Want Some Answers ???


Hi David

Good to hear from you, although unexpected. I’m happy to continue discussion if you wish. So Morris’s misquote? And the fact God echoed similar words in Gen.8.21 “I will never again curse the earth” (NLT, GNB, NAB RDB), you reply,

>>The book and page number I sent earlier:- Studies in Bible & Science p 115. Many other translations do not use the word 'earth' in Gen 8.21.<<

I still don’t see a problem with Morris’s comment. And the fact translations agree with him indicates a problem for you. You strenuously claimed, “Morris says that the Earth is cursed….This is his first and very serious error.” Yet we find God says it and you didn't know.

Adam was formed out of the dust of the earth (not from an ape like creature). God gave him dominion over all the lower creatures. He was placed over creation to cultivate and enjoy its fruits. So all other created systems must in some way be oriented man-ward as far as God's purposes are concerned.

The curse is followed by Noah's flood where God “drowned [the ground and] added to that curse” (Wesley). The flood was over all the earth and God said He will never again destroy “all flesh that is upon the face of the earth” (Gen.9.16,17). Which supports the reading of 8.21 I gave. God promised never again to destroy “every living thing” He made. In Gen.8.21 God mentions the "curse" which relates to “all flesh” and “every living thing” and “the face of the earth”. So the translation “I will never again curse the earth” is appropriate. As Isa 54.9 confirms "I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth" (NKJV AV NAB NRSV RSV NCV NLB TAB NIV RBV).

If Morris is correct we should find scholarly support. We do, some mentioned last time. Here's more, “I will not add to curse the ground there shall not be another deluge to destroy the whole earth” (Clarke’s Commentary OT, Vol.1 Genesis – Deuteronomy on Gen.8.21). See also, Jamieson, Fausset & Brown. So again, scholars of the Hebrew equate ‘ground with earth’ (as we). Most Bible dictionaries say as Easton’s, “EARTH: In the sense of soil or ground, the translation of the wordadamah'. In Genesis 9:20 “husbandman” is literally “man of the ground or earth”. Most say the same as Richards & Vine which you ignore. But you haven’t explained many points I raised yet.

What was the state of the ground before the fall? And I mentioned many times if the earth and universe is not subjected to the curse, why will God create another? (2Pe.3:10-13 Isa.65:17 66:22). This remains unanswered. And no convincing explanation is offered that the earth is not corrupted or made barren by sin (Gen.6.11,12 Isa.11.4 Deut.28.23 Psa.102.34). That the groaning creation of suffering, death, storms, disease, deserts and earthquakes do NOT indicate something is wrong on earth. You said, “
No they don’t. Adam was in a garden. The rest of the earth is not described”. That simply means these things are normal or mistakes in God's creation. As if, God's works are not perfect (this is contrary to scripture). Are we supposed to think they are only 'half the truth' about God? As if the 30,000 who perished in Iran mean nothing. What a horrible picture that paints of God. The Bible indicates they are signs "the ground "is cursed (wilderness, barren landscape weeds, etc). Because God cursed the ground they occur. If they are “revelation” from “nature about God's character or reflection of a "harmonious "earth, I'm unconvinced.

Interesting you think only the evolutionist is allowed to speak of all stages of development of the universe, cosmic, biological and human development. But Morris is not allowed, unless he repeats the folly of evolutionism. You still offer no convincing explanation about the heavens and earth growing old and so subject to the law of decay proving they are under the curse (Ps.102:25-27). “Not only mankind but also ‘the whole creation’ has been delivered into the ‘bondage of decay’ and has ever since been ‘groaning and travailing together in pain’ (Rom.8.21,22)” (p.239 The Genesis Flood. Morris). The mention of your “
late wife” was a change of subject.

>>I thought you would recognise that she is fully an animal, for you equate humans and animals into Rom 5.12. If you still think I should make a show of dead animals, then I re-reiterrate that I don't and won't (and am fully self-consistent in so doing). You don't and won't. So please, I hope you cease inventing what you think people believe and what they should do to be consistent, because it can become mighty offensive.<<

I've made the point, there is no way around the fact that plant life and animal life are different. And their death is NOT the same. So of course you are not “consistent” and want to side step the issue.

I don't “
equate humans and animals” as evolutionists. When Adam sinned ‘death entered the world’ (Rom.5:12). So while birds also die, that doesn’t mean I “equate humans” and birds. When the Bible says, “death entered the world” I accept that "the world" means "the world", not just Adam and Eve. Its obvious death has entered the world and the Bible explains why. You have no choice but to insist death existed before Adam, blame God, and even insist death is “necessary” (as Geoff said). I cannot help it if your doctrine is offensive. If you want to drop the issue that plant and animal life are different, I understand. The Bible says God “sustains all things by his powerful word”, you reply,

>>The quote is true and describes part of God's merciful activity now. It is now after the Fall. It doesn't say that he kept it in pristine perfection until the Fall, an unfounded, unbiblical human invention.<<

True the quote doesn't specify a fallen or non-fallen world. But it does say "all things", it does apply to creation and gives no reason to think God would NOT sustain creation before the Fall. Only you (and evolution theory) would deny God's sustaining care for creation. It is far more likely God would sustain that which is "very good". This would be keeping with His love of perfection.

Its the events of the fall that would indicate a change. In fact, at the Fall God indicates Adam and Eve would see a change in creation. There are numerous other examples when because of human sin, God’s plans for men changed. So the entrance of sin into “the world” caused a state of decay to begin which the earth reflects today.

In Gen.3 the ground & plant life change, hard work, pain, sorrow & death, and 'beasts of the field' are mentioned relating to the curse. And there are unexpected changes, Adam and Eve realized they were naked. There is a crisis between man and God. And we learn how much God hates sin, it changed His relation to the whole of creation. The law of decay sustained by God before the fall kept creation in perfection and God's perfect character would suggest in a regular consistent manner. Not human conjecture but biblical revelation about God (Ex.23.20 Num.6.24 Gen.22.8 Job 38.11 Psa.65.6-10 91.11 78.20 1 Cor.1.9 1 Thes.5.24). Even scientific laws indicate His sustaining activity.

The only reason you question His sustaining power is because you have ugly pictures about life, death and God. You must argue for billions of years of suffering, pain and death and bloodshed before Adam. And for a God who is
'merciful now' but unmerciful and distant from creation then. Evolutionary theory determines how you understand scripture regardless of what scripture says. Before the fall the Bible says, "the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters"(Gen.1.2) and He called creation 'very good' and blessed it (Gen.1.21-22). A very different picture to billions of years of a death ridden & suffering creation.

So we are miles apart. I see a completely unscriptural view about God, life, man, sin, death, the past, future, the atonement, and the gospel. Obvious you won't change your mind. And me neither on theistic evolution or Progressive Creationism so perhaps time to move on. Wishing you the best for the new year.