The importance of a literal Genesis

[Bob Hutton]

One of the problems of not accepting a literal interpretation of Genesis is that, Genesis being so foundational for so much of what we believe, we can easily go astray on vital matters.

3 examples will suffice:

1. Edmund Gosse was born to a Christian couple in 1849.  His mother went to be with Christ when he was still a boy.  His Father raised him in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord" and he made a strong profession of faith in Christ.  However, he had serious problems accepting Genesis and, eventually, went right away from the Lord.

2. Charles Templeton was a preacher alongside Billy Graham in the 1940s.  However, he started to doubt Genesis and this led to a downhill slide which then led to him writing a book entitled "Farewell to God".

3.Steve Chalke was a fine, and godly Baptist preacher whom I knew in the 1970s.  He came to a position of ridiculing anyone who held to a literal Genesis.  Within a few years he denied penal substitution, denied the inerrancy of the Bible and now does gay "weddings".

All 3 fell away from the Bible and their slide could be traced back to their denial of Genesis.  How we need to pray for grace to hold to the Bible as it stands.

Regards to all the dear brethren on this site,

Bob

Edited February 22, 2017 by Bob Hutton
within was spelled wrong

[Ukulelemike]

Indeed-much lays upon a literal interpretation of scripture, particularly the creation story. if you reject the basic foundation of truth, then, as Pilate said, "What is truth?" Once you ascribe Genesis to stories, myths, poetry, allegory, whatever interpretation you take, including gap/day-age/theistic evolution, then nothing is sacred from such re-interpretation.

I suspect many who have rejected it never really studied it out, never came to an understanding of how chapters 1&2 are not only NOT different interpretations of creation, but work hand-in-hand to tell the complete story.

And of course, today there is an amazing amount of scientific evidence to prove it out. I have, over the last couple months, been doing a series on Biblical Archaeology, and it is amazing how things like language and writing and civilizations prove out the literal biblical timeline.

 

[...]

.

Edited March 19, 2023 by ...

[Bob Hutton]

9 hours ago, Brother Stafford said:

If someone,of average intelligence, who had never heard of the Bible or of the God within it, nor had they ever heard of the concept of evolution, were to pick up the KJV and begin to read it in Genesis, there would be no reason for them to interpret the creation account in any other way than literally.  People only read Genesis allegorically in order to attempt to harmonize it with worldly theories.

I really don't think there's any other way of understanding people who do so.  They are blinded by their learned preconceived notions of their worldview and are willfully ignorant of the truth.  When you hold up an apple and they insist you are holding a shoe, no amount of human reasoning will be able to reach them.

You are absolutely right, dear brother, we need to simply read it as it is written.  Nothing explains the Bible better than the Bible.

Kind regards

Bob

[Wayfaring Stranger]

I think that a non-literal Genesis creation account causes theological issues. If the wages of sin are death, but death and corruption were present prior to the fall of mankind through Adam and Eve according to evolutionists. Darwinian evolution is a whole metaphysical and philosophical worldview diametrically opposed to Christian metaphysics and philosophy. While microevolution is a fact and an observable reality, macroevolution is usually the first step down the steps of descent into atheism. I never questioned God until I questioned the creation account in Genesis and started to drink the poison of neoplatonic Darwinian evolution. In fact one of the impetuses for me to convert to Catholicism in high school was the fact that Catholicism "accepted science."

[1Timothy115]

Baptists except science just not the mythology (i.e. warm little pond and matter without energy) kind. God gives wisdom to men for His own glory not to men to advance their own glory. For example God giving medical knowledge to men is a science we can accept. Sadly, too many give the doctor or surgeon the praise belonging to God.

Edited July 1, 2017 by 1Timothy115

[Alan]

Brother Bob,

Thank you for your thoughts on what happens to a believer when he doubts the literal view of the creation of God as recorded in the book of Genesis. Keep up the good work.

Alan

[DaChaser]

On 2/22/2017 at 12:03 PM, Bob Hutton said:

One of the problems of not accepting a literal interpretation of Genesis is that, Genesis being so foundational for so much of what we believe, we can easily go astray on vital matters.

3 examples will suffice:

1. Edmund Gosse was born to a Christian couple in 1849.  His mother went to be with Christ when he was still a boy.  His Father raised him in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord" and he made a strong profession of faith in Christ.  However, he had serious problems accepting Genesis and, eventually, went right away from the Lord.

2. Charles Templeton was a preacher alongside Billy Graham in the 1940s.  However, he started to doubt Genesis and this led to a downhill slide which then led to him writing a book entitled "Farewell to God".

3.Steve Chalke was a fine, and godly Baptist preacher whom I knew in the 1970s.  He came to a position of ridiculing anyone who held to a literal Genesis.  Within a few years he denied penal substitution, denied the inerrancy of the Bible and now does gay "weddings".

All 3 fell away from the Bible and their slide could be traced back to their denial of Genesis.  How we need to pray for grace to hold to the Bible as it stands.

Regards to all the dear brethren on this site,

Bob

I am in discussion with a Baptist pastor who is really into theistic evolution, and his points revolve around accepted scientific facts of evolution, and something called the Framework Hypothesis?

[Alan]

Framework Hypothesis is theistic evolution.

[Davidjayjordan]

On 2/22/2017 at 9:03 AM, Bob Hutton said:

One of the problems of not accepting a literal interpretation of Genesis is that, Genesis being so foundational for so much of what we believe, we can easily go astray on vital matters.

3 examples will suffice:

1. Edmund Gosse was born to a Christian couple in 1849.  His mother went to be with Christ when he was still a boy.  His Father raised him in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord" and he made a strong profession of faith in Christ.  However, he had serious problems accepting Genesis and, eventually, went right away from the Lord.

2. Charles Templeton was a preacher alongside Billy Graham in the 1940s.  However, he started to doubt Genesis and this led to a downhill slide which then led to him writing a book entitled "Farewell to God".

3.Steve Chalke was a fine, and godly Baptist preacher whom I knew in the 1970s.  He came to a position of ridiculing anyone who held to a literal Genesis.  Within a few years he denied penal substitution, denied the inerrancy of the Bible and now does gay "weddings".

All 3 fell away from the Bible and their slide could be traced back to their denial of Genesis.  How we need to pray for grace to hold to the Bible as it stands.

Regards to all the dear brethren on this site,

Bob

 

 

Exactly Bob, totally agree wioth you, and we are not just accepting Genesis because we need to but because it is truthful, honest, true history, and TRUE SCIENCE.

 

Evolution is bogus counterfeit, unproven, untestable, false science forced upon adults and children alike. It has zero basis in biology, chemistry, math, physics, egentics or any science. The Lord created laws and principles and all matter and all living things by design and intelligence.

 

Evolution is unscientific, creationism and Genesis is scientific and valid science. The Lord created SCIENCE

Edited August 14, 2018 by Davidjayjordan