What is Genesis 1 Talking About?

10 Comments

  1. Hi Grant, a very interesting read and an excellent beginning. I’m looking forward to the next installment. Are you going to, or perhaps I should say, will you please provide references for the comments and thoughts of others that you utilize to establish your position, especially from known scholars and their works? It will greatly substantiate your position and assist in your becoming an established scholar in your own right. Thanks, I’m always interested in what you have to say. =)

    1. Hi Terry,
      I certainly will. Since this entry is two part, the second blog will reference sources. A huge challenge to using blogs is that they have to be relatively short so it is difficult to discuss complex issues property. Supporting facts have to be sacrificed to avoid having a 2000 word esoteric academic essay that only people who know more than me would be interested in reading.

  2. Hey there…your minions asked me to chime in…

    Agreed that science is not the purpose of Genesis. It is ridiculous to watch people make a book that never intended to explain the minute processes of how God went about doing what he did into some sort of tome for scientific accuracy. Adventures in missing the point are across every religious flavour.

    Your statement, however, that “nowhere in the bible does it say God created anything out of nothing”…

    I didn’t consult anything other than my own memory banks, but what do you make of the term “ex nihilo”… that literally means “out of nothing.” Is there another interpretation that I am unaware?

    Everything I remember, this was a big one for biblicists of my ilk since the fact that the world was created “out of nothing” belied that God came before everything…and yaddah yaddah…that was big for apologists to hammer atheist infidels with…you know.

    Anyway…

    Chiming in…

    David

    1. Hi David,
      Thanks for reading. The concept of ‘ex hihilo’ is an extra-biblical doctrine that creates its own set of problems. The assumption is that ‘create’ means to start with nothing but the word itself means to form something that already exists so relying on Genesis 1:1 is a non starter. The other problem is that it assumes that we are the center of the universe as being Gods only creation. It is a carry over, I think, from the notion of the flat earth, then later that the sun revolved around the earth. The more science reveals, the further the bible gets removed from the natural world and gets established as a book of gospel principles. Some reference Hebrews 11:3 arguing that ‘not made of things which do appear’ means they are made from nothing which is too much of a stretch and is completely out of context since ‘things not seen’ has reference to faith which is in thing that are not seen but are true. I don’t think we are to have faith in nothing. I will be posting an entry about this very topic but if you are interested, I will prepare a longer essay on my view and send it your way for some feedback.

  3. I enjoyed reading your thoughts Grant. I learned some things I had not understood before. I look forward to your next installment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *