Romans: God is Not Fair, Part 3 (Romans 1, An Overview)

We now turn to Romans 1, which, like all chapters of Romans, presents a heavy dose of difficulty.

(Rom 1:18-1 ESV)  18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.  19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.  20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.  21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.  22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools,  23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. 

Paul first argues that the Creation itself reveals God.

20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made.

This is profound. It tells us that we should see God in nature — not only in birds and flowers but in the stars and atoms and fossils. God made it all, and so he is revealed in it all. Not only is there no conflict between religion and science, but science is one means by which God reveals himself.

Many books have been written on this very subject, and it’s an deeply important subject, but Paul was not thinking primarily in terms of cosmology or quantum mechanics. Rather, I suspect Paul was thinking more in terms of Aristotle, who taught that there is but a single God in an eternal heaven, who is the Creator of the cosmos, the Prime Mover. And he reached these conclusions purely from reason and observation, that is, without special revelation. And Aristotle was well known to any educated Roman or Greek.

“Wrath of God” is not an original concept with Paul. It begins with the Song of Moses following the Israelites’ escape from Egypt —

(Exo 15:6-7 ESV) 6 Your right hand, O LORD, glorious in power, your right hand, O LORD, shatters the enemy.  7 In the greatness of your majesty you overthrow your adversaries; you send out your fury [=wrath]; it consumes them like stubble.

God’s wrath appears again when the Israelites worshipped the golden calf, when they grumbled against God, and when they rebelled against him —

(Exo 32:9-10 ESV) 9 And the LORD said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people.  10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them, in order that I may make a great nation of you.”

And throughout their journey —

(Num 11:1 ESV)  And the people complained in the hearing of the LORD about their misfortunes, and when the LORD heard it, his anger [=wrath] was kindled, and the fire of the LORD burned among them and consumed some outlying parts of the camp.

(Deu 29:19-20 ESV)  19 [If] one who, when he hears the words of this sworn covenant, blesses himself in his heart, saying, ‘I shall be safe, though I walk in the stubbornness of my heart.’ This will lead to the sweeping away of moist and dry alike.  20 The LORD will not be willing to forgive him, but rather the anger [=wrath] of the LORD and his jealousy will smoke against that man, and the curses written in this book will settle upon him, and the LORD will blot out his name from under heaven.

The prophets speak in similar but more cosmic terms. The captivity of Judah was a result of God’s wrath —

(Jer 32:37-38 ESV) 37 Behold, I will gather them from all the countries to which I drove them in my anger and my wrath and in great indignation. I will bring them back to this place, and I will make them dwell in safety.  38 And they shall be my people, and I will be their God.

(Jer 30:23-24 ESV) 23 Behold the storm of the LORD! Wrath has gone forth, a whirling tempest; it will burst upon the head of the wicked.  24 The fierce anger of the LORD will not turn back until he has executed and accomplished the intentions of his mind. In the latter days you will understand this.

And so God’s wrath is normally pictured as a consuming fire, as destruction. But in Paul’s use of the word, God’s wrath is seen in debauchery — that is, God punishes people by letting them live in ways that demonstrate how far removed from God they are. In other words, God’s wrath sometimes reveals God’s displeasure, not through fire, but by letting people suffer the natural consequences of their sins.

24 Therefore God them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,  25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

“Gave them up” or “delivered” is found throughout the Torah, most commonly along the lines of —

(Deu 2:30 ESV) But Sihon the king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him, for the LORD your God hardened his spirit and made his heart obstinate, that he might give him into your hand, as he is this day.

(Deu 2:36 ESV) From Aroer, which is on the edge of the Valley of the Arnon, and from the city that is in the valley, as far as Gilead, there was not a city too high for us. The LORD our God gave all into our hands.

(Deu 7:23 ESV) But the LORD your God will give them over to you and throw them into great confusion, until they are destroyed.

(Deu 20:13 ESV) And when the LORD your God gives it into your hand, you shall put all its males to the sword,

The prophets use the term the same way, but often in reference to the Jews being delivered to the Babylonians —

(Eze 23:28 ESV)  “For thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will deliver you into the hands of those whom you hate, into the hands of those from whom you turned in disgust,

You see the same sense in Acts —

(Act 22:4 ESV)  I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and delivering to prison both men and women,

(Act 27:1 ESV) And when it was decided that we should sail for Italy, they delivered Paul and some other prisoners to a centurion of the Augustan Cohort named Julius.

