The Purpose of Genesis

Thanks to my friend Puritan Lad, who let me know of the writings of John H. Walton, professor of Hebrew at Wheaton College, who offers an expanded framework perspective on Genesis. But he goes a step or two further than the traditional framework view, and explores the very purpose of Genesis.

While I don’t agree with all that he says, and find his reliance on other ancient near-East writings a little disturbing, it does offer some valuable insights that confused and helped me at the same time. Walton does not question ex-nihilo creation, but also asserts that the Genesis creation account is not it.

If we accept the exegetical and hermeneutical principle that we need to read the Biblical text in the same context and with the same intent as the original audience, then it gets pretty hard to differ from Dr. Walton on technical grounds. And maybe he is right, I am blinded by my modern presuppositions which I want to read into the text. I guess we are all a little guilty of that, especially when we are so keen to refute or confirm modern scientific hypothesis.

According to Dr. Walton then, Genesis is nit an ex-nihilo creation account, but the account whereby God brought order to a chaotic universe. He relies on both a comprehensive exegesis of ‘bara’ (create) and a cultural comparison to near-East contemporary religions. He concludes that the purpose of Genesis was to establish the Hebrew God as the lone personal God that organized the universe into its current form, and sustains it moment by moment.

Dr. Walton is also pretty blunt about the fact that despite many efforts to read many modern scientific principles (earth as sphere, for example) into the Scriptures, it is unjustified to do so. There simply is no correlation between Biblical accounts and modern science, nor should we try to find any, since the purpose of Scripture was to establish the covenant of the Hebrew God with His people as their God and Ruler.

In his commentary on Genesis, Dr. Walton offers his interpretation of the creation account, and concludes that it is about function, not the establishment of matter. He uses several analogies to demonstrate his point, saying that if we “create” a painting, it is about what ends up on the canvas, and not how the canvas, brushes and paint were made in the first place. In the same way Genesis is about how God used existing matter to create a functional universe, although Walton proposes that “design” might be a better translation of ‘bara’ in this context.

Personally, I still find it a bit challenging to accept all of the premises offered by Dr. Walton, and therefore also struggle to unreservedly agree with all of his conclusions. But it does offer an interesting alternative to the normal YEC/Old Earth/Evo/Design arguments, and I will therefore continue to explore it. Because if he is right, then all of those arguments are pretty much non-applicable to Genesis, and we will have to find other ways to reconcile Scripture with our modern scientific understanding.

Misunderstanding the Laws of God

The universe works in a certain way, scientifically speaking. We identify the consistent behavior of the natural order as the laws of nature. Those laws, in general, are irreducible. We are able to explain the observations that has lead us to formulate those laws, and are also pretty sure that those laws determine how objects behave. It is consistent, reliable and predictable. We can predict consequences.

There is no naturalistic, non-circular reason for that being so. It is so because that is the way God created the universe, and that is what He intended. The regularity and predictability of the universe is mentioned quite often in the Bible, and in the context of creation. We confirm this in Psalms:

Psa 104:19  He made the moon to mark the seasons; the sun knows its time for setting.

So what misunderstanding am I talking about? I recently came to understand that this consistency and regularity of God’s laws do not only apply to the natural laws that He created, but also the moral laws. Human actions have consequences. When God says that He does not want us to act in a certain way, He means that there will be consequences if we don’t. The Bible is equally as full of examples of that as it is of the regularity of the natural laws.

One can name the OT kings of Israel, and see how Saul, Solomon and David, all favored by God, and anointed as kings, yet who strayed from the direct instructions that God gave them, leading to the eventual destruction of the nation of Israel. They did not understand, or were just too stubborn, to realize that when one breaks the moral laws of God, there is certain to be consequences.

Many people are equally as naive or stubborn today, preferring to believe that living in unbroken sin will have no consequences. Yes, as Christians we are forgiven, and we will not face the one big consequence, eternal damnation. But even for Christians there are consequences when they disobey God. One only has to look at the divorce rate, or how many people are financially bankrupt because of greed to see how people continue to be naive. God’s moral law has a certain and specific consequence, just like God’s natural law dictates the movement of objects in the universe.

It is the way that God intended it to be, that there are certain causes and effects, also in His moral law. It is fixed and certain. One may object and say that many people get away with disregarding the effects of God’s moral laws. I don’t think so. Everyone will experience the heartbreak and torture that goes with the consequences of the moral law. No-one is perpetually happy, disease-free or euphoric.

