Genesis 2
Waz up Syd?
Last week we discussed Genesis 1, chapter 1 and a six-day creation story. Earlier you emailed that you wanted to know whether the Bible conflicted with evolutionary theory and when creation actually happened. The short answers are “No” and “We don’t know.”
We talked last week about every culture having its own creation story. Evolution as taught by Darwin is just another story that is popular nowadays. If you passionately advocate it, it is its own religion in and of itself. I think it’s obvious to all that evolution within a species occurs. Short-horned cattle started with longhorns; my earliest ancestors were just over five-feet tall and cold most of the time; Yellow Labs and Bulldogs mate and produce some strange looking puppies. What you never see, either in all of the fossil record or in all of life now crawling around the planet, is one species becoming another species.
The idea that humanity evolved from monkeys defies what we observe daily. Further, it is bad science to state, as many high school biology texts do, that there is evidence suggesting intermediate stages of evolution, the so-called “missing link.” When Darwin wrote the 10th chapter of THE ORIGIN OF THE SPECIES, he lamented that trilobites, a huge class of complex bug-like animals that lived in ancient seas, seem to have no predecessors. Before them there was only blue-green algae. Even Darwin didn’t believe that animals could spring from bits of plant life, but he was enthusiastic that scientists someday would find the missing links. That was more than 150 years ago. I don’t think we should hold our breath waiting for that dim religious hope to be fulfilled.
From what I’ve read about humanity evolving from apes, all “evidence” has been deliberately fraudulent. That doesn’t mean that well-known pictorial line-up of primates…you know, the one starting with Australopithecus barely erect to Homo Sapiens tall and strong…is made up, but the implications are bogus. Not one true scientist will tell you that a primate from one part in “The Stages of Man” could cross breed with whatever is in the next stage.
Chickens, Syd, produce chickens. A Silver Spangled Hamburg can mate with a Rhode Island Red and produce cute little hybrid offspring. But no matter how much that Hamburg and a chicken hawk fancied each other, there would be no little chicks. Maybe the hawk would get fed up and decide all she really wanted was a meal!
I’d like to ask a question you didn’t ask. If evolution as preached can be shown at times to be fraudulent, at times to be bad science and at times dumb as a rock, why would anyone hold onto it?
Some don’t know any better. Others just don’t want to know. Like, I was going to spend my time in school telling teachers they were full of it, then doing the hard work of proving it, when I cared mostly about playing football. It was more like, “Yes, Sir, could you please repeat that again so that I know exactly what you want on your nonsense quiz?”
Others embrace evolution because they want to reject God and think Darwinism gives them the intellectual excuse to do so. King David wrote in Psalm 53:1 that “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’”
Finally, there are some Christians who embrace evolution between species. I don’t know why they do, but I don’t doubt their sincerity.
Wired Magazine did an article last month about a former evangelical minster Michael Dowd who has written a book called THANK GOD FOR EVOLUTION. In the book Dowd asserts that: “Evolutionary versions of each religion—Evolutionary Christianity, Evolutionary Buddhism, Evolutionary Islam, Evolutionary Judaism, Evolutionary Hinduism, and more—are emerging. Why is this happening? Because adherents of each tradition have discovered the same thing: Religious insights and perspectives freed from the narrowness of their time and place of origin are more comprehensive and grounded in measurable reality than anyone could have possibly dreamed before. Evolution does not diminish religion; it expands its meaning and value globally.”
A more traditional approach to creation and evolution, one that that Mr. Dowd probably wouldn’t like, can be found at the Answers in Genesis website.
Now on to your second question. Many struggle with the Bible’s six-day creation story. Astronomers say Earth is 16 billion years old and was created as a result of the “Big Bang.” Like evolution the Big Bang theory is a creation story that some people choose to believe. One of the great scientific discoveries of 20th century was that we live in a finite universe with a beginning (and, therefore an end). The Big Bang theory holds that before the beginning there was nothing, and then from the nothing a huge explosion formed all the material that has become the universe we live in.
