote 0

Jase

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2003
7,330
385
✟10,432.00
Faith
Messianic
Politics
US-Democrat
All of the writters were filled with God the Holy Spirit. God the Holy Spirit never makes an error. Man CAN interpret the bible correctly IF they want to learn the originals, systematic theology, exegetics, isogogis, and hermenuetics. But most christians are way to lazy and rather interpret it their own way, from their own personal prejudices.
Why are there errors in Biblical translations then?
 
Upvote 0

jeffweeder

Veteran
Jan 18, 2006
1,415
58
62
ADELAIDE
✟24,425.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3736/

Here is another web site, assoc with a i g.

This is an article by J Sarfati ph D who has written some really good books.

Genesis: Bible authors believed it to be history

‘The important thing is that God created, isn’t it?’
by Jonathan Sarfati, CMI–Australia

(Article available in Russian) Ever had someone tell you, ‘You’re missing the whole point! The purpose of Genesis is to teach that God is our Creator. We should not be divisive over the small details. Genesis teaches the theological truth of “Who?” and “Why?” not about the “How?” and “When?”’ Or else they say that the Bible is a book for faith and morality, not history.
An obvious answer is, why should we trust Genesis when it says God created if we can’t trust it on the details? After all, Jesus told Nicodemus, ‘I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?’ (John 3:12). So if Genesis can’t be trusted on an earthly thing, such as Earth’s age, the sequence of creative acts upon it, or the Flood that covered it, then why trust it on a heavenly thing such as who the Creator was? Also, if Genesis 1 were merely meant to tell us that God is creator, then why simply not stop at verse 1, all that’s necessary to state this?
However, the critic has overlooked something even more important—Genesis is written as real history. This is why the rest of the Bible treats the events, people and time sequences as real history, not parables, poetry or allegory.
What does the rest of Scripture say?

The age and unique creation of Adam and Eve mattered to Jesus

When teaching about marriage, Jesus said:
‘But at the beginning of creation God “made them male and female. … For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” So they are no longer two, but one’ (Mark 10:6–8).
Here, Jesus quoted Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 about a real first man and first woman who became the first couple, and this was the basis for marriage between one man and one woman today. Not a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, or more than two people. Evolution teaches instead that a whole population of humans evolved from a population of ape-like creatures.
Also, in the context of what Jesus quoted, the two become one flesh because Eve was taken from Adam’s flesh, and a man leaves his parents because Adam had none. Furthermore, Jesus said that Adam and Eve were there ‘from the beginning of creation’, not billions of years later.
Far too few Christians defend the foundation of marriage—the recent creation of Adam and Eve as Jesus taught. Then they wonder why sinful deviant acts such as adultery, fornication and homosexual behaviour are increasing, even within the church.
The timeframe of Creation Week matters to God

God Himself wrote the Ten Commandments with His finger. The 4th one is:
‘Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God.’
The reason he gave is:
‘For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day.’
Clearly the timeframe isimportant, otherwise this Commandment is meaningless. And if the creation days were really long periods of time, then logically the days of the working week would have to be as well. But ‘Work for 6 billion years and rest for one billion years’ doesn’t quite have the same ring to it …
Adam’s sin bringing death mattered to Paul’s preaching of the gospel

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul explains the gospel he had taught these people, and how central Jesus’ Resurrection is. And he explains why Jesus came to die:
‘For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. … So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit’ (1 Corinthians 15:21–22, 45).
Paul explains that the gospel (= ‘good news’) is necessary because of the bad news that our ancestor Adam sinned and brought death to all people (Romans 5:12–19). Thus, the last Adam, Jesus, cured this by living a sinless life, dying for our sin, and rising from the dead. Also, Jesus rose physically from the dead (rising from an empty tomb with flesh and bones (Luke 24:39)). So the death Adam brought must also have a physical component, as shown by his return to the dust from which he was made (Genesis 3:19).
All compromise views place death before Adam’s sin, thus undermine the gospel.
Jesus’ ancestry mattered to Luke