So think about the way that you go through life. Even if you are a faithful and serious Christian, do you understand the effects of God’s laws? How do you walk through life, as someone who understands that, or as someone who taunts the very creation?

I would suggest one lives a much happier life if one understands the immutability of all of God’s laws.

Redeeming Science – Vern Poythress

I don’t recommend many books. But for someone who wants to read a solid Biblical treatment of the Christians role in science, as well as a fair (if a little bit short) treatment of the YEC/OEC debate, I highly recommend this book. Dr. Poythress is well-known theologian who teaches New Testament at the WTS, and holds multiple degrees.

He is not scared to explore the strengths and weaknesses in all positions, and in classical reformed style, always seeks to put God first, before any man-centered reasoning and conclusions. In the process he will offend many, no doubt, but even if you disagree with him, he provides good food for thought. His chapter on how YEC necessarily has to lead to some form of mature creation is insightful and offers some perspectives I have not yet seen anywhere else.

He also manages to convince me that the analogical day view of creation is the most logical and most God-honoring position to hold. One of the strengths of reformed scholarship throughout history has been that calm, rational exegesis and reasoning will help us towards the truth, and this book certainly displays that. The book is a nice balance between Biblical scholarship and modern scientific concepts throughout, with great care to emphasize human shortcomings in knowing the mysteries of God.

In some places I wish that he elaborated a bit more on some of his thoughts. But I guess with the book already at around 370 pages, it would have taken a book on each of the chapters to fully explore all that can be said.

I recommend that anyone interested in this subject read Dr. Poythress’s book. It has certainly blessed me, and cleared up some lingering questions I had. It also raised some new ones, for which I am equally grateful.

Redeeming Science: A God-Centered Approach

God’s Truth

Is it possible to know God’s truth? And what is God’s truth? The reason I ask is that we so often see people claim that this verse or that verse is misinterpreted, and that it means something completely different. But what if both people are respected brothers or sisters in Christ? Which one of them speaks the truth?

I don’t know the answer to that, I cannot judge how others purport to reach their conclusions. But what we do know is what the Bible reveals about God’s truth. Truth is that which has it’s origin in God, and God only. As His creatures, we can know this truth when God gives it to us, and according to David in many of the Psalms, we should seek it, ask for it and be instructed by it. Jesus, in John 17, tells us that the process of sanctification is part of receiving truth, and that God’s Word is the truth.

Truth then is not something that can be acquired from outside of God, it comes from God and God only, and it is outside of us, and we need to get it from Him.

Sanctification is the process, when after justification, the Spirit works in us to make us more holy. It is the result of our justification and our surrender to the glory and grace of God. In sanctification necessarily follows humbleness, meekness and righteousness, and a thirst for knowledge of God. It is when we are changed so that we may receive teaching and guidance from God. In the Ordo Salutis, the chain of salvation, sanctification is the last part, partially completed on earth but not quite perfected due to the remnants of original sin. It is perfected when we are united with God in the life hereafter.

Getting to know the truth from God is dependent on our spiritual state, and our willingness to let go of preconceived notions and assumptions, and be in a state of learning and openness to being instructed by the Spirit, as we read in John 15.

Practically, how do we do this? All of the above is very helpful, but doesn’t resolve our scenario. Personally, I think that God’s truth cannot be hidden, and one knows when you have reached a true conclusion. There are many things that I personally struggle with, and I’m sure that is true for all of us. So I want to suggest the following simple process which may help us reach true conclusions:

1. Read what the Bible has to say. Read the complete section, the complete chapter and the complete book, if necessary.  Also do this both topically (by subject) and systematically (by broader doctrine). This helps us get the context of God’s Word, and allows the Word to clarify and interpret itself.

2. Pray for clarification and illumination. Be humble and open in your prayer.

3. Meditate (think deeply) about the specific topic and Scripture being discussed. Allow your mind to work through and consider all possible conclusions within the context of the piece.

4. Read it again and find other passages like it. Read and try to understand those. Keep praying and meditating about it.

5. Consider the cultural and historical background of the specific Scripture, and try to understand how people throughout history would have understood it. At this point, if need be, consult some works by respected scholars. Try to be broad in this research if you are going this way, because we tend to consult only those we agree with beforehand.

6. Repeat this process as often as needed. On some issues I have been doing it for years. One has to be patient.

The wisdom of God’s truth is a great blessing, but not always easy to come by. Sometimes it is complex and confusing, and while others may be convinced that they have reached a point of complete understanding, it may not be the case for us. There may still be little niggles of confusion and doubt, and while we may be told that we simply have to accept it by faith, it does nothing to settle it for us. Likewise, we must be patient and understanding with others when we feel that we have been blessed with the truth.

