GENESIS RELOADED

PART THREE: A SURE FOUNDATION

“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the Rock. And the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house and it did not fall, for it was founded on the Rock. But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand. And the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house, and it fell. And great was its fall.” (Matthew 7:24-27)

Our Lord Jesus Christ is the ROCK. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the TRUTH. And Jesus Himself said that those who worship God must worship Him in both Spirit and in Truth (John 4:23). Those who do not worship God in Spirit and in Truth have built their foundation upon, not the Rock, but the sand. In other words, they have not built their foundation upon Truth, but upon falsehoods. And according to Jesus, it’s only a matter of time before the whole house comes crashing down.

“If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3)

A quick glance at a few of the main tenets of AiG’s Statement of Faith will speak volumes in determining whether or not AiG’s spiritual house is built upon Truth, or upon lies:

• Satan is the personal spiritual adversary of both God and man.

• All mankind are sinners, inherently from Adam and individually (by choice) and are therefore subject to God’s wrath and condemnation.

• Those who do not believe in Christ are subject to everlasting conscious punishment, but believers enjoy eternal life with God.

We have already debunked these myths on this site, that:

1. Satan is the adversary of God
2. Mankind has free will
3. Unrepentant sinners are tossed away into an everlasting hell

Hence, there is no need to further elaborate on them. But now it is time to examine what is undoubtedly the most critical area of concern before we can bring science and the Bible into accord. And this is the notion that:

“Death (both physical and spiritual) and bloodshed entered into this world subsequent to and as a direct consequence of man’s sin.” – AiG Statement of Faith

Here are the statements from a couple of AiG’s regular contributors:

• Dr. Terry Mortensen: “Accepting millions of years of the geological ages (as the evolutionists interpret the fossil record) destroys the Bible’s teaching on death, which clearly indicates that there was no animal death or human death before the Fall.” – What are the most compelling scientific evidences of a young earth?

• Kenneth Ham: “I must interpret Scripture with Scripture, not impose ideas from the outside! When I take the plain words of the Bible, it is obvious there was no death, bloodshed, disease or suffering of humans or animals before sin. God instituted death and bloodshed because of sin; this is foundational to the Gospel. Therefore, one cannot allow a fossil record of millions of years of death, bloodshed, disease and suffering before sin.” – A young Earth – it’s not the issue!

Ham claims to “interpret Scripture with Scripture.” Does he? If these statements are true, then we should be able to find Biblical support for them (II Timothy 3:16). Can we? Is there any Biblical evidence to support the notion that no animals died prior to the time of man’s fall? NO. Read through the first three chapters of Genesis again, and I will assure you that you will be able to find nothing in the text that would indicate this. In fact, if you have a concordance, I encourage you to look up all of the passages that deal with the subject of sin and death, and see if you can find anything that tells us that man (via sin) was responsible for the death of animals. If you can’t, then we must conclude that this is but another fundamental Christian assumption. And everybody knows what happens when we ASSUME – we make an ASS out of both U and ME. Besides, why would a just and righteous God invoke a death sentence upon innocent animals, that do not have the ability to reason, for something that man was allegedly responsible for? If you stop and take the time to think about this, it really doesn’t make much sense. Even Mr. Spock would have to conclude that “It is highly illogical.”

Romans 5:12 is the most often cited verse to defend the orthodox position, that man himself was responsible for sin and death entering into the world:

“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”

Now it says here that death passed upon all MEN. Do you see any mention of death being passed on to all animals as well, as result of something man did? Do you? No? Good! Then we are making progress. Now, can we absolutely, positively, without question, prove from this passage (with a 100% degree of certainty), that the burden of responsibility rests upon man’s shoulders, that it was man’s fault? Or is the text simply stating a fact? Read it again for yourself, and see if you can still come to the fundamentalist’s widely held conclusion. An honest look at the passages which follow tell a different story:

“For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam to Moses…” (v. 13, 14a)

God’s Word tells us that “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). But it says here that sin is not imputed [attributed (a fault, crime, etc.) to a person; charged] where there is no law. Moses brought the law. Adam and Eve had NOT the law. Therefore, according to this passage, they were NOT guilty of transgressing something they did not possess, namely, God’s law. Nevertheless, they still DIED! So what’s going on? Why does God say they are innocent apart from the law, but invokes the penalty of sin (which is death) upon them as if they were guilty of breaking it?

Before addressing this question, it is necessary first to expose a little Pharisaic leaven. Fundamental Christian theologians interpret ‘death’ to mean ‘eternal separation from God.’ We read in Vine’s Concise Dictionary of Bible Words, p. 83, the following:

• 1. thanatos (2288) “death” (b) the separation of man from God; Adam died on the day he disobeyed God, Gen. 2:17, and hence all mankind are born in the same spiritual condition, Rom. 5:12,14,17,21, from which, however, those who believe in Christ are delivered, John 5:24; I John 3:14. “Death” is the opposite of life; it never denotes nonexistence. As spiritual life is “conscious existence in communion with God,” so spiritual “death” is “conscious existence in separation from God.”

