BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH by JOAOZINHO MARTINS

BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH A TREATISE ON SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

Joaozinho da S. F. A. Martins

Copyright @ 2012 by Joaozinho da S. F. A. Martins ISBN - 9781619965690 BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH … Affirming a Radical Evangelically-Based Biblical Theology of Creation Covering Three Distinct Creation Epochs By JOAOZINHO da S. F. A. MARTINS A TREATISE ON SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM -

Printed in the United States of America at Xulon Press, www.xulonpress.com Published by: Joaozinho da S. F. A. Martins, Orlim, Salcete, Goa, India Proverbs 23:23:- “Buy the Truth, and Sell It Not …” Statutory Regulation: All material contained in this publication, except those passages reproduced from copyrighted sources, is in the public domain and may be freely quoted without any prior written permission from the Author. Citation of the source will be appreciated. Permission to reproduce this maiden publication in whole is granted with the stipulation that the same is reprinted without any alteration in its contents and format or design and is genuinely reproduced solely for free but responsible distribution in Personal Evangelism. Any reproduction made for profiteering through sale, even any sale to recover costs of printing and related expenses, is expressly prohibited, and is illegal.============================================= =============================================================== Unless otherwise noted and specified, items in bold print, italics, and underlined print throughout the book are the Author’s emphases alone. ==================================================================== ***** Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture references are taken from the Authorized King James Version and the New J. N. Darby Translation, Kingston Bible Trust, UK.

===============================================================

PREFATORY NOTE “Biblical Creation Truth”, as propounded in this maiden treatise, differs from the traditional and the more recent controversial theories of creationism. The early Church proponents and the subsequent adherents of the traditional six-day creationism

as well as the proponents of the contemporary theories of creationism have overlooked that Genesis 1:1 is, in fact, a distinct and an independent creation account in itself exclusive of the works of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31. Nor it includes Genesis 1:2. Given the prevailing failure to differentiate and separate the creation account of Genesis1:1 from that of Genesis 1:3-31 it has been wrongly believed that the heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 and chaos of Genesis 1:2 as God’s activity of the first day! Contrary to the prevailing confusing theories of creation, the primeval “heavens and earth” of Genesis 1:1 undoubtedly, had to be and therefore were actually perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4) and beautiful (Ecclesiastes 3:11).The primeval earth was not chaotic covered with waters and darkness all over! Genesis 1:1, in just one short blessed sentence, covers within its grasp a creation account encompassing the ‘totality of a perfect and beautiful creation’. This fact is corroborated by ‘WISDOM’ who witnessed the creation of perfect primeval heavens and earth (Proverbs 8:27-31). Notwithstanding faulty interpretations made within the framework of traditional creation concepts, in no way does Proverbs 8:27-31 ‘parallel’ with God’s phased works in the realm of time (Genesis 1:3-31) but actually complement Genesis 1:1with additional details, proving it to be in the dateless past. Next, Proverbs 8:27- 31 does not mention anything about chaos on the primeval earth. Accordingly, the chaos of Genesis 1:2 must be a later occurrence. Moreover, Proverbs 8:31 when read with Proverbs 8:26c and, accordingly, when the same are interpreted contextually in relation to each other prove that the original earth of Genesis 1:1was not empty or void but inhabited with life! One may also confidently state that there were pre-adamic men in whom God’s Wisdom delighted (Proverbs 8:31). This could not be true of any men since the fall of Adam! Undoubtedly, the traditional-historical Church belief of a ‘Creation in Six Days, some six to ten thousand years back’, is hermeneutically defective. As such, a faulty interpretation of Genesis 1:1, 1:2, 1:3-31 and Exodus 20:11 or 31:17 lies behind the socalled ‘battle for a true view of the beginning’. If these Scriptures were objectively interpreted taking into account Genesis 2:4 relating to beginnings, it would be clear that there were two historical beginnings of God’s creative works; one, in the eternity past (Genesis 1:1, cf. 2:4a) and the other, in the realm of time (Genesis 1:3-31, cf. 2:4b). It’s time we admit our failure to consider all the Scriptures given ‘here a little and there a little’ and rightly divide the Word of Truth relating to creation and interpret the biblical creation accounts appropriately! And next, with realistic faith, come to grips with the revealed Biblical Creation Truth for ‘His Name’s sake’, even as we look forward to the creation of new heavens and a new earth in the eternity future (2 Peter 3:13)! ~~ Joaozinho da S. F. A. Martins

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Keep that which is committed to thy trust, Avoiding profane and vain babblings, And oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amenâ&#x20AC;? {1Timothy 6: 20-21} {Authorized (King James) Version (1769)}

DEDICATION

===============================================

DEDICATED TO THE GREATER GLORY OF THE TRIUNE GOD THE INTELLIGENT DESIGNER, CREATOR AND SUSTAINER OF ALL MATTER AND LIFE

To My Darling Mother

Jane Almeida Martins My Only Sister

Ave Ana Maria Martins My Only Niece

Mariella Miriam Martins

*************************************************************

Psalms 19:1-6

The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows his handiwork. Day unto day utters speech and night unto night shows knowledge. There is neither speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth And their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, Which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoices as a strong man to run a race? His going forth is from the end of the heaven, And his circuit unto the ends of it: And there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.

*************************************************************

God Creates -- God is Delighted -- God Redeems Creation is Godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gift;

From tiny organisms crawling on the ground To the planets in the sky, Everything is created by God and governed by a plan. Submission to this plan is important to everyone and everything. God created human beings in order to fulfill this plan; He created them in His own image and likeness And adorned them with divine qualities; He made them man and woman So that they could better Cooperate in this mighty plan. To enhance this stewardship, He sent His only Son; Having established a relationship with Creation, He carried forward His saving mission, And finally entrusted it to humanity. For this purpose, He founded a community, the Church.

Archbishop Filipe Neri Ferrao Pastoral Letter: 2011-2012 COVENANT BETWEEN HUMAN BEINGS AND CREATION: DIVINE LOVE’S MANIFESTATION

No. CP-Past/132/2011, Archbishop’s House, GOA, INDIA

******* “For Christian Humanism, -Faithful in this to the most firmly established Theology of the IncarnationThere is no real independence or discordance but a logical subordination Between the Genesis of Humanity in the World And the Genesis of Christ, through His Church, in Humanity”.

---

Lord Jesus, You are the Centre Towards which all things are moving: If it be possible, make a place for us all In the company of those elect and holy ones Whom your loving care has liberated one by one From the chaos of our present existence and who now Are being slowly incorporated into You in the unity of the new earth. Teilhard de Perre Chardin Hymn of the Universe

************************************************************* Our view of Creation Is the necessary starting point For Our entire World-View. In fact, so vital is the issue That Francis Schaeffer once remarked That If he had only an hour to spend with an unbeliever, He would spend the first forty-five minutes Talking about Creation And what it means for Humanity To bear the Image of God â&#x20AC;&#x201C; And Then he would use The last fifteen minutes to explain The Way of Salvation

John MacArthur, Jr. *************************************************************

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION PART ONE ATHEISTIC EVOLUTION V/s BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH

PART TWO BASIC FACTS OF CREATION REVIEWING SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

PART THREE EPOCHS OR PHASES OF TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

EPILOGUE THE WAY OF SALVATION MAN’S NEW CREATION IN CHRIST

Sweet God God, you are my Creator and of all things I see I thank you for this beautiful world that you have given me. I thank you for the birds that fly and for all the fish that swim For the trees that give us fruit and food and for our parents who try to make us very good. And most of all I thank you Lord for my loved ones you have sent And now I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t even know how to pay your rent. Ronda Martins (Age: 12 years) BLOSSOMS

A collection of poems @1999 Caranzalem, Goa, India

************************************ Study to show thyself approved unto God, A workman that needed not to be ashamed, Rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: For they will increase unto more ungodliness. (2 Timothy 2:15-16)

PART ONE Atheistic Pagan THEORY OF EVOLUTION (SATANIC EVOLUTIONISM) V/s BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH (TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM) **************************** Bible’s Authority v/s Man’s Fallible Guesses? Is It Science v/s Faith? Or Is It Bible and True Science? Bible & Science v/s Evolution Debunking the Atheistic Pagan Myth of Evolution

PART TWO

BASIC FACTS OF CREATION REVIEWING SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

In The ETERNITY Past… ...In The Realm of TIME… ...In The ETERNITY Future

*************************************************************

Creation of Invisible Things Physical Creation Creation – Chaos – Creative Six-Day Renewal Biblical Creation Truth V/s Traditional Six-Day Creationism Biblical Creation Truth V/s Protestant Theistic Evolution And the Catholic Moderate Doctrine of Evolution

PART THREE

PHASES of SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM Phase One: CREATION - IN THE ETERNITY PAST Creation of the Original Heavens and Earth Lucifer’s Rule on Earth Primeval Celestial Conflict Chaos on Earth “Biblical Pre-Adamite Theology” Phase Two: CREATION - IN THE REALM OF TIME Sequel to Lucifer’s Rebellion: Creative Six-Day Renewal Biblical Six-Day Creationism (God’s Second Phase of Creative Acts) Creation of Sabbath Origin of the Seven-Day Week A Literal 24-Hour-Seven-Day Week Phase Three: CREATION - IN THE ETERNITY FUTURE Final Celestial Conflict and Chaos on Earth Re-Creation of New Heavens and a New Earth

EPILOGUE

THE WAY OF SALVATION MAN’S NEW CREATION IN CHRIST

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Obviously, this maiden treatise falls short of scholarly standards that characterize a large number of modern professional-theological works as in secular publications. However, “As Christians are diverse in temperament and background, their manner and methods of communication will likewise be varied. We should accept this diversity as a blessing, knowing that God can both bless and use all of us…Unfortunately, the world of Christian ministry is swamped by ‘copyrighted’ methods and products (as well as by secular scholarly standards), that often do not fit the personality, (theological background) and gifts of the communicator who attempts to use them.” 1 I have no regrets about any academic deficits in this maiden treatise. Nor, do I seek to justify my failure to strictly adhere to any conventional scholarly secular standards. It was of prime concern to me to communicate with full conviction, but in all simplicity, the Biblical Creation Truth relating to pre-historical, historical and prophesied future works of Creation. This aspect has been somehow overlooked by the modern adherents of the Traditional Six-day Creationism and by Young Earth Creationists. So also, it has been equally ignored by the so-called theistic evolutionists and others. Admittedly, as a maiden theological work with controversial material, this treatise is bound to be undoubtedly fallible. As such, any theological inferences or conclusions in this maiden work that are found to be biblically untenable are my own responsibility. The same are open to unbiased biblically-based feedback and unreservedly subject to correction with the ‘Sword of the Spirit’– even, the very sure and authoritative truth of God’s Word, which is ‘forever settled in the heavens’ (Psalms 119:89). Accordingly, a revised version (hermeneutical spiral) of this maiden work will be published in due course of time, God enabling me and making it all possible according to the riches of His Grace and that, for His own pleasure. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Vivo Soggaard, Media in Church and Mission: Communicating the Gospel, Theological Book Trust, Bangalore, India; 1993, p. 21

In compiling relevant material for this book, various works have been referred to and quoted herein to reprove the faulty Traditional Six-Day Creationism as well as to refute the atheistic evolutionary concepts that are appealing to Theistic Evolutionists. My due apologies to all the Authors and Publishers from whose ‘copyrighted’ works I’ve quoted freely without any

written permission. This lapse was unavoidable because of the technicalities involved. Still, am willing to face all the legal consequences resulting from any probable infringement of rights of those concerned. Anyway, I am very much indebted to all those from whose works I’ve quoted without obtaining any prior written permission to reprint previously published material relating to Biblical Creation Truth. Copyright regulations are unduly enforced to restrict any reproduction of published Biblical Truth. Nevertheless, God’s TRUTH should be freely available (Matthew 10:8b) to all of His Children not only for personal growth but also for free reproduction and dissemination (1Corinthians 2:12b, 13). It is encouraging to note that some of the Books published by the Kingston Bible Trust, UK have no “copyright” on them making it possible to reproduce edifying material from the same for the benefit of Christians. God’s Word was never meant to be kept bound. So also Biblical Truth derived from the same eternal Word of God should not be unduly ‘curbed’ by adopting secular laws and or copyright regulations. Published Biblical Truth should be necessarily in the public domain for its free reproduction and dissemination. However, this is only my personal opinion; it should not cause any soul committed to abiding by secular principles to stumble. I consider it a very rare spiritual privilege to make Biblical Truth freely available to anyone who needs it. And that, to God’s Glory (2 Corinthians 9: 9-15) even if it involves “stealing” God’s truth (2 Corinthians 11:7-8) previously published by those gifted to understand it. Those who understand biblical truth are commissioned to freely share it with others. However, under the protection of ‘copyright laws’ reprinting of published truth even for any free distribution for evangelism is very much prohibited. But then, no legitimate claims can confidently be made by any one for ‘originality’ seeing that God is the Source of all Biblical Truth. Copyright prevents free and wide access to any previously published biblical truth. Thus it discourages reproduction of biblical truth by those who would want to reprint it so as to share the same with others (1 Corinthians 9:18). By all means, the material in this publication is in the public domain. As such, it may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for free circulation in spite of the “copyrighted” material in it. Copyrighted material having as its original source the Biblical Truth is reproduced with the understanding that

any ‘copyrighted’ claim on the same will be graciously waived by those concerned. Of course, we are called upon to be wise and responsible stewards of God’s riches of biblical truth given to us freely. As such, in our zeal to disseminate the Truth freely we need to be careful at the same time to see to it that we do not cast precious priceless pearls before the ‘swine’. I am very much grateful to God, above all the others, for His guidance in this maiden work. Equally I am thankful to Him for graciously stirring the hearts of those few concerned to re-examine and subsequently give up the traditional six-day creationism in the face of geological evidence and biblical truth relating to the Historical Science of Creation. Their commitment to biblical creation truth in spite of being labeled as heretics has emboldened my own convictions. It is my fervent prayer to God that the material in this book will be profitable to those willing to re-examine the traditional belief of ‘a creation of cosmos in six days’ and, accordingly, without any prejudice review, recover, and reclaim to God’s Glory the True Scriptural Creationism by ignoring age-related unbiblical issues. I am deeply indebted and very much grateful to Jack W. Langford, USA (www.separationtruth.org), for taking the time and effort to go through my lengthy manuscript and make appropriate profitable suggestions. I am also much grateful to Malcolm Withell and Mark Lemon, both of UK, for encouraging me to reproduce material from the books written and published by the erstwhile divines and reprinted by the Kingston Bible Trust, UK. The edifying material in these books (see Appendices) contains sound theological instruction relating to God’s works of creation which is certainly compatible with and is supplementary to the material in this treatise. My sincere thanks to my close friend Suraj DaCosta for his support and encouragement throughout. His concern has enhanced my commitment to this maiden work all along. I am also much thankful to Marjorie Nancy, Kamthian Vaiphei and Rodwin Rodrigues for their support and prayers for the success of this work. I want to express my deep appreciation for Naome Mhay Bernales and her church-family in the Philippines for their sincere prayers. Moreover, Naome’s emotionally edifying and caring relationship which I really cherish is invaluable in my own spiritual growth. Special gratitude goes to my brother Fr. Carmo das Chagas Martins whose books from his personal library are of much help to me. Some of these books dealing with the subject matter relating to my treatise contributed much to my understanding and insightful growth. I also owe my

deep thanks to my other close family members for bearing with me as I took time away from them to get this work completed. Finally, for a very fruitful self-publishing experience, I wish to thank the concerned staff at Xulon Press, Florida, USA. In particular, I owe special thanks to Cari Caryl, my Publishing Consultant. Her ‘online’ encouragement boosted my confidence so as to finally opt for the services of Xulon Press when other options seemed to be equally plausible. Further, I am thankful to Karla Castellon for her sincere devotedness and commitment to get this book published and become a reality – a dream finally fulfilled and materialized. The Lord JESUS, even our Master and Teacher, to whose care the fruitful outcome of this work is committed, may graciously bless all those who have personally contributed their mite for its success. And, may He equally bless all those who have to spiritually benefit from this work. May God Almighty be always pleased to add His special blessing to every inspired exposition of His Word and to its ongoing Ministry for His Name’s sake. And, may the blessed fruitful effect of His Living Word be richly produced in our lives to His praise, honor, and glory!

Orlim, Goa, India 19th February, 2012

Joaozinho da S. F. A. Martins

==========

INTRODUCTION ==========

boldly profess, at times, to be sincere Bible-Believing Christians genuinely committed to searching the Scriptures ‘to prove all things’ and ‘hold fast that which is good and true’ (1Thessalonians 5:21). Yet, very often, we somehow choose to remain enslaved to erroneous traditional church beliefs even when the same are found to contradict the plain Scriptural teaching. By all means, Tradition and Dogmas reign supreme in our hearts and minds influencing thereby our convictions and beliefs just as it was in the bygone dark ‘Middle Ages’. In the process, we end up behaving like religious fanatics. And then, we make it our Mission to criticize those who actually preach sound Biblical Truth. We unjustly label such, given our inherent prejudice, as heretics because what is preached by them seems to have no supportable base in church history; or, because what is taught by them is found to contradict our traditional doctrines and ‘hide-bound’ beliefs and concepts. Nevertheless, not withstanding our holy bias, “The truth or untruth of any doctrine does not depend on whether or not it was ever taught in church history. Its truthfulness depends solely on whether or not it is taught in the Bible. Now, admittedly, a teaching that no one has ever before heard about might be suspect, but the Bible, not church history, is the standard against which all teachings must be measured.”1 (Italics, underline or bold type for emphasis are mine throughout, except where as specified to be otherwise). _____________________________________________________________ 1: Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth, Moody Press, Chicago, USA 1999; p. 91.

At one time, in the history of professing Christianity, it was assumed by some that the earth was flat 2. It was also believed that the earth was the

centre of the solar system in keeping with ‘Ptolemy’s earth-centered model of the cosmos’ 3. But then, Copernicus and later on Galileo proposed that a spherical earth revolved around the sun along with some other planets. Eventually, based on discoveries that seemed to support the ‘sun-centered model of the cosmos’, Galileo published in 1632 his first ‘scientific masterpiece’ entitled ‘Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems’ 4 Galileo’s views, however, did upset the belief in the ‘earth-centered model’ resulting in a serious conflict between Science and the Roman Catholic Church, at the time. Accordingly, “In 1633, the Inquisition found Galileo guilty of the charge (of heresy), forced him to recant and sentenced him to life imprisonment.” 5 Eventually, the Church came to terms with Galileo’s views. So, “In 1971, in the face of the optical proof of the fact that the earth revolves round the sun, Benedict XIV had the Holy Office grant an imprimatur to the first edition of The Complete Works of Galileo.” 6 Next, Pope John Paul II declared in1979 that the “Church may have been mistaken in condemning Galileo” 7 and ‘instructed a church commission to study the case’. Finally, in 1983 the Roman Catholic Church acknowledged that “Galileo should not have been condemned” 8 and subsequently, Pope John Paul II apologized in general on March 13, 2000 for the then “sins of the church” 9, 10 as well as for condemning Galileo, Martin Luther and others. _____________________________________________________________ 2: Jeffrey B. Russell, The Myth of the Flat Earth, American Scientific Affiliation Conference, 1997 3: Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The (Elusive) Theory of Everything, Scientific American, India, October 2010, p.50. 4: World Book Encyclopedia, 1992, Vol.8, p.13-14; 5: ibid, p.13-14 6: Luigi Accattoli, WHEN A POPE ASKS FORGIVENESS, The Mea Culpas of John Paul II, (Translated by Jordan Aumaann), Alba House, New York, 1998, p. 140, (2005 reprint) 7: World Book Encyclopedia, op. cit, p.13-14; 8: ibid, p.13-14. 9: Online News Hour: A Papal Apology, March 13, 2000; (www. pbs. org / newshour / bb / religion /jan-june00 /apology 3_13); 10: www.pbs.org/world/2000/mar/13/catholicism.religion

Obviously, it is very, very difficult and overwhelmingly painful, given

our prejudice to unlearn biblical and or scientific errors and replace the same with truth! Nevertheless, as stated by Pope John Paul II, “We cannot but deplore certain attitudes (not unknown among Christians) deriving from a shortsighted view of the rightful autonomy of science: they have occasioned conflict and controversy and have misled many into thinking that faith and science are opposed.” 11 However, when ‘things as they appear’ are viewed according to the recently formulated theoretical “Model-Dependent Realism” 12, the Roman Catholic Church was not unrealistic in insisting to maintain and hold on to Ptolemy’s ‘earth-centered model’! Even as, in 1893 Pope Leo XIII stated in his encyclical Providentissimus Deus, the ancients wrote and believed about things “as things appeared to them” and “___ described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time and which in many instances are in daily use to this day even with the most eminent men of science.” 13 In a similar vein, Galileo, convinced as he was by his observations, was not guilty of ‘heresy’ for endorsing Copernican revolution by adopting the ‘sun-centered model’, thereby finally ‘dissociating faith from an age-old Ptolemaic cosmology’! Because, in tune with the scientific model of “Phenomenological”: “Language of Appearances”, “…the same physical situation can be modeled in different ways… to describe the universe we may have to employ different theories…Each theory may have its own version of reality; but according to model-dependent realism, that diversity is acceptable, and none of the versions can be said to be more real than the other”.14 _____________________________________________________________ 11: Luigi Accattoli, WHEN A POPE ASKS FORGIVENESS, op. cit. p.126 12: See Article by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, op.cit. p. 49-51, for details. 13: Quoted by Hans Wijngaards in ‘Historicity in the Old Testament’, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore, 1971, p.82 14: Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, op.cit. p. 51.

