Week 1: What Happened in the Garden
Recommended Reading:
Introduction- Chapter 3 (up to page 100)
Total page count excluding chapter bibliographies: ~70 pages
Key Quotes:
Introduction:
"What would change when you reinterpret the opening chapters of Genesis? In a word: everything" (pg. 13)
Chapter 1:
Chapter 1:
"False teachers are those who twist the Scripture to their own destruction…This should spur us on to take another serious look at the text and to make sure 'thus says the Lord." (20)
"The Biblical writers do not see history as merely a means of communicating theology; rather, they see history as the means of actualizing theology." (27)
Chapter 2:
"The Biblical writers do not see history as merely a means of communicating theology; rather, they see history as the means of actualizing theology." (27)
Chapter 2:
"Evolutionary claims tend to be overstated, and creationist responses are currently underdeveloped…[Christians] should therefore use this opportunity to exercise godly humility as we all try to answer important scientific questions in a context of faithfulness to Christ…" (69)
Chapter 3:
Chapter 3:
"As far as we know now, the only modern humans that lack Neandertal markers are from Southern Africa." (86)
Engagement Questions:
Chapter 1:
Engagement Questions:
Chapter 1:
1. What does Albert Chou mean when he says that scholars interpret Genesis 1-3 as function over formation? What are the implications for doing this?
2. What are the consequences for believing that Adam represents every man is not a unique and distinct single man?
Chapter 2:
1. What two attributes point to uniqueness of humanity against all other living beings and why are they important?
2. If Genesis 1 and 2 are a true, historical record of the origin of humans, what consequences would this have for our understanding of biological similarity? (50)
Chapter 3:
1. What are two interpretations for the genetic variability between Neandertals and Denisovans that agree with the Scripture?
2. If the above is not true, then we must conclude that evidence of hybridization was a result of bestiality. What sort of questions and challenges to your theology would arise?
3. How then should we interpret Genesis 1-3 to account for all of the arguments presented from biology and genetics?
Summary:
Introduction:
In the introductory chapter, Abner Chou lays the framework which will be considered for the rest of the book. The first chapter asks the question of whether or not Genesis 1-3 should be read as history. Chapters 2-3 confront several challenges that come from the scientific community, specifically as they relate to biology, anatomy, and genetics. In chapter 4, we examine chapter 3 from a literary point of view to see if it should be read historically or as allegory. Chapters 5 and 6 consider the theological ramifications of the introductory chapters of Genesis by seeing how they inform our understanding of original sin and the Messiah. The third part of the book, chapters 7-13, all deal with the moral implications and worldview ramifications we derive from the first three chapters of Genesis specifically as they relate to the business world, entropy in the world, law, psychology, gender relations, and education. The final chapter, chapter 13, brings it all together to help us understand that this all affects our understanding on the authority of God's word.
Chapter 1:
The main argument made in chapter one is that because all of Scripture implies that Genesis 1-3 is historical, it should not be considered mythological/allegory. An examination of the differences between Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) mythologies and the Scripture also highlight the fact that Genesis is historical. And because it is historical, it has a great deal to say about the theology embedded in it. Another way of putting it is to say that if we disconnect history from the theology presented in the Scriptures, we are left with nothing. An example of this can be seen when Peter argues in his second epistle that that there will be a final eschatological judgment (2 Peter 3:3). The justification that Peter provides for judgment is the global judgment of the flood (2 Peter 3:6). However, if the flood never occurred, if there was no true historical flood, then his argument does not follow logically to conclude that there will be judgment when Jesus returns. If there was no flood, then there will be no judgment. But history is teaching a theological reality.
Chapter 2/3
These chapters are much more technical and can be a bit weary for those who are not scientifically inclined, so I will do my best to summarize these chapters. They both follow the same format in 1) introducing the topic, 2) presenting the arguments made by those who oppose an orthodox understanding of Scripture, 3) elaborating on the academic discussion of the topic, 4) presenting an interpretation from a Christian worldview, and 5) encouraging the believers.
Chapter two addresses the reality that there is not much Christian advancement in addressing biological similarity of humans with animals. The authors are fair in presenting the very difficult challenges posed by biologists and geneticists, but also presents compelling explanations which could account for why humans are share a very similar genetic makeup to animals, such as apes. The mutations in our genetic sequence as compared to apes does not necessarily affirm evolution and the more we study our genetic makeup the more questions arise. For example, why is it that we seemingly have so much "junk DNA" which seems to do nothing? Humans and apes share nearly identical alpha and pseudo genes, yet scientists still have no idea what it is that those genes do. Because we do not understand what they do, it would be foolish to assume that the similarities are proof that animals and humans share the same ancestor. It is more logical that we share the same creator, as opposed to that we evolved from one another.
In chapter 3, the authors consider whether it is possible for the current population of the world, with all of its genetic mutations and variations, could have come from a single pair, Adam and Eve. In evaluating several objections to a single ancestral pair for all of humanity, certain assumptions are challenged such as the relationship between humans and other hominins and the degree of variation between modern humans and ancient humans. One interpretation which could address these factors is that all of creation experienced increased diversification after the flood and, depending on your interpretation, seems to coincide with Gen 11:10-25. Pages 90- 95 synthesize the arguments from a Biblical perspective to address the challenges made in the chapter all pointing to an historical interpretation of the Scriptures.
