Readers: I am posting this most recent e-mail as an example of the lengths one must go to in order to make biblical events surrounding the earth’s creation seem reasonable. In my new book, “Disproving Christianity: Refuting the World’s Most Followed Religion”, I discuss the book of Genesis and the order of creation at great length- including the ways in which the Bible tells time compared to our scientific understanding of earth’s origin and contradictions that Genesis creates including the secondary creation story. But here, I will simply post an e-mail from Colin, along with some minor commentary on my part (visible in RED).
My name is Colin and I’ve inadvertently stumbled upon your work and blog. I have taken it upon myself to simply respond to your blog entry/writing, “Where Did We Come From part 1“, with what I feel to be at least a viable, plausible, response to a few points that you’ve made. I hope to hear back from you.
I will surely respond to your queries. I’d first like to thank you for taking to time to read my work and form a response. Your e-mail indicates that you are responding to “Where Did We Come From PART ONE”- This was meant to be a kind of introduction to a children’s book which I am writing in order to give kids an understanding of origin the doesn’t involve the supernatural, so please excuse the briefness of the article- I extend into the topic at greater length in my book (Disproving Christianity)- which I would recommend that you read as someone who finds biblical literalism as an interesting topic. With your response, however, you are trying to prove that the millions of years of earthly evolution which we have witnessed via radiometric dating and various scientific methods are parallel to biblical scripture and can be understood by reading the book of Genesis in the Bible- this is simply not true.
With respect to Genesis “and the evening and the morning were the 1st day” being the age of the earth, you have overlooked one very important point; Genesis 1:1 & 2. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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 waters.” There is no stated defined time between “In the beginning….” (vs. 1), and when He said “Let there be light….” leading to the advent and conclusion of the first day (vs. 3-5).
In other words, the very statement that “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth” does not indicate with any specificity when “In the beginning” actually was. Neither is it at all stated that immediately after the heaven and earth were created that He began the six days of creation starting in vs.3. While it may appear to imply this, it is certainly not conclusive beyond any doubt. For example, I may buy a house and take ownership of it, but I may not move in and occupy it for several days, weeks, or even months – but it would still be my house. Therefore, if heaven and earth were created and God began/continued creation of other things (celestial, or even other dimensions unknown, but certainly speculated by even Einstein himself), then the earth may very well have been a few million years old before creation on it ever began.
This is an interesting, though unoriginal, approach to the interpretation of scripture. I have heard this argument many times before but it fails under pressure; for example, if ‘God’ was active and the earth had been created- it stands to reason that a perfect creator would begin “in the beginning” and not wait millions of years to inhabit the earth with humans. But it really doesn’t matter because the basis of the argument is the age of the earth, which you insist can biblically be represented as millions of years (this is a stretch, by the way). Assuming the in the beginning, doesn’t literally mean in the beginning, you still have the problems associated with the creation of other animals. The Bible still indicates (this cannot be argued) that all life on earth was created within a six-day period; this is a statement which can easily be disproven as there is plant-life on earth and animals that existed millions of years before man evolved- or, as you believe, God created Adam from “dust of the ground” (Genesis 2:7, 21-23).
It would also stand to reason that if they were both (heaven and earth) created “In the beginning”, you would need a clear, definitive, establishing of what “heaven” actually is (immediate universe/galaxy, other galaxies, all galaxies, the entirety of space and outer space, etc.) for there to be sound science. It stands to reason that “heaven” in vs. 1 would also have to be 6,030 years old (approximately) if it was created at the same time the earth was, and if it is in fact the very heaven referenced in vs. 6-8. I think that we can both agree that this is not the case. Unless you can account for what is considered a tangible, conclusive, calculation of age with respect to “heaven”, then your argument is flawed.
Also, heaven here in vs. 1 (Heb. shamayim) would seem to indicate somewhere other than our immediate universe, as it has a dual meaning including the visible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher ether where the celestial bodies revolve. The word in verses 6, 7, & 8 (Heb. raqiya) is translated atmosphere meaning lit. a firmament or visible arch of the sky, from a root word meaning canopy indicating our immediate sky. Another point to note here as well, is that vs. 1 states that in the beginning He created the heaven and the earth, but in verses 6 – 8 He created Heaven on the second day – 2 whole days after the earth. While the point could be made that it is in fact the beginning that’s being described over several verses, He said “Let there be….” for everything else but the earth. (Reading this, I wonder if it enters your mind how far you must stretch each individual word in order to make a realistic reading of the bible- it begins to sounds pretty ridiculous.)
With respect to dinosaurs, we read in Genesis 6:1 – 4 how fallen angels/demons (sons of God) had sexual intercourse with human women (daughters of men) and produced giant offspring measuring upward of 13′ – 15′ at maturity. They were also different in that some also had six toes and/or fingers. It’s therefore just as likely that these same demonic spirits might also have had intercourse with animals (people do this today) and produced dinosaurs. (Do you know how ridiculous this sounds? Do you honestly believe that dinosaurs are the offspring of 13-15’ tall demon-spawn having sex with animals? Btw, in reality when one engages in sexual behavior with another species (people do this today)- the end result is not offspring… That is what makes them a different species.)
I would like to discuss the Gnostic Gospels with you as well, but I’m sure that now is not convenient as I would hopefully receive a response to what I’ve outlined here. I spent a great deal of time in my early adult life (before the internet – at the library if you can believe it) studying these gospels and ultimately “trusting” in their validity.
I hope to hear back from you.
Thank you again, Colin, for taking the time to respond to my work. I hope you’ll read my more in-depth explanation in my book. But I’m hoping you’ll understand why I chose not to spend much time showing you scriptural errors when you make claims about dinosaurs and humanity coexisting from fallen angels having intercourse with human women and producing giant offspring (how would a human woman give birth to a 13-15’ creature we ask ourselves) that then have sex with other various animals and create an entirely new species of animal- and explain the existence of dinosaurs.
David G. McAfee