Obviously, to any unaided observer on earth with his or her naked eyes

the round earth appears flat and stationary and the sun appears to rise and move from the East, and set in the West. Such subjective inferences based on ‘appearances’ are realistic and acceptable within the framework of ModelDependent Realism. Still, the Bible states that the earth is circular (Isaiah 40:22), and not flat; and that, the sun (Psalms 19:6), and the stellar heavens (Job 22:14) have their circuits (or, circular movements)! Even though the Bible contains culturally loaded statements based on the logic of appearances which seem to contradict the scientific spirit of our times yet the Scriptures do not err nor contradict true Science. The problem at the heart of any debate even now as it was then concerns biblical hermeneutics. “Paradoxically, Galileo, a sincere believer, showed himself to be more perceptive in this regard than the theologians who opposed him.” 15 For, he stated: “If Scripture cannot err, certain of its interpreters and commentators can and do so in many ways.” 16 Atheistic Evolutionary Myths V/s Biblical Language of Appearances In the course of time, the traditional Roman Catholic and Protestant doctrine of “Six-day Creationism” or the belief of a ‘creation of the cosmos in six days, some six to ten thousand years ago’ which is “based on a more or less literal interpretation of the Genesis 1 account of Creation” 17 got openly challenged and very much shaken by Charles Darwin’s publication “On the Origin of Species”, some 150 years back. In his pretty controversial publication, “Darwin proposed that life on earth began hundreds of millions of years ago and developed by evolution through natural selection --- a stark contradiction of the Christian fundamentalist view that God created 18 everything in six literal twenty-four-hour days.” ______________________________________________________________________________

15: Luigi Accattoli, op. cit. p. 133; 16: ibid, p.133 17: Creation and Evolution? Christian Odyssey, Grace Communion International, March 2009, Volume 6, No.1, Ca., US, p. 5. Also available on the Internet at: www.christianodyssey.org 18: ibid, p. 5

Of late, atheistic theories claim that our complex universe has evolved, say, from ‘a soup of hydrogen atoms’; or that, it ‘came into being in one big bang’; or, by ‘inflation’ of ‘tiny microscopic pockets of spacetime’ giving rise to ‘self-reproducing inflationary universes’ and so on, ad nauseam. Unfortunately, the theories rather ‘guesses’ keep on ‘mutating’ and novel theories ‘evolve’, ad infinitum. So now we are told that, “According to the prevailing cosmological theory, our universe spawned from a microscopic region of a primordial vacuum in a burst of exponential expansions called inflation.” 19 The vague atheistic theories are adorned with a scientific garb which only the scientifically attuned but spiritually closed minds willingly accept. Some atheistic scientists, however, very well know that the diverse Theories of Evolution are absurd; nevertheless, they blindly accept the same rather than submit to God’s authority and accept Him as the Creator of all that is. But then, to confront the “pseudo-scientific community” with the inspired Divine Language of Appearances constituting Biblical Creation Truth is to make oneself ‘look foolish, ignorant or hostile’ 20 if not downright ‘antiscientific’! Surprisingly, Darwinism is gaining wider acceptance 21 even amongst the Christians at a time when it keeps changing and ‘mutant versions’ of the same and related theories of evolution make their subtle appearance, each contradicting the other. In a way, as of now, in spite of lack of evidence “--many major Christian denominations have come to terms with Charles Darwin’s theory, in one way or another. The Church of England has officially apologized to him for the decades of misrepresentation.” 22 _______________________________________________________________________ _ 19: Mariette DiChristina, Life Quest, Editorial, Scientific American India, Jan. 2010, p.4; 20: Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p. 5. 21: Timothy G. Strandish, Why Darwin’s Triumph? Signs of the Times, May-June 2010, Seventh Day Adventist Publication, Australia. 22: Christian Odyssey, op. cit, p.6

Much earlier, Pope John Paul II, in his (October 22, 1996) Message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences stated: “In his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), my predecessor Pius XII had already stated that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and his vocation, Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. [.... la théorie de l'évolution plus qu'une hypothèse.] It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.” 23 Darwinism, neo-Darwinism and related theories of evolution attempt to explain but in vain, the “origin” of matter and life so as to do away with any belief in a Creator God. As a matter of fact, the educational system worldwide in almost all the fields of higher learning is entirely centered around “evolutionism – the atheistic philosophy that denies the possibility (rather, the reality) of a Creator.” 24 As is always the case, “Man’s natural mind leaves God out, and wearies itself in endless speculations.” 25 But, “faith brings Him in, and everything is simple. No one need be afraid that discoveries of geology, or any other science, will ever shake the truth of Genesis 1. It is God’s record, and all true science will be found in harmony with it. Any theory which definitely conflicts with the Biblical account of creation is certainly wrong” 25 and therefore, such unbiblical theories should be rejected outright. “….we need to recognize that there are many strong creationists, not only among lay Catholics, but also among Catholic scientists as well. We could mention Dr. Guy Berthault of France, for example, whose studies on sedimentation have been profoundly significant in refuting geological uniformitarianism. Two Italian creationists, Dr. Roberto Fondi (paleontologist) and Dr. Giuseppe Sermonti (geneticist) have published important scientific books and papers refuting evolution. There are many others.” 26 _______________________________________________________________________________________

23: Luigi Accattoli, WHEN A POPE ASKS FORGIVENESS, op. cit., p. 137 24: Dennis Gordon, Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p. 7. 25: Charles A. Coates, An Outline of the Book of Genesis; Kingston Bible Trust, UK; 1991, p. 2. 26: Henry M. Morris, Evolution and the Pope, www.scienceofcreation.org

As a matter of fact, “… millions of Christians still firmly reject evolution in favor of an explanation (mainly, the “traditional” six-day creationism) based on a more or less literal interpretation of the Genesis 1 account of Creation.” 27 However, the traditional six-day creationism is a product of faulty interpretation of Genesis 1. It definitely falls short of a hermeneutic that is in harmony with the creation accounts in Genesis 1. Here, Genesis 1:1 and 2 are wrongly interpreted by mixing up the same with the true biblical six-day creationism in Genesis1:3-31 which is actually an independent and exclusive creation account, in itself. Alternatively, to counteract the threat of billions of years challenging the belief that “God created everything in six days some six to ten thousand years ago”, various attempts have been made to accommodate the dubious “long ages”. Accordingly, diverse theories to account for the speculated long ages have been put forth by way of compromise. Some of the theories, amongst others, include: “(1) The Gap Theory – the belief that there is a gap of indeterminate time between the first and the second verse of Genesis 1 (2) Progressive Creation – wherein God supposedly intervened in the processes of death and struggle to create millions of species at various times over millions of years (3) Theistic Evolution – wherein God supposedly directed the evolutionary process of millions of years, or just set it up and run.” 28 Theistic Evolutionists, Day-Age Creationists and Progressive Creationists presume a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 “flies in the face of scientific research” 29 and that, “for many, it defies common sense.” 30 So, guided by their unreliable “common sense”, they speculate that the so-called “development of species over vast periods of time tells us that God either created some form of evolutionary process in the beginning or continually created new species by fiat over billions of years. In either case, creation was no cosmic ‘accident’.” 31 _____________________________________________________________ 27: Creation and Evolution, op. cit. p.52 28: Ken Ham, http://www.answersingenesis.org /articles/nab/could-god-have-created-insix-days 29: Creation and Evolution? Op. cit. p. 6; 30: ibid, p. 6. 31: ibid, p. 6

They presume that “In the beginning” God created ‘big bang’ which next exploded into ‘space-mass-time universe’ poetically referred to as ‘heavens and earth’ by Moses in Genesis 1:1. And that, next on earth God created ‘some form of (biological) evolutionary process’ giving rise to male and female “homos sapiens” of which one pair He named as Adam and Eve; or else, if our fine-tuned “common sense” permits us we may confidently believe that God ‘continually created new species by fiat over billions of years’ finally creating the human species, both male and female, out of which perhaps He randomly chose a male and a female and named them as Adam and Eve some six to ten thousand years ago. As such, Christ’s genealogy should then be traced to simple single-celled sinless life. Next, we are told that the so-called “scientifically accepted facts”, “show that evolution is the most likely explanation for the development of species” 32 including the human species. The biased and totally ignorant ‘traditional six-day creationists’ are now asked to come to terms with these facts or else, boldly “offer a proven, rigorous and valid scientific alternative to evolution” 33 to account for the arrival and the existence of human life. Admittedly, the so-called battle between the Bible and Science is a logical consequence of adopting a defective hermeneutic that contradicts biblical and natural revelation. Actually, it is a battle between Science and the Traditional Six-Day Creationism concerning the origins and the diverse ages of the earth and of the universe and related aspects. Such a meaningless battle could have been fore-stalled if the biblical creation accounts and related scientific facts were accurately interpreted. Accordingly, vulnerable Christians would not then be simply prone to allowing “modern vague theories to replace the Genesis account of creation” thereby seriously “erring concerning the faith”. Theistic Evolutionists, Progressive Creationists and others have hopelessly compromised with the biblical truth of Creation in Genesis 1-2. They refuse to interpret the same literally based on the ‘analogy of faith’. Instead, they have embraced the atheistic theories of evolution by blind faith’. Subsequently, many nominal and even committed Christians, instead of interpreting the creation accounts literally and accept the same by realistic faith, have accepted the vague atheistic concepts by blind faith. _____________________________________________________________ 32: Creation and Evolution? Op. cit. p. 6;

33: ibid, p. 6.

As should be obvious, Theistic Evolutionists confidently believe that the true God is a ‘Creator of Evolution’ 34 who, they think, has created and set in motion a ‘macro-evolutionary process’ to bring the complex universe and life forms into existence in the course of billions of years. In doing so, they worship an ‘Unknown God of Evolution’. They “have no difficulty with, say, the concept of biological evolution, arguing that God fully gifted the creation with the ability to be and to become” 35 which is not only contrary to Romans 8:20-22 but also contrary to Carnot’s laws of thermodynamics. Next, Theistic Evolutionists --- in stark contrast to what is stated in Psalms 104:2b, Isaiah 40:22b as to ‘how’ and ‘how fast’ of the original creation and in Genesis 1:31-2:1 as to ‘how long’ of the six day recreation--- are of the opinion that “The Bible only says that God created all things that exist; it does not speak to the question of the manner of the creative process or how long the creative process took – or whether it is continuing even today.” 36 Their basic presupposition underlying their weird Creation-Evolution Unbiblical Theology is that “Genesis 1 is about the Who of creation, not the How” 37 However, biblical revelation relating to creation communicated through the ‘language of appearances’ was never meant to provide specific scientific details. The exact manner of the ‘How of Creation’--- which is actually even scientifically ‘unknowable’ (Ecclesiastes 3:11; Job 37:23) and therefore, a divine ‘mystery’ vindicating the ‘Absoluteness and Sovereignty of God’--- is left by the theistic evolutionists to atheistic scientists to explain who are but experts in guessing, propounding unfounded theories. Atheistic theories are adopted by the theistic evolutionists to formulate and reformulate their composite theory of ‘Theistic Evolution’. They don’t “deny the evidence from science that indicates a long history of life on this planet” 38 ending up in ‘The Descent of Man’ from some ‘Common Ancestor’. On the other hand, some zealous Catholic theologians postulate ‘Moderate Doctrine of Evolution’ 39 to accommodate evolutionary concepts contrary to biblical views relating to creation. _____________________________________________________________ 34: Creation and Evolution? Op. cit; p. 5; 35, 36: ibid, p.5; 37: ibid, p.5; 38: ibid; p.8 39: Michael Schmaus, DOGMA NY, USA, 1969, p.125.

Volume 2: God and Creation, Sheed and Ward, Inc,

Obviously, theistic evolutionists have been duped into believing evolution is a scientific fact. They falsely claim God is its Creator. In a way, they indirectly deny the Creator God the power to create instantly by fiat; Who in fact did create the original heavens and earth as a perfect universe instantly by fiat, in the dateless past (Genesis 1:1). God did not create the universe and life by creating and setting in motion any evolutionary process; nor did God create the entire original perfect universe during the course of “six days”, some six to ten thousand years back. Undoubtedly, the common prevalent belief of a ‘Creation in Six Days some six to ten thousand years back’ is based upon a faulty interpretation of Genesis 1.The early proponents of the traditional six-day creationism have overlooked the fact that Genesis 1:1 is actually a distinct and independent creation account different from that of the work of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31. As a consequence of persistent pervasive failure to distinguish and differentiate between the two creation accounts in Genesis 1:1 and 1:3-31 it has been erroneously believed all along that God created the original heavens and the earth recorded in Genesis 1:1, during the phased work of the six-days. Never! ‘Traditional Six-day/Young-Earth Creationism’ is a by-product of superficial interpretation resulting from a failure to rightly divide the Word of Truth relating to Creation! It’s high time, modern adherents of the traditional six-day creationism admit their failure. They need to consider all the Scriptures given ‘line upon line, --- here a little and there a little’ and divide the Word of Truth relating to creation accounts and interpret the same accurately. Subsequently, they need to correct their Theology of Creation instead of persistently clinging on to ‘hide-bound’ concepts! Towards Re-Evaluating Traditional Six -Day Creationism Whether we agree with it or not, the heavens and earth that were created “In the Beginning” (Genesis 1:1) had to be perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4) and complete. As such, Genesis 1:1 in just one blessed sentence covers within its grasp a creation account that actually encompasses the ‘totality of all original perfect creation’. It is next exhaustively covered by Natural or General Revelation subsequent to its restoration (Genesis 1:3-31) from a later chaos of Genesis 1:2 some six thousand years back.

Next, Genesis 1:3-31 clearly describe as to what exactly was created and made during the first six literal days. As a matter of fact, Exodus 20:11, 31:17 aptly summarize the work of the first six days. In no way, do these include the original creation of Genesis 1:1. The six-day-work is biblically an additional later work that has been wrongly mixed up with the original instant creation of the universe (Genesis 1:1) in the eternity past. As a result of such mixing up, we face the existing confusion in creation theology. A faulty biased interpretation of Genesis 1:1, 1:2, 1:3-31, Exodus 20:11, 31:17 lies behind the ongoing ‘battle for a true view of the beginning’ or the history of the origins. Accordingly, “The supposed battle-line is thus drawn between the ‘Old Earthers’ (this group consists of anti-God evolutionists as well as many ‘conservative’ Christians) who appeal to what they call ‘science’ versus the ‘Young Earthers’ who are said to be ignoring the overwhelming supposed ‘scientific’ evidence for an old Earth.” 40 Obviously, the ongoing ‘battle for a true view of the beginning’ is but an inevitable consequence of misinterpretation of creation accounts and geological findings. If the Scriptures relating to creation were properly interpreted, the ensuing accurate understanding concerning the Science of Creation would leave no room for any battle-line to be drawn. It is, therefore, important and mandatory that we interpret the creation accounts appropriately and with faith come to grips with the actual biblical creation truth, and then next discard our erroneous beliefs. As such, we will do well to freely choose to evaluate the traditional belief of a “creation of the cosmos in six days, some 6 to 10,000 years ago”. Next, by rightly dividing the Word of Truth, we need to reformulate our theology of creation so as for the same to be in tune with the biblical and natural revelation. As otherwise, we should be confidently able to address and resolve convincingly the embarrassing contradictions inadvertently presented by the faithful adherents of the traditional doctrine of ‘six-day creationism’.

_____________________________________________________ _ 40: Ken Ham, A young www.answersingenesis.org.

Earth—it’s

not

the

issue!

January

1998,

For example, instead of taking Genesis 1:1 at its face value - as a perfect ‘totality of all creation’ - Traditional Six-Day Creationists, without any biblical proof, state “It is impossible to tell what form the matter took….! The universe – at least its energy and mass – began to exist in some form, though the light-giving stars and planets had not yet taken shape. What shape everything was in is not spelled out in explicit detail! ….. But in that first instant of creation, the ‘space-mass-time’ began to exist.” 41 This assumption certainly contradicts Genesis 1:1 which describes the creation of perfect heavens and earth and not any vague ‘space-mass-time universe’. Traditional Six-day Creationists experience difficulty in accepting the fact that in the beginning itself “God created the heavens and earth” as a completed perfect creation and not some undefined vague ‘space-mass-time universe’. Their difficulty lies in their failure to separate Genesis 1:1 from Genesis 1:2 according to which the “earth was without form and void, with darkness upon the face of the deep”. As such, not only the earth, but even the vast universe is looked upon as incompletely created engulfed in total darkness supposedly then in need of further development. This ideation is not only contrary to the Scriptures but also to God’s character whose works are always perfect and beautiful! It is altogether unimaginable that God who is ‘pure light’ and is the ‘Father of lights’ (James 1:17), who ‘dwells in unapproachable light’ (1 Timothy 6:16), with whom light dwells (Daniel 2:22) and in whom is ‘no darkness at all’ (1 John 1:5) would ever, contrary to His character, create heavens and earth engulfed in total darkness. It is also unimaginable that God would create ‘earth’ as a lifeless ‘barren empty dark place’ to begin with so as to work further for six days and rest. Certainly, God did not create the original heavens and the earth the way traditional concepts tend to depict or portray it. The original creation was not simply some undifferentiated “space-mass-time universe”; nor, the earth was a wilderness that was barren and empty. The Bible nowhere states it as such. The original creation was complete and perfect and beautiful. For, the ‘morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy’ when once God laid the cornerstone (Job 38:4-7) thereof. _____________________________________________________________ 41: John MacArthur, Jr., The Battle for the Beginning: Creation, Evolution, and the

Bible, Indian Reprint by Grace to India, Pune; 2002, p.73.

Moreover, the “Wisdom of God” rejoiced in the habitable part of the primeval earth and took delight in the pre-adamic men (Proverbs 8:31). This would not be the case if the original creation was imperfect requiring further work for its completion. Proverbs 8:31 refers to pre-adamic life on the primeval earth of Genesis 1:1 and not to that of Genesis 1:11-13, 20-28. In fact, Proverbs 8:22-31is the only passage in the entire Bible that deals with the prior planning and subsequent execution of the plan through the creation of perfect heavens and earth as witnessed by God’s Wisdom. In no way this unique creation passage is related to the phased works of the six days of Genesis 1:3:31. This passage refers to an original perfect creation. As such, to even casually assume and state God created the original earth as described in Genesis 1:2 that is, ‘waste’ and ‘empty’ inundated with waters and covered with darkness is to contradict God who says all His works are perfect. Actually, ‘waste’, ‘emptiness or desolation’, ‘flooding with waters’ and ‘darkness’ are always results of judgment and not of direct creation. And darkness on earth has been the abode of the fallen angels ever since they sinned (Jude 6; Job 38:8-9). It is, therefore, unbiblical to interpret that what Genesis 1:2 states is the actual state of the original creation. To state as such is to impugn the character of God who is a Wise and Intelligent Designer and not a God of disorder or chaos. Undoubtedly, the Genesis 1:2 account doesn’t at all cover the original creation of ‘heavens and earth’ of Genesis1:1. It is certainly a description of a later occurrence of a judgmental outcome. As such, the Traditional Six-day Creationism cannot be biblically substantiated. It is built upon misinterpretation of creation Scriptures. The traditional six-day creationism is plagued with assumptions which are not only contradictory but also biblically and scientifically inaccurate. Therefore, it is not at all truly convincing. It contradicts Natural Revelation or scientific facts and geological-fossil evidence reflecting thereby a misinterpretation of Genesis 1. Obviously, the phrase “heavens and earth” in Genesis 1:1 is not interpreted by the traditional six-day creationists to mean a “fully developed perfect universe” though the same phrase, elsewhere in the Bible, is interpreted by them to mean as such. Instead, it is looked upon as an

imperfect creation characterized by chaotic disorder surrounded by darkness. Thus they contradict themselves whenever they state that the term “heavens and earth” wherever it appears in the Bible is a Hebrew ‘merism’ indicating the “totality of all creation”. For example, Ken Ham confidently states: “A linguistic analysis of the words ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in Scripture shows that they refer to the totality of all creation.” 42 So, one is left wondering as to how the Hebrew “merism: heavens and earth” only in Genesis 1:1 differs from the other similar ‘merisms’ referring to the whole of the originally completed creation so as to state “it is impossible to tell what form the matter took” in the Beginning; or that the “barrenness described in verse 2 is simply the original state of the universe in the twenty-four hours immediately following its initial creation.” 43 The ‘barrenness’ in Genesis 1:2, however, wasn’t “the original state of the universe …following its initial creation” but was a later chaotic state that actually ‘evolved’ on earth. In actuality, Genesis 1:2 state nothing about the original heavens and earth but only about the barrenness that was next extant on earth following its perfect original creation. When the Bible states that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, doesn’t it really mean that God created a fully developed perfect universe (Deuteronomy 32:4) in the dateless past? According to the traditional six-day creationists, “Out of nothing, in an instant, the universe – with all its space and matter – was made by God’s decree…. Or, in that first instant of creation, the ‘space-mass-time universe’ began to exist.” 44 Such erroneous assumptions may suit one’s traditional beliefs but are contrary to Genesis 1:1 account literally meaning the ‘totality of all creation’. Next, according to the traditional six-day creationists “The entire panoply of heaven – including the moon, the sun, the stars, and countless galaxies – was complete and fully functioning on the day God made it.” 45 Purportedly, all the planets and their moons except the earth were created on the fourth Day 46; and not “In the Beginning” (cf. Genesis 1:1). _____________________________________________________________ 42: Hen Ham, www.answersingeneis.org, op. cit. 43: John MacArthur, op.cit. p. 76 ; 44: ibid, p. 73; 45: ibid p. 107. 46: Donald DeYoung, Astronomy and the Bible, www.answersingenesis.org

If that be the case, then how do we explain the existence of “earth”, prior to the creation of ‘other planets and moons’ on the fourth day? Wasn’t the “earth” a constituent of the “solar system” or of the “panoply of heaven” from the time of its creation? Was the planet “earth” alone apart from the rest of the solar system created first, and then miraculously kept floating in ‘space-time’ until the fourth day? Or did God have different laws for the first three days so as to hang the earth in space (cf. Job 27:7) without sun’s gravitational pulls to maintain it in a fixed orbit? As otherwise, how can one explain the existence of the earth without any sun during the first three days seeing that the earth is known to revolve around the sun being held in its orbit by its gravitational pull? Next, it is stated that “According to Genesis 1:1, the heavens of outer space had already been created.” 47 In other words, the so-called ‘heavens of outer space’ were created first apart from the so-called ‘panoply of heaven’ which was supposedly created on the fourth day. However, the Bible doesn’t make any distinction between the ‘heavens of the outer space’ and the so-called ‘panoply of heaven’ purportedly consisting not only of the ‘moon, the sun, planets and the stars’ but even the ‘countless galaxies’. Weren’t the ‘countless galaxies’ a part of the ‘heavens of outer space’ and the planet ‘earth’ truly a constituent of the ‘panoply of heaven’ from the beginning of their creation? If the ‘entire stellar panoply’ was created on the fourth day then of what the ‘heavens of the outer space’ were actually made up of when created in the beginning along with the earth? (Genesis 1:1). And what particular primal gravitational forces kept the earth floating in space if the solar system or the stellar panoply consisting of the sun, moon and the stars was created on the fourth day? According to the traditional six-day creationism, the “starry heavens of the outer space” and the “earth” sans the ‘starry panoply of heaven’ were created on the first day. Accordingly, Genesis 1:1-5 is supposed to be the ‘biblical account of God’s activity on that first day of creation.’48 That is, “As day one emerges from eternity, we find the earth in a dark and barren condition” 49 as a constituent of the so-called “space-mass-time universe”. But the fact that the ‘morning stars’ sang and all the angels shouted for joy (Job 38:7) proves that perfect heavens and earth were created before Day 1, perhaps soon after the creation of the Angelic hosts. _____________________________________________________________ 47: John MacArthur, op. cit. p. 48: ibid ; 49: ibid

Certainly, the Bible does state that “In six days, the LORD made the heavens, earth and the sea and everything that is in them” (Exodus 20:11; 31:17). However, the heavens and the earth and the sea God says in Exodus 20:11, 31:17 that He made in six days refer to the firmament or to the heavens of Genesis 1:8, 14-19 and to the dry land called earth and to the sea of Genesis 1:10. These Scriptures doesn’t refer to the stellar heavens and earth or to the round globe and the waters which God created ex nihilo in the beginning and not during any of the six days. The Scriptures clearly differentiate the ‘Heavens and Earth” of Genesis 1:1 that ‘were of old’ (2 Peter 3:5) from those ‘heavens’ of Genesis 1:8, 14-19 and the ‘earth’ of Genesis 1:10 ‘which are now’ (2 Peter 3:7). The later were actually made or fashioned during the additional work of the six days described in Genesis 1:3-31. These obviously include the original parent-primeval ‘heavens and earth’. Traditional Six-day Creationists wrongly assume the creation of the stellar heavens and the spherical earth with chaos and darkness as God’s activity of Day One. However, God’s activities of the six days actually begin from Genesis 1:3 onwards with clear-cut commands such as “Let there be”, specifying each single day’s work. As such, what is stated in Genesis1:1-2 is definitely not in any manner God’s activity of Day 1. To state as such, is to leave the seeker of truth really feeling confused in spite of the evidence! It is obvious that the traditional six-day creationists have somehow got it sorely wrong whether it is admitted or not! The barrage of questions provoked by the traditional six-day creationism cannot be answered satisfactorily and, therefore, the confusion arising there-from is logically inevitable. As such, traditional creation concepts cause much confusion provoking unnecessary debate relating to the origins. The only way to clear the existing confusion is to come to terms with the fact that the six-day creation account in Genesis 1:3-31 doesn’t include in it the creation of stellar heavens and the earth nor the ‘panoply of heaven’ created instantly (Genesis 1:1) in the beginning. The phased work of the six days is, therefore, totally and uniquely different from the earlier work of instant creation of heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. Undoubtedly, the work of the six days is a later work subsequent to the chaos on earth (Genesis 1:2). It is in addition to the original work of creation of the perfect “heavens

and earth” of Genesis 1:1.