Now, if you have a concordance, please take the time to look up all of the Hebrew and Greek words that are represented by our English word “death” and see if you can find this idea of “eternal separation from God” anywhere in the text. I could not even find the word “separation” used anywhere in conjunction with the word “death.” So what is the lesson here? “Beware the leaven of the Pharisees.” Death is, however, the point in which the body is separated from God’s precious breath of life and returns to dust, and the soul retires into an unconscious state of being (see our Statement of Faith on the subject of death for an extensive list of Scriptural witnesses).

MAN’S NAKEDNESS BEFORE GOD

Now let’s examine the word “sin” to see if we can determine what this word really means. The Greek noun hamartia (266) is derived from the verb hamartano (264) and means, according to Strong’s Concordance, “to miss the mark (and so not share in the prize).” So a more cumbersome but accurate way to describe what it says in Romans 6:23 would go something like this: “Since man has missed the mark (or in other words, he has fallen short of the glory of God) he is destined to die.” Now is man himself responsible for his plight, or is God? Please take note of Adam and Eve’s condition at the time when they were first placed in the Garden of Eden:

“Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to tend and keep it. Then the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” (Genesis 2:15,22,25)

Genesis 2:25 brings to my mind the example of a two-year-old child, who after losing his diaper, runs around the house in front of guests, completely naked. Many of us have witnessed a scene similar to this. And why does the child unabashedly do this? Because he is not yet mature enough to know any better; therefore his behavior is indicative of both innocence as well as ignorance. And so it was with Adam and Eve. They were already naked from the very moment that God placed them in the Garden of Eden. And they were unashamed (they were both innocent and ignorant).

Christian theologians teach that Adam and Eve had a perfect, blissful, harmonious relationship with God until they “chose” (of their own free will) to rebel against Him. But there is one big problem with this viewpoint. If they were so “perfect,” then what made them susceptible to sin and rebellion in the first place? Those who have been perfected in God’s image do not have the capacity to sin, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who was always in perfect submission to His Father’s will, being our prime example. So what is the text trying to tell us? Is nakedness symbolic of holy perfection, of righteous standing before God? Hardly! The complete opposite is true (Hosea 2:9,10; Revelation 3:17,18). Nakedness is used in God’s Word to denote mankind’s sinful condition [see points 7 & 8 in part 2 of the “Destruction” series for a more in-depth look into this].

Now you will notice that the text clearly tells us that they were naked even BEFORE they had partaken of the forbidden fruit, BEFORE THEY HAD SINNED. In other words, they had ALREADY missed the mark, and were already DESTINED TO DIE!

“For the creature [that’s us] was made subject to vanity [we were created this way], not willingly [we did not of our own ‘free will’ rebel against God’s will], but by reason of Him [according to His plan] who hath subjected the same in hope.” (Romans 8:20 – KJV)

An open-minded and honest examination of the Scriptures clearly reveals that Eve, especially, was guilty of sin BEFORE she ever ate of the “forbidden fruit.”

“For all that is in the world – the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life – is not of the Father but is of the world.” (I John 2:16)

Now compare the above verse with the thoughts that were going through Eve’s mind right before she and her husband Adam partook of the fruit:

“So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food (the lust of the flesh), that it was pleasant to the eyes (the lust of the eyes), and a tree desirable to make one wise (the pride of life), she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate.” (Genesis 3:6)

Now let’s refer back to John’s epistle to gain further insight:

“Do not love the world or the things of the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” (I John 2:15)

Did you catch that? If ANYONE loves the world (along with all that is in the world), THE LOVE OF THE FATHER IS NOT IN HIM! So how could Adam and Eve have been perfectly created (past tense) in the image of God, when the Scriptures clearly tell us that they were not? The love of the Father was NOT in Adam and Eve, or else they would have had the ability (like our Lord Jesus) to abstain from temptation.

“For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15)

But it was never God’s intention to leave his beloved creatures in this wretched condition, for it was His plan from the beginning to create man in His image. God’s finished product will be one who is Christ-like: wise as a serpent, yet as harmless as a dove. Therefore, He put the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the midst of the Garden of Eden, and made sure that they would partake of this “forbidden fruit” by placing the tempter in the garden with them. What? Do you mean to tell me that God actually wanted them to eat of this tree? Then why on earth did God tell them not to eat of this tree? This would be the logical question that most fundamentalists would ask, and would best be answered with another logical question:

“Well then, why did God tell the nation of Israel to obey His commandments if He knew beforehand that they were not going to obey them?”

The answer is quite simple: so that we (like the nation of Israel) will be made aware of our sinful condition (Romans 3:20; 5:13; 7:7; Galatians 2:16; etc.). Adam and Eve were unashamed because they were unaware, or ignorant, of their frailty. They were as innocent as newborn babes, and could not discern the difference between right and wrong. But once they partook of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, their eyes were opened, and they became aware of their condition. In other words, the falling away must come first, before the man of sin can be revealed (II Thessalonians 2)! And once the man of sin (the mortality of man) is revealed, then man’s need for a Savior becomes apparent. Contrary to fundamental Christian teaching, the transgression of God’s law was an integral part of His plan from the beginning. And it was designed to give mankind instruction in the ways of good vs. evil (Romans 7), and it will be used as a schoolmaster to bring everyone to the Savior, Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:24).

*A CHALLENGE: Anyone who can clearly demonstrate from the Scriptures that animal death was a direct consequence of, and did not occur prior to, the “fall of man” is cordially invited to do so. – Gary Cottongim

PART FOUR: THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL