Please understand we at COD cheerfully share fellowship in Christ with all manner of creationists. But when some seek contention about what they think the Bible says, we will point out how much pressure their reading puts on the text. So we “fixed” Gen 2:17 to read as the literalists simply read it. Quite different isn’t it.
What the Bible says can differ from what you think it should say. Some think they are cleaning up heresy by fighting evolutionary creationists. But are they reading aright? Below is Gen 2:7 (KJV) adjusted to match what some claim.
Of course this contradicts Paul’s exposition saying Adam was made mortal as a living soul, but let’s not worry about that.
The South Australian issued “IEAC Reaffirmation Statement” claimed that the supporting ecclesias took the Genesis creation record as “literal in all its details”. This is simply incorrect as demonstrated by Gen 2:19-20 where Adam names every animal and bird. The record five times tells us Adam named all/every animal and bird. This all happened in less than one day. Do the literalists think so? No. They don’t. They adopt an inconsistent pick and mix approach to Genesis 1-3. Continue reading
The focus on Adam in Genesis largely misses the point that we are all adam. Scripture clearly aligns all humanity with the first couple in its language. Rather than obsess over biology, we should rather take the point of the demonstration of human failure and divine grace which Gen 2-3 portrays. We can chose to be in Adam or in Christ. Focussing on the later would be healthy. Following is a brief exploration of the way scripture links us to Adam… Continue reading
In July 2017 The Lampstand Magazine included a unfortunate and inaccurate insert on evolutionary creation. This post deals with their astray commentary on Gen 1-3 in the insert table. Below is a preproduction of their table on Gen 1-3 with a simple repudiation underneath Continue reading
For more detail on this subject see this post.
Genesis 1 is a wonderful and exciting part of Scripture but its interpretation is complex. I suggest there is evidence from within the passage and on the basis of simple knowledge of God’s works to interpret it as something other than literal history. A minority of early Christadelphians shared this position.
Many of the passages considered in Genesis 2-3 are presented as being hostile to EC. However, on examination, they are neutral – they neither support nor rule out the doctrinal preconditions which would allow some level of evolution as a tool in the hand of God. As to the common proposition that Adam was amortal prior to the Fall and experienced a change in nature, the evidence is strongly to the contrary within Genesis.