Chaos and Darkness of Genesis 1:2 Is It a Work of Creation or of Judgment? Genesis 1:1 is definitely an independent creation account of the original perfect heavens and earth. Subsequently, by rightly dividing and separating Genesis 1:1 account of original creation from that of the later additional work of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31 we are obviously left with Genesis 1:2 that records the chaotic conditions on earth. In fact, it is because of these chaotic conditions on earth God had to further work as planned in a phased manner for six days. As such, the chaotic conditions on earth cannot be a product of the original perfect creation of “heavens and earth” God says He created “In the Beginning”. Traditional Six-day Creationists do not rightly divide the Word of Truth and separate the creation account of Genesis 1:1 from Genesis 1:2 or from that of Genesis 1:3-31. Yet, such a distinction is biblically warranted. It is theologically appropriate as it clears the prevailing confusion in traditional creation theology. The fact that Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3 are independent creation accounts should not provoke “Young Earthers” to be unduly defensive. Such a distinct separation is a theological necessity whether we are dealing with a young earth or ages-old universe. However, as far as biblical revelation is concerned, there is no indication as to the actual length of time covering the accounts dealing with the two phases of God’s creative acts with a chaotic situation in-between. After all, elusive “time”, as we measure it, was created beginning with Day One (Genesis 1:5) of the creation week. Time did not begin from the “Beginning of the Creation” of the original universe as is wrongly assumed by the traditional six-day creationists. The creation of heavens and earth in the beginning and the conditions on earth as in Genesis 1:2 were before the creation of time. The so-called ages of the earth and universe whether in thousands of years or billions of years, biblically speaking, are irrelevant (2 Peter 3:8). In no way any “age” should ever bother Christians seeing that it is not at all a biblical issue. As such, the age of the earth or of the universe should be of

much concern to none. In a way, neither Progressive Creation nor Theistic Evolution over billions of years is biblically relevant. The long ages advocated by these theories need to be scientifically confirmed; nor the ages advocated by the ‘young-earth creationists’ can be relied upon to be accepted with conviction as biblical truth. Jesus’ statements concerning Adam and Eve as being made ‘male and female’ ‘from the beginning of the creation’ could mean as such from the beginning of their creation. It certainly doesn’t mean to imply that the earth is young 50 or that the universe is about 10,000 years old. Jesus who lives in ‘timelessness’ is neither a ‘young-age creationist’ 51 nor is He ‘agesold earth advocate’ (cf. 2 Peter 3:8). Next, apart from dividing and separating Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:331from each other it is not possible to account for the chaotic conditions of Genesis 1:2 but to resort to inaccurate explanations based upon traditional beliefs. Anyway, the chaotic conditions (i.e. “waste” or “tohu” and “emptiness” or “bohu”, and “total darkness”) cannot be the products of original creation (Genesis 1:1) but are the outcomes of judgment. Similar chaotic conditions elsewhere in the Bible are always of judgment a fact with which no biblical theologian will disagree. Speaking of judgment, Isaiah 34:11b states: “… He shall stretch out upon it the line of waste (tohu) and the plummets of emptiness (bohu)”. Now, “That pictures God as the Architect of judgment, using a plumb line of tohu, which is kept taut by weights made of bohu.” 52 As such, the chaotic conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 are of judgment as a consequence of sin and, therefore, cannot be a state of the original earth, or of the universe. Traditional six-day creationists are of the opinion that there was no sin prior to the creation week. According to them, Lucifer sinned some time after Day 7 and subsequently Adam sinned. As such, the chaotic conditions on earth spoken of in Genesis 1:2 cannot be of judgment, we are told. They somehow assume the earth was created in an unformed, imperfect or chaotic state inundated with waters all over and covered with darkness at the beginning itself, supposedly on Day 1. And, that it was next developed and made good during the work of the remaining five days of Genesis 1. ___________________________________________________________ 50: http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/k/author-terry-mortenson/v/recent.

51: Mortenson, ibid ;

52: John MacArthur, op. cit, p. 74.

However, to assume as such is to contradict the Scriptures according to which the waters were originally in one place in the beginning (Proverbs 8:30). These waters eventually deluded and covered the earth in a universal flood (cf. Job 38: 8). Next, the waters then flooding the earth (Genesis 1:2) had to be rebuked to return to their original location (Job 38:8, 11; cf. Genesis 1:10). This aspect has no relevance to Noah’s flood. Whether the traditional six-day creationists openly admit it or not, Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:12b-15 point to Lucifer’s rebellion and sin as having taken place much prior to the creation week. Unfortunately, sixday creationists hardly seem to take into account these Scriptures. Instead, they seem to be somehow convinced all these Scriptures have nothing to do with the time of Lucifer’s sin; or with the chaos on earth which can be only explained as a consequence of Lucifer’s sin and that of his angels (Jude 6) and the pre-Adamite world (2 Peter 3:6). Nevertheless, God’s planned and phased work of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31 which actually comprises the true biblical six day creationism with evangelical themes of restoration and renewal was occasioned by prior Satan-dominated evil chaotic conditions on a darkened and deluged earth. Traditional six-day Creationists state, but not convincingly, that Lucifer sinned some time after Day Seven of the creation week and not before. However, their belief is definitely not based upon biblical evidence but is merely assumed as such. They, somehow, overlook the fact that the Serpent was already there in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:1 read with Genesis 1:25) before the creation of Adam. This fact (cp. Revelation12:9) confirms that Lucifer sinned much before the creation week, and not after. Obviously, Lucifer already had sinned before the creation week. As such, Chaos on earth had to be a consequence and an aftermath of Lucifer’s sin. At the same time, it is a consequence of the sin of the angels (Jude 6) and that of pre-Adamic men over whom Lucifer ruled. It may sound heretical; but, nevertheless, these are biblically-based pre-historical facts! A relevant question would be: when did God actually create the vast Angelic Host including Lucifer and the angels that sinned with him? Were all the Angels, including Lucifer, created during the creation week as is assumed by the traditional six -day creationists? Next, weren’t there any pre-Adamite men on earth under Lucifer’s dominion and ruler-ship? How do

we then are to explain the Scriptures that answer these questions pointedly? The prevailing belief of the Traditional Six-day Creationists that the angels were created during the creation week is biblically untenable. Such an assumption contradicts the biblical fact that the angels were already in existence long before the creation of the earth. The angels were already there to actually witness earth’s creation and shout for joy (Job 38:7). As such, the angels could not have been created during the creation week. They were created before the creation of the earlier heavens and earth. Moreover, leaving aside any geological-fossil evidence there is biblical evidence, as highlighted herein, to confirm the existence of pre-Adamic life. This includes pre-Adamic men on the original primeval earth. Traditional six-day creationists overlook the above biblical creation facts. They simply assume that God created the universe in a chaotic condition. Their assumption is contrary to God’s nature and character and, therefore, theologically inappropriate. At the cost of repeating, chaos and darkness cannot be a part of the original work of an Intelligent Designer whose works of direct creation are always functionally perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4), and also beautiful (Ecclesiastes 3:11a). Various other discrepancies characterize traditional six-day and modern young-earth creationism which certainly cannot be biblically and scientifically resolved. However, if we first divide the Word of Truth in Genesis 1 and allow the Bible to interpret it there cannot be any inconsistencies in the interpretation of the Scriptures relating to creation. As such, once the traditional six-day creationists come to terms with the fact of an earlier instant creation as distinct from that of the later work of the first six days there will be no room for any discrepancies. Next, attempts made by theistic evolutionists, progressive creationists and others to accommodate the ‘evolutionary long ages’ are only exercises in futility. The Bible is totally silent about the ages of the earth or of the universe so as for anyone to logically dispute as to whether we are dealing with a ‘Young Earth and Universe’ or an ‘Old Earth and Universe’. As such, the debatable issue of earth’s age is biblically irrelevant and a sheer waste of time. At the most, any speculated ‘long ages’ of the earth or universe if at all substantially found to be true based upon relevant scientific data could be then convincingly adjusted but only in relation to the so-called ‘gap’– rather, the ‘white space’ between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 as well as the chaotic ‘black space’ between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3.

Anyway, “the issue is not ‘young Earth’ versus ‘old Earth’, but this: Can fallible, sinful man be in authority over the Word of God? Compared to what God knows, we know ‘next door to nothing’! This is why we should be so careful to let God speak to us through His Word, and not try to impose our ideas on God’s Word… this message needs to be proclaimed to the Church as a challenge to return to Biblical authority, and thus stand tall in the world for the accuracy of God’s Word. Ultimately, this is the only way we are going to reach the world with the truth of the Gospel message.” 53 But then, how often we read into the Bible what is not there such as earth’s age instead of letting the Bible speak to us and tell us only what is actually there. We are accustomed to read into our bibles what we assume to be true. It will be, indeed, a constructive exercise to consider what the Bible says about God’s works of creation in all its creation-accounts. Otherwise, we can end up with wrong interpretations of Scriptures when taken in isolation. As an example of such wrong interpretation, consider the following: “The question is what God says that He did! And what He said in writing was this, recorded with His own finger on a table of stone: ‘In six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day’ (Exodus 20:11; see also Exodus 31:15-18),” 54 interpreting these passages as referring to ‘all creation’ covering Genesis 1in its entirety thereby mixing up Genesis 1:1-2 with Genesis 1:3-31. What God actually says in Exodus 20:11 that He did is the work of the six days described in Genesis 1:3-31. This work is in addition to the original creation of heavens and earth. Exodus 20:11 or 31:17 doesn’t state that God created the original universe during the six days. These scriptures do not refer to the creation of “stellar heavens of the outer space” but to the “firmament” called “heavens” of Genesis 1:8 made on the second day. This firmament includes the solar system and also the stars re-arranged on the fourth day (Genesis 1:14-19). Next, it does not even refer to the “original earth” or the “globe” but to the “dry land” called “earth” of Genesis 1:10 that God made to appear on the third day after gathering the waters into one place constituting the “seas”. The Bible describes two inter-related but distinct ‘heavens’ and ‘earth’; one, created in the beginning (Genesis 1:1); and the other, on the second and third day with a re-arrangement of the solar system on the fourth day (Genesis 1:7-10, 14-17). _____________________________________________________________ 53: Ken Ham, op. cit;

54: Henry Morris, www.cri.org; op. cit.

God’s systematic work of the six days actually involves a work of restoring functional order out of the chaos brought about by Lucifer’s rebellion upon the original once beautiful earth. These redemptive and restorative aspects of God’s work of the six days differentiate it from the original earlier perfect work of instant creation wherein dwelled light until Lucifer sinned. And just as God restored physical order out of chaos on earth through His work of the six days resting on the seventh day so also God has been working all this long, during the last 6000 years, to restore spiritual order out of moral chaos brought about by Adam’s sin. In fact, the very nature of God’s phased work of the six days culminating in God’s resting on the seventh day portrays that every single day of the creation week has a typological and prophetic significance. The six-day work points to God’s work of restoring spiritual order out of spiritual chaos as a result of man’s sin under Satan’s rule on earth through six millennial days. It is followed by the Millennial Sabbath during which Satan will be forced to take rest in the ‘bottomless pit’. These are fundamental evangelical truths underlying the work of the six days and the creation of the 7th day Sabbath. As such, the typological, restorative and the prophetic aspects of the phased work of the six days sets it apart as distinct and uniquely different from that of the original work of an instant creation of primeval heavens and earth by fiat wherein dwelled righteousness until the day Lucifer and his angels and pre-adamic men sinned. Next, the uniqueness of the phased work of six days also sets it apart from the future work of instant creation of New Heavens and Earth. Whether the traditional six-day creationists freely admit it or not the fundamentalist belief of a creation of heavens and earth or of the universe during the six days of the creation week is hopelessly untenable, both biblically and scientifically! The Bible proves it to be so and Science confirms it and that should settle it, once for all, without any further debate! As such, the need of the hour for the traditional six-day creationists is to abandon their faulty traditional six-day creationism. Modern adherents of the Traditional six-day creationism have no other option but to admit that the traditional six-day creationism is theologically flawed and biblically incompatible. And, accordingly, they need next to convincingly align with the actual pristine biblical creation truth.

We need to consider what the Bible actually teaches about creation, “here a little and there a little” (Isaiah 28:10, 13). And next, rightly divide the Word of Truth about God’s past and the prophesied future works and formulate a Theology of Creation which is free from contradictions. Hopefully, traditional six-day creationists will revise their theological position after evaluating the same in the face of the many questions it raises. As long as these questions cannot be answered convincingly with biblically supported answers it is of no real value to hold on to the traditional six-day creationism but adopt a creation position which is free from contradictions. Traditional Creationism cannot serve any evangelical purpose seeing that it is plagued with inconsistencies. It provokes questions that cannot be biblically and scientifically answered prompting unbelievers to question biblical integrity. In fact, it acts as a stumbling block in the way of those genuinely seeking truth relating to creation. As such, a vibrant Biblical Theology of Creation is a dire need of the hour. The modern militant Church should not hesitate to aim towards such a goal mainly for evangelical purposes. As noted succinctly by John MacArthur, “Our view of creation is the necessary starting point for our entire world-view. In fact, so vital is the issue that Francis Schaeffer once remarked that if he had only an hour to spend with an unbeliever, he would spend the first forty-five minutes talking about creation and what it means for humanity to bear the image of God – and then he would use the last fifteen minutes to explain the way of salvation.” 55 This treatise aims to address the basic biblical facts relating to the different phases of creation by rightly dividing the Word of Truth in Genesis and elsewhere in the Holy Bible. To any one attempting such an exercise objectively it will be obvious that the true biblical six-day creationism described in Genesis 1: 3-31 summarized by Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 is totally different from the traditional six day creationism. After all, it has wrongly mixed up the work of the six days (Genesis1:3-31) with the work of instant creation (Genesis 1:1) in ‘timelessness’ thereby inadvertently doing violence to biblically based Theology of Creation. _____________________________________________________________ 55: John MacArthur, op. cit, p. 43,

“Biblical Creation Truth” or the “True Scriptural Creationism”, the subject matter of this book verily differs from the biblically untenable traditional six-day creationism according to which it is assumed that God created the universe in six days. It is thus wrongly assumed that the creation week of Genesis 1 begins with Genesis 1:1 and not with Genesis 1:3. In fact, the universe was created much earlier in the dateless and ageless past, much before the actual work of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31 which truly constitutes the true biblical six-day creationism. This sharp distinction is essential to our understanding. The distinction between the creation accounts in Genesis 1 is a theological necessity and is biblically warranted whether one really agrees with such a distinction or not. But the Bible is definitely clear about it! To deliberately ignore such a biblically-based distinction affirming a radical theology of creation is to hopelessly remain enslaved to naïve tradition. Undoubtedly, given the human nature for what it is, one’s bias based upon one’s preconceived notions and presuppositions underlying the prevailing belief in the traditional six-day creationism will surely come into play. Such bias makes it difficult to acknowledge the errors and embrace the truth. However, if we are to remain faithful to God’s Word then we should not hesitate to prove all things and faithfully hold fast that which is biblically true constituting sound doctrine! Resistance to correction is inevitable! And, even as one chooses to evaluate traditional beliefs he or she is likely to experience dissonance! The disturbing question is: How could the Church simply ever err all along in its doctrine of creation so as to believe that which is biblically untenable? Instead of merely looking to church history to defend one’s belief on the premise that it has been accepted as such all along one will do well to check the truthfulness of any belief as to whether it is really biblical or not. More so, when such a belief is objectively stated to be biblically untenable. Anyway, it may be conveniently stated that no traditionally accepted belief system is complete and final but is subject to scrutiny in the light of any new understanding of biblical truth no matter how much uncomfortable one feels with it. As such, we need to be always willing to ‘prove all things and hold fast that which is true’ even if it means painfully facing the cost of giving up one’s established traditional, historical church beliefs and hide-bound concepts and erroneous beliefs.

On the whole, we need to be fully cautious and be aware of the fact that “The argument from church history seems to rear its head almost every time any doctrine is discussed. If the doctrine was taught in ancient times this supposedly makes it more reliable. If, on the other hand, it has not been taught until more recent years, then it is suspect. “Of course, the argument itself is invalid. The truth or untruth of any doctrine does not depend on whether or not it was ever taught in church history. Its truthfulness depends solely on whether or not it is taught in the Bible. Now, admittedly, a teaching that no one has ever before heard about might be suspect, but the Bible, not church history, is the standard against which all teachings must be measured.” 56 Anyone who experiences unhealthy ‘cognitive dissonance’, will do well to acknowledge the same and lay aside any resistance arising therefrom. Next, for the sake of truth come under grace and choose to be honestly objective so as to freely ‘prove all things and hold fast that which is true’. As such, the reader to be objective will do well to act on the principle of ‘bracketeering’ by creating an empty mental space ( ) freed from all bias resulting from traditional beliefs. Next, let the Bible do the plain speaking; that is, involve oneself in “exegesis”, by reading out of the text instead of impulsively or with bias engage in “eisegesis” by reading into the biblical creation texts one’s established assumptions or traditional beliefs. And then objectively evaluate the three-phased-creation theology presented herein constituting the core truths of “Biblical Creation Truth”. The focus of “Biblical Creation Truth” is not merely to review the biblical facts in understanding the Theology of Creation, per se. The focus goes much beyond that. It takes into consideration the evangelical aspects and the spiritual application as is symbolically portrayed by the physical creation events. Its goal, notwithstanding the prevailing faulty and confusing Traditional Six-Day Creationism and Theistic Evolution is to affirm a radical evangelically-based biblical theology of creation rooted in the very first chapter of the Bible – Genesis 1. _____________________________________________________________ 56: Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth; 1999; Moody Press, Chicago, USA, p. 91.

To conclude, Genesis 1:1 definitely deals with a perfect creation wherein dwelled light (life, truth and righteousness) until Lucifer when, once placed on earth sinned by rebelling against God bringing in darkness and chaos on earth (Genesis 1:2) as a consequence, necessitating God’s work of the six days (Genesis 1:3-31). Accordingly, “In Genesis 1 we have a picture of the work of God in connection with His counsels. You may say it is a picture of creation, but it is a wonderful picture of God's work which leads right on to the rest of God. Thus Genesis (1:3-31) gives a description of the work of the six days, and it ends with the Sabbath of rest, and it is thus a picture of the end to which God is really working. He is working up to a certain point and that is to secure rest and satisfaction for Himself in the full blessing of man. Depend upon it, which is God's object.” 57 Hermeneutically speaking, the very first two verses of Genesis 1 when rightly divided and separated from each other and studied exegetically with the help of other related Scriptures make it clearly evident that these two verses actually describe two different states of God’s physical creation: One, the initial perfect state of the original heavens and earth as in Genesis 1:1 when the earth was under the dominion of Lucifer and angels, wherein once dwelled light symbolizing life, truth, righteousness and peace. Two, the later imperfect state as in Genesis 1:2, depicting the original once perfect earth next in total chaos inundated by waters all over and covered by darkness, undoubtedly as a consequence of Lucifer’s sin and that of his subjects; and, perhaps, a creation that is subjected to futility and uselessness (Romans 8:20-21) and which is now under Satan’s dominion and control (Luke 4:6). Accordingly, “… in the light of the first Epistle of John… sin existed at that time, but it did not exist in connection with man nor in relation to the creation brought before us in the opening of Genesis and which God pronounced to be ‘very good’. Sin existed already in relation to Satan; he was the original sinner – he ‘sinneth from the beginning’ or ‘outset’, but there was a created scene down here without sin.” 58 _____________________________________________________________ 57: Charles A. Coates, Miscellaneous Ministry on the Old Testament, Vol.30, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, 1991 reprint, p.3. 58: J. Pellatt, Departure and Recovery in ‘The Closing Ministry of J. Pellatt’, (1843 – 1913), Vol.1, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, p. 150-151.

Genesis1:3-31 describe God’s additional works of the six days. This additional phased work performed through specific six days by its very nature and methodology distinguishes it from that of the original instant creation of Genesis 1:1. Moreover, unlike the work of the original creation of Genesis 1:1, the work of the six days is peculiarly characterized by specific “commands” (cf. 2 Corinthian 4:6) as if to address or to order the cosmic forces of darkness to “Let There Be…” functional conditions necessary to sustain new life on earth. No such specific commands were given at the time of original creation and neither such commands were necessary. God simply visualized or planned it, willed it and spoke it into existence by fiat; and the perfect heavens and earth came into existence. And since it was all perfect, the heavenly host shouted for joy and the Wisdom of God, Personified, rejoiced in the habitable part of the earth. Moreover, Wisdom also took delights in the pre-adamic sons of men then dwelling in the habitable part of the original primeval earth (Proverbs 8:31). On the other hand, the specific work of each of the six days begins with “And God said” thereby giving specific commands to “Let There Be” life sustaining conditions on earth that became or that was barren, and void. “‘Let There Be’ in Genesis 1 - the unanswerable fiat” 59 is said to be the equivalent of “‘Thou Shalt’… in the moral world” 60; and in each case, it is a “commandment” which is the “divine language” 61 to restore order out of chaos. In the one case, to restore order out of physical chaos in the physical universe; and in the other case, to restore order out of moral chaos in the moral universe. Thus the work of the six days is basically restorative, culminating in the creation of Sabbath. It symbolizes God’s dispensational work of six millennial days to be followed by a millennial-dispensational Sabbath of heavenly rule on earth next culminating in the creation of new heavens and new earth (Isaiah 65:17).62 The following section is a brief statement giving a view (synopsis) of the theological material relating to “Biblical Creation Truth”. _____________________________________________________________ 59: R. E. O. White: Biblical Ethics: John Knox Press, Atlanta, USA, 1979; p.18. 60: R. E. O White, ibid, p.18. 61: ibid, p.18. 62: Alfred Edersheim, Biblical History: Old Testament, Text: Public Domain, Database @2004, WORDsearch Corp., Volume 1.

Synopsis The material covered in this Treatise is presented mainly in Three Parts. Each part covers relevant topical sections addressing, in depth, related issues from different angles. As such, repetition of significant biblical facts heretofore overlooked, has been tentatively inevitable. Part One covers the topic of Atheistic Evolution v/s Biblical Creation Truth. It addresses Biblical Authority as against fallible human theories and questions as to whether the God of the Bible is a “Creator of Evolution” who has created and set in operation an evolutionary process or whether God created the universe and everything in it differently. Next, it questions as to whether ‘Theistic Evolution’ is a fitting response to atheistic evolution and accordingly next, Evolutionary Myths are exposed and debunked. Part Two deals with the basic aspects of creation relating to God’s works in three phases covering three different and distinct periods. Against this background, obvious draw-backs of the traditional six-day creationism are further addressed depicting its biblical and scientific inaccuracy. Next, the fallacy of ‘smuggling’ evolutionary concepts into the Bible by the Theistic Evolutionists is addressed concluding thereby that it implies to worshipping their so-called “Beleaguered God of the Gaps” with myths. Part Three covers the three phases of God’s creative works in detail, beginning with the creation of perfect original heavens and earth followed by the work of the six days and then at the end, a new creation. The first phase of Part Three deals with the creation of the angelic host followed by the creation of heavens and earth in ‘timelessness’, wherein dwelled light and righteousness until the time of Lucifer’s rebellion when the earth became without form and void covered with waters and darkness all over. Next, the second phase comprising the work of the first six days is dealt with during which God restored order out of chaos on earth that was plunged into darkness. Next, that God created life-conditions for human life and rested on the seventh day thereby creating measurable units of time and the first week of human history.

