| Author | Message | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3792 Registered: 10-2004  |
Gabriel, What I meant by undermining verbal inspiration was his implication that the Holy Spirit did not inspire each of the three different renderings--the actual words of the text--but that it was only from their human memory. Who are we to say that the Holy Spirit did not want to emphasize specific things in the different Gospels? Jeremy | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 625 Registered: 7-2005 |
Jeremy
I agree, I don't exclude this possibility. That was not my point. The point was that in the light of today's positive evaluation of the predatory acts, as good things, it's a mistake to exclude them from a pre-fall world because of our perceptions of them as bad. If they are good today, you can't rule the possibility that they had been as good yesterday, or before the fall. What I said doesn't prove that the situation was so before the fall (predators hunting at night), but eliminates the objection saying that such things cannot exist in a pre-fall world because they are bad. If they are good today, they could be as good yesterday. Don't misunderstand my point, I didn't say that the things were so before the fall, but that they could be so. Gabriel | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 626 Registered: 7-2005 |
Jeremy
I may be wrong, but I didn't get this impression from what he said. What I understand to be his meaning is that the Holy Spirit's inspiration doesn't imply a direct communication of Jesus' words, for example, like in an audible dictation. Instead the Holy Spirit inspired their words in the sense that He made sure that what they wrote based on their memory is accurate and faithful to the historical truth. They were not left by themselves, alone, in trying to remember what Jesus said, but the Holy Spirit used their memory to transmit accurately the truth Gabriel | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3793 Registered: 10-2004 |
Gabriel,
What it says is that God gives them prey to eat. This means that in a sinful world, it is not a "bad" thing. Even without that Psalm, I think most Christians would admit that God wants animals to hunt and find food and that He provides food for them. But that doesn't mean that animal death is an inherently "good" thing. So I guess I just don't see how that Psalm affects the debate one way or the other. Jeremy | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3794 Registered: 10-2004 |
Gabriel,
If that is what he is saying then I don't see how that is any different than the historic understanding of inerrancy and verbal inspiration. By the way, I would also like to point out that when we come across two (or more) differing quotations of Jesus in the Gospels, there may be other possibilities as well. For example, one may be a partial quotation and one is a complete (or more complete) quotation (we see this with the quotations of Pilate's sign on the Cross, for example). Another possibility is that He may have uttered both statements (either on the same occasion or on different occasions), or that the quotation is a combination of parts of multiple statements. Jeremy (Message edited by Jeremy on September 05, 2011) | ||
| Jackob Registered user Username: Jackob Post Number: 627 Registered: 7-2005 |
Jeremy
Maybe the animal death is not an inherently "good" thing, I agree with you, my point was that, in the light of above declaration, you can't rule out the option that it is an inherently "good" thing. It remains a possibility as the opposite position remains a possibility. It isn't a proof inclining decisively the balance into a direction or another, it's only a proof that things are not settled as they seem to be.