Grace and Peace,
Alex Galvez
To never miss an article, click on the "Subscribe" button at the top of the blog page (https://aogalvez.blogspot.com/)
****************************************************
These articles usually follow the current Bible Reading plan for Overflow Ministries. If you would like to join the reading plan, simply download the plan here: Overflow Reading Plan
2. What are the consequences for believing that Adam represents every man is not a unique and distinct single man?
Chapter 2:
1. What two attributes point to uniqueness of humanity against all other living beings and why are they important?
2. If Genesis 1 and 2 are a true, historical record of the origin of humans, what consequences would this have for our understanding of biological similarity? (50)
Chapter 3:
1. What are two interpretations for the genetic variability between Neandertals and Denisovans that agree with the Scripture?
2. If the above is not true, then we must conclude that evidence of hybridization was a result of bestiality. What sort of questions and challenges to your theology would arise?
3. How then should we interpret Genesis 1-3 to account for all of the arguments presented from biology and genetics?
Summary:
Introduction:
In the introductory chapter, Abner Chou lays the framework which will be considered for the rest of the book. The first chapter asks the question of whether or not Genesis 1-3 should be read as history. Chapters 2-3 confront several challenges that come from the scientific community, specifically as they relate to biology, anatomy, and genetics. In chapter 4, we examine chapter 3 from a literary point of view to see if it should be read historically or as allegory. Chapters 5 and 6 consider the theological ramifications of the introductory chapters of Genesis by seeing how they inform our understanding of original sin and the Messiah. The third part of the book, chapters 7-13, all deal with the moral implications and worldview ramifications we derive from the first three chapters of Genesis specifically as they relate to the business world, entropy in the world, law, psychology, gender relations, and education. The final chapter, chapter 13, brings it all together to help us understand that this all affects our understanding on the authority of God's word.
Chapter 1:
The main argument made in chapter one is that because all of Scripture implies that Genesis 1-3 is historical, it should not be considered mythological/allegory. An examination of the differences between Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) mythologies and the Scripture also highlight the fact that Genesis is historical. And because it is historical, it has a great deal to say about the theology embedded in it. Another way of putting it is to say that if we disconnect history from the theology presented in the Scriptures, we are left with nothing. An example of this can be seen when Peter argues in his second epistle that that there will be a final eschatological judgment (2 Peter 3:3). The justification that Peter provides for judgment is the global judgment of the flood (2 Peter 3:6). However, if the flood never occurred, if there was no true historical flood, then his argument does not follow logically to conclude that there will be judgment when Jesus returns. If there was no flood, then there will be no judgment. But history is teaching a theological reality.
Chapter 2/3
These chapters are much more technical and can be a bit weary for those who are not scientifically inclined, so I will do my best to summarize these chapters. They both follow the same format in 1) introducing the topic, 2) presenting the arguments made by those who oppose an orthodox understanding of Scripture, 3) elaborating on the academic discussion of the topic, 4) presenting an interpretation from a Christian worldview, and 5) encouraging the believers.
Chapter two addresses the reality that there is not much Christian advancement in addressing biological similarity of humans with animals. The authors are fair in presenting the very difficult challenges posed by biologists and geneticists, but also presents compelling explanations which could account for why humans are share a very similar genetic makeup to animals, such as apes. The mutations in our genetic sequence as compared to apes does not necessarily affirm evolution and the more we study our genetic makeup the more questions arise. For example, why is it that we seemingly have so much "junk DNA" which seems to do nothing? Humans and apes share nearly identical alpha and pseudo genes, yet scientists still have no idea what it is that those genes do. Because we do not understand what they do, it would be foolish to assume that the similarities are proof that animals and humans share the same ancestor. It is more logical that we share the same creator, as opposed to that we evolved from one another.
In chapter 3, the authors consider whether it is possible for the current population of the world, with all of its genetic mutations and variations, could have come from a single pair, Adam and Eve. In evaluating several objections to a single ancestral pair for all of humanity, certain assumptions are challenged such as the relationship between humans and other hominins and the degree of variation between modern humans and ancient humans. One interpretation which could address these factors is that all of creation experienced increased diversification after the flood and, depending on your interpretation, seems to coincide with Gen 11:10-25. Pages 90- 95 synthesize the arguments from a Biblical perspective to address the challenges made in the chapter all pointing to an historical interpretation of the Scriptures.
Grace and Peace,
Alex Galvez
To never miss an article, click on the "Subscribe" button at the top of the blog page (https://aogalvez.blogspot.com/)
****************************************************
These articles usually follow the current Bible Reading plan for Overflow Ministries. If you would like to join the reading plan, simply download the plan here: Overflow Reading Plan
You may follow Overflow Ministries @ https://faithlife.com/overflowtx/activity
or on Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/OverflowChurchTX/
or on Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/OverflowChurchTX/
Comments
Post a Comment