Special emphasis is placed upon the work of the first six days of the creation week. Its typological and prophetic significance is highlighted pointing to God’s works of spiritual redemption in the course of six millennial days under Satan’s rule on earth. Subsequently, there will be the establishment of the Millennial Sabbath. The underlying evangelical aspect of the six-day work makes it spiritually meaningful. The third phase deals with the creation of the new heavens and a new earth not by evolution nor in six days, but instantly by fiat to be inherited by the saints or the Sons of God. God promises to create new Heavens and Earth by fiat after destroying the present temporary heavens and earth. This promise should go a long way in convincing the skeptics with the fact that God created the original universe by fiat, perhaps instantly. There is no sufficient scriptural base to believe in a creation in six days or through evolutionary processes in the course of billions and billions of years. The book concludes with a theologically significant Epilogue with an evangelical focus and thrust in mind. It takes into account the framework of the spiritual significance of God’s phased redemptive physical works of the first six days that involved restoring order out of chaos and darkness extant on earth before the creation of Man; but, unlike the pre-adamic man, this time after His own Image and Likeness, as the pinnacle of His creation and as a type of the second Adam, even Christ, the God-Man. Next, the subject of fallen human nature and man’s sinful condition is dealt with. Subsequently, the Way of Salvation and man’s redemption through Christ’s substitutionary bloody death for reconciliation, justification, sanctification and restoration is dealt with for evangelical purposes. Finally, the truly repentant Believer’s New Spiritual Creation in Christ and his or her eternal covenantal relationship with God and ruler-ship under Christ in the Kingdom of God after the creation of the new Heavens and the new Earth is briefly addressed. After all, man’s spiritual creation is the supreme manifestation of God’s purpose for creating the physical man on earth. It is therefore a relevant topic that needs to be incorporated in any discussion relating to God’s Works of Creation.

Psalms 8: 1-9 â&#x20AC;&#x153;1: O LORD our Lord, how excellent [is] thy name in all the earth, Who has set thy glory above the heavens? 2: Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings Hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, That thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger. 3: When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, The moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; 4: What is man, that thou art mindful of him? And the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5: For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, And hast crowned him with glory and honor. 6: Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; Thou hast put all [things] under his feet: 7: All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; 8: The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, And whatsoever passed through the paths of the seas. 9: O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!

PART ONE Atheistic Pagan THEORY of EVOLUTION (SATANIC EVOLUTIONISM) V/s BIBLICAL CREATION TRUTH (TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM) ******************

Satanic Evolutionism Bible’s Authority V/s Man’s Fallible Guesses Is It Science versus Faith? Or Is It Bible and True Science? Bible & True Science V/s Atheistic Theory of Evolution (Debunking the Pagan Myth of Evolution)

Evolution, at the most, is an idea about history, Not observational science. There may be inferences we can make About the past based on modern observations, And these may or may not be true, But don't bother claiming that ideas about history Are the same as repeatable observations in the present. And don't insult us by thinking that we will believe that they are.

Roger Patterson ******* If science depends on Naturalistic explanations, It must accept that our thoughts are Simply the products of chemical reactions That evolved from random chance. How can you ultimately rely on randomness To evolve the correct way of thinking? If there is no God, Ultimately, philosophically, How can one talk about reality? How can one even rationally believe That there is such a thing as truth, Let alone decides what it is?

Ken Ham

Satanic Evolutionism

Evolutionism is a subtle satanic doctrine aimed to deny the existence of the unseen reality of a Creator God! Under the pervasive influence of the unseen devil and his demons, Evolutionism is propounded, advocated and propagated by the atheistic philosophers, scientists, and evolutionists whose goal is to deny God’s role in creation and, instead, attribute all that exists to the goddess of blind chance. Nevertheless, “--- that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shown it unto them. 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” (Romans 1:19-20). Evolutionism is, therefore, a hodge-podge of contradictory doctrines built upon imaginary and unscientific false atheistic theories. These theories basically include the so-called cosmic evolution of matter and organic or biological evolution of complex life. The multi-varied forms of these basic theories grotesquely display a biased spirit of pseudo-science and the blind, religious, irrational faith of its proponents and naïve adherents. Consequently, just as there are different religions with their diverse gods and belief systems so also atheistic evolution means different things with varied views to different “classes” or “genre” of atheistic evolutionists. The proponents of evolutionary theories actually wear the garb of true science. But, in real life, they are the deceived ‘high priests’ of atheistic evolutionism - a subtle devilish religion and not at all a true science. Atheistic evolution is purportedly a process of gross gradated changes over a long period ranging from millions to billons of years (Doctrine of Gradualism) during which the so-called cosmic and organic evolution has taken place. Accordingly, the complex universe comprising of galaxies with its immeasurable stars, planets and other cosmic bodies has supposedly evolved from huge clouds of hot gases or from some undefined imaginary primitive nebulous matter and so on. However, they cannot account for the origins of such primitive nebulous matter.

Next, organic or biological “evolutionary theory holds that all species probably evolved from a single form of life which lived about 3 and 1/2 billion years ago. Over time, the basic life form evolved into two or more species. These species, in turn, developed into many other species;” 1 which next, eventually produced “the more than 2 million species that inhabit the earth today”2 (Doctrine of Speciation). Most evolutionary change is supposedly as a result caused by the interaction of processes which could be best termed as Doctrines of Mutation, Natural Selection (“Survival of the Fittest” with its sub-doctrines of Directional Selection, Stabilizing Selection and Sexual Selection). Add to these recent doctrines such as the Genetic Drift, Synthetic Theory and Punctuated Equilibrium and so on. There is simply no end to man’s fallible speculations. There is no room for any direct creation of universe or life including human life by God. Instead, cosmic evolution presumes our universe made up of sextillions of stars has evolved from lower units of matter such as hydrogen atoms or from a cloud of hot gases in the course of billions of years. But why only some hydrogen atoms or a few clouds evolved into complex universes is a mystery even for intelligent minds to grasp and thereby appreciate the myths of evolution. Next, biological evolution is the “Theory that all living things developed from a few simple forms of life through a series of physical changes. According to evolution, the first mammal developed from a type of reptile, and ultimately all forms are traced back to a simple, perhaps a single-celled, organism.” 3 In other words, the many species of plant and animal life of today are said to have evolved from some simple unicellular primitive forms of life that lived about three and half billions (or, more?) years ago. In other words, ‘simplicity’ of unicellular life evolved into the ‘complexity’ of human life. Imagine the evolutionary magic of primordial life forms that, contrary to known laws of nature and of chance, supposedly evolved, in the course of billions of years, into more than “1,000,000 species of insects, 250,000 species of beetles, 110, 000 of butterflies and moths, 80,000 of shellfishes, 80,000 of snails, 60,000 of arachnids, 40,000 of flies, 25,000 of barnacles, crabs, lobsters and shrimps; 20,000 of fishes, 10,000 of bees; 10,000 of wasps, 9,000 of worms; 5,000 of ants, 1,200 of birds and 1,000 species of cockroaches. There are also many species of larger animals, and over 180,000 species of plants. Species of fungi are 100,000; algae 20,000; mosses 20,000; corals 5,000; and sponges 3,000; besides many other species of living things.” 4

And the so-called primeval nebulous matter or hydrogen atoms and undifferentiated protoplasmic life has supposedly come into existence from nowhere. Appeal is made to undefined blind operations of unintelligent impersonal gods of chance to account for the existence of the same. Accordingly, in atheistic evolutionary thinking there is simply no room at all for any uncaused efficient cause, as demanded by pure logic and true science as well as by common sense, to account for the origin and planned well-designed creative development of matter and life forms. There is no room for any Intelligent Designer and Creator God to account for the complex universe and the living world with all its energy systems and the intricate laws governing the same in absolute mathematical precision and orderly perfection; whose origins the atheistic scientists and evolutionists, even as they accidentally stumble at and discover, cannot logically account for but irrationally assign the same with religious zeal to some impotent blind and dumb goddess of chance! Accordingly, “… 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. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:21-22). To imagine each of the species as having evolved out of some simple undifferentiated unicellular life forms finally evolving into ‘homo sapiens’, sounds fictional and absurd! Even atheistic scientists are not convinced of any truth in the theories of evolution. As admitted by Professor Jerome, “We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neo-Darwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better, you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation.” 5 Of course, given sufficient time covering millions or billions of years, evolution has become possible. This is somehow considered to be a scientific possibility but only according to the fancy speculations and myths of the evolutionists. In other words, Time is the fancy ‘hero’ or ‘god’ of the evolution plot. Imaginary time slots convert the myths of evolution to sound scientifically true. These are next accepted by faith by the atheistic scientific community. And, it is believed as such, contrary to the true scientific spirit and in spite of the lack of evidence. And, instead of acknowledging God, the goddess of chance with its prophetic probabilities is worshipped.

Atheistic scientists and evolutionists need to be rationally objective, and without prejudice or bias come to terms with “The fact that evolutionary processes, on the scale of millions of years, cannot be observed, tested, repeated or falsified, places them in the category of historical science. In secular science, evaluating historical events is considered just as acceptable as conducting laboratory experiments when it comes to developing scientific theories. Since scientific theories are subject to change, it is acceptable to work within an admittedly deficient framework until a better or more reasonable framework can be found.” 6 Moreover, “When we deal with the issue of origins, we must realize that no people were there to observe and record the events. When scientists discuss the origins of the universe, or life on earth, we must realize that the discussion is based on assumptions. These fallible assumptions make the conclusions of the discussion less valid than if the discussion were based on actual observation. Almost all biology books / textbooks written in the last two generations have been written as if these presuppositions were true.” 7 Unjustifiably, contrary to sound ethical principles, the “Proponents of the evolutionary worldview expect everyone to accept evolution as fact. This is a difficult case to make when the how, why, when, and where of evolutionary history are sharply contested or unknown by the scientists who insist evolution is a fact. Evolutionists often claim that creation is not scientific because of the unprovable assumptions that it is based on. The fact that evolution is based on its own set of unprovable, untestable, and unfalsifiable assumptions is recognized by many in the scientific community.” 8 Somehow, scientists sometimes choose to be subjectively speculative rather than be honestly rational and objective. As such, in view of what is stated above, one is left wondering as to how the myths of evolution are considered to be truly scientific. Fallible unscientific conclusions based upon ‘unprovable’ assumptions are accepted as scientific facts with an irrational religious faith by the biased atheistic scientists and evolutionists. On the other hand, any belief in a Creator God is totally unacceptable; instead, it is replaced by a blind belief in chance who is the goddess of evolution. And such a state of mind only confirms the biblical truth that ‘once God gives one over’, man succumbs to subtle deception. Such deception leaves no room to objectively perceive and accept by faith revealed truth and unseen reality.

Systems of Reality Perception There are obviously three basic systems of perception by which we acquire or obtain the knowledge of “reality” or “truth”. One, “Rationalism” – determines the reality through reasoning; two, “Empiricism” – determines reality through what we see, touch, taste, hear and smell; three, “Faith” – determines reality through confidence in the authority and veracity of someone” who has the knowledge of realities, physical or spiritual, that cannot be simply verified through the use of our five senses (R. B. Thieme). In principle, accurate scientific knowledge is restricted to that obtainable by ‘empiricism’ and ‘rationalism’, subject to verification by experimentation. According to the commonly accepted scientific technical language, “Observability, testability, repeatability, and falsifiability are the hallmarks of the scientific method. If an idea is not observable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable, it is not considered scientific. Neither creation nor evolution is directly observable, testable, repeatable, or falsifiable. Each is based on certain philosophical assumptions about how the earth began. Naturalistic evolution assumes that there was no God, and biblical creation assumes that there was a God who created everything in the universe. The argument is not over the evidence – the evidence is the same – it is over the way the evidence should be interpreted” 9. Next, the weakness of the so-called rational scientific method lies in its restricting itself “to gaining knowledge about the universe by allowing only naturalistic and materialistic explanations and causes. Science in this sense automatically rules out God and the possibility that He created the universe, because supernatural claims, it is asserted, cannot be tested and repeated. The denial of the supernatural events limits the depth of understanding that science can have and the types of questions science can ask.” 10 Nevertheless, scientists are quick to entertain the goddess of chance to whom they blindly attribute supernatural evolutionary powers! It is altogether impossible for human beings to explain the origin of life apart from God’s revelation in the Bible. “Research on the origin of life seems to be unique in that the conclusion has already been authoritatively accepted …..What remains to be done is to find the scenarios which describe the detailed mechanisms and processes by which this happened. One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current

wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written.” 11 Anyway, both Biblical Creation Truth and the Theory of Evolution are built upon faith in presuppositions. These are relied upon to account for the origin of Matter and Life in all its complex forms wherein everything is governed by intricate laws. However, faith in one’s presuppositions about realities has to be realistic faith and rational. Only infallible inerrant Biblical Revelation can provide the basis of proven evidence especially of things or realities that cannot be seen. Therefore, faith in biblically derived presuppositions is tangible and realistic and rational. On the other hand, faith in fallible humanly derived presuppositions or speculations is blind. Unfortunately, all such blind faith is unrealistic, irrational, religious or superstitious. This includes the negative faith of the evolutionists, mainly their “philosophical leap of faith that lies at the eve of evolution thinking” such as “molecules-to-man macroevolution” or “soup of hydrogen atoms-tosextillion stellar systems evolution”. However, this kind of evolution is neither observable nor repeatable nor is it falsifiable to be treated as true science. Actually, to unbiased sound minds, evolutionary theories are only a ‘hodge-podge’ of fallible presuppositions and vague speculations which may, in due course of time, eventually ‘mutate’ or else, ‘fossilize’ but never evolve into true science! Biblical Revelation, dealing with “Creation Truth”, on the other hand, is, undoubtedly, totally RELIABLE, ABSOLUTE and INFALLIBLE. After all, it proceeds from the Intelligent Mind of the ONE Supreme Omniscient God who is the perfect source of all true knowledge and wisdom. Undoubtedly, Biblical Divine “Revelation is a direct road or path” to comprehension of realities, seen and unseen. And, it is absolute; “but is closed to a great many people and independent of rational thought. Those who can make use of it are fortunate. The second path is strictly rational and scientific…but relative with respect to the recording instrument, man” 12 However, scientific man is hopelessly a crude, imperfect recording instrument. As such, Scientific Knowledge is hopelessly RELATIVE, FALLIBLE and UNRELIABLE, and it keeps constantly changing. Technically speaking, “All science is based on observation and experimentation by using our senses. But reality is not always identical with

our perception. Reason and experience must intervene to correct the direct impression of the senses and to construct in our brains a picture which corresponds to what we call the external world, the objective world, in opposition to the subjective idea which is the result of the information given by the senses. In short, this picture is relative, and not absolute.” 13 Scientific Enterprise, however, is not without its practical limits. Its crude findings and conclusions are not necessarily absolute. As such, “To help us understand that science has practical limits, it is useful to divide science into two different areas: operational science and historical science (origins). Operational science deals with testing and verifying ideas in the present and leads to the production of useful products like computers, cars, and satellites. Historical science (origins) involves interpreting evidence from the past and includes the models of evolution and special creation. Recognizing that everyone has presuppositions that shape the way they interpret the evidence (rationalism) is an important step in realizing that historical science is not equal to operational science.” 14 As historical sciences, the models or doctrines of “Evolution” and “Special Creation” have to depend upon prior subjective presuppositions to interpret evidence from the past. Accordingly, “Because no one was there to witness the past (except God), we must interpret it (the evidence) based on a set of starting assumptions. Creationists and evolutionists have the same evidence; they just interpret it within a different framework. Evolution denies the role of God in the universe, and creation accepts His eyewitness account – the Bible – as the foundation for arriving at a correct understanding of the universe.” 15 As a matter of fact, “All scientists, creationist or evolutionist, have the same evidence; the difference is the presuppositions that are used to interpret that evidence. All reasoning is based on presuppositions. Biblical creationists start with the assumption that the Bible provides an accurate eyewitness history of the universe as a basis for scientific thought. Evolutionists begin with the presupposition that only natural laws can be used to explain the facts. Facts exist in the present, and our interpretations are an attempt to connect the past to the present. The evolutionists must assume everything about the past, while biblical creationists have the Bible as a “time machine” that can provide valuable insight into the past...” 16 _____________________________________________________________

1: The World Book Encyclopedia (International), World Book Inc., USA, Vol. E 6, p.406 2: The World Book Encyclopedia, ibid. 3: The World Book Dictionary, Vol. 1 A-K, World Book, Inc; US; p.737, 4: Finis J. Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, Dake Publishing, Inc; USA, p. 82 5: Prof. Jerome Lejeune, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org. 6: Patterson, R. Natural Selection v/s Evolution, 2007; www.answersingenesis.org 7: ibid. 8: ibid. 9: Roger Patterson, Evolution Exposed: What is Science? www.answersingenesis.org. 10: ibid 11: Yockey, H.P., A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology 67:377–398, 1977; quoted by Roger Patterson in “The Origin of Life”, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org. 12: Lecomte Du Nouy, Human Destiny, The New American Library of World Literature, Inc., New York, USA , 1956 reprint, p.15. 13: R. Patterson; What is Science? Evolution Exposed, 2007;www.answersingenesis.org. 14: Ken Ham, Creation: Where’s the proof? www.answersingenesis.org/go/proof 15: ibid 16: Ken Ham, Creation: Where’s the proof? www.answersingenesis.org/go/proof.

Bible’s Authority V/s Man’s Fallible Ideas

“The fundamental debate is really about The most trustworthy source of information about history. Do we start with the Bible, Which God says is true in every detail, including its history, Or do we start with the changing theories of imperfect man? God tells Christians to walk by faith And that ‘without faith it is impossible to please Him’ (Hebrews 11:6).”

Bodie Hodge

THE HOLY BIBLE

The Holy Bible, as a Book which is “superior to all other books”, “stands before the world unique, defying all comparison or competition. It owes nothing to any other, although every other is indebted to it. The Bible differs from every other book. 1. Every book must have an author, and an author whose moral and intellectual perceptions are equal to the task. Now we assert, that the book we call the Bible infinitely transcends the moral and intellectual powers of any man, or any set of men of which history makes mention; this is not less true even of the men whose names are associated with its production. Our assertion is that the Bible contains “the oracles of God” --- that God is its author --- that its origin can and must be traced to the Almighty mind. 2. Its history already is of itself a science, in which a lifetime would be too short to become perfect. Some portions of it are older than any known record besides. None of it belongs to one age alone --- “It goes up to the beginning of all things, and gives some prophetic notices of the end of all things” --- whilst every passing age affords some evidence that it is intimately connected with it. It gives us faithful biographies of such men as Moses, and David, and Solomon, and Daniel, and Paul, and John, and Jesus. Its history runs parallel with the history of the most learned, most mighty, and most polished nations of antiquity; and still holds on its way, and will, till “the kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ.” Against it earth and hell have been leagued, and many times has every copy been hunted out to be burned, as though it were the enemy of God and man. Does it not differ, then, from every other book in its history? 3. Every author has a style peculiarly his own, and oftentimes it is so strongly marked that many who know the author can easily detect his anonymous productions. So is it with the Bible. The first thing which strikes us perhaps on minutely examining its style is its unity. Another thing is its style is its sublime simplicity. The treasures of Heaven, the secrets of God, the depths of eternity, are made clear to the mind of a little child. 4. A book is worthless or valuable in proportion to the new truths it unfolds, to the light it throws on old truths, or to the purifying and elevating thought it presents. Now every page, almost every line, in the Bible, if thus estimated, becomes invaluable. But what are those revelations which make it differ from all other books? Among many others it reveals to us God in all His perfections. It reveals to us man as he was, is, and might be. The disclosures it makes on this subject are such as our consciousness approves. 5. But what book has exerted a tithe of the influence that the Bible has over individuals, and families, and societies, and institutions, and governments, and nations? It has gone hand in hand with civilization, science, law, and has been the precursor of all that could elevate the physical, intellectual, and moral conditions of a people. Happy is the man who experimentally understands its influence!” Joseph S. Exell, The Bible Illustrator, Vol.1, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, USA, p. XXIII

Bible’s Authority V/s Man’s Fallible Ideas

Objectively and rationally speaking, as has been convincingly stated earlier, “The fundamental debate is really about the most trustworthy source of information about history. Do we start with the Bible, which God says is true in every detail, including its history, or do we start with the changing theories of imperfect man? God tells Christians to walk by faith and that ‘without faith it is impossible to please Him’ (Hebrews 11:6).” 1 The Self-existent Ever-Living God is the Source of everything. He is the Creator of all forms of life. These life forms include the microscopic viruses, bacteria and unicellular simple life forms as well as the multi-varied diverse and complex forms or species of flora and fauna. Accordingly, “The only true account of the origin of life on earth is found in the account of the only Eyewitness who was there. The Bible explains that the presence of life on earth is the result of supernatural actions of an omnipotent Intelligent Designer—the God of the Bible. Many complain that accepting this supernatural explanation stops anyone from pursuing knowledge about the natural world, but the presence of a logical Creator provides a reason to look for order in the universe. This point is underscored by the fact that many of the major fields of science were founded by men who believed in the Creator God of the Bible. The only aspect of science that the acceptance of creation excludes is the story of evolution.” 2 .

However, as stated by Ulric Jelineck, “Under Divine Guidance, men did not attempt to interpret what they were told to write.” 3 “… the Divine Guidance lay in the fact that none of the writers of the Scripture tried to interpret what they wrote in the light of the science of the day, because had they done so this book would be full of errors as are many books of today. Now this book is not a scientific text book. If it were written as a scientific textbook it would have needed to be written in the terms of final science. … nor are we living in the time of final science; as a matter of fact we are just beginning to scratch the surface of things scientific.” 4 And the scientific knowledge man has gained is nothing in comparison to what God knows! The God of the Bible declares that He created by fiat all the material

and spiritual creations, the animate and inanimate things and that He is the First and the Last Cause of everything that exists; not only that, He further states that He is going to destroy “the heavens and earth (Genesis 1:3-31) that are now” (2 Peter 3:13) and create “new heavens and earth” (2 Peter 3:22) and ‘all things new’ instantly by fiat. Of course, atheistic scientists cannot accept nor feel comfortable with any biblical truth! They simply cannot, given their strong unholy bias. On the other hand, theistic evolutionists entertain their own ideas about God whom they profess to know as a “Creator God who creates by fiat”. At the same time they assume He is a ‘Creator of Evolution’. Indoctrinated with the myths of evolution, they assume that God has brought everything into existence by creating and setting in motion an evolutionary process that worked all the wonders in the course of billions of years. With a worshipful attitude, perhaps, they then ‘gasp’ and adoringly whisper “How Great Thou Art?!” The Bible states and proves that GOD IS and that HE is the CREATOR of Matter and Life. HE is the SUPREME INTELLIGENT DESIGNER and the FIRST CAUSE of everything that has been in existence and now exists, both seen and unseen realities. However, “The agnostic and the atheist do not seem to be in the least disturbed by the fact that our entire organized, living universe becomes incomprehensible without the hypothesis of God. Their belief in some physical elements, of which they know very little, has all the earmarks of an irrational faith, but they are not aware of it.” 5 Anyway, the arrogant human tendency is always to blatantly ignore the ‘hypotheses’ rather the ‘reality’ of God! So, the true Living God is never real to them. And so, they are given over to hold on to vague speculations with irrational faith. But, “Many men who are intelligent and of good faith imagine they cannot believe in God because they are unable to conceive Him”. However, “An honest man, endowed with scientific curiosity, should not need to visualize God, any more than a physicist needs to visualize the electron. Any attempt at representation is necessarily crude and false, in both cases. The electron is materially inconceivable and yet, it is more perfectly known through its effects than a simple piece of wood. If we could really conceive God we could no longer believe in Him because our representation, being human, would inspire us with doubts. It is not the image we create of God which proves God. It is the effort we make to create this image.” 6 Some astute atheistic Scientists and Evolutionists know they cannot

deny the FIRST CAUSE without making them-selves look foolish, ignorant and highly biased. As such, these “Evolutionists do not deny the FIRST CAUSE”. Most embarrassingly, therefore, “Their theory begins with matter or substance already in existence. They believe in primitive nebulosity and powers possessed by molecules. They do not try to account for how these came to exist, how molecules got their inherent powers, or how there came to be definite laws governing them so that they could produce, without failure, all things as we now have them. “Their theory does not show why there is such bitter hatred against the God of the Bible as being that first cause. It does not consider proved facts, but has absolute faith in a mere supposition which no fact has ever been produced to prove. Its teachers seemingly deny God, the Bible, and known facts and continue to rob multiplied thousands of children of simple faith in God and the Bible without a sting of conscience. “They do multiplied drawings of different kinds of human beings rising from a molecule through a monkey to the present man, and add guess upon guess of how life was in each stage of evolution, but refuse to accept the Bible truth of the origin of all things. They glibly deny God and His work in creation and at the same time pose as having the only truth on the subject.”7 Strong words of rebuke, indeed! Once the atheistic theories of evolution take hold of any man, there is no room left for any biblical truth. Evolutionary thinking then reduces the biblical doctrine relating to the ‘fall of man’ to a mere myth. Man’s sinful nature is then treated as a mere animalistic extinct from which he is required to further evolve by obtaining freedom from the same through the processes of civilization and moral development. As such, there is no ‘sin’ and hence, there is no need for man’s redemption from sin through the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Next, there is no resurrection, no life after death, no accountability to God, no judgment, no heaven and no hell-fire. Thus all the Biblical Doctrines are reduced to mere myths and, instead, the myths of evolution are blindly accepted as “scientific truth”. Nevertheless, puny man will have to bow down to biblical authority over him or her, sooner or later; or else perish in the lake of fire. That is how the Bible describes the fate of those who despise the Word of God and its Rule in one’s life and conduct; a fearful outcome to those who ignore God. _____________________________________________________________

1: Bodie Hodge. 2: Roger Patterson, â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Origin of Lifeâ&#x20AC;?, ibid. 3: Ulric.Jelinek, op. cit. p.6. 4: ibid. p. 5. 5: Lecomte Du Nouy, Human Destiny, The New American Library of World Literature, Inc., New York, USA , 1956 reprint, p.15. 6: Ibid, p. 99 7: Finis Jennings Dake, op. cit. p.80.

