Listening today to some lectures concerning creation versus evolution; have been actually for several days.<\/p>\n
Excellent lectures given by a good scientist who is a good Christian.<\/p>\n
I would say a friend but although we have been acquainted for a number of years, I don’t know if friend would be accurate.<\/p>\n
But my “friend” the scientist as careful as he is, sometimes does what we all do when examining the Bible, and that is to say more than the text or focus on something other than the plain meaning of Scripture.<\/p>\n
We want to make a point and so we give Scripture just a little bit of help, nothing malicious, no harm intended.<\/p>\n
But it is a mistake.<\/p>\n
Just think about it. God has his prophets write down his words to get his point across but in our Christian zeal we sometimes are more concerned with getting our point across.<\/p>\n
I’ve done it. If you speak very much, you will do it.<\/p>\n
The discussion was concerning Adam and Eve and their discovery that they were naked after they rebelled against God and ate what God said not to eat.<\/p>\n
(Genesis 3:7 NKJV) Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
“and they knew that they were naked”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
My “friend” then went on to make a comment that “we usually take this as physical nakedness and it may have that in mind but<\/u>. . . (this is not verbatim but very accurately communicates his point).<\/p>\n
He then directed the discussion to nakedness as far as their psychological openness to each other. He wanted to make the point that they went from being very transparent and open, communicating well with each other to a more closed approach in their relationship.<\/p>\n
That probably is true. It is not really my point to agree or disagree with what he said after he took the detour.<\/p>\n
My problem is the detour<\/strong><\/u> itself: That this nakedness may have been physical nakedness<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
There is no room<\/strong> in this text for this “may have.” God made clothes for them and dressed them because they were physically naked. Their stuff was showing<\/strong>. Now why this mattered that much at that time, and what are all the inferences we can draw from this (probably volumes), I don’t know.<\/p>\n
(Genesis 3:21 NCV) The LORD God made clothes from animal skins for the man and his wife and dressed them.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The plain meaning is they were naked.<\/p>\n
Sometimes our detours are harmless but often these seemingly innocuous missteps are building a theology that falls prey to our broken hearts, not broken as in love-sick, but broken as in sinful and fatally flawed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Listening today to some lectures concerning creation versus evolution; have been actually for several days. Excellent lectures given by a good scientist who is a good Christian. I would say a friend but although we have been acquainted for a … Continue reading