Indeed a lot of apparent contradictions may be resolved in this way. Not all of these situations can be resolved through such procedures. Take an Old Testament account, for example. You have the conquest of Canaan described in Joshua, with Othniel conquering Debir in chapter 15, long before Joshua's death. In Judges, the first chapter, it starts with Joshua's death and after his death, we have the story of Othniel conquering Debir. Or in Joshua 21:43-45 we have a statement saying that God gave to Israel rest and no one of his enemies was able to stand against him:
But when you go to Judges 1, there are enemies that were able to withstood them:
The situation goes worse, Judges 1:27-36 presents a long list of places still under the possession of non-Israelites. This is why I posted that link which offers for reading two chapters on OT history. It's a work in progress, there is still work to do in order to understand better Bible's historicity and how these accounts harmonizes with each other. Gabriel | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 240 Registered: 9-2006 |
So Psalms 140 is not conclusive on the question as to what kind of world existed before the fall of man. However, the text has the cycles of the sun and moon, day and night, and predators hunting their prey, all as parts of a divinely appointed natural order. There are Christians who have said, and especially SDA's, that the law of tooth and claw is of Satanic origin, which this text refutes. It's interesting that many evangelical Christian authors have offered the possibility of predation before the Fall, such as Tim Keller, Wayne Grudem, and CS Lewis. Hugh Ross's model is not without problems, but he has helped start a good conversation in the church, and I respect him for that. I am hoping that someone will respond to the idea that a suffering universe of "futility" was made from the beginning for Christ to die in and glorify Himself through redemption. A redeemed universe was always God's Plan A, not the sterile, pain-free "utopian" universe, as taught by EGW and most YEC's. Revelation 13:8 is a good jumping off point, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Anyone? Oh well, not everyone gets excited about the same things. Martin C | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12926 Registered: 12-2003  |
Martin, I actually find that theory to be quite provocative. I remember that even as a young Adventist I used to wonder how the original creation before the fall was as wonderful as I was told...using the SDA paradigm, I was told that Adam and Even lived in a perfect world with perfect happiness and a perfect relationship with God. I was even taught that because we sinned, we'll be somehow closer to God because of our sin and His intervention in the long run. And I wondered how God could have had a "perfect" plan A that would somehow be improved upon by His "plan B" which came about as a consequence of our clumsy disobedience. Now, knowing that God never had a Plan B, that His Plan is eternal and has never changed, that Jesus is the Lamb slain from all eternity, the idea of decay and even death in the universe preceding Adam and Eve's sin makes even more sense. There is so much we simply are not told. I have often thought about the implications of Jesus' sacrifice being eternal yet "worked out" inside of time...and that thought has both created questions in my mind but also hinted at more clarity. Understanding that Jesus' blood was an eternal reality, not a time-bound phenomenon upon which eternity waited, has made His not punishing the sins committed beforehand (Romans 3:24-27) make a lot more sense. If Jesus' blood is eternal, existing in fact before time, then it makes some sense to me that God could have created a creation (more than a world or solar system or even a single universe) that contained destruction and death...yet Eden could have been flawless. But speaking of flawless, Adam and Eve were flawless, but they were different from our promised future. They were not redeemed. They did not know Jesus as their suffering Savior—until they sinned. No, sin is never from God, but God redeems the effects of sin and transforms them into something better. Being saved and forgiven and transferred from the domain of darkness into the kingdom of Jesus creates new life and new depth that unfallen Adam and Eve did not yet know. So, Martin, I don't fully grasp all the implications of this theory, but it certainly opens up a very interesting train of thought. Colleen | ||
| Christo Registered user Username: Christo Post Number: 274 Registered: 2-2008 |
Adam and Eve may have been flawless at one time, but did not walk by Faith, and so the tree of knowledge of good and evil had some appeal. Faith in God has always been the standard of relationship. Job knew that his redeemer liveth, Abraham was in the Faith hall of fame, but I never heard mention of Adam and Eve being of Faith. With regards to earlier comments about a universal seducing spirit that works elsewhere other than SDA, I think of " beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, a little leaven leavens the whole lump." Leaven is whatever is not of Faith, so when churches other than SDA preach any kind of do's and don'ts to be right with God other than Christ Crucified, it is leaven. This leaven makes them ripe for SDA pickings. I used to think that leaven represented sin, but I've come to realize that it means self justification. So in the days of unleavened bread, though the Hebrews did not know it, it was really calling them to be completely redeemed by God, and to clear out any ideas of achieving ones own solution, Let God be your solution. Go seven days a week without self justification, go seven days a week justified by God. As a side note speculation, I do believe they could have made it to the promised land in seven days after departing Egypt. Its only some 200 miles, and with Gods wind in your sails, why not? They did not have up their sails of faith, and subsequently just drifted for 40 years. Raise up your sails of faith, and let God fill them with his direction. Chris | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12927 Registered: 12-2003 |