Is It Science V/S Faith? Or Is It the Bible and True Science?

“Since there is no real scientific evidence That evolution is occurring at present Or ever occurred in the past, It is reasonable to conclude that Evolution is not a fact of science, As many claim. In fact, it is not even science at all, But an arbitrary system Built upon faith in universal naturalism.”

Roger Patterson ************************** “If science depends on Naturalistic explanations, It must accept that our thoughts are Simply the products of chemical reactions That evolved from random chance. How can you ultimately rely on randomness To evolve the correct way of thinking? If there is no God, Ultimately, philosophically, How can one talk about reality? How can one even rationally believe That there is such a thing as truth, Let alone decides what it is?”

Ken Ham

Is It Science versus Faith? Or Is It The Bible and True Science? Genuine living faith in God as the Creator of matter and life is not only realistic but is relevant, very essential, and mandatory. This faith is spiritually fruitful as the same is built upon reliable biblical revelation. As such, it is not like the blind irrational faith of those who accept the unscientific speculations of baseless evolutionary theories about the origins of matter and life. Anyway, to be objective, “One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written.” 1 Zealous Bible-believing theistic evolutionists state that “God delights in concealing things; scientists delight in discovering things” (Proverbs 25:2, Message Bible). Accordingly, they assuredly believe that “It must be exciting to be a scientist today. It must be even more exciting to be a scientist, who believes in God, able to examine the natural world through the eyes that recognize the work of the great Master Architect.” 2 The problem arises when “Believers see Science as a threat and Scientists as enemies of Faith.”3 And the problem is further aggravated when theistic evolutionists add unhealthy confusion even to biblically orientated and spiritually well-ordered minds by failing to interpret both the “Holy Bible” and the “Book of Science and Natural Revelation” the way God wrote them. Actually, there is no tangible conflict between ‘Good Science’ and ‘Biblical Faith’; rather, it is a conflict between God and the Old Serpent of Evolution falsely interpreting, if not questioning, God’s Creation accounts in the Bible. In the process, the Man, rather the Innocent Christian, becomes the arena of that conflict. He has to choose either to accept the Biblical Creation account literally by faith or else, allow himself to be carried away by the intellectually appealing but biblically and empirically or factually unfounded ‘scientific speculations’ the Serpent of Evolution has to dangle. Scientist Urlick Jelinek eloquently states: “Since God wrote the Bible and God wrote the ‘Book of Science’ there can be no disagreement between them. And if there is any disagreement in our minds between them you will find that it is because there is something wrong with either the observation of the facts or the interpretation of that observation.” 4

Instead of studying the Bible to find out what God has to say about His creation and evaluate the questionable scientific findings accordingly, theistic evolutionists interpret the dubious research findings in relation to erroneous biblical views such as the “Traditional Six-day Creationism”. Or else, they blindly accept the vague findings as absolute truth. In the process, they make themselves ‘look foolish’ and ‘ignorant’. Certainly they are not aware of the fact that there are two biblical accounts in Genesis 1. One, of an instant original creation of Genesis 1:1 and the other of the true Biblical Six-day Creationism based upon a literal interpretation of Genesis 1: 3-31. Nevertheless, our “Realistic scientists know that they might never uncover all the mysteries of creation”. And though they “…may never fully resolve {all} questions in this life, {still they believe} it is a legitimate and exciting quest, and we are discovering wonderful things along the way.” 5 However, in the meantime, it will be a wise thing to be careful “not to smuggle into Scripture concepts that are not there… the Divine Guidance lay in the fact that none of the writers of the Scripture tried to interpret what they wrote in the light of the science of the day, because had they done so this book would be full of errors as are many books of today. Now this book is not a scientific text book. If it were written as a scientific textbook it would have needed to be written in the terms of final science. …nor are we living in the time of final science; as a matter of fact we are just beginning to scratch the surface of things scientific.” 6 Whether they openly agree with it or not, theistic evolutionists are guilty of “smuggling into Scripture concepts that are not there”. Instead of allowing the Scriptures to confirm and clarify the so-called tested and wellestablished genuine scientific findings, they are ‘smuggling into Scripture’ unbiblical evolutionary concepts or the baseless “scientific speculations”. Or else, they indulge in biased biblical interpretations and falsely presume that ‘Genesis 1 is about the Who of creation, not the ‘How of creation’. Accordingly, they tell us that Genesis 1 creation account need not be taken literally but be treated as a ‘genre of the creation epic’ adopted by Moses. Certainly, the Bible is not technically a scientific textbook written in ‘terms of final science’. Yet, the Bible in its very first book titled ‘Genesis’ deals with subjects of permanent scientific value, fundamentally, but not finally. Genesis, as such, is ‘preeminently scientific bedrock’ upon which all true knowledge (all Sciences) should find a permanent foundational base.

As has been appropriately observed by George C. Morgan, the “Book of Genesis” actually “contains the foundation truths of theology, cosmogony, anthropology, sociology, hamartiology, ethnology, and soteriology. None of these subjects are dealt with finally, but all are presented fundamentally. Genesis supplies men with the rudiments of the science of God. It offers a theory of the origin of the universe. It says the first thing concerning the science of man. It lays the foundations of the science of society. It reveals the simplest matters of the science of sin. It introduces the study of the science of races. Finally, it presents the initial truths concerning the science of salvation. The essential value of the book is the fundamental character of its teaching on all these matters. Its declarations meet us at the point where knowledge, proceeding along the line of investigation, fails; and present truths undiscovered by investigation.” 7 Biblical Revelation as well as Natural-General Revelation, when left untainted by human misinterpretation of both biblical and scientific facts, go hand in hand. These two domains cannot be at war with each other if both the biblical facts and scientific discoveries are interpreted without any prejudice or bias. Bible and true Science can be the proper and the real sources of true knowledge in our “pursuit of the ultimate answers of life.” Biblical Faith and true Science based upon Natural Revelation cannot be at odds or in a flat disagreement with each other. These two sources of knowledge cannot act as enemies at logger-heads or be engaged in a ‘war of words’. Rather, as succinctly pointed out by the physicist and theologian John Polkinghorne, “Science and Religion ... are friends, not foes, in the common quest for knowledge”. All who seek true and profitable knowledge should keep this fact in mind in their common quest for knowledge. ______________________________________________________________________ 1:Yockey, H. P., A Calculation of the Probability of the Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 67:377-398, 1997. 2: John Halford, Editorial, Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p. 4. 3: ibid, p. 4. 4: Jelinek, Urlic, Science and the Bible, Kingston Bible Trust, England, p. 4. 5: Creation and Evolution? op. cit. p. 8.

6: Ulric Jelinek, op. cit. p. 5.

7: George Campbell Morgan, Handbook for Bible Teachers and Preachers: Applications to Life from Every Book of the Bible, Baker Book House, USA, 1982, p. 1

“God has created and made everything beautiful in its time”. “Also He has put eternity in their hearts, Except that no one can find out the work That God does from beginning to end. ” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)

Bible & True Science V/s Atheistic Evolution Debunking the Atheistic Pagan Myth of Evolution ************************ “God has created and made everything beautiful in its time”. “Also He has put eternity in their hearts, Except that no one can find out the work That God does from beginning to end. ” (Ecclesiastes 3:11) *******

“Science cannot answer the questions relating to the Genesis of Matter and Life; or, prove that there has been ever any evolution of life from inert matter; or, that animate primordial life forms actually evolved from inanimate matter. Only Philosophy based on Natural Revelation and beyond that Theology based on Biblical Revelation can arrive at an answer to any question of Origin of Matter and Life that is intellectually and scientifically satisfactory. Philosophically speaking, ‘Effect’ cannot be greater than the ‘Cause’. Now, that rules out the possibility of any blind chance (a lesser cause) giving rise to matter (a greater effect), and inanimate matter (a lesser cause) giving rise to animate life forms (a greater effect).Therefore, theologically speaking, GOD, as the Prime Mover and Uncaused Cause, is the Creator of Matter and Life including Human Life as well as the Unseen or Invisible Spirit-life.” ~~~ Fr. Carmo Martins, Personal Notes, paraphrased.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The agnostic and the atheist Do not seem to be in the least disturbed By the fact that our entire organized, Living universe becomes incomprehensible Without the hypothesis of God. Their belief in some physical elements, Of which they know very little, Has all the earmarks of an irrational faith, But they are not aware of it. Some of them have remained slaves to a naĂŻve verbalismâ&#x20AC;?

Lecomte Du Nouy

Bible & True Science V/s Atheistic Evolution The Answer to the Question of Origin of Matter and Life is actually outside the realm of scientific enterprise or any other human investigating enterprise. No man can really ever find out (cf. Ecclesiastes 3:11) the real answers to the knotty questions relating to the origin of matter and life; nor explain the purpose for the existence of matter and life; nor provide any meaning to human life. At the most, men may philosophize; or, they may confidently lean upon biblical revelation. The pertinent questions relating to the origins are purely philosophical and theological issues and are, therefore, not within the realm of the empirical scientific enterprise. Scientifically unfounded Theory of Evolution is not a true science. It is not even a philosophy but an illogical nonsense. The so-called theories of Evolution hailed as scientific realities and taught in almost all the fields of higher education have fancily occurred and still occur in the minds of the atheistic- materialistic scientists and evolutionists. These theories are then blindly accepted by the educated elite without questioning because there is no room for questioning. “Thus saith the Atheistic Scientist”… and that settles it, once for all…to question is to invite antagonism; or else, sound foolish and ignorant or downright stupid! Evolutionism is more of a religion that includes atheistic theories of inorganic-cosmic evolution and organic-biological evolution. These theories encapsulate a ‘family’ of fallible ideas and myths to account for the origins of matter and life in a crude attempt to do away with a living Creator God. Subsequently, evolution of complex life forms over the course of billions of years culminating in the ‘Descent of Man’ from a Common Ancestor is firmly but blindly believed without any ‘sting of conscience’! Frankly speaking, most “People believe the ideas of the evolutionary development of life on earth for many reasons: it is all that they have been taught and exposed to, they believe the evidence supports evolution, they do not want to be lumped with people who do not believe in evolution and are often considered to be less intelligent or “backward,” evolution has the

stamp of approval from real scientists, and evolutionary history allows people to reject the idea of God and legitimize their own immorality.” 1 Next, “Evaluating the presuppositions behind belief in evolution makes for a much more productive discussion. Two intelligent people can arrive at different conclusions using the same evidence; so their starting assumptions are the most important issue in discussing historical science.” 2 However, the vague unfounded Theories of Evolution have been constantly ‘mutating’ and ‘evolving’ into new revised forms and will continue to further ‘evolve’ into yet newer and newest modified versions. At the moment, “Classical Darwinism has been replaced by an enlarged theory of natural selection which (purportedly) does greater justice to the facts of the living world. With the rise of twentieth-century biochemistry an evolutionary approach to the subject of the origin of life (purportedly) became possible. A most influential hypothesis was stated by A. I. Oparin (1924), and by Haldane (1929). According to a recent modified version of this hypothesis, life originated by a process of chemical evolution on the earth, before there was free oxygen in its atmosphere. Through the action of ultraviolet light, inorganic material gave rise to organic molecules, which in turn evolved into complex polymers having a primitive capacity to reproduce. From these diffused polymers, specific closed organisms developed, culminating in the nucleated cell. At this stage, chemical evolution was succeeded by organic evolution.” 3 Both the historical and the modern modified versions certainly sound like fancy fiction-stories! ‘Naturalism’ and ‘Materialism’ are based on beliefs that “scientific laws are adequate to account for all phenomena” (naturalism) and “physical matter is the only fundamental reality and that all organisms, processes, and phenomena can be explained as manifestations of matter” (materialism). As such, those indoctrinated with naturalism and materialism cannot entertain anything supernatural or miraculous, including supernatural biblical truth. Rather, as has been accurately and succinctly pointed out by S. Hawking and L. Mlodinow, “…one’s concept of reality can depend on the mind of the perceiver. That viewpoint, with various subtle differences, goes by names such as antirealism, instrumentalism or idealism. According to those doctrines, the world we know is constructed by the human mind employing sensory data as its raw material and is shaped by the interpretive structure of our brains. This viewpoint may be hard to accept, but it is not difficult to understand. There is no way to remove the observer – us – from

our perception of the world.” 4 “As measuring devices, however, we are crude instruments” 5 No wonder, fallible scientific theories keep on changing! On the other hand, the Word of God is permanently unchanging, infallible and inerrant, absolutely trustworthy and foundational to all true knowledge. As appropriately and wisely commented by Lecomte Du Nouy, “Science struggles constantly against the imperfections of our sensorial system, the rhythms of which are not always in unison with outside phenomena.” 6 Given such a drawback he advises: “Let us try not to transpose facts belonging to one scale of observation in our own universe onto another, and, above all, let us beware of casting human judgments on events which transcend our experience.” 7 (Underline / italics, mine)! Whether scientists freely admit it or not, the vague fancy Theory of Evolution is still a theory; it is “what fallible scientists think or speculate” whilst claiming they are searching for truth about the origins of matter and life based on what they observe in nature. Unfortunately, it is an eternally incomplete search for truth. And, it will remain an eternal search, because the study of the origins of matter and life includes truth that cannot be purely ascertained by the use of the ‘five senses’. Nor it can be ascertained by mere rationalism as is the case in all empirical sciences. Anyway, “evolution cannot be truly scientific as it cannot be observed experimentally or repeated to prove the validity of its conclusions”. Any unbiased scientist, who is objectively rational, will do well to accept without prejudice that “The evolution of living beings, as a whole, is in absolute contradiction to the science of inert matter. It is in disagreement with the second law of thermodynamics, the keystone of our science, based on the laws of chance. To account what has taken place since the appearance of life, we are obliged to call in an “anti-chance” which orients this immense series of phenomena in a progressive , highly “improbable” direction (incompatible with chance), resulting in the human brain.” 8 Accordingly, Lecomte Du Nouy doesn’t fail to confront fellow but erring scientists by stating as follows: “Should we keep our blind confidence in human reason and intelligence, we will attribute these contradictions to our momentary ignorance and will say: In a near or distant future, new facts or new interpretations will enable us to shed light on these obscurities, due

to our imperfect knowledge of reality’. But in so doing, we cease to think rationally, scientifically. We simply express a hope based on a sentimental trust in science. What is more, we completely lose sight of the fact that when these contradictions, as in our example, are not with details, but with a set of fundamental concepts, which constitute the foundations of our science, we have actually shaken the whole scientific edifice in the name of which we have condemned (Biblical) Faith, and have been driven, by an irrational faith in an unaccountable abstractive intelligence, to demonstrate its failure.” 9 Obviously, the imaginary evolution of man from some ‘common ancestor’ is scientifically untenable. For, “Just as there seems to be an impassable gap between the irreversible ‘evolution’ of electrons and that of atoms (built up of electrons); between the irreversible ‘evolution’ of atoms and that of life (built up of atoms); so also there seems to be an intellectually impassable gap between the ‘evolution of life’ and that of ‘man’ as such.” 10 Atheistic scientists are prone to foolishly think that the universe has evolved from some primitive material atoms, call it ‘soup of hydrogen atoms’. But, from what did the original hydrogen atoms evolve? Analytically speaking, “Material atoms are made up of sub-atomic particles: protons, electrons and neutrons. But between the realm of the atoms and that of electrons there is today an impassable chasm; the laws which explain the motion and behavior of the electrons are not the same as those which govern the atoms.”11 Obviously, “right at the beginning, there is a break in the continuity of the history of the evolution of the universe, or rather in man’s interpretation of this history.” 12 Next, some biased scientists blindly assume that life came into existence from lifeless inert matter some billions of years ago by spontaneous generation (abiogenesis). Others assume and theorize inorganic matter gave rise to organic matter under the action of ultraviolet rays, eventually evolving into a ‘nucleated cell’. But they cannot account for the origin of primitive matter they begin with whilst theorizing. Instead, they fall back on ‘chance’; but then, the laws of chance cannot account for the origin of any primitive life. On the whole, realistically speaking, “It is impossible to lay down the

basis for a calculation which would enable one to establish the probability of the spontaneous appearance of life on earth” 13 ‘by chance’. Still, wonder and worship the goddess of ‘chance’ ‘and ‘gasp’, ‘How Great Thou Art?’ Moreover, in accordance with the known laws of chance, “The probability for a single protein molecule of high dissymmetry to be formed by the action of chance and normal thermal agitations remains practically nil”. Accordingly, “An explanation of the evolution of life by chance alone is untenable today. It does not permit the incorporation of man and of his psychological activities into the general pattern of things.” 14 Unfortunately, this is rather pretty difficult for biased minds to digest and honestly accept and thereby uphold one’s scientific integrity! If it be scientifically and logically impossible for even a “simple” protein molecule to evolve by chance, how can one account for any evolution of complex phenomena of Life and that of Man by mere chance? Does it mean that Mother Nature chose to “cheat” or violate the laws of chance to make evolution from simple to complex forms somehow still possible, when logically arguing it could never be by “chance”, lawfully? As otherwise, “It is totally impossible to account scientifically for all the phenomena pertaining to Life and its development and its so-called progressive evolution, and that, unless the foundations of modern science are overthrown, they are unexplainable.” 15 Nevertheless, in their misguided zeal to deny God, “Evolutionists seem pathetically eager to find some way of accounting for the universe and its life forms without resorting to God and creation. But they must inevitably fail, and some at least sense they will fail. ‘In our attempts to understand the nature of the universe, theorists must often admit to reaching a possible dead end – a question we may never satisfactorily answer’; James M. Cline, The Origin of Matter, American Scientist. Vol.92, March-April 2004; p. 156’. It is obvious that Genesis 1 is a satisfactory answer, but our atheistic physicists and astronomers keep trying since they feel they must find an answer that does not involve God.” 16 The so-called evidence for evolution is absolutely irrelevant to logically account for the origin of matter and life. Nor is it substantially valid and credible to scientifically explain the origins or the basal first cause - which is the root and the trunk necessary to nourish and support the Tree of Evolution. Next, Louis Pasteur has disproved the theory of spontaneous generation. Yet, scientists have not given up that theory. They still maintain

that life gradually came into existence from lifeless inert matter. But they cannot explain precisely how; instead, they keep on guessing, thereby only displaying their unholy biased ignorance. It has been stipulated that everything observable and subject to scientific experimentation and scrutiny deals with the five known existing categories: time, force, action, space and matter. Scientists cannot account for the origin of these basic five scientific categories and the Laws of Nature that govern their relationships as arising out of nothing by mere ‘blind chance’. The actual origin of these five prominent categories can only be accounted for by the biblical witness of Genesis1:1 wherein Time (In the Beginning), Force (God), Action, (created), Space (heavens) and Matter (and the earth) rightly fit in. Atheistic Scientists are frenetically working overtime to explore the origin of matter and life so as to account for the existence of life and matter without the need of a Creator God! And, even if scientists do somehow succeed in creating life in the laboratory, it will only prove that it requires an intelligent mind to create it and that nothing can come from nothing by ‘chance’. As such, to be scientifically precise, nothing has ever evolved or can ever evolve of its own out of nothing by chance. True science rejects the theory of evolution rooted in the assumption that “Nothing working on nothing by nothing, through nothing, for nothing begat everything” 17 including the super-intelligence of the atheistic scientists. Next, the theory of biological evolution contradicts known laws of nature. “It is a law of nature that nothing reproduces anything greater than itself. There can be no evolution without the power of reproduction in living things. Since reproduction is a prior condition to evolution, it cannot be a product of it. Hence we face the logical necessity for the creation of life and its power of continued reproduction.” 18 Unfortunately, biased evolutionists are not willing to weigh the facts that are in favor of creation and change. In a way, they somehow prove that God has given them over to hold on to the blatant evolutionary lies. Accordingly, they further indulge in the so-called scientific but vague irrelevant speculations which make sense only to those who have no fear of God. Life comes only from the pre-existing life and non-living matter can never give birth to life. If we do not allow our prejudice to blind us, we will conclude “The laws of chance, in their actual state, cannot account for the birth of life”. It is scientifically impossible to explain the ‘birth of life’ by

resorting to the operation of the laws of chance. Instead, we should be quick to honestly admit that the laws of chance actually “forbid any evolution other than that which leads to less and less dissymmetrical states.” 19 Such a relevant conclusion necessarily goes against the theory of evolution. For, according to evolutionary thinking “The history of the evolution of life reveals a systematic increase in dissymmetries, both structural and functional”. Therefore, such a “… formidable contradiction stands today as an insurmountable obstacle in the path of materialism” 20 – or evolutionism, or naturalism, or religious fanatical atheism and communism. The intelligent unbiased minds have no other option but to believe in the Self-existent Creator God of the Bible as the uncaused First Cause of everything that exists. Accordingly, it is rationally sound and scientific to believe that “In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and Earth”. God is the Uncreated Source that has brought the Heavens and Earth into existence not during the six days of the creation week, 6000 or 10,000 years back, but by fiat in the dateless pre-historical past. The ‘work of the six days’, the truth of which is challenged by the evolutionists in vain and because of which challenge theistic evolutionists have bowed down to them by compromising with the biblical truth of Genesis 1 and 2 is a much later work of renewal and restoration through re-creation. Atheistic Scientists and Evolutionists unduly feel threatened by the Biblical account of Creation because as absolute revealed truth along with Natural Revelation it strikes at the root of the Tree of Evolution. And once you strike and chop off the root and the trunk at its very base the whole tree falls flat. If evolution ever worked, then scientists should be able to prove how the first forms of matter and life came into existence out of nothing. Apart from it, evolution is nothing but downright myth! Anyway, those who blindly believe the vague Theories of Evolution know that there is no substance even in the theories that presume to explain the origin of even simplest forms of life. Admittedly, “… there is not a single fact or a single hypothesis, today, which gives an explanation of the birth of life or of natural evolution. Willy-nilly we are, therefore, obliged either to admit the idea of transcendent intervention, which the scientist may well call God as anti-chance, or to simply recognize that we know nothing