In other words, “gave them up” means delivered to defeat or to punishment. To live a life of sin, separated from God, is punishment, not pleasure. It’s defeat, not victory.

Theologians debate whether this means God took away their free will to make them behave this way or simply withdrew from them so that they behaved as they wanted with no divine influence to behave better.

The sense of the word is that God did something, but not that he overcame their will. When God delivered a city to the Israelites, the Israelites had to fight the battle, but God was with them. The key is that God strengthened them or weakened their enemies, but they still had to choose to join the fight.

Thus, God didn’t cause those who rejected him to sin. Rather, he heightened their sin — perhaps by stepping aside and letting sin run amuck. Perhaps by elevating the desire to sin so that their debauchery would be manifest — so that the defeat that sin brings would be obvious to all.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;  27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.  29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,  30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,  31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.  32 Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

And this is Paul’s argument. God reveals himself through his Creation. His nature is evident, and certain sins are obviously sin even to those who’ve never even heard of YHWH or the scriptures. Nature itself teaches us that it’s a sin to be disobedient to our parents (v. 30), and nature itself teaches that sexuality is designed heterosexual.

Therefore, God punishes society that sins against God’s nature as revealed in nature — and does so by letting society descend into the sorts of sins that demonstrate how very wicked a God-less society is.

This is profound and contrary to common sense. When we seen society collapse because of Godlessness, we want to pass laws to fix it. God wants the society to descend so deep that they cry out for relief — for a Savior.

Many an individual has only found God by hitting rock bottom, and we understand that. Paul says that God applies the same principle to entire societies.


About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in God Is Not Fair, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

30 Responses to Romans: God is Not Fair, Part 3 (Romans 1, An Overview)

  1. laymond says:

    (Exo 15:6-7 ESV) 6 Your right hand, O LORD, glorious in power, your right hand, O LORD, shatters the enemy. 7 In the greatness of your majesty you overthrow your adversaries; you send out your fury [=wrath]; it consumes them like stubble.

    Mat 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
    Mar 16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.
    Jhn 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

  2. rich constant says:

    contextually JAY:
    i gotta gripe with this chapter
    1. issue…
    not bad eh,
    right off the bat, i gotta a gripe.
    on how to read,a letter.
    so forgive me, but your a lawyer and outta know better.

    if we are trying to get any where in understanding what the Spirit is communicating through Paul,we best, at least read for structure in our interpretation of such Paul wrote 1st. Cor 2:11-14.
    if you break into chapters that is pure ontology. yes?
    If we are seeking to understand gods story.

    ROM 1:18 – 3:20
    to continue onward into our observation of the cause of the oneness. IN, BY, and THROUGH THE ANNOINTED ONE,FOR THE purpose of FAITH IN THE FATHER,THROUGH THE SPIRIT.
    looking to the restoration of the cosmos because GOD is GOOD…

    any way Jay:
    as my mom would say,

    …WITH A NEW! ROPE!!”


  3. Price says:

    One of the most depressing parts of scripture to read (for me) is the last few chapters of Judges…It ends with what created it… vs. 25 of Chapter 21… In those days there was no King in Israel; Everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” I agree that the Lord will allow us to live our lives in a self destructive pattern in order to allow us to self destruct…. The story of the Prodigal Son comes to mind… But, then again He brings it upon those whom He wishes in sudden fashion as He did with Job and Noah… God handles things unequally at times for sure…Either way, without a “King in Israel” we are abandoned to ourselves which general works out..not so good.

    Rich… I tried but couldn’t grasp your point..I’m sure it was me but I was confused as to what exactly your objection was…

  4. Price says:

    BTW…I believe the part about seeing God’s divine Nature in nature speaks for a long earth…:) Otherwise, what we see in nature is an illusion that He created to purposefully mislead us into thinking something was done according to the laws of physics that He created when in fact He bypassed them… Just saying.

  5. rich constant says:

    ROM 1:18-32
    the idea starts wit a major idea (statement) and finishes with a clear summation
    which IS GOOD, although i am afraid that we will loose sight of the cohesiveness of the picture of the story. as is summed up in ROM 16:25-27.

  6. rich constant says:

    i will take issue with this after i clean and drink more coffee price.
    that’s why theory of quantum physics’s have worked to maintain the definition of faith in Heb.11:1.
    through a balance of sorts. we live in a liner time frame god does not.
    men are given Revelation to explain God in a Newtonian world view.
    kinda like if a tree falls in a forest and no is around to hear it fall did it really make a noise…

    BTW…I believe the part about seeing God’s divine Nature in nature speaks for a long earth…:) Otherwise, what we see in nature is an illusion that He created to purposefully mislead us into thinking something was done according to the laws of physics that He created when in fact He bypassed them… Just saying.

  7. rich constant says:


  8. rich constant says:

    ROM 1:18-32
    the idea starts wit a major idea (statement) and finishes with a clear summation
    which IS GOOD, although i am afraid that we will loose sight of the cohesiveness of the picture of the story. as is summed up in ROM 16:25-27.


    1:11 For I long to see you, so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you,

    16:25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that had been kept secret for long ages,

  9. Jay Guin says:


    I have to say you make a lot of sense. I’ve always found it a bit inconsistent to argue that God made the universe looking older than it really is, when God says to look at the creation to learn about God and his qualities. I think the evidence favors a very old earth, and I see no inconsistency with scripture. True science declares the glory of God. It can be no other way.

  10. Jay Guin says:


    I really can’t cover 1:18 – 3:20 in one post! In fact, the plan is to cover exactly those passages and then draw some conclusions. At present, I’m not intending to go further with this study of Romans — but I could change my mind. It happens.

  11. We now turn to Romans 1, which, like all chapters of Romans, presents a heavy dose of difficulty.

    I remember when I was about 12 or so. I had always heard Romans was very difficult. So I read it through in one sitting.

    After college Greek reading classes at both the under-graduate and graduate levels and a class in Romans & Galatians taught by Richard Rogers at Sunset, and teaching Romans at least a couple of times, plus other intense study of the book, I have still never understood Romans as much as I did when I concluded that it was not so difficult after all after that reading at age 12!

    How naive we are when we think we have mastered God’s Word!


  12. rich constant says:

    that’s so true Jerry
    kinda like what Einstein said.
    most of the time the simplest answers are true…basic concepts dove tail into one another.
    ya don’t cut and whack at scripture
    break the story apart and write short subjects and say a-men.
    not only do you do a disservice to god but one to your brother.


  13. abasnar says:

    Difficult or not … that depends. We can make everything seem so complicated that only theologians can help us in our misery; or we can read with a childlike faith at face value. Of course, as we grow our understanding also grows, but that’s a natural process, not an academic one.

    As for the old earth: This is a pretty new idea from the 1800s, and the theory of evolution depends heavily on enormous amounts of time. To say God created the earth “looking old” is nonsens – He created a complete cosmos! Only if we conclude that the cosmos and earth need time to come into being we imply their old age. But God said it and their it was. When he put the stars as a calendar into the sky He did not have to wait until the light travelled all the way from the borders of the universe to our planet. He created everything complete and functioning.

    Of course, in the long earth concept the question also arises: When did death enter creation? Do we just have an old earth, but the God planted Eden and created Adam out of dust who through his sin brought death and corruption into this world? Normally those who blend evolution-theories into their reading of Genesis also believe that the varieties of life were shaped by the rules of selection, i.e. by death. Which – in the end – boils down to the conclusion that physical death cannot be the result of sin. The “emergency exit” to this “discovery” is the attempt to “spiritualize” the death God spoke of in Eden. “AH, God meant they would die SPIRITUALLY!” And this leaves us with the question why Jesus had to die PHYSICALLY.

    Questions after questions, and one inconsistency follows another one as soon as we blend in materialistic philosophies into our understanding of God’s Revelation. No wonder everything suddenly seems SO COMPLICATED that only theologians can help us out …

    But be it as it may: To conclude that the eart is OLD from THIS passage in Romans is impossible, because that’s not even remotely the topic Paul is addressng here.


  14. Price says:

    Alexander…actually, there were many prominent Jewish teachers who wrote of the compatibility of an old earth (billions) and the Torah…back as far as 11th century… Perhaps earlier in Jewish tradition.

    As far as God working outside of time…that’s pretty much understood…but that doesn’t take away from the fact that the laws of nature that He created and which are a part of time… indicate that God created and/or allowed the earth to bring forth using these laws…If He did not do that then He left the appearance that He did…and wrote about an expanding universe in the book of Job to indicate how the universe operated…but not really…I find that to be inconsistent…

    But, the whole thing wouldn’t create a stir if the authors of the KJV has translated the Hebrew word “long period of time” versus “day”…. It’s a translation based on a presupposition that isn’t necessary. Given what science has proven to all but the fringe elements, it would seem that Christians don’t compromise the authenticity of the Bible by accepting a long earth.. In contrast, the 6 day creation, 6,000 year old earth has so little support that it has been removed from public education or any matters of law which in MHO trivializes our faith unnecessarily… But, whatever…people are free to believe what someone convinces them of I guess. But, quoting scripture to try and prove the Sun revolves around the Earth (which was once done by the church) would now be a slight against one’s intelligence and would be roundly rejected by those who do not know Jesus… and probably anything else that person said…which is the greatest damage to the faith. IMHO

  15. Alabama John says:

    One thing is certain and that is they lived a longer life. Regardless of the time factor question, when so many generations are alive at the same time they lived long. We put their pictures in the paper when there are five generations alive. Forget the math, see how many faces would be in a generation picture
    Genesis 5: Lamech was born about the time Adam died so 9 generations alive at the same time.

    A 12 year old would read more like the folks back then would of read. Even Pauls education was no match for the universities of today.
    The true mark of a smart man is one who can make a complicated scripture or thought easier to understand, not the other way around.

  16. Alabama John,
    Your comment reminded me of the good, old sister of an earlier generation. The congregation had given her a set of commentaries to show their appreciation. After she had them for a while, someone asked her how she was enjoying them. She replied, “The Bible sure does help explain those commentaries!”

    Alexander commented earlier that only theologians can really get things complicated. My most productive study and teaching is when I simply get people to look seriously at what the text actually says – instead of what I (or my students) have always thought it says.


  17. Alabama John says:

    And that is the very reason you have students.

  18. abasnar says:

    But, the whole thing wouldn’t create a stir if the authors of the KJV has translated the Hebrew word “long period of time” versus “day”…. It’s a translation based on a presupposition that isn’t necessary.

    Since the days are defined by evening and morning in the text I think it is so clear what is meant, that I have to say the presuppoitions are definitly on the other side, Price. If we start changing God’s word for the sake of scientific fashion where will that end?

    But that’s off topic anyway … maybe God is unfair that he confirms the errors of worldly wisdom by sending the scientists into wrong directions on purpose. But – after all – this also has been written:

    2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
    2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
    2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

    I’m not impressed by science, but by the Living God. Why should He have given us the creation account in Genesis? Only that we should find out later that it was not the way He said it was?

    Come on, Price! God knows what He says and what He has done, but a mankind runnig away from the truth in order to live out and justify their unrighteousness cannot but err and will be led further into darkness by the Lord Himself – isn’t it that what Romans 1 also says?

    Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
    Rom 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
    Rom 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    Rom 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up …

    We call them scientists – God calls them fools. I know whom I have to believe, trust and follow. And I will never use God to fill in all the “missing liks” in evolution so this atheistic philosophy could survive.

    God does not lie, and He is a perfect communicator: This means He can be understood by us without special education or tools.

    Again, more clearly: If we start changing God’s word in order to gain the acceptance of a “scientific world” we take the road of Bultmann and others who said the resurrection is unbelievable to modern man. One wrong turn leads us all the way in a wrong direction, Price.


  19. Price says:

    Alexander, you might be careful about how you throw around condemnation…The church made the same claims toward Galileo and imprisoned him for heresy…only Science proved his innocence.

    I’m not some leading scientist but when you combine Evening and Morning…you don’t get a full 24 hours… that ever enter your mind ? Psalms 90 uses the same Hebrew words to describe the entire beginning and ending of a human life…surely that doesn’t me we all live one day… Are you studied in Hebrew ??

    I don’t mean to argue the point too much but when the public education system of the whole United States has thrown out creationism from even being considered….When the Federal Courts laugh and scoff because the only support you have is Faith in something for which there is seemingly no proof…you really might consider going back and making absolutely sure that your credibility doesn’t depend entirely upon 16th century translators and their personal bias toward what they were putting down on paper… The Church as a whole has lost considerable influence in the world we live in…Our light shines about 6 inches in some areas…And, if the creationists are as wrong about the 6 days as they were about the earth being the center of the universe then all of those ugly things you said about science…would be true about the church… The only difference between then and now is apparently they were able after some period of time to admit they were wrong…

    an interesting analysis of the Hebrew and alternative translation from a Biblical perspective can be read at this link…
    Nothing in this critique would allow for “rewriting” the original language…

  20. Randall says:

    This is a question – not a doctrine I am putting forth. I do have an opinion but I would like to know what the opinions of others are as well.

    When we read the creation account at the beginning of Genesis – from the ESV Bible Online says:
    3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 And God saw that the light was good. And God separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.

    6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse [1] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 And God made [2] the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. 8 And God called the expanse Heaven. [3] And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

    Should we understand that it was God’s intent that those to whom the book was written, as well as we ourselves, were meant to understand the phrase “there was evening and there was morning, the second day” etc. as a literal 24 hour day? Is that the point God wants to make to us? I am sure some would answer one way and others another way, but I would be interested to our thinking and the reason(s) for it.

  21. Price says:

    Randall….My understanding from reading…I’m not a Hebrew linguist….is that the two terms Evening (Ereb) and Morning (boqer) are incorrectly linked together in the KJV…A more appropriate translation according to the folks at the link mentioned above…is that there was an evening and there was a morning, the (nth) day which is found in the NASB and ESV translations. Many scholars have read this to mean that there was a beginning and there was an end which made up a long period of time… That would be consistent with what we understand to be true from all of the “ists” that exist today… I am not aware of a single discipline of science that has any demonstrable proof whatsoever that would support an earth of 6,000 years…

    But who can refute the suggestion that God just pretended to make a creature that is no longer in existence and had it fossilized in a rock to make it look like it did… Seriously, what would be the point in pretending that something existed which did not exist that made the world look ancient in time, when it was in fact very young ?? That makes God look like a prankster…

    When Aristotle promoted an eternal void as the universe we knew that wasn’t true…the Bible said there was a beginning… When the scientific world was able to demonstrate an expanding universe (book of Job) they were able using the law of physics to go back in time to a beginning… The discovery was trumpeted right up until the time somebody pointed out that science just proved the Bible right… Some cheered…others were converted…others shrugged their atheistic shoulders. One can only wonder if the school and legal systems would look at the Bible differently and perhaps as the only ancient historical book that actually got it right if there wasn’t such a loyalty to the translation of the KJV. and creationism…??

  22. Jay Guin says:

    Price and Alexander,

    I appreciate the importance of this discussion. I’ve studied the issue extensively. Therefore … I’m not going to participate. I have to either participate full bore or not at all. Maybe one day I’ll take the topic up.

    Ultimately, to me the main thing is that creation/evolution should never, ever become a fellowship issue. The worse mistake we can make is to declare that someone can’t be a Christian if he accepts evolution or an ancient earth. That’s an argument made by atheists ignorant of the scriptures and adopted by some Christians ignorant of the scriptures. The Bible nowhere demands that you take a young-earth viewpoint in order to be saved.

  23. Price says: it… look forward to you bringing it up at a future date.. I agree it’s not a salvation or fellowship issue but it sure has an impact…:)

  24. abasnar says:

    I also agree that it is not a salvation issue – and we accept in fellowship also those who hold to a different view; but we would not let them teach on this subject.

    Evening and morning: I did not say, this makes 24 hours, but I meant that the use of these shows that days are meant, because a day ends with evening (and the following night) and a new day begins at morning (or in Jewish understanding: The new day begins with the eveing and the following morning). Our 6-day week + Sabbath is based on the 6-day creation.

    Psalm 90 does use days in a poetic manner, but note: Moses did not use the phrase evening and morning. So this cannot be used as an argument. You cannot take a text where a word is used metaphorically to explain away the literal meaning of the same word in another text.

    BTW I did not condemn anyone – I just quoted from 2Th 2:10-12 and Rom 1:24; by this I mean that God can cause people to stumble ever deeper into darkness and error.

