Peter Ruest wrote:
>Let me just add a few points in confirmation.
>
>Claeys, K. (1979), "Die Bibel bestätigt das Weltbild der
>Naturwissenschaft" (Stein am Rhein, Switzerland: Christiana) proposed
>that
>(1) a reading of Genesis which considers it as divinely inspired in all
>its details is consistent with what is known from science;
Well, not without enlightened interpretation. This, of course, is the
biggest problem. Traditional translations and Genesis commentary has
suffered from a lack of attention to extra-biblical literature.which is
available today, but was unavailable when conservative theology was cast
into cement, and in general, it has been ignored since discovery because it
deviates from tradition. Tradition is tough to crack.
>(2) the Hebrew text clearly indicates evolution as an essential one of the
>Creator's instruments;
Evolution is allowed ("Let the earth bring forth ...") in my
estimation. As to whether the Genesis text "clearly indicates" evolution -
who would have said that before Darwin? It certainly wasn't "clear" to
anyone prior to 1859.
>(3) Gen. 2:4 ff is a continuation of Gen. 1:1 - 2:4 (not a double or
>"second creation story");
Most would consider the accounts as coming from two different human
sources, although there is only one Holy Spirit. Even if the five books of
the Pentateuch came from Moses himself, he certainly relied on exterior
sources.
>(4) humans descended from animals;
No argument from me or any of my brachiating forebears.
>(5) in Gen. 1:27, the creation of the first humans in the image of God is
>in view - it does not talk of Adam and Eve;
I heartily disagree. Adam was created in God's image as an ambassador to
the indigenous populations who were unaccountable at the time, and not in
God's image. Who is the "man" in Genesis 1:27? It has been argued that
this verse applies to generic man, all Homo sapiens, and not exclusively to
Adam and his following generations. But most Bible scholars believe this
passage applies solely to Adam and Eve, and their descendants who came
under the Adamic covenant. This is the preferred view, and implied in
Genesis 5:1-3:
"This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created
man, in the likeness of God made he him; male and female created he them;
and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were
created. And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in
his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth."
Who was created "in the likeness of God"? The man, Adam, who "lived an
hundred and thirty years, and begat a son," "and called his name
Seth." Who were not created "in the likeness of God"? Those who did not
live "an hundred and thirty years," and did not "begat a son" called Seth -
the indigenous populations.
In Genesis 1:27, Adam represented God, having been "created in His own
image." This status was passed through the godly line of Seth (Gen.
5:3). Noah and his generations were God's chosen people, and thus were "in
the image" (Gen. 9:6). This status as representatives of God was conferred
upon the Israelites through the Abrahamic covenant (Gen. 17:1-8).
Apparently, those outside the nation of Israel were outside the realm of
accountability. This can be inferred from Matthew 23:15, "Woe unto you
scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell
than yourselves."
When one outside the Jewish faith was brought to the knowledge of God, he
became accountable. Because of false teaching, he was condemned. This
unique status for Israel as God's chosen people was rescinded, or at least
modified, at the cross. Christ was appointed by God as His
representative. The second Adam, Christ, was in the "image of God" (II
Cor. 4:4) just as the first Adam, and the mantle was passed to the
followers of Christ.
In I Corinthians 11:7, Paul's instructions were not to unregenerate men,
but to the redeemed of the church at Corinth. According to Paul, they were
in "the image and glory of God." They received this authority as believers
in Christ, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every
creature" (Col. 1:15). Fallen man has no claim to God's image unless he
receives it through redemption.
Psalm 8 points to the coming Messiah. David affirms that Christ has
dominion over all things. This was given to Adam at his creation (Gen.
1:28), and was intended for his generations, but it was clearly in Christ's
hands after the Fall. "Thou madest Him to have dominion over the works of
thy hands: thou hast put all things under His feet: all sheep and oxen,
yea, and the beasts of the field; the fowl of the air, and the fish of the
sea ..." (Psa. 8:6-8).
Bible expositors have gone overboard postulating the marvelous similarities
between us and our Creator.
In what manner are we, his stumbling creatures, like the Most High God? Do
we possess His holiness, or His righteousness? Can we boast of His
wisdom? Are we omnipotent? Can we transcend time? Is it in our power to
forgive sin? Can we grant immortality? No, we mere mortals presume too much.
Our claim to being in His image rests upon the righteousness of Christ, not
by any birth right, lest any man should boast. "For my thoughts are not
your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord" (Isa. 55:8).
>(6) Gen. 2:7 does not talk of creation - Adam was not the first human being;
The word "formed" has a degree of ambiguity not attached to the word
"create." But the word for create (bara) is used three times in Genesis
5:1-3 which most assuredly is Adam.
>(7) there were therefore human preadamites before Adam, from whom Adam
>descended.
My belief is that Adam had no natural parents, otherwise, why would the
Luke genealogies stop there? But it isn't an issue I think is particularly
important. Just acknowledging "preadamites" is a big step.
Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution - www.orisol.com
"The answer we should have known about 150 years ago"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 13:05:55 EST