of these questions outside of a small number of mechanisms. This is not an act of faith but an undisputed scientific statement. It is not we, but the convinced materialist who shows a powerful, even though negative, faith, when he obstinately continues to believe, without any proof, that the beginning of life, evolution, man’s brain, and the birth of moral ideas will some day be scientifically accounted for. He forgets that this would necessitate the complete transformation of modern science, and that, consequently, his conviction is based on purely sentimental reasons.” 21 Moreover, as is very well known to educated atheists, “The ideas of natural selection, speciation, adaptation, and evolution are often used interchangeably by secular scientists”. This they formidably do so, so as to unjustly suppress Biblical Truth as well as Natural Revelation. And, instead of honestly acknowledging the truths of which they are fully aware they not only stubbornly hold on to evolutionary lies but unjustly further propagate these lies in the Name of Science clothing themselves with a scientific garb. But “When scientists and authors use evolution to mean both “change in features over time” and “the history of life on earth,” it is difficult to know which definition is being used in each instance. This is often used as a bait-and-switch technique (equivocation). When small changes that arise as a result of the loss of information are used as evidence for molecules-to-man evolution, the switch has occurred.” 22 Anyway, the foes of biblical faith are in no way without any excuse! Upholding the well-established structural design in creation, “Biblical creationists consider major structures to be part of the original design provided by God. Modifications to those structures, adaptations, occur due to genetic recombination, random mutations, and natural selection. These structures do not arise from the modification of similar structures of another kind of animal. The beak of the woodpecker, for example, did not arise from the beak of a theropod dinosaur ancestor; it was an originally designed structure. The difference in beak shapes among woodpeckers fits with the idea of natural selection leading to changes within a population of woodpeckers—within the created kind.” 23 Furthermore, “The rationalist, who in the last forty years has had reason to doubt the all-mightiness of reason, accepts without tremor the overthrow of physical theories considered unshakable in his youth. He admits the inconceivable space in which the electrons move. He admits that

the electron is a “wave of probability”. He admits the existence of particles such as the “Neutrino”, and the “Anti-neutrino” which were invented for reasons of pure mathematical symmetry. He admits, without resistance, the existence, the reality of these paradoxical entities which he is forbidden to visualize---;” 24 “… yet he obstinately refuses to admit the possibility of a supernatural, creative power without which the greatest scientific problems are incomprehensible, simply because the models furnished by his sensorial experience do not enable him to conceive or visualize it even though he is quite aware of their limits. He knows and does not even discuss the fact that the image he has built up of the universe rests on reactions determined in him by a minute fraction (less than 1 per thousand billions, or 0.000,000,000,001 per cent) of the vibrations surrounding him and which go through him without leaving a trace in his consciousness. There is nothing more irrational than a man who is rationally irrational.” 24 Unashamedly, the atheistic highly biased cocked rationalists and evolutionists along with the atheistic scientists take pride in being wholly rationally irrational. The fact that the CREATOR GOD of the Bible exists and that He is the FIRST CAUSE of everything that exists is a basic spiritual reality. But then, just as in the case of unseen but known physical ‘paradoxical entities’ one is ‘forbidden to visualize’ so also we are expressly ‘forbidden to visualize’ known and unknown spiritual realities. Nevertheless, “whether or not you think God exists is not a concern at the moment. What should concern you is maintaining logical and clear thought. If you say ‘There is No God’ you are being arbitrary and foolish (Psalms 14:1; 53:1-2).” 25 “A logical statement might be, ‘On the basis of rationalism and empiricism, God does not exist. But if you dogmatically say ‘I do not believe God exists…’ you demonstrate inconsistent thinking. If you truly do not think God exists, at least express the concept by making a statement that shows you are a logical thinker” 26 Notwithstanding biased speculations, scientific discovery, at the most, has only disproved wrong traditional beliefs claimed to have been derived from the Bible. The Bible’s view is that God is the unchallengeable Almighty Creator of the universe and all that is in it. And that next our vast incomprehensible universe is maintained by His almighty power with an utmost scientific precision that defies the imagination of our crude scientists. “This is no

happenstance. The regularity of nature is the constancy of God who sustains the physical, moral and spiritual order. Nature or Science is a tribute to the Majesty, to the wisdom and to the Benevolence of God.” 27 Next, the Almighty Creator God of the universe reveals Himself to us in the Bible in a well organized logical sense “because God is totally organized” 28. God not only makes organized sense, “but His organized sense is presented in the Bible in the form of a plan we can understand. God not only has a plan but His plan is perfect and His plan includes you. You are the object of God’s plan. If you can say: ‘I am a person, I am a human being, I belong to the human race’, then you can say ‘God has a personal plan for me’. That is why you are here on this earth.” 29 But if you deny the reality that you are a human being and instead claim, without any proof, that you or your ancestors have evolved from some ‘common anthropoid monkey’, then you have no other option but to live as a monkey, or else ‘mutate’ into a donkey. Now, you will quickly admit, if you are a logical thinker, of course, by chance that is not at all possible for a monkey to mutate into a donkey. But the very fact that you can think logically and critically and, therefore, not dumb, should prove to you that you have not descended from monkeys but that you are a PERSON created in the Image and Likeness of God. Nevertheless, contrary to facts that can be relied upon to ascertain spiritual realities, “The agnostic and the atheist do not seem to be in the least disturbed by the fact that our entire organized, living universe becomes incomprehensible without the hypothesis of God. Their belief in some physical elements of which they know very little, has all the earmarks of an irrational faith, but they are not aware of it. Some of them have remained slaves to a naïve verbalism.” 30 And, slaves they are! And, as long as scientists choose to remain enslaved to naïve verbalism they can as well be labeled as pseudo-scientists who are clever at concealing their ignorance. If we are rational and objective then we will openly confess that “The Omnipotence of God does not enter into the restricted pattern of our actual scientific thought. It is no more shameful to confess it than to confess our incapacity to conceive the electron which we have domesticated.” 31 Precisely, “What is science? It is the method by which man tries to

conceal his ignorance. It should not be so, but so it is. You are not to be dogmatical in theology, my brethren, it is wicked; but for scientific men it is the correct thing. You are never to assert anything very strongly; but scientists may boldly assert what they cannot prove, and may demand a faith far more credulous than any we possess. Forsooth, you and I are to take our Bibles and shape and mould our belief according to the evershifting teachings of so-called scientific men. What folly is this! Why, the march of science, falsely so called, through the world may be traced by exploded fallacies and abandoned theories. Former explorers once adored are now ridiculed; the continual wrecking of false hypotheses is a matter of universal notoriety. You may tell where the learned have encamped by the debris left behind of suppositions and theories … as broken bottles.” 32 Somehow, it is very encouraging to know that there are scientists who understand biblical creation truth and are, therefore, convinced creationists. And, “Clearly, creationists can indeed be real scientists. And this shouldn’t be surprising since the very basis for scientific research is biblical creation. The universe is orderly because its Creator is logical and has imposed order on the universe. God created our minds and gave us the ability and curiosity to study the universe. Furthermore, we can trust that the universe will obey the same physics tomorrow as it does today because God is consistent. This is why science is possible. On the other hand, if the universe is just an accidental product of a big bang, why should it be orderly? Why should there be laws of nature if there is no lawgiver? If our brains are the byproducts of random chance, why should we trust that their conclusions are accurate? But if our minds have been designed, and if the universe has been constructed by the Lord, then of course we should be able to study nature. Yes, science is possible because the Bible is true.” 33 The Living Creator God is very much actively involved in the human affairs! Like it or not! And, “It is because God created a logical, orderly universe and gave us the ability to reason and to be creative that technology is possible.” 34 As such, to come to a logical conclusion: Here is the point: “If there is a God, if He has revealed Himself, if He makes sense, if He has a perfect plan, and if He has perfect plan for every human being, including you, then YOU owe GOD a hearing.” 35 Therefore, listen to the Living God Who speaks to you in the First Person, saying: “The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool… for ALL those THINGS hath Mine Hand hath made, and all those things have

been, thus saith the LORD, (regardless of your latest theory of evolution or the particular phase of evolution); but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and TREMBLES at MY WORD” (Isaiah 66:12). And, to those who really tremble at God’s Word and humbly obey Him, they are promised an eternal inheritance in His Kingdom and further, ruler-ship under the Risen Christ in the new eternal heavens and earth! “Well, the universe has not existed from eternity past, but it will exist eternally in the future. There was a beginning, but there will be no end. . . ‘The new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord’ (Isaiah 66:22)… Peter says that we can then "look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelled righteousness" (II Peter 3:13).” 36 ______________________________________________________________________ 1: Roger Patterson: Natural Selection vs. Evolution March 8, 2007, www.answersingene sis.org. 2: Roger Patterson, ibid. 3: J. D. Bernal, The Origin of Life, New York, 1967. 4: Hawking, S. & Mlodinow, L., The (Elusive) Theory of Everything, Scientific American India, October 2010, p.50. 5: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p. 140-141, 145. 6: ibid 7: ibid 8: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p.76. 9: ibid 10: ibid 11: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p. 12: ibid 13: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p.19; 41.

14: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p.19. 15: ibid 16: Henry Morris, PhD, The Eternal Future of Time, Space, and Matter; www.icr.org. 17: Finis Jennings Dake, op. cit. 83. 18: Dake J. Finis, op. cit. p.83. 19: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. 40 20: ibid 21: Ibid, p. 98. 22: Roger Patterson, Natural Selection vs. Evolution, Evolution Exposed, March 8, 2007 www.answersingenesis.org. 23: R. Patterson, ibid. 24: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit. p.100. 25: R. B. Thieme, op. cit. p.3 26: ibid. p.3. 27: Urlic Jelinec, Bible and Science; op.cit, p. 7. 28: R. B. Thieme, op. cit. 4. 29: ibid 30: Lecomte Du Nouy, op. cit.. 134. 31: ibid 32: Charles Haddon Spurgeon. 33: Jason Lisle, Ph. D., Can creationists be scientists? www.icr.org. 34: Jason Lisle, Ph.D, ibid) 35: R. B. Thieme, op. cit. p. 4. 36: Henry Morris, Ph.D., The Eternal Future of Time, Space, and Matter, www.icr.org

*** In the Section to follow (Part Two), the basic biblical facts about God’s Works of Creation are briefly dealt with. If we choose to rightly divide and handle the Word of Truth relating to creation accounts fearfully and objectively without any bias rooted in traditional creation concepts, it will become very clear that there are actually three independent and distinct phases of God’s works. The first phase is dealt with briefly in Genesis 1:1; the second phase is covered by Genesis 1:3-31 and the third phase is as prophesied in such Scriptures as Isaiah 66: 67, 2 Peter 3: 13 without any mention as to the actual length of the periods or ages relating to the three phases of creation. The GOD of the Bible is the CREATOR GOD who WAS. He had created ‘In the Beginning’ a perfect and beautiful universe and everything in it instantly by fiat, in the dateless past, or in the eternity past without any reference to elusive time, as we measure it on earth; And GOD IS, who, beginning with Day One, worked for six days both to create by fiat and make, mould, re-fashion, re-align, re-order, restore and replenish here on earth (second phase); and since then, GOD has been working providentially and miraculously, in he realm of time. And GOD WILL BE; and He is to come, and will come and will display His omnipotent power by creating new heavens and a new earth, not by creating evolution or by setting in motion some evolutionary process, but by fiat (third phase); and that, to uphold His Glory and for His eternal pleasure, in the eternity future! As such, it is not at all necessary to embrace the atheistic evolutionary worldview in as much as the God of the Bible has created everything by fiat and will destroy it all on the Judgment Day. He will next create New

Heavens and a New Earth, not by creating evolution or in six days but, undoubtedly, instantly by fiat, true to His awesome creative power and perfect character!

PART TWO

BASIC FACTS OF CREATION TOWARDS REVIEWING TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

In the Eternity Past… (Genesis 1:1; 2 Peter 3:5)

… In the Realm of Time (Genesis 1:3-31; 2 Peter 3:7)

…In the Eternity Future (Isaiah 65:17; 2 Peter 3:13)

*********************************************** * BASIC FACTS OF CREATION REVIEWING TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

Towards Reviewing True Scriptural Creationism Creation of Invisible Things Physical Creation Biblical Creation Truth V/s Traditional Six-Day Creationism

Biblical Creation Truth V/s Theistic Evolution And the Catholic Doctrine of Evolution TOWARDS REVIEWING

TRUE SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

According to the ‘Traditional Six-Day Creationism’ it is taught that God created everything that exists during the six days of Genesis 1 about six to ten thousand years ago. However, such traditional thinking is obviously based upon a faulty Scriptural interpretation. The traditional belief of a sixday creation actually differs from the True Scriptural Creationism. True Scriptural Creationism includes first, the instant creation of heavens and earth by fiat and next, the additional phased work of the first six days; and also takes into consideration the prophesied new heavens and new earth to be created instantly by fiat. The Traditional belief of Creation in Six Days assumes that Genesis 1 deals with the ‘totality of all creation’ as having taken place in six days. In assuming as such, it obviously fails to distinguish that Genesis 1:1 actually deals with an earlier work of an instant perfect creation different from that of the much later additional phased work of the six days (Genesis 1:3-31). Accordingly, traditional six-day creationism wrongly assumes the chaotic condition on earth described in Genesis 1:2 is essentially an activity of God’s work of the first day. In actuality, Genesis 1:2 is not a work of creation at all, but a later judgmental outcome on the original perfect earth. It is a consequence of Lucifer’s rebellion along with his subjects. Failure on the part of the Traditional Six-Day Creationists to treat Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:3-31 as two different and independent creation accounts lies behind their belief that the heavens and earth and everything in them have been created in six days some six to ten thousand years ago. In assuming as such, they overlook the fact that the original creation of heavens and earth was in the dateless past much before the later work of the

six days some six thousand years back. It is biblically inaccurate to assume that the original creation described in Genesis 1:1 is the same as the later work of the six days described in Genesis 1:3-31. Next, the chaotic conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 are in no way a work of the original perfect creation notwithstanding the conjunction ‘waw’ joining this verse to verse 1. The debatable grammatical connection between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 has nothing to do with the biblical fact that these two are independent of each other. In assuming the original creation of heavens and earth to be the same, and is as old, as the later work of the six days of some six to ten thousand years ago traditional six–day creationism has given rise to an ongoing conflict between the true Science and the Bible regarding the ages of the earth and the universe. True Scriptural Creationism, however, gives no room for any such debate between the Bible and true Science. Instead, the two are in perfect harmony with each other! At the cost of repeating, the real battle is not between the true Science and the Bible or its Creation Record. These two are in perfect agreement with each other. Any supposed conflict is apparently based upon our misinterpretation of either biblical or scientific facts. As such, the real battle is between misunderstood biblical facts relating to creation and the scientific facts or unscientific speculations challenging misinterpreted biblical facts propounded by Young Earth Creationists. Next, the battle is augmented by different views put forward such as the ‘young-earth’ and ‘old-earth’ creationism and related positions. All these views are an attempt to patch up and resolve the apparent conflict between the Bible and true Science. Nevertheless, the ongoing battle is meaningless exercise in the face of clear biblical truth relating to creation. There is no Scripture in the Bible relating to creation or any other subject that is in conflict with true Science. Nothing in the Bible has been proved to be false based upon any scientific discovery. Objectively speaking, it is not at all necessary to treat Genesis 1 and 2 and other creation accounts as ‘literary devices’ purportedly adopted by Moses and others in keeping with the “standard style and genre of creation epics at the time”. Nor does the Genesis 1 creation record require any special interpretive methods such as ‘progressive creationism’, ‘process creation’, ‘day-ages old-earth creationism’ ‘punctuational evolution’, etc. so as to ‘capitulate to the evolutionary time-scale of modern unbelieving

geologists and astronomers’. At the other extreme, there are “thousands of scientists who believe in a recent six-day creation. There are also organizations of scientists who are young-earth creationists in at least ten different countries as well as in the USA”. And, there are those different church denominations, theologians and a large number of nominal Christians who hold on to a ‘six-day young-earth creationism’ etc. assuming it is purely True Biblical Creationism. Notwithstanding the unbiblical views of the theistic evolutionists, neither the original creation of the heavens and earth nor the work of the six days in any way involved the creation of evolutionary processes by God. As such, no one should presume the complex species of life have evolved from simple species in the course of billions of years. Such a presumption is biblically irrelevant. “So couldn’t God have used evolution to create? The answer is no! A belief in millions of years of evolution not only contradicts the clear teaching of Genesis and the rest of the Scripture but also impugns the character of God.” (Ken Ham, Could God Really Have Created Everything in Six Days? www.answersingenesis.org). At the same time, God’s phased work of the six days doesn’t include the creation of the original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. These were already created much earlier. As such, it is unbiblical to state that “Taking Genesis 1, at face value, without doubt it says that God created the universe, the earth, the sun, moon and stars” during the six days of the creation week. Obviously, a faulty interpretation of Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1: 3-31 creation accounts by the proponents of the Traditional Six-day Creationism is the cause behind the ongoing debate between Science and the Bible. Next, it has further given rise to different theological positions. However, the positions adopted by the young-earth creationists, day-ages old-earth and progressive creationists, etc. are not without any theological problems as is obvious from the ongoing debates amongst their proponents. One is left wondering as to how age-related conclusions have been drawn or even the need to draw such conclusions has been felt at a time when the Bible is silent on issues such as the age of the earth and or of the universe. “As for the exact date of the first creation, it may be safely affirmed that we have not yet the knowledge sufficient to arrive at any really trustworthy conclusion.” (Alfred Edersheim, Biblical History: Old Testament, Text: Public Domain, Database @2004, WORDsearch Corp., Volume 1 and Chapter 1)

As a matter of fact, instead of interpreting the biblical creation record by allowing the Bible to interpret it what has been done is to interpret the creation record in the background of one’s established but erroneous traditional belief of all creation in six-days. Accordingly, it is wrongly assumed by the modern adherents of Traditional Six-day Creationism such as Young Earth Creationists that the creation record in the first chapter of Genesis deals with a creation in six days, six to ten thousand years back. The assumption is, therefore, biblically unjustifiable. An appropriate interpretation of the Scriptures will bring to light that the very first chapter of Genesis in fact covers two distinct creation phases. Accordingly, it would be certainly obvious that Genesis 1: 3-31 is different from Genesis 1:1 covering different historical periods. As such, the chaotic conditions described in Genesis 1:2 are not of original creation. Thus, as it has been precisely stated by Alfred Edersheim, “The first verse in the book of Genesis simply states the general fact, that "In the beginning"—whenever that may have been—"God created the heaven and the earth." Then, in the second verse, we find earth described as it was at the close of the last great revolution, preceding the present state of things: "And the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." An almost indefinite space of time, and many changes, may therefore have intervened between the creation of heaven and earth, as mentioned in verse 1, and the chaotic state of our earth, as described in verse 2.” 1 Accordingly, it is definitely biblically inaccurate to state that Genesis 1:1 to 1:3-5 cover God’s activities of Day 1. Not at all! Undoubtedly, Traditional Six-day Creationism and its variants differ from the True Scriptural Creationism which covers the creation of the original universe of Genesis 1:1 and the much later actual biblical six-day creationism of Genesis 1:3-31. Most probably, such an interpretation will not be easily accepted by the traditional six day creationists and is likely to meet strong, if not unholy, opposition. Nevertheless, it is necessary to do a thorough objective unbiased review of all the Scriptures relating to creation. For this purpose we need to consider a few preliminary hermeneutical assumptions. It’s only then we will be able to get a clear view of the True Biblical or Scriptural Creationism. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Alfred Edersheim, Biblical History: Old Testament, Text: Public Domain, Database

@2004, WORDsearch Corp., Volume 1, Chapter 1

Preliminary Considerations Given the human nature for what it is, subtle and prejudiced, anything that contradicts our traditional beliefs is bound to be looked upon with skepticism and disdain coupled with uncalled-for defensiveness. It has been rightly said that it is much more difficult to unlearn error than to learn new truth. And it is these aspects of human nature that leave some souls highly biased. Their bias, in turn, keeps them from being open-minded so as to appreciate and accept new truth. It is, therefore, essential that we sincerely recognize and acknowledge those aspects of human nature that prevent us from correcting our wrong beliefs and learn new truth. And accordingly, next realize the need to practice the principle of ‘bracketeering’ ( ) by withholding one’s ‘presuppositions’ so as to keep the same from unduly interfering with one’s learning process. This is important to keep one’s prejudice in check. Therefore, to interpret the Scriptures in the Genesis Creation Record appropriately we need to consider a few preliminary hermeneutical facts: First: No single or any textual unit of Scripture lies within the domain of one’s private interpretation. We need God’s help through prayer to properly discern scriptural truth and rightly divide the Word of Truth within the parameters of Bible’s interpretation of its own inspired Scriptures. Rightly dividing God’s Word is important notwithstanding our knowledge of grammar and syntax of the original Hebrew and Greek. Next, interpretation has to be based upon “a consistent, general approach to the interpretation of the Scripture – literal or normal sense. The value of this literal system is that it specifies a normative role for the textual contexts in interpretation and a normative practice of interpretation….As

such, the Bible is to be interpreted as a book, albeit a divine book”. The fact that the Holy “Bible is a divine book authored by God and composed by man, does introduce special applications of the normative principles of general hermeneutics”, based upon the “analogy of faith”. “Narrative portions are understood to refer to historical realities as the human is inspired to compose a divinely revealed interpretation of history. Prophetic portions are understood to speak of future events as the human prophet speaks empowered by divine revelation”. Second: The importance of retaining the literal sense of historical narratives. Genesis 1 to 2:3 is primarily a plain historical narrative “corresponding to reality and the sequence of events portrayed correlating with real time”. Therefore, “it is not an extended poetic metaphor” nor is it a mere creation story that “uses the standard style and genre of the creation epics at the time.” 1 Based on statistical analysis of Genesis 1to 2:3, it has been concluded that “ (1) It is not statistically defensible to read Genesis 1:1-2:3 as poetry; (2) since Genesis 1:1-2:3 is a narrative, it should be read as other Hebrew narratives are intended to be read as a concise report of actual events, couched to convey an unmistakable theological message, and (3) when this text is read as a narrative, there is only one tenable view of its plain sense.”2 Third: Inherent distinctiveness of scriptural texts. Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3-5 are texts with an inherent distinctive nature. Content analysis of these texts will make it clear that these three biblical passages or texts are purely distinct and independent accounts though they are contextually related to each other as far as the historicity of the events they are dealing with is concerned. Content analysis of these three passages and their historical ‘periods’ render them mutually exclusive. As such, it is improper to take these three independent texts together and interpret them as one single textual unit purportedly comprising of ‘God’s activity on that first day of creation’ as is done by the proponents of the Traditional Six Day Creationism (John MacArthur, Jr., op. cit. p.73). Content-wise each text is exclusive and is independent of the others. Each text is primarily covering events that are historically sequential. As such, they are not directly related to each other. Accordingly, it should be noted that irrespective of the Hebrew syntax or sentence construction of these texts (Boyce), Genesis 1:1 is solely and wholly descriptive of a completed perfect phase of creation, seeing that God,

whose works are perfect, is the Creator of it all. This initial phase of instant creation is followed by chaotic conditions on earth (Genesis 1:2). The subsequent phased work God carried out in six days is described as the next phase of creation works. (Genesis 1:3-31).The peculiarity of the six days’ work lies in the fact that the work on each of these six days is a response to God’s specific commands to “Let There Be”. These commands are obviously addressed to the cosmic powers of darkness so as to restore the lost original life conditions that existed earlier on the primeval earth. Fourth: The importance of engaging one’s spiritual gift of discernment. We first need to discern the doctrinal relatedness of scriptures and then rightly divide the Word of Truth. The goal here is to study all the Scriptures related to any doctrine by stirring one’s gift of spiritual discernment and enlightenment so as to get the whole picture. For, to “Whom shall He teach knowledge? And whom shall He make to understand doctrine? To them, that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little” (Isaiah 28:9-10). Thus, it is important that one obey 2 Timothy 2:15 read with 3:16, 17 and rightly divide the Word by separating the three accounts in Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3-31 from each other. Subsequently, interpret the same with related Scriptures given ‘here a little, and there a little, precept upon precept’ (Isaiah 28:10-13) to get a clear picture. In doing such an exercise, it will be evident, within the context and background of related Scriptures that Genesis 1:2 is not a description of any activity of day one but is a much later chaotic condition that developed on earth. Related Scriptures will make it clear that the chaos was as a consequence of Lucifer’s rebellion and that of his angels during the administration of the pre-Adamic world that was then. Lucifer’s rebellion, even prior to Adam’s sin, had brought the original heavens and earth if not the whole of God’s original creation into bondage and decay thereby subjecting it to futility (Romans 8:20) and or to ‘uselessness’. Next, it will be obvious that Genesis 1: 3-31 is a description of God’s later phased redemptive and or restorative works. These involved giving commands to ‘let things appear or be created by fiat’ or ‘expressing permission and purpose in connection with already existing things’. The phased work of the six days is, therefore, mainly physically redemptive and restorative in nature. During the re-creative phase God gave express commands to restore conditions on earth as well as create new life forms so

as to make it suitable for the habitation of man. Just as God gave plain commands to Pharaoh to ‘Let His People Go’ when His people were in bondage in Egypt so also God gave commands to ‘Let Things Happen or Be Created’ on earth during the six days of Genesis 1:3-31. By issuing such commands God restored order out of chaos and thus made the earth free from being under bondage to Satan consequent to his rebellion and fall. Fifth: Application of the Law of Double Reference of biblical interpretation: In understanding and interpreting certain scriptures it becomes necessary to apply the principle or law of double reference. In many passages of the Bible it will be evident that “a visible creature is addressed but certain statements also refer to an invisible person who is using the visible creature as a tool. Thus two persons are involved in the same passage. The law of interpretation to follow in such passages is to associate only such statements with each individual as could refer to him”. Accordingly, “the statement of Genesis 3:15 could apply only to the serpent and not to Satan. The first part of verse 15 could apply to both the seed of the serpent and Satan. The last part of verse 15 could only refer to Satan and to Christ. A simple example of this law which is recognized by scholars is the case of Christ addressing Peter as Satan. We have other examples in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:11-17” 3. Sixth: The principle of allowing Scripture to interpret Scripture. Instead of habitually interpreting the Scriptures with the grid of one’s traditional church beliefs we need to interpret Scripture with Scripture. Instead of merely looking to church history to defend one’s belief on the premise that it has been accepted as such all along one needs to check the truthfulness of any belief as to whether it is biblical or not; more so, when a belief is stated to be biblically untenable. No traditional belief is complete and final but subject to scrutiny in the light of biblical truth. As such, the need is to ‘prove all things and hold fast that which is true’ even if it means facing the cost of giving up one’s traditional church beliefs. To religiously hold on to traditional beliefs whilst the same are found to contradict Scripture is to indulge in idolatry. On the whole, we need to be fully aware and cautious of the fact that “The argument from church history seems to rear its head almost every time any doctrine is discussed. If the doctrine was taught in ancient times this supposedly makes it more reliable.

