Why is earth's AGE important to you?

[2PhiloVoid]

It is time that we see a bird's eye view of the Bible. Individual salvation is good but not the end all and be all.
That God has a large number of individual spiritual people who are forgiven each is good. I certainly benefit rom it.
But what about the larger purpose of God.

The larger purpose of which we are told in Genesis chapter one is what I'd like to bring out.
Yes, Genesis gives a geneological background.

I try to get some of us to see "I get saved, You get saved. He and she get saved. Wonderful!" is a component of a larger
eternal purpose of God.

Is that really all we need to know?
Some of us need eventually to know some more.

Romans in the NT starts more with OUR need to be saved from condemnation.
Ephesians in the NT starts more from the viewpoint of God's need.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ,
Even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before Him in love,
Predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, (Eph. 1:3-5)

The holy and eternal God has a "good pleasure". He had it "before the foundation of the world."
Before He created the universe God had a plan. It is apparently FOR this plan He created all things.

The holy God marked out the destiny of som beings He is going to create - "predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ".
His sons will share His holy nature. This is like God cannot create another of Himself.
But He can have a corporate entity of people into which He can dispense His life and nature that they express Him.
He has a need. He has a good pleasure to satisfy. Based on this need He lays the foundation of the world. He creates the universe.

Adam is far away in history. However Jesus Christ is closer in time to us. He is called "the second man." He is called "the last Adam."
What helps me is to trust that if there is this "second man" and this "last Adam" who is so important, a first man and first Adam is likely.

This "first man Adam" and "second man" seemed to take seriously that there was a beginning humanity rather than a gradual emmerging of humans. I came to the Bible with a skeptical filter about Genesis. Eventually, I decided that if it was good enough for Jesus it must be trustworthy.

Here Jesus refered to the beginning of creation, mankind and the first marriage - Adam and his wife.

But from the beginning of creation, He made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife;
And the two shall be one flesh. So then they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Therefore what God has yoked together, let man not separate. (Mark 10:6-9)

Here He refers the serpents lying as well as to the Cain the murderer and Abel account -

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks it out of his own possessions; for he is a liar and the father of it. (John 8:44)

I came to the Old Testament through Jesus. Gradually, I noticed how seriously Jesus took some stories in Genesis.


A point of this post is that the "real historical person" spoke of crucial Genesis stories as history.
Jesus said the people of Sodom would stand in judgment with the generation of His day.
I decided that it makes no sense for Christ to warn that contemporary historical people will stand alongside with fictional mythic people at a divine judgment.

And you, Capernaum, who have been exalted to heaven, to Hades you will be brought down. For if the works of power which took place in you had taken place in Sodom, it would have remained until today.
But I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you. (Matt. 11:23,24)

And you realize Jesus spoke of the end times as being like the days of Noah. (Matt. 24:24-27)
And Jesus spoke of Lot and his wife from Genesis 19. (Luke 17:28,29)
Does seeing that Jesus spoke this way about Genesis stories give you more confidence in the historicity of Genesis?

I appreciate your efforts here to present the larger picture of all that any of us can find in the Bible. Fortunately, I'm already well aware of most of what you're wanting to bring to my attention.

Thanks for caring!

Be blessed!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yeah, it's trickey. I do think there are salient features of Christian faith laid out in the primeval history that, pretty much, lay the framework for faith, i.e., God is Creator, creation is not God, creation is good, creation is orderly, humanity bears the divine image, sin messes everything up, etc.

I read the Genesis account as communicating spiritual/metaphysical truths that frame the whole sin/salvation account, and yet I do not take the primeval history as a one-for-one account of historical happenings. I don't find that approach to be a problem. Lol. And, I believe Christ was the promised Messiah, Son of God, who rose from the dead, and I believe that's a fact of history. Stone me.

Personally, I won't be the one stoning you; but I might use your body as a shield!!

 

[didactics]

I appreciate your efforts here to present the larger picture of all that any of us can find in the Bible. Fortunately, I'm already well aware of most of what you're wanting to bring to my attention.

Thanks for caring!

Be blessed!