God’s truth cannot be bought or conjured up or asserted or penned like a nursery school rhyme. It can only come as part of being made holy, and one cannot be made holy in a state of indulgence, self-importance or arrogance, where the own self is more important than God Himself. Only by being utterly humble and open before Him can we reach true insight, and can we move forward on the journey to know more about His truth, and become holy through being blessed by His knowledge.

I’m still a heretic

In the latest edition of Christianity Today, there is a review of a book that criticizes YEC. I’ve also read a couple of follow-up discussions at several websites, and it seems that since I don’t believe in a “young earth”, I am not a Bible believer, I am a scoffer, I am a misguided fool, I am a blasphemer, I am confused, I must deny whole portions of God’s Word and I hold to a twisted ideology. Oh, and don’t foget a charlatan and apostate, who is intellectually dishonest, and NOT a Christian.

I’m so glad we have all of that settled, including my one-way ticket to hell. Actually, it’s not the first time this has happened to me, that so-called brothers in Christ attacked my faith like that. Whenever I enter those discussions I make a bet with myself on how long it will be before the ad-homs start flying, and I usually lose because I overestimate the goodwill and fellowship of those who call themselves Christian.

We criticize atheistic evolutionists for their unwillingness to enter dialogue, for their hand-waving dismissal of anything that contradicts their beliefs, for closing the scientific apparatus to anything that doesn’t hold to their assumptions. And the criticism is valid. But why do some Christians insist on doing the same when it comes to the YEC position? I perceive the atheist attitude as being a sign of weakness, that such aggression and name-calling are the only techniques left after the house of cards come tumbling down. Must we now conclude that the YEC position is equally as fragile? Surely not.

Calling me names does nothing to my faith, and does nothing to God’s truth either. But it does affect my impression of those whom I enter into discussions with. I can call names as much as the next guy, but that is a waste of time, and an insult to God. In an area as sensitive as this, which seems to cause much division among Christians, it is especially an affront to our Savior that we cannot show goodwill and honesty towards brothers. Frankly, it just causes many to not want to have discussions like that any more. I now have to hide my beliefs because I know where it will lead….not to fruitful discussion but to the accusations above.

So I would urge that we show some tolerance and understanding amongst ourselves before launching into attacking others in such a brutal and insulting fashion. This manner of debate seems to have become a staple of modern America, answer your detractors by calling them the worst names you can think of and you will have won the debate. Facts, research and careful analysis seem to have mostly gone by the wayside as a result of this culture of attack. It’s easier to rattle off a two-line putdown than to conduct some research to see if the other person actually has a valid point or not, and to prepare a careful and thoughtful response. Pulling down a link is still easier should the conversation continue past the first exchanges.

We are so fortunate that we stand on the shoulders of giants that went before us, and that some serious scholars take the time today to try and gain insight into the mysteries of our Lord. That type of wisdom can never come from being proud and insulting mockers of brothers, but can come only from being humble before God.

So next time, before you mock and insult a brother or sister in Christ, think what effect you may have on that person. I can promise you, it is not a positive effect. Pray and be still before God before you speak dismissively and angrily. You may just honor God more that way.

Day of Prayer

One may argue about the value of the National Day of Prayer, but it does offer us the opportunity to point out what Jesus said about prayer:

Mat 6:5  “And when you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites. For they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, that they may be seen by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward.
Mat 6:6  But when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
Mat 6:7  “And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words.
Mat 6:8  Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.
Mat 6:9  Pray then like this: “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name.
Mat 6:10  Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
Mat 6:11  Give us this day our daily bread,
Mat 6:12  and forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
Mat 6:13  And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

Today, if you do not know our Almighty Lord and Savior, use this opportunity to come before Him in prayer and repent of your sins before Him. If you consider yourself a Christian, reflect on what it is you really have in our Lord, and what you ask for.

Pray always, and pray with the wisdom that can only be gained from being on your knees.

So what is Christianity really?

I see this misunderstanding a lot. In a recent rant from an atheist, directed at a friend, he claimed that the basic message of Christianity, after you ignore the “witchcraft” and “superstition”, are the moral lessons. Treat others as you want to be treated, “go forth and make life better for all you encounter”, and “leave the planet better than we found it”.