If, on the other hand, it has not been taught until more recent years, then it is suspect. Of course, the argument itself is invalid. The truth or untruth of any doctrine does not depend on whether or not it was ever taught in church history. Its truthfulness depends solely on whether or not it is taught in the Bible. Now, admittedly, a teaching that no one has ever before heard about might be suspect, but the Bible, not church history, is the standard against which all teachings must be measured.” 4 (underline, italics mine) Seventh: Recognizing spiritual symbolism/imagery in the Scriptures. Obviously, Genesis 1 creation record is richly loaded with imagery and symbolism. Recognizing and identifying the same with the help of related Scriptures will make it obvious that the creation accounts do not necessarily deal with a description of physical works of creation per se. It will also become clear that these creation accounts portray themes of spiritual significance having evangelical import. As such, Genesis 1 and 2 are not only literal creation accounts. They also cover and include systematic orderly composites of archetypical characters. These archetypical plots are loaded with motifs of restoration, redemption, reconciliation, etc. The archetypical primeval images and symbols appear throughout the Bible culminating in their fullest expression in the Book of Revelation. Accordingly, Genesis accounts of creation can be better appreciated by taking into consideration both their literal and symbolic meanings. The underlying theological and evangelical significance of these images, motifs and archetypes become apparent in the light of other related scriptures. Theological connotations of the imagery and symbols of Genesis 1-2 become evident as these are interpreted in the Bible ‘here a little and there a little” without our need to spiritualize the same. All we need to do to understand biblical imagery is to simply interpret its symbolic and figurative meanings by looking for the same elsewhere in the Bible. For example, subsequent to Genesis 1:1 wherein God who is pure Light created perfect original heavens and earth, the creation account next immediately shifts to describe conditions on earth that are actually contrary to God’s nature but symbolic of cosmic forces of Darkness (Genesis 1:2). The spiritual meaning of ‘light’ and ‘darkness’ could not be obvious apart from the meaning of these symbols as revealed elsewhere in the Bible. The work of each of the six days can be better understood in terms of what God

has done in the course of the six millennial days in carrying out His plan of redemption and spiritual salvation. Therefore, one has to be willing to openly accept the Bible’s own interpretation of its various symbols and imagery employed in the creation accounts. As such, this maiden work whilst reviewing the True Biblical Creationism revealed in the Sacred Scriptures has also taken into consideration the rich imagery, symbols and archetypes in the creation accounts based on their Biblical meanings and connotations but without spiritualizing the same. Keeping in mind the essential preliminary considerations, we need to look at God’s different physical creative acts and interpret the same appropriately. The subsequent sections of this part of the treatise covers God’s various creative acts beginning with the creation of the “Invisible Things” or of the ‘Angelic Hosts’ as far as the biblical record of creation is concerned. The description of ‘Invisible Things’ is followed by an elaborate descriptive account of God’s different phases of the physical creations. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p.8 2: Steven W. Boyd, The Biblical Hebrew Creation Account- New Numbers Tell the Story, Institute for Creation Research; www.icr.org. 3: Finis, J., op. cit. p.93. 4: Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth; 1999; Moody Press, Chicago, USA, p. 91.

Creation of Invisible Things In A Beginning --- In the Eternity Past GOD, (Elohim, pl. in Hebrew), who is essentially ONE SPIRIT and HOLY in ESSENCE but TRIUNE in operations is the CREATOR of all that exists. HE, Who “WAS”; and “IS”, and “IS to COME” always existed, hence GOD is EVERLASTING or ETERNAL. HE is the EVER LIVING ONE inhabiting ETERNITY. The finite mind cannot understand or grasp what eternity is, or what it actually is like, other than to simply state that it has neither beginning nor end. GOD is ETERNAL SPIRIT! Tauntingly, or even sincerely, the question “Who created God?” is very often asked! The answer is: God is Eternal Spirit, Uncreated Being! “By very definition, an eternal Being has always existed—nobody created Him. God is the Self-Existent One—the great “I Am” of the Bible. He is outside time; in fact, He created time. Think about it this way: everything that has a beginning requires a cause. The universe has a beginning and therefore requires a cause. But God has no beginning since He is beyond time. So God does not need a cause. There is nothing illogical about an eternal Being who has always existed even though it might be difficult to fully understand.” 1 The entire creation, the seen and the unseen realities, is the work of the Triune Eternal God. All the three Persons of the Godhead (Elohim) were involved in creation. In other words, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit planned and executed in unison the creation of all life and matter. Matter and Life: each has “A Beginning”! GOD, not blind chance, is the Cause of their origin.

Next, in relation to each other, the three Divine Persons are co-equal; but when these Divine Persons are “viewed relative to creation, They do at least change in attitude, for in love They have come into relations in which They are known to the creature, One of Them having become Man” 2 Accordingly, God’s WISDOM, became FLESH (John1:14). Wisdom personified states: “The LORD possessed ME at the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I have been established from everlasting, from the beginning, before there was ever an earth.” (Proverbs 8: 22-23). In the dateless Past, there was a “BEGINNING”; and that in relation to ‘God’s Ways, before His works of old’ (Proverbs 8:22) outside the realm of time. Accordingly, as the Apostle John puts it, “In the BEGINNING (“ARCHE” in Greek) was the WORD and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD. The same was in the beginning with GOD” (John 1:1-2). Specifically, God created through Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit. As such, Jesus Christ, the Word of God personified, is the ‘He Arche’ or the ‘Beginning of God’s creation’. Notwithstanding one’s traditional beliefs, the ‘Beginning of God’s Creation’ has nothing to do with the actual beginning of time. Another “A Beginning” is in relation to the beginning of angelic creation. It is outside the realm of time in the eternity past; next, is the “A Beginning” in relation to the physical creation of Genesis 1:1, again outside the realm of time in the dateless past. As a matter of fact, the phrase “In the Beginning” in Genesis 1:1 should be properly translated as: “In A Beginning”, as suggested by Andrew Martin “to account for the absence of the definite article in the word “bereshit” 3 As such, the term ‘beginning’ in the Bible is only “a beginning”, which is one among other beginnings. Finally, is the “A Beginning” in relation to God’s work of physical creation in the realm of time during the work of the six days. Biblically speaking, ‘from the beginning of creation’ can actually mean from the “A Beginning” of creation outside the realm of time. Or, it may refer to another ‘A Beginning’ before the creation of the first day of the week. Or, it could also mean from the ‘A Beginning’ of the creation of Adam and Eve. As such, the phase: ‘from the beginning of creation’ doesn’t necessarily always mean from the ‘beginning of Genesis 1:1. In each case, either the context or the content of the scripture should make it clear. Moreover, Greek word “Arche”, like “Archegos”, technically means ‘the Founder as the First Participator, Possessor’; e.g. Jesus Christ is called

the ‘Archegos of Life’ (Acts 3:15) because HE is the ‘He ARCHE’, meaning ‘Beginning or the Originator of God’s Creation’. This excludes Him from being Himself a product of that beginning.” Again, “Arche means a passive beginning or origin, or an act, or a cause as in Colossians 1:18; Revelation 3:14; Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13. In these verses, CHRIST is called the BEGINNING because HE is the Efficient First Cause of all Creation: spiritual or nonmaterial and physical or material. HE is the HEAD because HE is before all things, and all things were created by Him and for Him.”4 “All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made”. Next, in Colossians 1:16-17 Paul clearly states as to “what ?” are the ‘all things’ that were actually made by the Word, who is the Image of the Invisible GOD: “For by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist”. It is therefore understood that the “all things” created by Christ as stated in Colossians 1:16-17 include the unseen or the invisible things, even the myriads of Angelic hosts as well as the physical things. There are thousands even thousands of angels, seraphim, cherubim and other spiritual beings that minister unto God. And also ten thousand times ten thousand angels stand before Him (Daniel 7:10; Revelation 5:11); rather, an innumerable company of angels minister to God (Matthew 26:53; Hebrews 12:22) being created for that very same purpose. Next, as stated in Hebrews 1:14, angels also minister to those destined to inherit salvation: “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” The angelic host is vast and countless and each ‘spirit’ or ‘angel’ is created to serve God and man in specific ways. Perhaps, Lucifer and his angels were placed on earth to serve man whom God would create next. Even otherwise, the devil and the fallen angels now serve God’s purposes. They are under His sovereign control and are totally subjected to Him. When did God create all the myriads of angels? Were all the angels a part of God’s original physical creation? Does the Bible specifically tell us as to when exactly the vast angelic host was created and brought into being? Do Exodus 20:11 indicate and Colossians 1 confirm that the angels were created during the creation week as stated by the traditional six-day and young-earth creationists? 5

Nowhere in the entire Bible is it mentioned as to when exactly the angels were created. Neither Exodus 20:11 indicates nor Colossians 1 confirms that the angels were created during the creation week. This is merely an assumption lacking biblical support. Exodus 20:11 clearly refers to physical works of God during the creation week as described in Genesis 1:3-31. And though Colossians 1 speaks of the creation of ‘invisible things’, it doesn’t say at all that these were created during the creation week. Obviously, the angelic host was created much before the physical creation It can be confidently ascertained from the Bible that the angels were not a part of the original physical creation and that they were created very much earlier. Angels are first referred to in the Holy Writ in the oldest book of the Bible, Job, in relation to their service to God (Job 1:6; 2:1) and as witnesses of God’s physical creation (Job 38:7) at the beginning. God confronts Job by asking him rhetorically as to where he was when God laid the foundations of the earth, when all the sons of God (that is, the angels) shouted for joy (Job 38: 1-7). As such, it is inaccurate to assume and teach that the angels were created during the creation week at a time when it is not at all directly stated in the Bible. Obviously, the angelic host had to be created before the creation of heavens and earth so as for the angels to be there to witness God’s physical creation and shout for joy. Moreover, related scriptures confirm the creation of angels before the creation of visible and invisible, physical or material things. And, the very fact that they have been created to serve God Who is eternal, should lead us to confidently conclude that their creation to serve God had to be in the eternity past even before any of the works of physical creation in the eternity past. Next, does the Bible state that Satan, rather Lucifer, sinned and fell some time after Day 7 of the Creation week? 6 Precisely, nowhere in the Bible it is stated as to when exactly Lucifer sinned and fell. But certainly it was not after Day 7 of the ‘creation week’. There is sufficient scriptural evidence to convincingly believe that Lucifer sinned long before the phased works of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31. It is biblically inaccurate to state that the angelic hosts were created during the work of the six days. There is no Scripture in the Bible to support any such theological ideation. Nor is it biblically accurate to assume if not to presume and believe that the entire original creation of the heavens and earth

or the creation of the universe was during the work of the six days. Notwithstanding the traditional belief of ‘six-day creationism’ not only the angelic host but even the original perfect creation of heavens and earth was not during the creation week but very much earlier. When objectively considered, “Traditional Six-day-creationism” is based upon a wrong interpretation of Genesis 1 which actually records the creation of two physical worlds having their unique distinct social systems:One, as recorded in Genesis 1:1, spoken of by the Apostle Peter in 2 Peter 3:5; and the other, as recorded in Genesis 1:3-31, spoken of by Peter in 2 Peter 3:7. Precisely, “Peter taught two distinct ends of two sinful careers of the earth: (1). The world that then was. The pre–Adamite, social system had a sinful career or it would not have perished in the flood of v. 6; Genesis 1:2; Jeremiah 4:23-26; Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:11-17; Matthew 13:35. (2) The present Adamite sinful social system, marking the present sinful career of the earth. It will come to an end during the Millenium, v. 7, 10-13; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28; Revelation 20: 7-10”7. God made the physical worlds by CHRIST (Hebrews 1:2c, 10; 11:3). Next, Christ is now “upholding all things by the Word of His power” (Hebrews 1:3c) even the works of physical creation from the beginning. The next section deals with the physical creation of heavens and earth that was in existence in the eternity past, having been created “In A Beginning”. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Ken Ham & Jason Lisle, Is There Really a God? www.answers ingenesis.org. 2: J. T., Names of Divine Persons, Kingston Bible Trust, U. K. p.5 3: Andrew Martin, The Knowledge of Ignorance, Cambridge, 1985 4: S. Zodhiates, op. cit. p. 1670. 5: Ken Ham, What About the Gap and Ruin-Construction Theories, September 6, 2007; www.answersingenesis.org. 6: Ken Ham, ibid 7: Dake J. Finis, op. cit. p. 42

When He prepared the heavens, I was there: When He set a compass upon the face of the depth: When He established the clouds above: When He strengthened the fountains of the deep: When He gave to the sea His decree, That the waters should not pass His commandment: When He appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him: And I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him; Rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth; And my delights were with the sons of men. (Proverbs 8:27-29).

Physical Creation “So many evidences have come from so many directions and have converged with such remarkable unanimity upon the conclusion that the material Universe came into existence all at once in a great creative act some billions of years ago that it would require either a lot of new evidence or a special prejudice to hold any other opinion. If today we dot believe in creation, it is in spite of, not on account of, the testimony of Science. And I mean creation by supernatural means – that is, by processes quite literally outside the laws of nature.” ____Edward McGrady, Religious Perspectives in College Teaching: In Biology, Hazen Foundation, New Haven, 1950, pp. 13-15

************ The first Book of the Bible, GENESIS, is the Book of Beginnings. But, unlike John 1:1-2 which also includes the creation of the ‘non-material’ invisible things, Genesis 1:1 deals solely with the Physical Creation in the ‘background’ of eternity past, without any reference to time as we measure it on earth. It states simply but exhaustively that “In A Beginning, GOD created the HEAVENS and the EARTH”. Genesis 1:1, therefore, covers the creation of a perfect completed universe. Genesis 1:1 creation account is a brief statement of a beautifully completed work of creation (Ecclesiastes 3:11a) of heavens and earth displaying God’s glory. It was witnessed with joy by the angelic host (Job 38:7). It’s here itself that we need to divide the Word of Truth and treat Genesis 1:1 account as a comprehensive but exclusive statement of truth

relating to a perfect creation. It means exactly what it says that ‘In A Beginning’ God created a perfect universe obviously in an instant, by fiat. The original universe was not created during any of the first biblically defined six literal days of creation as is assumed by the six-day creationists. Nor could it be biblically appropriate to state that the universe had evolved through some evolutionary process in the course of billions of years as is assumed by atheistic and theistic evolutionists. God did not create and set in motion any evolutionary process. The Bible doesn’t state it, as such! The Universe created by fiat ‘In the Beginning’, even long before the creation of time, obviously included our solar system consisting of the sun, nine major planets including the earth, thirty-one known satellites along with a number of other very faint moons more recently discovered and innumerable asteroids or minor planets and many comets and meteors. Next, there are trillions of solar systems beyond ours or more than forty sextillion stars which are suns to other planets like our sun is to our solar system. The entire universe was created by fiat In A Beginning, perhaps instantly and not in six days. When God says He created the ‘heavens and the earth’ ‘in the beginning’ in itself it covers the totality of a perfect creation. Exactly when that ‘beginning’ was is not stated in the Bible; it could be just 10,000 years back, or long ages before that. One may convincingly state, based on Proverbs 8:22-23, that it was in the dateless eternity past. Actually, the real beginning no man can really ever find out. As such, human effort to estimate the actual age of the universe is futile. Proverbs 8:27-30 is ‘an eye-witness account’ by the WISDOM of God, Personified, who actually witnessed the creation of the original heavens and earth. It states “When He prepared the heavens, I was there: when He set a compass upon the face of the depth: When He established the clouds above: when He strengthened the fountains of the deep: When He gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass His commandment; When He appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by Him”. Proverbs 8:27-30 refers to the primal creation described in Genesis 1:1. In no way does it refer to the first three days of the creation week as assumed by the ‘traditional six-day creationists’ (John MacArthur, Jr., op cit. p.88). It deals primarily with the ‘preparation’ (Heb. ‘kuwn’) (Proverbs

8:27a) and subsequent creation of the original perfect heavens and earth (Genesis 1:1) consisting of a ‘dry land’ (Proverbs 8:29c) or ‘the habitable part of the earth’ (Proverbs 8:31a). The earth, therefore, ‘In the Beginning’ was not wholly covered with waters as in Genesis 1:2. The flooded earth of Genesis 1:2 was actually a later condition. In the beginning itself and not on the third day the ‘fountains of the deep were strengthened’ (Proverbs 8:28b). Next, God had ‘set a compass upon the face of the depth’ (Proverbs 8:27b) when He decreed that the waters forming the vast ‘sea’ should not ‘unlawfully’ move from their affixed original place (Proverbs 8:29a, b). God’s decreeing that the ‘waters of the sea’ should not move away from their original fixed place symbolizes Lucifer’s restricted dominion upon the primal earth. However, consequent to Lucifer’s sin, the sea symbolizing Lucifer’s pride that led to his fall broke away from the decreed bounds (‘as if it had issued out of the womb’, Job 38:8b) and engulfed the original dry land thereby covering the entire earth. Subsequently, God ‘made the cloud the garment thereof and thick darkness a swaddling-band for it’ (Job 38:9; Isaiah 45:7). This is precisely what Genesis 1:2 describes and is, therefore, definitely of a later development. It is not a condition of original creation or is it the work of original creation. God next set His hand to restore light on earth (Genesis 1:3-5). Next, He created the ‘atmospheric heavens or the firmament’ (Genesis 1:68). Subsequently, on the third day, He rebuked the waters to return to their original place as recorded in Genesis 1:9, Job 38:8, 11, Psalms 104:7, 9 and let the dry land appear (Genesis 1:10) once again for the habitation of man. The work of the third day, therefore, is a later work during which God restored the original ‘dry land’ from the earth’s flooded and chaotic condition of Genesis 1:2. How old is the universe should not be of concern to us as long as the Bible is silent about it. Neither the long ages guessed by the scientists should ever bother us or be an issue for any debate; for, to God, “Whom we cannot even conceive in relation to time”, it is all “instantaneous”. Given the biblical fact that God created the heavens and earth instantly by fiat in the beginning, outside the realm of time, we cannot mix it up with the additional work of the six days and state that God created everything in six days. As such, traditional creation theory is hopelessly unscriptural and defective.