Yes, and I would like to add because post #80 is a great point. We're not just looking back to Genesis to know we are sold on sin, but even our propose is restored in Christ. It goes back to when Adam and Eve were mandated to take dominion on the earth and be good stewards. Or as Ephesians 2:10 has it, we are created for good works, his workmanship. The creation account is definitely not a universal reconciliation approach. We must acknowledge and embrace Jesus as Lord with right hearts, otherwise if the damned were raised to new life in the end, restored to right standing with God, it cannot be expected they will serve him wholeheartedly when the earth is restored.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes, and I would like to add because post #80 is a great point. We're not just looking back to Genesis to know we are sold on sin, but even our propose is restored in Christ. It goes back to when Adam and Eve were mandated to take dominion on the earth and be good stewards. Or as Ephesians 2:10 has it, we are created for good works, his workmanship. The creation account is definitely not a universal reconciliation approach. We must acknowledge and embrace Jesus as Lord with right hearts, otherwise if the damned were raised to new life in the end, restored to right standing with God, it cannot be expected they will serve him wholeheartedly when the earth is restored.

Sure. But, historiographically speaking, if Christ exists as Lord, then it is the bible that is partially human in nature and subservient in its purpose to Him, not the other way around. We might want to guard against the proposition that the bible offers us some sort of "iron-clad" set of knowledge that can be fully and comprehensively demonstrated to answer all of life's question. Personally, I don't that it can very well, but it can be rationally affirmed for the general puprose of informing us about salvation and eternal life.

Anyway, that's neither here nor there. I'm not here to tell others exactly "how" they "should" believe in Jesus of Nazareth. No, I'm just participating in a thread on a public forum and airing my own personal viewpoint. So, you and I----------we're not competing here for who has the winning answer.

I'm simply on the side of existential, doxastic, epistemological humility. And I have my reasons for this, especially where the age of the earth is of concern on a theological scale.

 

[BobRyan]

Why is the age of the earth an important matter to you (if it is)?

What is the most important thing that knowing the age of the earth will tell you?

It tells us that Bible history is reliable rather than myths and legends having no real value in truth.

It tells us that God created all life on Earth just as He said.

It tells us that we serve a kind and loving God who ;
1. Does not "create" via "death and destruction"
2. Does not condemn all mankind to the lake of fire second death - because some ancient hominid "made a mistake" but rather because sinless, perfect, massively intelligent Adam and Eve -fully capable of doing right -- made a mistake given a super east test to pass.
3. Made one man, one woman, marriage between man and woman not man-man or woman-woman

Christ affirms the existence of Adam and Eve.
Paul affirms the fact that Adam was created first and then Eve and that Eve sinned first.
NT writers affirm the real world wide flood in 2 Pet 3

 

[BobRyan]

It is time that we see a bird's eye view of the Bible. Individual salvation is good but not the end all and be all.
That God has a large number of individual spiritual people who are forgiven each is good. I certainly benefit rom it.
But what about the larger purpose of God.

The larger purpose of which we are told in Genesis chapter one is what I'd like to bring out.
Yes, Genesis gives a geneological background.

I try to get some of us to see "I get saved, You get saved. He and she get saved. Wonderful!" is a component of a larger
eternal purpose of God.

Is that really all we need to know?
Some of us need eventually to know some more.

Romans in the NT starts more with OUR need to be saved from condemnation.
Ephesians in the NT starts more from the viewpoint of God's need.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ,
Even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before Him in love,
Predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, (Eph. 1:3-5)

The holy and eternal God has a "good pleasure". He had it "before the foundation of the world."
Before He created the universe God had a plan. It is apparently FOR this plan He created all things.

The holy God marked out the destiny of som beings He is going to create - "predestinating us unto sonship through Jesus Christ".
His sons will share His holy nature. This is like God cannot create another of Himself.
But He can have a corporate entity of people into which He can dispense His life and nature that they express Him.
He has a need. He has a good pleasure to satisfy. Based on this need He lays the foundation of the world. He creates the universe.

Adam is far away in history. However Jesus Christ is closer in time to us. He is called "the second man." He is called "the last Adam."
What helps me is to trust that if there is this "second man" and this "last Adam" who is so important, a first man and first Adam is likely.

This "first man Adam" and "second man" seemed to take seriously that there was a beginning humanity rather than a gradual emmerging of humans. I came to the Bible with a skeptical filter about Genesis. Eventually, I decided that if it was good enough for Jesus it must be trustworthy.

Here Jesus refered to the beginning of creation, mankind and the first marriage - Adam and his wife.

But from the beginning of creation, He made them male and female.
For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and shall be joined to his wife;
And the two shall be one flesh. So then they are no longer two, but one flesh.
Therefore what God has yoked together, let man not separate. (Mark 10:6-9)

Here He refers the serpents lying as well as to the Cain the murderer and Abel account -

You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks it out of his own possessions; for he is a liar and the father of it. (John 8:44)

I came to the Old Testament through Jesus. Gradually, I noticed how seriously Jesus took some stories in Genesis.