Chris, very thoughtful post. Thank you. Colleen | ||
| Martinc Registered user Username: Martinc Post Number: 241 Registered: 9-2006 |
Chris, interesting thoughts about faith and our first parents. And you are dead on about the "leaven of the Pharisees" leavening churches who do not make the gospel their center. As for Israel being able to get to Canaan if they had more faith, I would say that it was in the desert afflictions that their faith was created by God. Their wandering was a failure, but it was also plan A, not Plan B. Likewise, we shouldn't feel punished or lost because we are having a desert experience. Affliction is Plan A. Colleen, great post showing why our brand of fundamentalism answered many difficult questions by raising even harder ones, then discouraged serious thought about them. This is very fertile ground for agnosticism and is part of the burden I feel for these issues. Most churches don't have good responses to many questions of science and faith, it is often "YEC or die." There's a lot of propaganda to herd them in or out. In the culture war, you have to choose the herd you'll run with. So many people will find their answers elsewhere and not return. Like you, I don't really know if God put death into His creation before the Fall. If He did, I can see why. More than ever, however, I am convinced that making suffering and redemption from sin God's eternal decree, His Plan A, makes Christ and Him crucified supreme. He must be at the beginning, the center, and the end of everything. Martin C | ||
| Deb Registered user Username: Deb Post Number: 9 Registered: 3-2008 |
We need to ask God to remove our own presuppositions about creation that we have learned from the "wisdom" of man. Don't look to men like William Dembski, Hugh Ross, or Francis Collins for wisdom. Instead take God at His Word for how He created the universe and all that is in it. We don't have all the details but He has given us enough that we don't have to be gullible and easy targets for false teaching. Just because some Adventists may also teach YEC doesn't mean we should reject the idea that the earth is young. Remember a counterfeit like the SDA church will always have some truth in it. There are many godly & well educated scientists such as Dr. Kurt Wise, author of "Faith, Form, and Time: What the Bible Teaches and Science Confirms about Creation and the Age of the Universe", who come from a firm position of belief in God's Word and are young earth creationists. We who believe in YEC are not crazy, plagiarizing, uneducated, divisive, fundamentalists who are possessed with the same spirit as EGW was, contrary to what has been suggested in previous posts. We have simply looked at the evidence and ideas about origins through the lens of God's Word and using good observational science have come to believe what God has said rather than man's wisdom. One important point I would like to make: If death (even of animals) was part of God's original creation then that makes Him a monster and a liar! I would toss my Bible and say forget Christianity if I thought that were true. But God said His creation was "very good" from the start and I believe Him. He also says that death is our enemy and will not be in the New Earth. How could death be an enemy and come as a result of sin but yet be present before the Fall at a time when God called everything very good??? (I also wanted to note that Psalm 104 which was referenced in a previous post was written after the Fall and so naturally talks about animals as predators.) So in conclusion, I am going to rely on God's wisdom not my own. | ||
| Animal Registered user Username: Animal Post Number: 981 Registered: 7-2008  |
Deb...Awesome post !! The Word says it...I believe the Word...that settles it for me. You either believe God or you dont. I give no credence to the "experts" quoted on this thread. If one cannot trust the record of scripture, then I have no reason to trust God or worship Him. I trust the Lord and His Word. ...Animal | ||
| Pnoga Registered user Username: Pnoga Post Number: 480 Registered: 1-2007  |
"One important point I would like to make: If death (even of animals) was part of God's original creation then that makes Him a monster and a liar! I would toss my Bible and say forget Christianity if I thought that were true." Not to get everyone stoked up, but to have death occur to all including animals because one man sinned, then that is pretty monstrous as well. Did God Create all? Did He create Satan knowing He would sin and deceive Mankind into sinning? Did God not create man knowing he would sin and even put the tree there to temp him? What is sin? God had to define Sin, therefore is He not the creator of sin? Jesus said if you think the thought it is sin. Isaiah 45:7 states that God creates good and evil. God finished (ceased) all His works of creation on the 6th day, that means nothing will be created afteward and He declares All is good. That means if death occurs after the fall then animals now start eating flesh, meaning death to some life, he would have to creat the animals to eat, since that would be a change in teeth, etc