Apologetics: Ruminations on Eden, the Flood, Babel & Archaeology: An Interview with N. T. Wright

17 Responses to Apologetics: Ruminations on Eden, the Flood, Babel & Archaeology: An Interview with N. T. Wright

1. Price says:

   June 4, 2014 at 6:00 am

   Thanks for sharing..
2. Ray Downen says:

   June 4, 2014 at 9:11 am

   N. T. Wright wrongly says, “Actually, this fits with the scientific evidence according to which there were some significant changes in the hominid population and lifestyle around 6000 years ago, though I wouldn’t myself put too much weight on that. – See more at: http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/06/02/n-t-wright-bible-isnt-inerrantist/#sthash.70tG3k0o.dpuf.” I prefer to believe the Bible is inspired and inerrant. No one now alive was alive 6,000 years ago to report on what was then happening.

   But God had Moses write and tell about that time, which includes no “hominid population” at all on this planet. Moses describes the first pair, from whom all now alive are descended, just as we ALL of every race are descendants of Noah. Scholars can orate at will and guess about 6,000 years ago, but the Bible tells about it from the only One who really knows. How greatly to be praised are those scientists who recognize that God created our universe and through Moses has told us about the early days.

   Hovind in Florida and Sharp in Oklahoma are two in particular whose work has come to my attention in recent months. I believe they are right in believing the Genesis account rather than trying to replace it with imagined hominids and far more years than Moses knew about. The “Does God Exist?” ministry is another excellent source for truth about creation.
3. laymond says:

   June 4, 2014 at 9:52 am

   Ray, we agree on much more than we disagree on (I think). There are some who spend their time here on earth (many who claim to be Christian) studying the bible in order to disprove it, as written. There is no doubt in my mind there were mistakes made during translations, but if we keep those mistakes in context with the total, we find those mistakes correctable. We need to look at God through the lenses of Job (who do you think you are to question me, you were not there ) .
   That said, if one questions what is plainly written about the being of Jesus, I don’t see where they have the right to complain about others who question the creation, and the time thereof .
   If I were to believe the things some here believe about the bible, I would never pick it up. As for the modern day earth I do believe it was created by God as a place for (modern day) humans to live . I don’t believe matter was created at that time, and the bible never says that it was.
4. laymond says:

   June 4, 2014 at 11:42 am

   Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
   (in my opinion this “beginning” was the beginning of a plan of God’s to create a being to represent him, his image)
   Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
   (as we see the material for making the earth, may have been available already, just in the need of saving , or salvaging. and we don’t know the age of this material)

   Gen 1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
   (Looks to me as if God parted the waters that surrounded this material, and put it to good use)

   Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
   Gen 1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
   Gen 1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
   Gen 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
   ( this was the first time the planet earth was called “Earth” , and a few days later the first “earthman” was created.) no one has any record of the mass that earth was created from, nor how many times it had been used to place life upon. The fact that this mass of water soaked dirt was salvaged during this operation, and was threatened to be returned to it’s former situation when God decided to abandon the project does give cause to suspect that it might have been used before.
5. laymond says:

   June 4, 2014 at 11:55 am

   Jay as you said my time was not wasted, but as I have said many times before I am not as enthralled with Mr. Wright and his writings as some might be. My tongue is kind of salty when I finish reading him. ( those grains of salt add up)
6. Jay Guin says:

   June 4, 2014 at 10:47 pm

   Laymond,

   I don’t agree with everything Wright said in the interview either, but I was challenged and edified. I also disagree with him on the nature of hell and the interpretation of Galatians 5 — but I’ve learned an immense amount from the man and will continue to read his works.
7. Jay Guin says:

   June 4, 2014 at 10:52 pm

   Ray,

   Technically, Wright was correct to refer to Adam and Eve as “hominids,” because the scientific term includes humans. But I would have said “humans” myself. And I don’t think it quite works for Adam and Eve to be dated 4004 BC, because by then, humanity — with language, tools, burial, art, writing, trade, etc. — had covered the planet. They have to be earlier or else you have to suspend the laws of science to collapse all of pre-Flood history into 1500 years.