In chapter 3 of his Gospel, Luke traces Jesus’ lineage from Mary all the way back up to Adam. There is not the slightest hint of a break showing where historical characters end and mythical figures begin—all are treated as equally historical; none are mythical. This includes Adam himself, who was created directly by God, not through a long line of ape-like ancestors or pond scum (Luke 3:38).
This is important for Paul’s teaching in the above section. It is also vital for the Atonement. The prophet Isaiah spoke of the coming Messiah as literally the ‘Kinsman-Redeemer’, i.e. one who is related by blood to those he redeems (Isaiah 59:20, which uses the same Hebrew word גוֹאל (gôēl) as is used to describe Boaz in relation to Ruth). The book of Hebrews also explains how Jesus took upon Himself the nature of a man to save mankind, but not angels (Hebrews 2:11–18). So only Adam’s descendants can be saved, because only thus can they be related by blood to the Last Adam.
So if anyone thinks that Genesis history doesn’t matter, then ask how they should preach to the Australian Aborigines. If they have really been here for 40,000 years (according to carbon-14 dating that old-earthers accept), then how could they come from Adam, and how could they be related to Christ, so how can they be saved? Indeed, a compromising clergyman of Darwin’s day claimed that Aborigines had not evolved enough to preach the gospel to them!1
Cain and Abel’s reality mattered to John

The Apostle John taught:
‘Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous’ (1 John 3:12).
Thus, in teaching the church about good and evil, John accepted the real history of Cain murdering Abel, as an example of real evil.
Jesus also believed that Abel was the first man whose blood was shed. And He taught that Abel’s blood would come upon that unbelieving generation as surely as that of the other martyred prophets throughout Scripture (Matthew 23:35).
Also, Hebrews 11 lists Abel, Enoch and Noah as heroes of the faith, without any hint that they were less real than any of the others listed.
The order of creation mattered to Paul

Paul taught much about the role of men and women in church. Paul justified it by citing the real history of Genesis. He wrote:
‘For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man’ (1 Corinthians 11:8–9).
Thus, Paul accepts the Genesis history that God created first Adam, who then named all the land vertebrate animals that God had previously created, then God made Eve from Adam’s rib—she was not an evolved apewoman! However, later on Paul points out:
‘In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God’ (1 Corinthians 11:11–12).
Here, Paul is following Genesis as well, for Adam named his wife Eve because she would become ‘the mother of all the living’ (Genesis 3:20).
Paul repeats this even more directly in his instructions to his pupil Timothy, ‘For Adam was first formed, then Eve’ (1 Timothy 2:13). Next verse, Paul teaches that Genesis 3 is also real history, ‘And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.’
Noah, the Flood and Ark mattered to Jesus and Peter

Jesus taught about the sudden reality of His future judgment by comparing it to the time of Noah:
‘Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the Ark. Then the Flood came and destroyed them all’ (Luke 17:26–27).
Here, Jesus treats Noah as a real person, the Ark as a real ship and the Flood as a real event that destroyed all people outside the Ark.
Peter likewise warned of a coming Judgment by comparing it with the Flood. He even said that one characteristic of ‘scoffers’ was a willful ignorance of two things: the reality of special creation of the world out of water, and its destruction by water (2 Peter 3:3–7).
But if we deny that the Flood was a real event, then logically the future Judgment must be denied as well. And if the Flood was merely a local Mesopotamian flood, then people could have escaped simply by emigrating. Logically, sinners could escape the future wrath of the Son of Man just by keeping out of Iraq!
Summary

These are only a few examples of where other Bible writers take Genesis as history. Indeed, the inspired writers treat the people, events and times as real, not merely literary or theological devices. And the reality of the history is foundational to crucial teachings about faith and morality.
 
Upvote 0

rmwilliamsll

avid reader
Mar 19, 2004
6,006
334
✟7,946.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Green
After all, Jesus told Nicodemus, ‘I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?’ (John 3:12).

This is exactly the position that YECists find themselves in. They have shown to the world that they do not understand earthly things, they do not properly read the book of God's nature and as a result many atheists ridicule them because if they do not understand the age of the earth, then how is anyone to trust them with things spiritual, which by their very nature can not have confirmation from the world.?

Genesis: Bible authors believed it to be history

this is the point of the essay. let's look at the supporting evidence. looking at each bolded point:

What does the rest of Scripture say?
let's look

The age and unique creation of Adam and Eve mattered to Jesus
nothing about the age, either how old they were or how long ago they lived. again back to GEn 2.