Admirable traits, for sure, but as with many, this person is confusing the result with the cause, while cherry-picking the sections he likes, applying an arbitrary standard. Not only is he making claims not sustainable by atheism, he is also demonstrating his profound ignorance of what Christianity really is. We have discussed the shortcomings of atheist morality many times here and elsewhere, so I won’t dwell on that.

So what should we tell this person to demonstrate what Christianity really is? In short, the Christian belief is described in short as creation, fall, redemption and salvation.

Creation is the ex-nihilo coming into existence of all that can be described as having a cause. This is where Christian belief starts, with the belief that an almighty eternal God made our physical and spiritual universe.

Fall refers to the entry of evil into the world. It has had a profound effect on the world we live in and experience, an effect none of us can escape. We see it every day in evil acts, disease, disasters and tragedies.

Redemption refers to that grace our Creator has freely given us. While God expects us to behave in a certain way, He also knows that it is impossible for humans in their weakened sinful state to behave in that fashion. Transgression of the law requires punishment in any culture, and because God’s expectations is the universal moral law, He also punishes transgressions. But because He loves His creation more than we can describe, He also provides for us not to have to face that punishment, but rather sent a substitute to be punished on our behalf, Jesus Christ. We are redeemed before God by resting in the adequacy of Christ’s death to cover our transgressions.

Salvation is reached when our lives are changed by the belief in Christ’s redemptive act, and when that starts to change our lives so that we may act like our atheist friend thinks all people should.

Of course all humans may act in a moral manner from time to time, due to the fact that we share a common creation and common grace, that grace which transfers to all mankind to protect against anarchy and annihilation. But that behavior is still a result of grace, and not of selfish moral compunction.

Can one then be selective when claiming Christians should behave in a certain manner? Of course not, moral behavior in the Christian context is woven tightly into the Christian ground motive described above, and without it there is no compelling unselfish reason to behave in a certain fashion.

I would advise our non-believing friend to gain a deeper understanding of what Christianity is before he makes flippant statements again.

Crushed for us

We celebrate Easter this weekend, the occasion on which God’s manifestation in human form was dramatically and necessarily concluded with the death of Jesus. This was foretold long before Jesus even came to earth, yet the purpose was clear….He was to take the punishment for our sin, because God is gracious and loving.

Isa 53:1  Who has believed what they heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
Isa 53:2  For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.
Isa 53:3  He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
Isa 53:4  Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5  But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed.
Isa 53:6  All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Isa 53:7  He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth; like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent, so he opened not his mouth.
Isa 53:8  By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people?
Isa 53:9  And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth.
Isa 53:10  Yet it was the will of the LORD to crush him; he has put him to grief; when his soul makes an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring; he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
Isa 53:11  Out of the anguish of his soul he shall see and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous, and he shall bear their iniquities.
Isa 53:12  Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.

We are thankful for and humbled by the love of our Lord, which we can never deserve or earn, just prayerfully consider and accept. There is no greater love.

The D-word

The storm rages (or fizzles) on. Intelligent design is creationism in disguise, theistic evolution is true but one cannot prove it by detecting design, and naturalistic evolution is still the ad-populum argument for atheism.

But what is design (the D-word) really? And can we argue that it is creationism in disguise?

There are of course a few definitions for design, but it seems to be appropriate in these discussions to define it as someone or something, with a predetermined outcome in mind, put forth some specifications for what that outcome should look like. As an engineer myself, I used to do that all the time…calculate and draw up designs from a statement of work, or, to use a military term, a required operational capability. But there had to be a starting point, some idea of where we wanted to go before we could add the numbers etc. Building and testing what was designed was a whole other mess.

I’m not always impressed with ID (Intelligent Design) being labeled as “creationism”. As a creationist, I don’t think it goes far enough. It kind of hinges on the edge of being useful. Because the one thing that evolution proposes that ID doesn’t, is a mechanism by which what we see (and what we are) has come to be. I can design things all day long, but without an artisan to put those designs into a working physical form, those designs are completely useless. One can see why there are supporters of theistic evolution, however flawed that compromise might be.

I guess one could argue that detecting design is a useful exercise, and may disprove one of the assumptions of the naturalistic movement, that of ontological naturalism…or does it? In efforts to keep ID immune from accusations that it is nothing but thinly disguised creationism, it has been proposed that a designer might be aliens. Which of course begs the question, where did the aliens come from? And in the absence of evidence, it is a similar commitment to that of a creator God. In other words, we are no closer to solving the ontological dilemma.I will add that the same holds true for the naturalistic atheist side, a belief in a multiverse is equally without proof.

