Re: The Origins Solution

From: Vernon Jenkins (
Date: Wed Oct 10 2001 - 18:24:27 EDT

  • Next message: Jeff Schloss: "JOBS: Bio at Westmont"


    You write concerning evolution, "Unfortunately, there isn't just one
    commonly accepted definition. If we define it simply as "descent with
    modification," where is the complaint? Maybe you should tell us how you
    define it."

    For me, as a Bible believer and YEC, the term 'evolution' means any
    doctrine or concept that requires its adherents to ignore, selectively
    'interpret', or otherwise do violence to the Scriptures.

    An early paragraph in the Introduction to your book begins "In Scripture
    we are shown the truth and told the truth..." That sounds clear enough.
    But you then proceed to treat it as a malleable text where - in a
    process of 'rolling revelation' - the findings of science are given
    pre-eminence in establishing the true meaning of key passages -
    particularly those that impinge on origins.

    Clearly, it is essential as Christians that we make no foolish mistakes
    in respect of what God is actually telling us. Through the apostle
    Peter, he warns as follows: "His (Paul's) letters contain some things
    that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort,
    as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."(2Pet.3:16,
    NIV). Dick, I suggest this must be a stumbling block for people like
    yourself; perhaps you can explain how you surmount this truth - and
    demonstrate your wisdom in doing so!

    In my last post I had occasion to draw your attention to Isaiah 29:14 -
    God's promise to 'destroy the wisdom of the wise' - a prophecy that you
    will no doubt agree must come to pass. It has since occurred to me that
    this is undoubtedly linked with that of 2Thess.2:11 (to which I also
    referred) - for how is 'worldly wisdom' to be destroyed except by the
    strong compulsion (1)that it believe and propagate a lie? and (2) that
    the lie is, ultimately, unmasked publicly? The matter of God sending
    'strong delusion', I suggest, contains a message for us all. Clearly, it
    must involve a deception! However, on closer analysis this turns out to
    be a self-deception on the part of those who have refused to believe the
    truth that God has provided in his special revelation - the
    Judeo-Christian Scriptures! We only need consider the preamble to Job's
    trials to appreciate this. Of course, you touch on these things when you
    ask (Ch.3) "Would God implant false evidence to lead us to erroneous
    conclusions?" I say, No - but he might well allow Satan to do so! You
    add the rider "If so, to what purpose?" In Job's case it was to prove
    his faith and glorify God; similarly in ours; but additionally, to
    encourage unbelievers in their unbelief!

    Finally, let me comment on your view of Adam. You say, "We assumed Adam
    was presented in Genesis as the first of our species where it is far
    more probable that Moses was telling the children of Israel the history
    of their people beginning with Adam who lived in southern Mesopotamia
    about 7000 years ago. Adam was not the first of the human race, he was
    the first of the Jewish race and their offshoots. A small difference
    perhaps, but it makes a lot of difference how we understand certain

    For a self-confessed Bible-believer you appear to be intent on rewriting
    large portions of the script. It's really breathtaking! Were not the
    promises re the Jews as God's chosen people given to Abraham, Isaac and
    Jacob (Gen.12:2,3; 26:24; 35:10-12)? On your understanding they should
    surely have first come to Adam, and then to each of the ante-diluvian
    patriarchs? Again, your assumption of a local flood is certainly at odds
    with a fair reading of the narrative (Gen.6-8)!


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 18:21:37 EDT