in order to eat flesh. Or we can see that this death which God's speaks of is only related to man and his relationship with God. God told Adam the day you eat of the tree you would surely Die. Adam had to know what death was, or did God describe death to him? Which means the knowledge of death was before the fall. Not only that, but they had to partake of the tree of life to live forever, so eternal life was equated to tree of life, even after Adam sinned God said that man has become like Him knowning good and evil and had to be cast out lest he eat of the tree of life and live forever. If death did not occur before the fall then why the tree of life? And the bible does not say that God commanded all to freely to eat of the tree of life but jut to man. Nothing about animals being barred from the tree of life and such. Either the Bible is full of contradictions or we are not understanding it and need to be theologians versed in the original language, or put our trust in someone who claims to understand what it says. Or follow the crowd, of whom follow someone's teachings or interpretations of scripture who claim that the Holy Spirit is revealing these things. Sorry to be a debbie downer guys, just some things that I see to be plain in scripture, that no one can seem to give straight answers to without compromising their doctrines. Paul | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 1609 Registered: 7-2003  |
Chris I get this strong sense from Romans as well and tend to think this is actually the case. I thing that giving Satan the credit for the delicately balanced yet oh-so sustainable "circle of life" that now exist gives him far, far too much creative power. I don't think people realize just how essential it is to have life cycles (including death) and interdependence (including predators) at every level be it microbial, bacterial, viral, plant, animal, or even stars. This entire universe was incredibly fine tuned and balanced with death in mind. I don't see how this could have changed after the fall without creating an entirely new universe fundamentally different in nearly all aspects from the previous one. There is even the strong suggestion in Genesis that Adam and Eve would have continued to live if they continued to eat of the tree of life which allows us to infer that they would (and did) die without it. In other words, they were created with the potential for aging and death into a universe which was subject to decay. They died spiritually the day they sinned, then began to die physically the day they were driven from the garden and barred from the tree. None of this caught God off guard. I get the strong suggestion from Romans that He created a self sustaining, finely balanced universe that would sustain them and their descendants for millennia and that his Plan A was always redemption and recreation of the entire created order. | ||
| Seekinglight Registered user Username: Seekinglight Post Number: 571 Registered: 3-2009 |
Deb, I see certain parts of YEC as coming from the presuppositions and wisdom of men, also. I don't see it as the only option for interpreting Genesis, and I don't know why folks imply that to be "orthodox" you must subscribe to it. | ||
| 8thday Registered user Username: 8thday Post Number: 1597 Registered: 11-2007  |
I was reminded earlier today how highly educated SDAs are. Now.. I am reminded again, as former SDA circles are also very intellectual thinkers. Just don't hear discussions like this every day where I come from. Okay, how about never? I am just happy if I can get someone to realize there is a Creator. Carry on. (Message edited by 8thday on September 08, 2011) | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12933 Registered: 12-2003 |
The point that none of this caught God off guard is central. Moreover, if the incarnation was programmed into the solar system, as suggested by the astronomic record as compared with the biblical record (see Bethlehem Star at http://www.bethlehemstar.net/), then REALITY (which is way bigger than we can see) has to be eternally REAL—all of it. The new heaven and the new earth foretold in 2 Peter and Revelation are NEW. God did not make a new heaven and a new earth at any time between creation and now. All of our present existence had to be incorporated into the cosmic plan from the beginning, it seems to me. I have no idea exactly how this works or even exactly what all it implies, but I believe that to state that no decay or death could possibly have existed in any aspect of creation before Adam and Eve sinned is perhaps a limited viewpoint. (At any rate, Lucifer sinned before Adam and Eve...) Romans 8 is clear that God is the one who bound all creation to decay. Satan is not responsible for decay. Genesis 3 states that God's "sentence" on Adam was to curse the earth...the substance from which he was made. It was a much deeper, broader, and more significant curse than merely cursing Adam and his offspring. Again, I don't really know what reality is about all this, but I do see that God is not limited by our perspective. Sondra, thank you. Very good reminder! Colleen | ||
| Jeremy Registered user Username: Jeremy Post Number: 3799 Registered: 10-2004 |
Colleen, Where do you find in Scripture that Lucifer sinned before Adam and Eve? Jeremy | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 12939 Registered: 12-2003 |
I don't...I get that from the serpent being there. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean Lucifer sinned before them...there are other possibilities. Goodness...I don't know exactly how to explain this to myself, but your question really does make me think, Jeremy! Colleen |