From last week you may remember the Latin phrase ex nihilo, “out of nothing.” In the Biblical context it is God who invented time and matter ex nihilo. God was before the beginning. Applying the phrase to the Big Bang theory, I have to wonder how nothing becomes something without someone behind it, but the theory won’t let me have anything behind it. As my mind tries to compute that, I feel like I’m watching a Three Stooges skit and have to explain it to someone who has no sense of humor.
I can’t stress something strongly enough. I am not a scientist. I am a just an interested outsider who can sometimes understand a scientific concept and less often explain it so that other people understand. What I have general assurance of is knowing that science and scientists change.
The “Scientific Method” is an offshoot of Christianity. A reasonable God, early Christians believed, wants His people to understand Him, appreciate His ways, and, therefore the faithful must use logical means to discover the “hows” and “whats” of the universe He made. From that Christian supposition that the magical art of alchemy was erroneous gave rise to the serious science of chemistry. A great book on this subject is THE VICTORY OF REASON: HOW CHRISTIANITY LED TO FREEDOM, CAPITALISM, AND THE SUCCESS OF THE WEST by Rodney Stark. Today, most chemists don’t know or won’t acknowledge the roots of their field of endeavor. Nor should they or other scientists have to. The processes and laws of God work for all no matter what anyone believes.
Belief and prejudices do affect how scientists look at data and interpret results; however, even the most holy of scientists catch only glimpses of the workings of the universe. New technology and knowledge keep giving us new ways to look and demand that prior conclusions be tweaked or changed radically. Yesterday’s bedrock theory always risks being today’s voodoo.
Syd, I’m preparing you for something that will put you at odds with most of your peers and teachers. A happy prospect, right? Not. As you contemplate being an oddball, let me continue. The scientist’s job is not to prove the Bible. Equally, Christians will find themselves on shaky footing if they say, “Ah, ha! You see that new discovery? That proves….”
….very little except that our way of looking at the material world is constantly changing. Science studies the natural world. The Bible reveals in parts both the natural and supernatural, and focuses on God’s historical dealings with people and His teachings for living our lives today. He made the animals, let Adam name them, and gave Jonah the job of saving them. He allowed Aristotle to classify them so that several thousand years later biology students would have to remember the difference between Phylum and Family on an exam.
The Lord of the material world is not waiting around for science to catch up with Him. Someday He will reconcile what scientists have struggled to learn with what truly is. In the meantime it may be as difficult to accept the Big Bang theory as it is to accept the Biblical teaching that God created everything in six literal days.
Many Christians feel compelled to believe either the astronomers or the Bible. In doing so, they usually feel foolish when, calculating the days since creation, they have to argue that the world is 6,000 years old, a belief that stands in direct opposition to modern geological and anthropological discoveries. Even so, there are very intelligent people who support a literal six-day creation story. John F. Ashton wrote a book, IN SIX DAYS: WHY FIFTY SCIENTISTS CHOOSE TO BELIEVE IN CREATION, in which doctorate-holding scientists from around the globe give sound reasoning and evidence for being oddballs.
Other smart people take a hybrid approach. This is often called “The Gap Theory.” It teaches that in Genesis 1, verse 1, God created the heavens and the earth a long long time ago (billions or zillions or even trillions of years ago). Then there is a gap after verse 1, and verse 2 picks up, “The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep.” From verse 2 we can start counting up to the present time, roughly 6000 years.
The 17th-century English poet John Milton wrote Paradise Lost, an epic poem in which Milton imagines the gap by vividly interpreting Ezekiel 28. The Earth is a desolated battlefield. Here is where 1/3 of all the angels fell when Satin rebelled against God and wreaked havoc on this planet. God in his mercy to all creation rebuilds the Earth and creates man.
Another possibility is that the astronomers and six-day creationists are both right. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity as applied to cosmology could bridge the divide. It comes down to an issue of, “Whose clock are you talking about?” Before and after the Spirit of the Lord hovered over the surface of the deep, the only clock around was God. He is eternal, beyond time, and Adam wasn’t around yet to need a watch, to know seasons, or whether Eve is late or early for a stroll around the garden. Some scholars interpret the ancient Hebrew for days to be a relative term for periods of time. It is very possible, then, that 16 billion years could be represented by six days.
That is a lot to think about, but you did ask the questions! Now can move on to this week’s topic: Genesis 1, chapter 2.
