Pages

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Summary Point # 14

The words "heaven" and "earth" are each defined in two ways in Genesis, one of which is specified by God Himself during the six-day activity as atmosphere and continental land. Therefore, the definitions assigned during those six days must modify the passage in Exodus when referencing the very same six days. This is basic hermeneutics 101 or if there is a "grade school" hermeneutics it would be centrally emphasized there. Exodus 20:11 refers only to the work of the six-day period which pertained to earth's air, land, and sea for "work" is the setting of the fourth commandment. The "uninhabited and empty" earth was being "filled" with biological life. To apply Exodus 20:11 to the stellar heavens violates the context, for it has nothing to do with the original creation of sun, moon and stars, completed in verse one, but only the "work" of the following six days. Air and land, having been defined by God Himself during those referenced six days, simply leaves us with no other option.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

I appreciated Margaret's recent letter to a young earth advocate:

"Hello again, ______________.

I think it's worthwhile summarizing what we have been discussing during the past several weeks.

In 1998, Danny Falkner said this in an article on www.icr.org/research/index/researchp_df_r01/ creation astronomy: "For the universe as a whole we must explain the light travel time in a plausible way."

Ten years later - correct me if I'm wrong, that plausible explanation is still missing. That being so, it is hard to see how the "young universe" hypothesis can be termed "scientific." It may be right, but it isn't scientific.

But does the text of Genesis 1 demand such an interpretation? I don't think it does. 

There is compelling evidence that "day one" begins at verse 3, AFTER "God created the heavens and the earth" (v. 1), and AFTER the earth is described as empty and dark (v. 2).

THEN we read, "And God said ..."

This is the introduction to every work that was done during the six days. It was God's word that accomplished the transformation of the earth into the completed, life-filled planet described in verse 28. At each step, "God said," and it was done. And the first step is recorded in v. 3.

The question remains, then: Is there anything in the TEXT that makes this interpretation impossible? If there is, then I hope someone will point it out.

If there isn't, then a literal reading of Genesis is perfectly consistent with the evidence of astronomy, and someone who believes in an old universe should not be accused of rejecting the authority of the Bible."