   Personally, I go with an earlier date for Adam and Eve — which is the best way for them to truly be parents of all humanity.
8. Larry Cheek says:

   June 4, 2014 at 11:17 pm

   Jay,
   Does that indicate that you are in agreement with the time frame of the flood? Just that there was a longer time frame between Adam and the flood or Noah? I know there are many on the blog that speak of a belief that the flood was a local, not whole earth. If I remember correctly you have also portrayed that concept. How can we reconcile the message in scriptures that states that all air breathing animals died, and if they did not why was it necessary for all species to be in the Ark to be preserved?
9. Jay Guin says:

   June 5, 2014 at 9:11 pm

   Larry,

   I take the Flood to be local and early enough to have affected a very large portion of the human population — resulting the folk tales of the Flood that appear all over the world now. It had to precede the scattering of humans or else there’d be no folk tales in Polynesia about the Flood.
10. Skip says:

    June 6, 2014 at 2:44 pm

    N.T. Wright says, “The way I see it is that there were many hominids or similar creatures, part of the long slow process of God’s good creation. And at a particular time God called a particular pair for a particular task: to look after his creation and make it flourish in a whole new way.” This flies in the face of the story as explained in Genesis. There was no sin in the garden until Adam and Eve fell. Does this mean the Wright thinks all hominids before Adam and Eve were sinless? Doesn’t Genesis clearly teach that Adam was the first person created?
11. Skip says:

    June 6, 2014 at 10:34 pm

    Jay, regarding folk tales…Noah’ s descendents could have migrated if Pangaea existed at that time. Or perhaps they crossed continents in other ways. Genesis 6:17 God says “he will destroy ALL life under the heavens except those on the ark.” Genesis 7:19 says, “all the high mountains under the ENTIRE heavens were covered.” I can’t explain it but I have no choice but to believe a global flood.
12. laymond says:

    June 7, 2014 at 6:43 am

    Skip asked “Doesn’t Genesis clearly teach that Adam was the first person created? ”

    I believe it does, and there is nothing mentioned about baptism either, so it can’t be a re-creation.
    This is kind of like the tower to heaven isn’t it ? A lot of time wasted on an impossible task. Maybe we should get back to the job at hand, before God splits us all up to go our own way 🙂
13. Skip says:

    June 7, 2014 at 9:51 am

    I am somewhat shocked and dismayed that several on this topic have suggested that essentially everything in early Genesis is allegorical and can’t possibly be true. I am a scientist and understand mathematically and scientifically that God can set any initial conditions he wishes.

    If the Bible says in several places there was a global flood above all the highest mountains, then I believe the Bible. If the Bible says that Noah released a dove and it could not land because “water was over all the surface of the earth”, then I believe the Bible. If the Bible says that Adam is the first man, then I believe the Bible. If the Bible says that Adam lived 930 years then I believe the Bible.

    Science had many things seriously wrong about the earth in the past such as the earth was flat or the sun revolves around the earth. Now we arrogantly think that science has everything completely correct and we are forcing the Bible to conform to our meager knowledge. Give it 100 years and I bet science will come closer to the Biblical explanation of origins.

    If I make everything I don’t understand allegorical then I don’t have to believe baptism, or many other commands, are necessary. Let’s start making a list of everything that Biblically doesn’t make sense to us and let’s just tear those pages out.

    I Corinthians 1:19 “For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”
14. Monty says:

    June 7, 2014 at 10:14 am

    Skip said,

    “I am somewhat shocked and dismayed that several on this topic have suggested that essentially everything in early Genesis is allegorical and can’t possibly be true. ”

    As I said earlier, in another post, “It just keeps getting weirder and weirder”, the more we feel compelled to wed the two.
15. Skip says:

    June 7, 2014 at 10:44 am

    Monty,
    I suggest a divorce because this wedding, with our current limited scientific knowledge and perhaps limited Bible knowledge, ain’t working.
16. Larry Cheek says:

    June 7, 2014 at 11:18 pm

    It seems very puzzling to me that men could read of the interaction between men in the OT and God and come to the conclusion that the objects that God created could remotely contradict the message that he has created and expects men to believe. Would anyone believe that Adam, Abraham, Issac, Joseph, Daniel, Samuel, David or Solomon would have dared to suggest that God had given them a flawed story of the creation and their heritage? How many times in our lessons have we been guided to observe God’s story (scriptures) as through the eyes of those that the message was being directly written to inform. Even during the messages men who were addressed, dealt very harshly by God if they did not adhere to the message. Many men come to mind, King Saul, Nebuchadnezzar, Kings of many nations, etc.
    Why would we believe that we will not be admonished in a similar fashion?
17. Randall says:

    June 15, 2014 at 9:45 am

    So Laymond,
    Perhaps it would be wise to go back and read more of what Alexander Campbell wrote and you will see he was rather orthodox in both his Christology and his view of the Trinity. Do we draw inferences with these doctrines, yes of course, as we do with almost all Christian doctrine, However, they are fairly drawn.
    Hesed,
    Randall

Comments are closed.