Those hostile to the accuracy of the Bible often refer to this as the second creation story and assert that it differs from the one told in Genesis 1, chapter 1. They would have us believe that Moses made a mistake by forgetting to cut out one of these two stories when he was proofreading Genesis.
In chapter 1, we saw creation from God’s perspective, from His eyes. Starting in verse 4, we’re doubling back, dropping down and seeing the story from humanity’s perspective. This is a literary technique known as “recapitulation.” Chapter 1 looks at creation with the perspective of a telescope. Chapter 2 recapitulates this and looks at creation with a microscope, focusing on what humanity is most interested in, Day 6, where you and I, before we were ever born, can see our first grandparents.
We’ll see recapitulation elsewhere in the Bible, as well. For example, the New Testament starts with The Gospel of Matthew, then recapitulates three times. Mark, Luke, and John revisit the same story from different points of view.
You indicated that you understood verses 5 to 9, so I won’t elaborate except to say that it is important to note that in verse 9, Adam had access to the tree of life but not the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
You wanted to know more about where Eden was in verses 10 to 12. Based upon the story told, it could have been somewhere in modern day Iraq. Others have suggested it lays somewhere deep in the ancient Caucasus. Some have even suggested that it exists in another dimension (scientists think there are at least 10 of them). The bottom line is no one knows for sure where it was.
What is certain, however, is that in verse 15, God told Adam to work and care for the garden, not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Why did God say this? Is He trying to keep knowledge away from Adam? Some suggest that He wanted Adam and Eve to remain pure and undefiled, looking only at the good that is God. I think it had more to do with Adam only appearing like an adult, but in fact, he was a new creation (like a new child). He wasn’t mature enough to differentiate between good and evil. God had the intention of sharing the knowledge, but only when Adam was ready. Sooner would be like giving a machete to a five-year-old. No good thing could come out of it! But when the five-year old became fifteen, that would be a different story.
In verse 18, God is standing in the corner of garden watching Adam, like a human father watching his child play. And God thought to Himself that it is not good for Adam to be alone, so he decided to make a “helper” for Adam. Many people have the notion that God is a sexist and assume that the word helper is used pejoratively, meaning a slave or a servant. This is the farthest thing from what God wanted! The Hebrew word for helper is `ezer, and it literally means “help mate,” an equal partner.
God in verse 19 parades all the animals He created past Adam to see what name Adam wants to give them. This isn’t a task that an aloof or distant God gives one of his subjects to do. It is an act of a loving and intimate father wanting to share the experience with the child he loves. You can almost visualize God pleasure when Adam decides on a name to give each animal. The imagery is analogous to an earthly father taking his child to Sea World for the first time and seeing the excitement and amazement on the boy’s face.
In verse 21, God puts Adam in a deep sleep and takes a rib (or more accurately takes Adam’s side) and creates Eve. God then brings her to Adam. Adam didn’t build her, but God needed a major part of Adam (perhaps DNA) with which God would make her. In verse 23 we have the first instance of poetry in the Bible. Adam says that Eve shall be called “women.” He’s making a joke since the Hebrew words for woman (ishshah) and man (ish) sound alike, Ishshah from ish.
Each act of God leads to completion and perfection with the jewel in the crown of creation being humanity. The final act of creation, however, is not man but women. Eve was the Crown Jewel of God’s creation.
Syd, in the last verse in Genesis 2, we see that God created man and women fundamentally equal, in love with each other and with Him, living innocently in paradise. That will change! Every good story has a conflict, and next week in chapter 3 conflict enters the Bible. And that’s just the start of conflict that dogs every generation since.
Have a great week! Please give my warm regards to your folks. Tell them my tripping and twisting my ankle didn’t hurt my foot so much as my dignity.
UGM thinks outside the box too. One of their innovations is the Meal Tcket. Meal Tickets are a great alternative to handing out cash to those who are asking for money. Each ticket is good for one meal at the Mission’s Men’s Shelter located in Pioneer Square. Those coming to the shelter for a meal will be greeted by friendly staff and a nutritious meal. (The shelter serves 3 meals a day, 365 days a year.)