The timeframe of Creation Week matters to God

and the Sabbath is not mentioned from Gen 1 to Exodus 6.
no evidence that any of the patriarchs had ever heard of it.
no evidence in general revelation for a 7 day week until rough 2500BC in Mesopotamian. curious lack of any support for a 7 day week beginning in a recent creation event. looks a lot more like Moses reading the framework of the Sabbath week back into Creation and not the other way. the question is HOW it matters to God, assuming historical is not shown, either from the Bible or from history.

Adam’s sin bringing death mattered to Paul’s preaching of the gospel

not only is this death before the fall wrong, but it has nothing to do with Gen 1. It takes place in Gen 2.

Jesus’ ancestry mattered to Luke
even ignoring the fact that the geneologies are manipulated in both Luke and Matthew to prove a point. They AT BEST get you back to GEn 2 and say nothing about how to interpret Gen 1 as historical and scientific in order like a newpaperman report or not.

Cain and Abel’s reality mattered to John

again this says nothing about how God wishes us to read Gen 1.

The order of creation mattered to Paul
again this is Gen 2, and doesn't help us at all on how to read Gen 1.

Noah, the Flood and Ark mattered to Jesus and Peter
ditto

guess what?
even conceding all the points, it says nothing about how to read Genesis 1 or even why we ought to use the metaphor of an eyewitness report to understand it.

argument by missing the point and deluge of irrelevant material. Where does the Bible tell us that Gen 1 is an eyewitness account to the events of Creation week?

the big point?
if you mishandle the revelation of God in the world, then how are those who understand it and your falsehoods, going to trust you for information about the private spiritual realm for which they do not have access and have only your word (now shown to be false about so many things) to guide them?

so, why must i see Gen 1 as an scientifically and historically accurate account of creation?
 
Upvote 0

OldWiseGuy

Wake me when it's soup.
Site Supporter
Feb 4, 2006
46,773
10,979
Wisconsin
Visit site
✟1,005,302.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Understanding also comes with time and experience, as well as study. Our 'space to repent' is actually our entire lifetime. Therefore we have a lifetime to study and consider God's words.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3736/

Here is another web site, assoc with a i g.

This is an article by J Sarfati ph D who has written some really good books.

Genesis: Bible authors believed it to be history

‘The important thing is that God created, isn’t it?’
by Jonathan Sarfati, CMI–Australia

(Article available in Russian) Ever had someone tell you, ‘You’re missing the whole point! The purpose of Genesis is to teach that God is our Creator. We should not be divisive over the small details. Genesis teaches the theological truth of “Who?” and “Why?” not about the “How?” and “When?”’ Or else they say that the Bible is a book for faith and morality, not history.
An obvious answer is, why should we trust Genesis when it says God created if we can’t trust it on the details? After all, Jesus told Nicodemus, ‘I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?’ (John 3:12).
happy0194.gif

Jesus had just told Nicodemus 'You must be born again' much to Nicodemus's literalist confusion. And Safarti wants to use this to support literalism!
 
Upvote 0

jeffweeder

Veteran
Jan 18, 2006
1,415
58
62
ADELAIDE
✟24,425.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In luke 11:50-51, Jesus says-
http://www.christianforums.com/50 so that the blood of all the prophets, shed since the foundation of the world, may be charged[38][Or required of ] against this generation,
http://www.christianforums.com/51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged.

A literal reading of Genesis shows Abel as the first one to be killed, since creation.

mk 10
http://www.christianforums.com/6 "But from the beginning of creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE.

MK 13
http://www.christianforums.com/19 "For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will.

James Barr, then Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University, wrote in 1984:
‘… probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: … the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story.’23
Barr, consistent with his neo-orthodox views, does not believe Genesis, but he understood what the Hebrew so clearly taught. It was only the perceived need to harmonise with the alleged age of the earth which led people to think anything different—it was nothing to do with the text itself.
 
Upvote 0

linssue55

Senior Veteran
Jul 31, 2005
3,380
125
76
Tucson Az
✟26,739.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Why are there errors in Biblical translations then?
Because........... Man CAN interpret the bible correctly IF they want to learn the originals, systematic theology, exegetics, isogogis, and hermenuetics.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.