A point of this post is that the "real historical person" spoke of crucial Genesis stories as history.
Jesus said the people of Sodom would stand in judgment with the generation of His day.
I decided that it makes no sense for Christ to warn that contemporary historical people will stand alongside with fictional mythic people at a divine judgment.

And you, Capernaum, who have been exalted to heaven, to Hades you will be brought down. For if the works of power which took place in you had taken place in Sodom, it would have remained until today.
But I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you. (Matt. 11:23,24)

And you realize Jesus spoke of the end times as being like the days of Noah. (Matt. 24:24-27)
And Jesus spoke of Lot and his wife from Genesis 19. (Luke 17:28,29)
Does seeing that Jesus spoke this way about Genesis stories give you more confidence in the historicity of Genesis?

Very good point.

As Andy Stanley said in recent years - "The Bible is a house of cards" - it all works or it all breaks. Genesis is interwoven into books of the OT and also books of the NT.

 

[didactics]

Sure. But, historiographically speaking, if Christ exists as Lord, then it is the bible that is partially human in nature and subservient in its purpose to Him, not the other way around. We might want to guard against the proposition that the bible offers us some sort of "iron-clad" set of knowledge that can be fully and comprehensively demonstrated to answer all of life's question. Personally, I don't that it can very well, but it can be rationally affirmed for the general puprose of informing us about salvation and eternal life.

Anyway, that's neither here nor there. I'm not here to tell others exactly "how" they "should" believe in Jesus of Nazareth. No, I'm just participating in a thread on a public forum and airing my own personal viewpoint. So, you and I----------we're not competing here for who has the winning answer.

I'm simply on the side of existential, doxastic, epistemological humility. And I have my reasons for this, especially where the age of the earth is of concern on a theological scale.

Yes, I get that the Bible is not a science textbook, and a literal reading of Genesis doesn't contradict science, it contradicts the mainstream view held by scientists of the day, namely the Big Bang.

It was Jesus of Nazareth who referred to the entire Hebrew Bible as the law and the prophets (for example Matt. 5:17). The law is the Pentateuch. Romans 4 mentions the law of circumcision given to Abraham. It was given to him before it was given to Moses.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes, I get that the Bible is not a science textbook, and a literal reading of Genesis doesn't contradict science, it contradicts the mainstream view held by scientists of the day, namely the Big Bang.

It was Jesus of Nazareth who referred to the entire Hebrew Bible as the law and the prophets (for example Matt. 5:17). The law is the Pentateuch. Romans 4 mentions the law of circumcision given to Abraham. It was given to him before it was given to Moses.

Yes, I already understand that interpretation. Unfortunately, there is the possibility that even Jesus and Paul, and Moses even earlier, were wrong about the actual past that transpired during the time of the Patriarchs.

But that doesn't mean there can't be sacred, prophetic stories given by which God wants us to align our values. Hence, ... the book of Genesis.

Reference

Hoffmeier, J. K., Wenham, G. J., & Sparks, K. (2015). Genesis: History, fiction, or neither?: Three views on the Bible’s earliest chapters. Zondervan Academic.

 

[oikonomia]

Let me ask the particpants this:

God had plenty of angels who live forever.
Why did He need to make another being who lives forever?

 

[didactics]

Yes, I already understand that interpretation. Unfortunately, there is the possibility that even Jesus and Paul, and Moses even earlier, were wrong about the actual past that transpired during the time of the Patriarchs.

But that doesn't mean there can't be sacred, prophetic stories given by which God wants us to align our values. Hence, ... the book of Genesis.

Reference

Hoffmeier, J. K., Wenham, G. J., & Sparks, K. (2015). Genesis: History, fiction, or neither?: Three views on the Bible’s earliest chapters. Zondervan Academic.

Well I have to correct myself on something. Gal. 3:17 mentions the covenant given to Abraham; the law was later introduced to Moses. So, the law could not be introduced unless the covenant was first established through Abraham.

 

[oikonomia]

As God was laying the foundation of the world He already had some creations who live everlastingly.
God tells Job of the angelic sons of God prior to His creating man.

Job 38:6,7 - Onto what were its bases sunk, / Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together / And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

So why did God need another creation made from the dust whom He could cause to live forever?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Well I have to correct myself on something. Gal. 3:17 mentions the covenant given to Abraham; the law was later introduced to Moses. So, the law could not be introduced unless the covenant was first established through Abraham.