    What I like best about the creation account in Genesis:
    First God created the Earth and then the sun, moon and stars (4th day). Oh, I know this raises so many questions and seems so unbelievable; But – boy – I like it: “There you go, explorers of our origin, you got it all wrong from the very beginning!”

    It’s not about scientific proofs, because these proofs vary from generation to generation. Today it is in question whether the speed of light is static or can change. There are more than one explanation for the red in the spectrum of distant galaxies. And the first men on the moon were puzzled because there was only an inch of dust up there. Serious scientists have more questions than answers; therefore we should not make their vague ideas a guideline of how to interpret scripture.

    My own brother is a scientist, a chemist and co-preacher in our church. He says the same: There is not just one science – there are many scientific ideas.

    But be it as it may: Nowhere in the scripture the length of days or age of the earth is debated. It is reported and can be (at least) roughly estimated by counting the genealogies. I see no reason to doubt either Genesis 1 or the genealogies.


    P.S.: As for the translations of evening and morning (and I struggle enough with Greek, so I don’t bother with Hebrew; but I can ask my brother who speaks Hebrew fluently)

    But I know of no translation who has it differently, also not in our German translations. As soon as you begin to understand evning and morning as “beginning and end of a long time” you stop doing a translators work and become an interpreter or paraphraser. Words have theitr clear meaning, and the textual context defines their meaning – when we come with a philopsophy from the world we’l like to harmonize with the scripture, assumptions like the given one are made: Changing day (which is a specific span of time) into an unspecific period of time. Thus the whole meaning of the text gets changed.

  25. guestfortruth says:

    Here is an outline for Romans Chapter 1


    What a tremendous book is the books of Romans! Adequate superlatives are simply not available to properly evaluate the importance of the book, but one things is certain: an accurate understanding of the book would eliminate the needless confusion existent in the religious world regarding justification by faith, the purpose and duration of the law of Moses, the place of baptism in God’s scheme of redemption, and a host of other subject too numerous to mention. It is no exaggeration to say that one must grasp the foundational principle set forth in Romans 1 in order to accurately interpret the book as a whole. For example, Paul’s authority as an apostle is established in this chapter itself conveniently divides into two major sections: (1) The power of the Gospel (1:1-17) and (2) The Sins of the Gentiles (1:18-32).
    Chapter 1:1-2 Paul’s Resume
    Chapter 1:3-5 Paul’s Redeemer
    Chapter 1:6-7 Paul’s Readers
    Chapter 1:8-9 Paul’s Remembrance
    Chapter 1:10-13 Paul’s request
    Chapter 1:14-15 Paul’s Readiness
    Chapter 1:16-17 Paul’s Resolution
    Chapter 1:18-20 God’s Revelation
    Chapter 1:21-23 Gentile Reaction
    Chapter 1:24-28 God’s Rejection
    Chapter 1:29-31 Gentile Rebellion
    Chapter 1:32 God’s Retribution

  26. Alexander,
    I appreciate your comments above, especially about how science has more questions than answers.

    I do think you overlooked the very first words of Gen 1, though. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” I see no indication that He created earth and then later created the sun, moon and stars. Yes, the activity of the second & third days (as well as the fifth and sixth days) was centered on earth. Only the first and fourth day was focused on the universe beyond earth, though in each of these the emphasis is on the impact of that part of creation on the earth.

    There is some evidence that Genesis 1 is also poetic and rhetorical. Note the parallelism between days 1-3 and days 4-6:

    Day 1 – Light; Day 4 – Light holders (sun, moon, & stars)
    Day 2 – Separation of sea & sky; Day 5 – fish & birds to inhabit the sea & sky.
    Day 3 – Dry land & vegetation; Day 6 – animals & man to inhabit the land.

    I do not make too much of this, but I do believe that it suggests Genesis 1 is more in the nature of answering the who and what of creation than in answering the how and when – except as it says, “God did it.”


  27. abasnar says:

    We can’t expect all answers from this shor chapter either, Jerry. I do like the way it set up very much, whether it is poetic in language I do have some doubts, becuase other than in typical Hebrew poetry there are no parallel structures in the verses. But maybe it is better to understand these words as a “manifesto” a solemn declaration.

