I don't recall when I first came across the ministry, InspiringPhilosophy (IP). According to their “About us” page, they are an apologetics ministry and describe themselves as, “a nonprofit Christian organization with the goal of spreading and defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” I'd say they're sincere. I've seen a lot of their videos on YouTube and some of them are really good. Of course, there's probably not anyone with whom I agree 100% of the time and my point of contention with IP is their confrontational attitude toward young earth creationism (YEC).
There are other Christian apologists who compromise on the issue of origins but not all of them are as in your face about it as IP. IP doesn't just disagree with creationism; they produce a lot of material to try refute it. One particular video they've made is TOP TEN Biblical Problems for Young Earth Creationism. As the title suggests, they present 10 passages from the Bible which, they claim, don't reconcile easily with a young earth. I invite you to watch the entire video for yourself.
I'd like to write a point by point rebuttal of each item. As much as I dislike writing series, I see no choice but to respond in a series of posts. Depending on the length of my reply, I will respond to 1 or 2 points at a time. Please keep checking back.
The video alleges that Adam and Eve were created as mortals. The Fall didn't change anything about their bodies; God merely put them out of the Garden for their disobedience and, thus, cut off access to the Tree of Life. The following is their argument in IP's own words:
The implication numerous scholars have pointed out is Adam and Eve were already mortal and the only way they obtained immortality in the Garden was eating continuously from the Tree of Life. To make them mortal again, all God had to do was prevent access to this sacred tree. But that means humans were already mortal before the Fall and only granted immortality through a special fruit – not because they were created with immortal bodies.
This biggest problem I have with this point is that it doesn't reconcile with the rest of Scripture. Consider Romans 5:12-15, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.”
This passage is unambiguous that death entered into the world because Adam sinned. Creationists generally believe this even includes the death of animals but, at the very least, it means the death of men. Yet what IP is saying is Adam was always mortal and would have been kept alive forever only by eating continuously from the Tree of Life. But what if hadn't eat from the Tree of Life continuously? If what IP is saying is correct, Adam would have died – even if he hadn't sinned! That is absurd.
So that I'm not accused of making a straw man of IP's argument, let me quote directly from the video (beginning about 7:43):
This is also supported by the fact that Adam is called dust, which is an idiom in the Bible to denote that one is mortal. In Genesis, it might just be metaphorical language to denote that he was a mortal human – meaning Adam was mortal before the Fall which implies death was a possibility before sin entered. [bold added for emphasis]
Theistic evolution borders on heresy. According to this false-gospel, death is not the consequence of sin; it's that way God intended things to be and it's been that way for billions of years. It is an insult to God that seems to me to be blasphemy.
God created man to be immortal and He intended the Tree of Life to give its fruit in a creation where nothing died. How can I know this? Because the Tree of Life will also be in the new creation. Consider Revelation 22:1-2 which says, “And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.” Now, we know for certain there will be neither death nor pain nor sorrow in heaven (Revelation 21:4). Am I to believe I will enter heaven with a mortal body and will only be kept alive by continuously eating its special fruit? It's nonsense. In fact, this whole point is ridiculous. Let us hurry and be rid of it!
From the video, Young earth creationists often argue that Genesis 2 is a recap of what takes place on day 6, within Genesis 1, when God made humans. But Genesis 2:4 poses a problem for suggesting the chapter is a recap. The verse begins with, “These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.” This is what scholars call a toledoth and it is used throughout Genesis almost like chapter markers for the ancient audience. However, when this phrase is used, it always introduces what comes after the person or the generations that follow him. It is never used to denote a recap of something that happened prior to this.
IP is about half right here. Genesis 2:4 is called a toledoth and toledoths are a sort of marker that divides the text. The contention is, do they belong to the text before them or after them? According to IP, it always introduces what follows and never recaps the text before it. The video seems very confident about this. But if you listen to the video's argument, I want you to hear what conclusion IP draws from this assumption.
After God establishes the cosmos, He then hones in on one region on the earth to create a garden environment. But this would mean that what is commonly viewed as the creation of the first man in Genesis 2 (Genesis 2:7), is not actually the creation of the first man since in the prequel to Genesis 2, God elects all humans to be His image – and this would take place before Genesis 2 and before Adam is believed to have been created from dust.
Toledoths are something scholars continue to debate. However, IP, whom I assume is not a scholar, so grossly abuses the Genesis 2:4 toledoth, that he uses it to justify the idea that a world full of people lived prior to Adam! Once again, their point seems to fly in the face of Romans 5, cited above, that says people did not die prior to Adam. Unbelievable!
The reason toledoths are the subject of much inquiry, is because scholars are puzzled by them. In modern thinking, especially in the west, we generally view a text like this as sort of a headline that introduces something. Yet when we read the text that follows each toledoth, it makes the “headline theory” seem sort of awkward. In the subject verse, Genesis 2:4, the headline seems to be, “These are generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.” Yet the verses that immediately follow talk about the creation of the Garden and of Adam. There is no talk at all about the creation of things like the sun, moon, and stars (i.e., “the heavens”), for example. So if that telodoth is supposed to introduce what follows, it's a rather poor description of the passage that immediately follows it.
The rest of chapter 2, and next couple of chapters that follow, talk about the life of Adam. I encourage you to take a minute and read Genesis 2-4 right now. It talks about the creation of Adam and Eve, about their Fall, about Cain killing Abel and God giving Eve another son, Seth, after Abel was killed. Which then leads us to the second toledoth of the book, Genesis 5:1, “This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;”
Just as IP is not a scholar, neither am I. Yet I appeal to the average person's ability to judge the text for himself. Doesn't Genesis 2:4 seem to describe well Genesis 1? And doesn't Genesis 5:1 seem to describe well the section between Genesis 2:4 and the end of Genesis 4? I suggest to you that toledoths are not headlines but are conclusions! In recent decades, there has been research in this area that lends weight to my position. I present the following (source):
While touring Mesopotamia in the Royal Air Force in the early 1900s, [British Air Commodore PJ] Wiseman developed a strong interest in ancient civilizations and archaeology. During this time, he visited several archaeological dig sites where thousands of ancient written documents in the form of clay tablets had been unearthed. Though, not an archaeologist himself, he did manage to gain access to some of the greatest archaeologists of his day and attain invaluable insights from them.... It was during this time Wiseman became familiar with some of the literary practices of ancient scribes—in particular, their use of colophons. Put simply, colophons are concluding remarks found at the end of written documents which identify the author or owner of the document, along with other important information. Wiseman noticed that most of the tablets discovered contained these concluding signatures and soon made the connection between them and the Genesis toledoth. What if these phrases were not titles? What if they were concluding remarks per the literary customs of that era, and what if the names attached were not in reference to subject-matter, but rather owner/authorship?
When IP so boldly proclaims that toledoths never recap or punctuate the text that precedes them, they are either ignorant of the research that contradicts their opinion or they are intentionally omitting that fact, hoping their audience won't research it for themselves.
Read the entire series:
Again, it seems to me that you have the better of the argument.
ReplyDeleteOne point: I do not claim to be a biblical scholar (I don't speak Hebrew), but I am aware that some scholars, at least formerly, have held that the break between the "days of creation" account and the "Adam and Eve" account occurs in mid-verse in Genesis 2:4 -- "This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created," is the concluding sentence of the days of creation account, and the remainder of the verse, "when the LORD God made the earth and the heavens ..." should properly attach to verse five.