Right. Paul mentions Abraham, because Paul believed that the book of Genesis reflected the actual past. The truth is, no one, not even Moses or Paul, actually knew the past. They knew what transpired in their own lives, however, and they worked to align their perceptions and writings with their cultural identies and current experiences.

There's no reason for us to assume that Moses was given a direct dictation from God on every story or person we find in the book of Genesis. We need to remember this.

 

[didactics]

Right. Paul mentions Abraham, because Paul believed that the book of Genesis reflected the actual past. The truth is, no one, not even Moses or Paul, actually knew the past. They knew what transpired in their own lives, however, and they worked to align their perceptions and writings with their cultural identies and current experiences.

There's no reason for us to assume that Moses was given a direct dictation from God on every story or person we find in the book of Genesis. We need to remember this.

But this much you do believe:

But that doesn't mean there can't be sacred, prophetic stories given by which God wants us to align our values.

What values did they want us to know? Surely the writers wanted us to value the covenant God made with his people. Maybe you think Abraham was just a fictional character. But was there no need for a covenant of any kind to precede the law given to Moses? Then you have a real problem if the answer is no. Because if the answer is no, then we don't even know the purpose of the apostles writings.

We need to know more than just needing a savior from hell. To dig deeper, we need a savior from sin. Gen. 9:6 shows us that it was God who set the first law for a government, capital punishment. God is the creator of government not just because he made people, he gave a command. Yes, and we should value the covenants because of what they show us. God rewards those who obey and punishes those who transgress.

 

[BobRyan]

Well I have to correct myself on something. Gal. 3:17 mentions the covenant given to Abraham; the law was later introduced to Moses. So, the law could not be introduced unless the covenant was first established through Abraham.

"Sin is transgression of the law" 1 John 3:4
Cain is warned against murder in Gen 4.
Adam and Eve sinned.

Rom 5.
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned— 13 for until the Law sin was in the world,

This is why all major Christian denominations on Earth affirm that law (such as the TEN) was in place since Eden.

 

[BobRyan]

Let me ask the particpants this:

God had plenty of angels who live forever.
Why did He need to make another being who lives forever?

All created intelligences in the universe will live forever as God does, so long as they do not disconnect themselves from the source of all life.

Why does an artist paint more than one kind of painting scene?
Why do parents have more than one child?
seems like the same question

 

[BobRyan]

As God was laying the foundation of the world He already had some creations who live everlastingly.
God tells Job of the angelic sons of God prior to His creating man.

Job 38:6,7 - Onto what were its bases sunk, / Or who laid its cornerstone,
When the morning stars sang together / And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

So why did God need another creation made from the dust whom He could cause to live forever?

Why does an artist paint more than one kind of painting scene?
Why do parents have more than one child?
seems like the same question

 

[BobRyan]

Right. Paul mentions Abraham, because Paul believed that the book of Genesis reflected the actual past. The truth is, no one, not even Moses or Paul, actually knew the past.

They knew that God does not lie and God showed Moses the past

They knew what transpired in their own lives

Which included writing and reading scripture -- direct contact with God etc

There's no reason for us to assume that Moses was given a direct dictation from God on every story or person we find in the book of Genesis.

until we read the new testament and find out that this is what happened.

2 Peter 1:
21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

 

[BobRyan]

Yes, I already understand that interpretation. Unfortunately, there is the possibility that even Jesus and Paul, and Moses even earlier, were wrong about the actual past that transpired during the time of the Patriarchs.

Not is not possible that God was wrong.

2 Peter 1:
21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.


Gen 3: "Indeed - has God said?"

Is it possible that the serpent was wrong?
Is it possible that man's speculation was wrong?

But not possible that God's Word is wrong because God cannot lie.

 

[oikonomia]

BobRyan you responded:

"Why does an artist paint more than one kind of painting scene?
Why do parents have more than one child?
seems like the same question "

So you would say just VARIETY was God's purpose of (in addition to angels) God creating man ?

Thanks on a reply.

 

[oikonomia]

All created intelligences in the universe will live forever as God does, so long as they do not disconnect themselves from the source of all life.

Why does an artist paint more than one kind of painting scene?
Why do parents have more than one child?
seems like the same question

I believe that man is capable of something that none of the angels were capable of.
That includes the highest being God made, the angel Anointed Cherub.

Something God secured with man which He did not have with any angels.
I'm hoping there is an interest somewhere to know what that was.