    Yet, sun moon and stars on the fourth day (as i said this raises many other questions) really makes me smile broadly. I once heard this was to written to make clear how stupid it is to worship the sun, the moon and the stars. It is stupid, but whether that’s the reason is hard to prove. I can imagine that God did it on purpose, maybe also to put to shame modern science. But again, that’s hard to say.

    But I like it very much 😉 Sticking to the words, the whole story reads very different than what we usualy hear. And this at least leads us to distrust all these theoiries as soon as we started to trust the One who is introducing Himself in this chapter.

    I don’t like it, when we start “harmonizing” God’s word with what we think we understood of the cosmos. That’s why I reacted rather strongly to this “old-earth” stuff.

    God said it, I believe it, that’s all that faith demands.


  28. guestfortruth says:

    Jay ,
    Jay said “adopted by some Christians ignorant of the scriptures. The Bible nowhere demands that you take a young-earth viewpoint in order to be saved.” Are you talking about the Christian apologist? “ But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; (1 Peter 3:15). Today in the Theological circles there is a false teaching called: “Theistic evolution” and even some of our “Christian Colleges” has been infected by those theories. Do you remember what the Jesus taught in Matthew 6:24 “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be loyal to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. In this world there are 2 positions about the Origin of the World, In One side are the Creationist and in the other side the Evolutionist, Those that claim that the man evolved from ape to a man “Evolutional Theory”. I recommend you to hear Brother Brad Harrub P.h.D from He answer the question with the bible : Can A Christian be an Evolutionist? Also you can see that here in this link:

    If we ignore what God has said about the Creation and try to accommodate evolution in the biblical teaching that is an man made big “Opinion” “Assumption” in his inspired, inerrant all sufficient word. We need let the Bible Speak and don’t have any doubt about what God intent to share with us as we read in Deut 29:29
    In Ephesians 4:13-15 “ till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ—. We have the example of the brethren in Corinth. The church there was putting the eyes in the preachers and the Inspired Paul asked all the Corinthians to “Speak the same thing” and be “perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement” ( 1 Cor. 1:10-13) The scriptures teachs one body, one spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God (Eph. 4:1-6) of course since the establishment of the church has always confront the problems . This was true in the early days of the church, and it is likewise true today. Swinging from the extreme side of “liberalism” (going beyond God’s Word in certain things 1 Cor.4:6), some have gone to the extreme side of “radicalism“ ( making man’s opinions equal to the Scriptures).
    Failure to distinguish between matters of Faith and matters of opinions is one of the main causes of division.
    Christians” walk by fait not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7).Faith comes by hearing God’s Word (Rom.10:17). The Bible is the divinely inspired Word of God (2Tim. 3:16,17). One must follow the Scriptures (Rev. 22:14); and where the Lord has given explicit instructions, one dare not change them. He must neither add to nor substract from the Word of God (Deut. 4:2;2John 9; Rev. 22:18,19). Where God has spoken on any subject, man’s acceptance of what He has said is in the realm of faith (Rom. 10:17). Yet, there are areas in which the Lord has not given instructions- areas in which He has left decisions on how to do the things He has authorized to the judgment of Christians . This judgment ( 1 Cor. 1:10) must be in harmony with the New Testament principles (1 Cor.14:40).We need to remember that “For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. (1 Cor. 14:33). Not all is matter of “opinion” .

  29. guestfortruth says:

    guestfortruth, on July 8th, 2011 at 2:36 pm Said: Your comment is awaiting moderation.


    I recommend the book ” Creation Compromises 2nd. Ed” by Bert Thompson.

    and Also The Truth About Human Origins by Brad Harrub P.h.D and Bert Thompson.

    Answering the question: Can A Christian be an Evolutionist?

    I hope everybody enjoy the Videos from Bro. Brad Harrub.

  30. laymond says:

    Jhn 1:6 ¶ There was a man sent from God, whose name [was] John.
    (but unlike Jesus, he did not die for a great cause like taking away man’s sins, he died because he disrespected a king, an earthly king.)
    Mat 14:10 And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison.
    Mat 14:11 And his head was brought in a charger, and given to the damsel: and she brought [it] to her mother.

    Is this God’s fair justice for the man that Jesus said.
    Luk 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: ————

Comments are closed.