In the end, we know very little. Do I think that the universe was designed? Sure. Do I think we can detect that it was designed? Sure. Do I think that we are all the result of a mindless random process? Most assuredly not. Do I have an alternative process by which we came to be? Sure, but it sure as heck isn’t scientific by current standards.

See, the problem is that something had to kick it all off. Something had to come from nothing, somewhere in the past, regardless of what position you hold. Time cannot be eternal past. Is the argument then how things developed from the first coming into existence until now, billions of years later, or is it the first appearance of existence, or both? We have options…

1. Something came from nothing. No go, because, nothing, well, means nothing.
2. Something came from something. What is/was the second something?
3. God created the universe from nothing. And here we have to stop and ask about mechanism. Because although one can design things with an outcome in mind, without hands and materials it is meaningless.

And this is where I feel that the current discussion ends. We simply don’t know. Design theory sure as heck ain’t gonna tell us. Non theistic evolution grinds to a halt pre-life. We simply cannot comprehend how something can come from nothing. Our whole life revolves around cause and effect.

As a creationist I of course believe that God created it all. He said it and it came to pass, instantly. God’s perspective of course is a lot different. He did not design with an outcome in mind. The outcome was there at the same time as the design, as God eternal is outside of our time dimension. God did not first put out a statement of work, and then calculated a drew the whole universe out, and then called up His Heavenly artisans to chop, hammer and fit together the whole universe. No, it was all complete in both design and existence at the same time. Of course, being subject to the temporal world, we perceive it a lot differently.

So while I believe that ID is useful to expose the limitations of non-theistic evolutionary mechanisms, it does not go far enough in trying to determine how design became existence.

What is a Christian marriage?

In modern Western society, marriage has become nothing more than a social and cultural construct. It is an institution regulated by the government, to be made and dissolved at the drop of a bureaucrat’s signature. Those who want to attack marriage often use this image of marriage to try and score cheap points.

The divorce rates in the USA are high, so these attackers point to the fact that since the majority of Americans call themselves Christian, they must by hypocrites because although they divorce in high numbers, the Christian community still wants to shake a fist at homosexuals or pedophiles. Whether the analogy is valid or not is not the subject of this post. But I do agree that the holy institution of marriage is cheapened and downright destroyed by the ease of getting a divorce, which leads to the high numbers of divorce.

One can also hardly recognize the sanctity of marriage, or even properly proper relationships in our modern culture. There is hardly a show on television which doesn’t portray loose sexual relationships as the norm. And there is no sign in modern literature or the pop press of what can be considered Christian marriage. The liberal assault to portray marriage as a civil agreement, and not a Godly institution, continues unabated in Washington and across the country.

If we are to argue that marriage in its Christian form is not the norm any more, then what, we ask, should such a Christian marriage look like? because if we are to recover marriage as a holy institution, then surely we need to be able to describe what it is we want to achieve.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is consistent with the created order. It was the intent of God to have a man and woman as partners to be together and procreate. If not, He would have created two men (or two women) and be done with it.

Also, when two people get married, they enter into a 3-way partnership: husband, wife and God. God is the One that puts a husband and his wife together. God joins two people together so that they are no longer separate, but are as one, even in flesh. So often I see marriages falter or end because that tripartite alliance is not there.

Mat 19:4  He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female,
Mat 19:5  and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh’?
Mat 19:6  So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.”

To make a Godly marriage one needs faith, love and dedication to each other and God. In particular one needs love, and God gives us a description of love that fits perfectly with how a husband and wife should love each other:

1Co 13:4  Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant
1Co 13:5  or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful;
1Co 13:6  it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.
1Co 13:7  Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
1Co 13:8  Love never ends….

If a husband and wife love each other like that, then there can never be any reason to want to divorce. Unconditional love is what God loves us with, and is the example He sets for us. It would serve us well to emulate that in marriage. As God describes His people as His bride, the analogy fits well.

Too often people trust themselves and are disappointed, and that snowballs to end up in divorce. Married couples must have faith. In fact they must share faith. I’ve not heard of many divorces where husbands and wives read and pray together. A true shared faith takes the focus away from selfish interests and focuses on what is most important… the One who truly makes matches in heaven.

So while there are many divorces, I would argue that it is because marriage has been cheapened to a license from the courthouse, instead of being a sacred agreement before and with God. And those Godly marriages are the true Christian marriages that will last until death and beyond.