But then, it is stated in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 that God made the heavens and the earth in six days and that He rested on the seventh day. Don’t these Scriptures prove that God created everything in six days? The apparent contradiction is resolved by allowing Scripture to interpret Exodus 20:11. It is stated that God created the heavens and earth by fiat in the beginning (Genesis 1:1). It is also stated that God made the heavens and earth in six days (Exodus 20:11; 31:17). The apparent contradiction is resolved by accepting the fact that these two are different creation accounts. The heavens and the earth that God created as recorded in Genesis 1:1 and Proverbs 8:27-30 and the heavens and earth and ‘all that in them is’ that God made in six days as in Genesis 1:3-31 are not one and the same. Actually, it is the work of the six days recorded in Genesis 1:3-31 that is referred to in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17. It is not the same work of creation by fiat that is recorded in Genesis 1:1. It is in addition to it. It is hermeneutically of prime importance to distinguish between these two biblical creation-accounts seeing they deal with two different periods or phases of God’s creative works. Failure to treat these two creation accounts separately lies behind the traditional faulty understanding of biblical creationism. As such, the concept of traditional six-day creationism is hermeneutically defective and, therefore, it is biblically inaccurate. The creation of the ‘heavens and earth’ referred to in Genesis 1:1 is certainly an earlier perfect work of direct creation. On the other hand, God’s phased work of the six days (Genesis 1:3-31) is a much later work of recreation or renovation. Nothing could be more clear from the Scriptures than the fact that the ‘heavens’, ‘earth’, and the ‘sea’ and ‘all that in them is’ referred to in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 are the heavens of Genesis 1: 8, including the solar system of 14-18, the earth and the sea of Genesis 1: 10 and ‘all that is in them’ that was created and made during the six days. As such, the original perfect creation is totally independent and is prior to God’s next phase of creative works beginning with the first day of Genesis 1: 3-5. Nor is it biblically true to assume that the heavens and the earth when they were created in the beginning were in a state of disorder and chaos contrary to God’s character whose works are perfect. The chaotic condition on earth as in Genesis 1:2 was, therefore, a definite consequence of Lucifer’s sin and is not of original perfect creation. And to restore order out of chaos as well as to restore the splendor of original life on earth God next actually worked systematically for six days. This six-day work was

essentially against the pervading evil forces of darkness. Therefore, God necessarily rested on the seventh day to crown the completion of His job of six days and create the Sabbath in perfect alignment with His eternal plan. The original heavens and the earth were unique and distinct, perfect and complete, created instantly by fiat in the eternity past. Therefore, the heavens and the earth including the “all things therein” God says He created and made in six days resting on the seventh day (Exodus 20: 11) refer to the stellar and atmospheric heavens and the earth which God recreated (Genesis 1:3-31) once the original perfect heavens and earth were found in a state of chaos with darkness and waters covering the earth – a condition of judgment brought about by Lucifer’s rebellion against God’s government. However, it has been defensibly but inappropriately argued that “The phrase ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in Scripture is an example of a figure of speech called merism, where two opposites are combined into an allencompassing single concept, in this case the totality of creation. A linguistic analysis of the words ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in Scripture shows that they refer to the totality of all creation. “For example, in Genesis 14:19, God is called the Creator of heaven and earth’. “In Jeremiah 23:29, God speaks of Himself as filling ‘heaven and earth’. See also Genesis 14:22, 2 Kings 19:15, 2 Chronicles 2:12, Psalms 115:15, 121:2, 124:8, 134:3, 146:6, Isaiah 37:16. Thus, there is no Scriptural warrant for restricting Exodus 20:11 to earth and its atmosphere or the solar system alone. So Exodus 20:11 does show that the whole universe was created in six ordinary days.” 1 It’s certainly biblically inappropriate to defend as such. It amounts to a gross misinterpretation of creation accounts in Genesis 1:1 and in Exodus 20:11. Granted, it may be hermeneutically true to state that the “merism: heavens and earth” as two opposites are combined into an all-encompassing single concept comprising the ‘totality of all creation’. However, we must keep in mind that in Genesis 1:1, the “merism: heavens and earth” refers to the ‘totality of all creation’ that was created “In A Beginning”. On the other hand, in Exodus 20:11 it is very clear that the “merism: heavens and earth” referring to a ‘totality of all creation’ is plainly referring only to that that was made specifically “In Six Days”. But in no way it is referring to the perfect original creation of Genesis 1:1 that was created outside of time. Thus the hermeneutical difference between the two creation accounts is very significant: Genesis 1:1 refers to that which was created ex-nihilo “In A

Beginning”; Exodus 20:11 refers only to that which was made and created in six ordinary days. Now, that which was made and created during the six days is out of the existing material; whereas, that which was made “In A Beginning” is purely ex-nihilo, out of nothing, created in the eternity past. As pointed out earlier, there is enough Scriptural warrant in Genesis 1: 6-8 and 9-10, 14-19 for restricting Exodus 20:11 to earth and sea of Genesis 1:10, cf. Psalms 136:6 ; and to its atmospheric heavens or firmament of Genesis 1:8, cf. Psalms 136:5 and to the solar system (sun and the moon and the stars) of Genesis 1: 14-19, cf. Psalms 136:7-9 which God says He made and or made to appear during the six days, also creating all that in them is, resting next on the seventh day. It is our wrong interpretation of Scriptures in Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:11 that lie behind our failure to appreciate the significant differences between these two creation accounts. The six-day creationists are somehow quick to interpret Exodus 20:11 as referring to the ‘totality of all creation’. This they do in spite of the fact that Exodus 20:11 is best interpreted by Genesis 1:8, 14-19 solely referring to the atmospheric heavens; and next by Genesis 1:10 referring to the ‘dry land’ called earth and to the sea and all that in them is. At the other extreme, they somehow fail to interpret Genesis 1:1 as a ‘totality of all creation’! However, if we let Scripture here a little interpret Scripture there a little, then it will be obvious that the merism: ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in every Scripture it is referred to, though it encompasses the original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1, doesn’t necessarily and technically always refer to the entire universe perfectly created ‘In A Beginning’. In most of the cases, it refers to the heavens and the earth visible to the naked eye referred to in Genesis 1: 8 and 1:10 and to the solar system referred to in Genesis 1: 14-19. Next, if we conclude from Genesis 1:14-19 that the sun, moon and stars were actually created on the fourth day and not in the beginning then we will have to conclude that the ‘heavens’ were created on day two (v.8) and that the earth was created on day three (v.10) which will be, of course, an illogical conclusion contrary to Genesis 1:1 and 2. As such, the sun, moon and stars which were created along with the stellar heavens were made to appear visibly on the fourth day through the clearing of the dense cloudy skies just as the ‘dry land’ wasn’t created but was ‘made to appear’. After all, there were the original “heavens” before the “atmospheric heavens” of Genesis 1:8; and there was an “earth” before the appearance of

the “dry land called earth” of Genesis 1:10. The six-day creationists have erroneously mixed up the two biblically different “heavens and earth” as if they were one and the same. At the same time, they contradict themselves by stating that these two are different by excluding the ‘heavens and earth’ of Genesis 1:1 as if they were different from the other related ‘merisms’. The Biblical truth is clear: the ‘merism’ Heavens and Earth refers to the ‘totality of all creation’. It refers to the whole Universe including the Sun, Moon and the Stars and the earth created together by God by fiat, perhaps at the same instant “In A Beginning” in the dateless past. Next, the merism: “heavens and earth” includes the atmospheric heavens and the dry land that were made to appear again during the six days. Biblically speaking, however, it is one and the same ‘merism: heavens and earth’ referring to the ‘atmospheric heavens’ and to the ‘earth’. Of course, six-day creationists are not going to easily accept the fact that the solar system was created in the beginning and not on the fourth day. But the fact is that on the fourth day God re-arranged and made the greater light (sun) to rule during the day and the lesser light (moon) to rule during the night by taking their proper positions in relation to earth. So also the stars that were created earlier “In the Beginning” were made clearly visible again to brighten the earth during the night. It is unimaginable that the earth was kept afloat in space on its own without solar system until the 4th day. The biblical fact that the heavens and the earth of Genesis 1:8 and 10 are different from the original perfect heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 is further confirmed by Genesis 2:4a. It states: “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created”. “Generations” means ‘descent, family, race, origin, birth’. Therefore, Genesis 2:4 does not indicate the process of heavens and earth came into existence, but the events which followed their establishment. In other words, it is not a summary of the events which preceded Genesis 2:4” 2 Thus the term “generations” in Genesis 2:4a point to two different ‘heavens and earth’. The first generation of original PERFECT ‘heavens and earth’ of Genesis 1:1 is, therefore, totally different from the next generation of ‘atmospheric heavens’ of Genesis 1:8 and the dry land or ‘earth’ of Genesis 1:10 created, rather ‘made’, during the work of the six days. Next, the much disputed and argued about Hebrew word “Re’shiyth” in Genesis 1:1translated as “BEGINNING’ “means the first in place, time,

order, or rank; the beginning of a fixed period of time (Genesis1:1, Deuteronomy 11:12; Job 42:12). Genesis 1:1 and John 1: 2 leave no doubt that Genesis 1:1 was the initial act of physical creation” 3 However, the ‘beginning of creation’ doesn’t mark the “beginning of a fixed period of time’ as in Genesis 1: 3-5 but it refers to the ‘beginning of God’s ways’. The actual beginning of time as we measure it today is from the first day of the creation week. It marks the beginning of the period of human history. It has nothing to do with the beginning of the original heavens and the earth first created by God (Genesis 1:1) in the ‘eternity past’. Biblical Revelation discloses ‘here a little and there a little’ when and ‘how’ and ‘what’ particular things were made as they were made as well as ‘all the things’ that are to be created and made in the future. The Bible mentions about three distinct categories of heavens and earth that are inter-related. The three categories of creation may be distinguished as follows:(i) In the eternity past, before the creation of time, as we measure it today; (ii) In the realm of time, all the things, that were made in the first six days; (iii) In the eternity future, the “all things new” that will be made in the eternal future, without any reference to time. As such, as far as the Biblical Revelation is concerned, there are actually three distinct, major ‘chronological’ phases or periods or ages ‘aeons’, or worlds that describe God’s Physical or Material and Organic or Biological Creative Works – that is, of heavens and earth with biological and social-relational life on earth. The three phases of God’s creative works are in perfect accordance with God’s overall plan and eternal purposes both for angelic creatures and for human beings created after God’s image. Apostle Peter aptly summarizes these three phases as follows:(1) Heavens that were of old, and the earth standing out of the water; and the world (kosmos) that then was (2 Peter 3:5-6); in the Eternity past; (2) Heavens and earth, which are now (2 Peter 3:7); in the Realm of time; (3) New heavens and the new earth (2 Peter 3:13); in the Eternity future.

Next, as convincingly stated by Finis J. Dake, the three phases of heavens and earth are also characterized by three distinct social systems on earth. That is “1: The pre-Adamite, the one that then was before the present heavens and the earth (v 6); 2: The Adamite sinful social system, from Adam to the new heavens and the new earth (v 7); 3: The Adamite sinless social system in the new earth (v 13; Revelation 21:1-22; 5; Isaiah 66:22-24.”4 The sinless social system of the new earth need not necessarily be of the eternally saved Adamites in Christ but will also include the elect angels. The above three major phases and accounts of God’s creative works with their associated social systems are supported by Scriptures given elsewhere in the Bible “line upon line, line upon line, here a little and there a little” (Isaiah 28:9-10). The Bible gives us a necessary but not a complete view of all that constitutes and encompasses Biblical Creation Truth. The three phases of God’s creative works during the three different and mutually exclusive periods will be dealt with, in detail, in Part Three of this work. However, the same to be appreciated one should be free from bias resulting from the traditional six-day creationism. A scholarly unbiased approach to these aspects will lead to a comprehensive understanding of God’s creative works as well as a better appreciation of the same. Such an understanding will pave the way to resolve prevailing conflicts with science precipitated by the traditional sixday creationism as well as by the proponents of Young Earth Creationism. Actually, scientific discoveries should be of help to us to gain a better understanding of God’s creation. However, “We do not say that the Word of God falls in with the results and facts of science, thus honoring the Word; it never borrows light, but adds a luster and glory to every subject it touches” (Walter Scott, op. cit). After all, God is the Author of Biblical Revelation as well as of Natural Revelation or the Book of Science. These two sources of knowledge can never contradict nor are they in opposition to each other. ____________________________________________________________ 1: K. Hem, op.cit. Underline, mine. 2: Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit. p.1652. 3: S. Zodiathes, ibid., p. 1636.

4: Finnis. J. Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, Dake Publishing, Inc., 2001; Indian Edition, Sathyam Publications, Kerala, India; Section 2 p. 480.

Biblical Creation Truth V/s Traditional Six-Day Creationism The proponents of the “Traditional Six-day and Young Earth Creationism” do not “rightly divide the Word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15) in Genesis 1 creation account. In doing so, they restrict themselves to a ‘single narrow interpretation of the first chapter of the Bible’. Accordingly, they overlook, if not bluntly ignore, certain important doctrinal aspects of the scriptural accounts of creation. And as a result, they have come up and still come up with unbiblical interpretations that fly ‘in the face of scientific research and defy common sense’. The resulting bias makes it even more difficult for them to unlearn error or to learn new truth, objectively. If one only leaves aside at least for a while, if not completely shed away for eternal good, the traditional belief of a creation of everything during the six days of Genesis 1:3-31 and be next willing to look at the creation accounts in Genesis 1 objectively, then it won’t be difficult for such an honest soul to conclude and openly admit that the traditional doctrine of a creation in six days is indeed faulty. An objective study of the creation accounts in Genesis 1 will certainly lead one to confirm that the traditional concept of ‘creation in six days’ is unbiblical. It should be obvious by now that the traditional six-day creationists have been focusing on narrowly interpreting Genesis 1 in its entirety as if it dealt with creation of the whole universe during the first six days. As such,

the fact that Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and 1:3-31 constitute three different creation accounts has been overlooked. Instead, these three distinct creation accounts are treated as a single creation account. Moreover, Traditional Six-day and Young-Earth Creationists have not taken into account those Scriptures that point to the creation of angelic hosts as occurring earlier than the physical creation. So also they overlook the Scriptures that indicate that the angels and pre-adamite men lived on earth under Lucifer’s administration. They also need to consider those Scriptures that point to Lucifer’s rebellion and his consequent judgment that brought the chaotic conditions on earth. Only then, they will be able to accept and appreciate the fact that the phased work of the six days is totally distinct. And that, it was thus planned to depict the implementation of God’s program on earth for man’s ultimate redemption from remaining enslaved to Satan. As is wrongly presumed by the Traditional Six-Day Creationists, the Bible doesn’t state that the whole universe along with the round globe we call earth was created during the work of the six days. Nowhere in the true six-day-creation-account of Genesis 1:3-31, is it stated that the heavens and the round globe or earth were created during any of these six days. Six day young-earth creationists somehow presume the heavens and the earth were created on the first day; but the Bible certainly doesn’t state it to be as such. Moreover, as is erroneously presumed by the Traditional Six-Day Creationists, the Bible nowhere in it states that the earth is only six thousand years old or even ten thousand years old. Nor does it state that the earth is billions of years old. In fact, the Bible doesn’t at all talk about the age of the earth or of the universe; it says neither the earth is young nor it says the earth is old. As such, it is of no use at all to keep oneself pre-occupied in guessing the ages of the earth or that of the universe. All we can do is to simply comply with God’s silence about the age of the earth or universe by remaining silent ourselves; nor should we allow ourselves to be troubled by any scientific guesses about the ages of the earth or universe. The Bible simply states that the heavens and the earth were created in “A” “Beginning”; but that “Beginning” is not the beginning of Day One or the beginning of Time as is assumed by the Six-day Creationists. The Bible briefly states in Genesis 1:1 that it was “In a beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. It doesn’t tell us when that beginning was! It was a ‘creation’ not within the context of any measurable time but within the context of eternity, outside the realm of time. The Bible tells us that that

particular “Beginning” was the ‘beginning’ of a “physical creation”. Therefore, it is not the “Beginning of Time” as we measure time on earth. Actually, Day One begins much after the original creation of the heavens and earth mentioned in Genesis 1:1. It begins much after the original perfect earth became and then was found to be in a state of chaos, without ‘form’ and ‘void’ or ‘empty’, inundated by waters and covered by darkness all over, as stated in Genesis 1:2. Moreover, the Bible is silent as to how long it was in a chaotic condition before God commanded the existing light to shine out of darkness on earth(2 Corinthians 4:6) thereby creating a recurring cycle of day and night regular periods, beginning with Day 1 of Genesis 1:3-5. And, it has been as such, ever since the beginning of Day One of the creation week described in Genesis 1:3-5. As such, it is biblically inappropriate to assume Genesis 1:1-2 is God’s activity of Day 1. Chaos of Genesis 1:2; Not a Work of Creation The Bible tells us that the earth was or became void and empty; and that darkness covered the waters that covered the earth. It doesn’t say that it was created that way. It could never have been created that way seeing that God creates perfectly (Deut. 32:4)! How some dare to think of chaos in Genesis 1:2 as a work of creation one cannot understand. No matter how we choose to translate it, whether it is “As to the earth, it was empty and void” or whether it is “And the earth was void and empty” or “And the earth became empty and void”, the fact is that that was the condition on earth. It was not created as such by God whose works are perfect. God is not the Author of confusion or of ‘towhu’ or ‘bohu’. As such, these chaotic conditions cannot be in accordance with His essence and perfect character as the Creator God who creates all things perfectly. Even if “The most straightforward reading of the verses sees verse 1 as a subject-and-verb clause, with verse 2 containing three circumstantial clauses”, in no way does it mean that these “three statements that further describe the circumstances introduced by the principal clause in verse 1” (www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/gap-ruin-reconstruction-theories), are essentially “a description of the state of the originally created earth”. To state as such, is to foolishly state that the circumstantial clause in verse 2c “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” is also “a description of the state of the originally created earth”. Therefore, the chaotic tohu and bohu and darkness cannot be acts of original creation.

As such, it is definitely wrong to conclude that the clause “And the earth was without form and void in Genesis 2a” is a description of the state of the originally created earth, irrespective of the fact “that the Hebrew conjunction waw, meaning “and” at the beginning of verse 2, is a “waw copulative,” “which compares with the old English expression “to wit”. In no way, the Hebrew conjunction ‘wau’ in Genesis 1:2 should prevent us from ‘sharply dividing the Word of Truth’ in a manner which is in harmony with God’s character, whose works are perfect and beautiful. It is biblically wrong to state that it was all darkness all over when God created the heavens and the earth. The stellar heavens necessarily had to be full of light as the purpose of all stars is to give light. There are no stars that are totally dark or that do not emit at least colored light. To state that it was all dark in the universe soon after its creation is to state contrary to known facts. The sextillions of solar systems comprising the vast galaxies necessarily had to emit light from the beginning. Darkness, therefore, had to be a much later condition as a result of judgment. Jeremiah states that he saw the earth as it was in Genesis1: 2 without ‘form and void’ and with no light (cp. Jeremiah 4:23); no man and no birds (cf. Jeremiah 4:25); and instead of vegetation or fruitful place, he saw wilderness and cities broken down (cp. Jeremiah 4:26). Jeremiah’s vision here seems to be more of a ‘warning-reminder’ of the historical past as well as it is a prevision of prophetic prediction of some future catastrophe. The Bible doesn’t say that the light and darkness were first created on the first day of the creation week; that is, that there were no light and darkness periods before Genesis 1:3-5. Or, that the sun, moon and stars were actually created on the fourth day. That is, that there was no sun and moon in the stellar heavens prior to Genesis 1:14-19. The very fact that the earth today revolves around the sun and is held in its orbit with precision by the sun’s gravitational pull demands the existence of the sun from the beginning of earth’s creation and not from the fourth day as is wrongly assumed. Next, the Bible doesn’t state that the earth brought forth vegetation for the first time on the third day; or that the fowl of the air and the fishes and other creatures were created for the first time on the third day; or that, the cattle and other animals were created for the first time on the fifth day of the creation week; that is, that there was no vegetation of any kind or that

there were no aerial birds or aquatic creatures and terrestrial animal life of any kind prior to that which is described in Genesis 1:11-12, 20-28 accounts. In fact, a proper understanding of Genesis 1:11-12, 20-28 accounts will actually confirm that there was an earlier ‘vegetation’ on earth; or that, there were the ‘fowl of the air’ and ‘aquatic creatures’ and ‘terrestrial animals’ prior to their (re-)creation as described in the Genesis accounts. When the Bible states that “… the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his (its) kind”, and the “tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind”, it actually states what has been overlooked that the vegetation which the earth brought into existence in response to God’s command on the third day was ‘after its kind’- it was something now brought forth ‘after the same kind’ that was once there earlier on earth prior to its destruction as described in Genesis 1:2. Similarly, when the Bible states that when “God created great whales and every living creature …, which the waters brought forth, after his kind, and every winged fowl after his kind”; or next, when it states that “God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that crept upon the earth after his kind”, it actually states what has been overlooked, that the fauna God created on the fifth and sixth days was actually something of the same kind that was earlier on earth prior to its destruction as described in Genesis 1:2 . As otherwise, if the earth had brought forth flora and fauna for the first time on the third, fifth and sixth day , then what the earth brought forth could not be ‘after its kind’, if there was no earlier life of the ‘same kind’. The phrase ‘after his/their/its kind’ has been commonly associated with reproduction of one’s own kind, which fact is indeed true. After all, it is a biblical and scientific fact that all living forms reproduce ‘after their own kind’. However, in the Genesis 1:3-31 account referred to earlier, the phrase “after one’s kind’ in every case does not refer to any reproduction of the same kind as is assumed; for these are not accounts of reproduction but of a re-creation after some original kind of the same type. Certainly, it is not stated here that which the earth newly brought forth eventually or immediately reproduced after its own kind. Rather, it states that the earth brought forth ‘living forms’ ‘after its own kind’, exactly “like the ones that were earlier”. This is confirmed by other similar statements in the Bible. As a matter of fact, Isaiah 14:12, Ezekiel 28:12c-16, 31:8-9 and 2

Peter 5-7 indicate the presence of life forms much before the creation of life recorded in the Genesis 1 account. Anyway, there had to be a Garden of Eden with vegetation on earth in the original creation as the same can be certainly and confidently inferred from Ezekiel 28:13, 31:8-9, 18. Unless proved to the contrary, Prophet Ezekiel talks of a pre-Adamic ‘Garden of Eden’ (Ezekiel 28:13; 31:8-9, 18). As a matter of biblical fact, Adam was placed in a Garden that was planted Eastward of an already known place called Eden (Genesis 2:15) and tested for his obedience (Genesis 2:16-17) and was then cast out for disobeying God (Genesis 3:2324). So also, Lucifer was tested for his obedience in an earlier Garden of Eden (Ezekiel 28:13) and was next cast out from the same for disobeying God (Ezekiel 28:16). As such, it is very clear that there were two distinct ‘Gardens of Eden’ on earth but at two different periods! In the footnote to Ezekiel 28:13(see ‘The MacArthur Study Bible’, page 1191) John MacArthur interprets the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13 as the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:15. However, the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13 cannot be the same as the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:15. For, in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:15, Satan is present as a Serpent (cp. 2 Corinthians 11:3). On the other hand, in the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13 it is Lucifer who is addressed wherein God talks of Lucifer’s earlier wisdom, beauty and sinless-ness. This indicates that he was once in an earlier Garden of Eden when he ruled in a pre-Adamic world on earth, during which he eventually sinned and fell (Isaiah 14:12; Ezekiel 28:16). That there has been an earlier Garden of Eden is further confirmed by the fact that when the Bible states the location of the newly (re-)created garden, it does so by referring to its location as if it were in a place or rather, planted in a place, that was eastward of an already known Eden – that is, that the “LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden” (Genesis 2:8). In keeping with the principle or rather the “Law of Double Reference” of biblical interpretation, it may be stated that Ezekiel 28:12b is addressed to Lucifer and not to the King of Tyros as in Ezekiel 28:12a. Similarly, the passages in Ezekiel 31 though to begin with are addressed to Pharaoh, King of Egypt (Ezekiel 31:2), the focus is then next shifted. As such, Ezekiel 31:8-9 are not actually addressed to Pharaoh but to Lucifer, referring to his original status of grandeur and splendor he once had when in the Garden of Eden (Ezekiel 28:13-15) before his fall (Ezekiel 28:15-18; 31:18).

In fact, God is actually addressing Satan by addressing to the King of Tyros or the King of Egypt just as Christ addressed Satan by addressing to Peter (Matthew 16:23; Mark 8:33). There could not be any Garden of Eden in Egypt during Pharaoh’s time or at any other time anywhere on earth once the original Garden of Eden from which Adam after sinning was cast out, was destroyed. Therefore, the “Garden of Eden” of Ezekiel 28:13 should be pre-historic and, therefore, it is not the same garden that was planted eastward of Eden of Adam’s time. As such, there had to be an earlier pre-Adamic Garden of Eden under Lucifer’s dominion. It was, in a way, a type of the Garden that God would next create and plant on the eastern location of the original Garden of Eden after creation of Adam and Eve. Again, the pre-adamic Lucifer’s Garden of Eden could be very well considered as a type of the millennial kingdom. Next, during the millennial reign of Christ, the earth will be like the Garden of the Lord (Isaiah 51:3; Ezekiel 36:35), which is again a type of the Garden or heavenly Paradise of the ‘Eternal State’. Isaiah also talks about pre-Adamic nations which were under Lucifer’s rule when he was on earth (cp. Isaiah 14:12). These nations were swayed by him after he sinned in exalting himself and were destroyed. If this be the correct interpretation, then it can be confidently stated that anthropoid life was extant on earth prior to its condition as stated in Genesis 1:2 or before the work of the six days. There must have been nations of primitive preAdamic ‘sons of men’ (Proverbs 8:31b) which Lucifer did weaken. Or else, there must have been anthropoids like human beings, whose remains now discovered are wrongly claimed to be the ancestors of human beings. Perhaps, “All the species … must have been advanced apes or anthropoids possessed of considerable intelligence and resourcefulness – but who completely died off before Adam and Eve were created. … There may have been advanced and intelligent hominids that lived and died before Adam, but they were not created in the image of God” (1) the same as Adam was created after God’s image/likeness. Anyway, the fact that the anointed Cherubim Lucifer ruled on earth prior to Adam cannot be denied in the light of the Scriptures to that account. Isaiah 14:12 cannot refer to nations on earth under Satan’s influence that are now; nor can they be of any other time. They refer to some nations which Lucifer ruled before he sinned and became Satan. Lucifer’s creation and his subsequent rebellion as described in Isaiah 14:28 cannot be ‘some time after

day seven’ of the creation week as assumed by the Young Earth Creationists. Based on what is stated above we may, therefore, confidently state that Peter speaks of the world (social system) that “then was” (2 Peter 3:67). This social system, unlike the ante-diluvian world of Genesis 6, was totally destroyed by a universal flood. Such a universal destruction could be only explained and accounted for by treating Genesis 1:2 account as a later development or rather a judgmental outcome. Universal destruction as depicted in Genesis 1:2 could never be logically associated with the creation of the heavens and earth (Genesis 1:1) in “A Beginning”. To state as such, is to impugn the character of God who creates all things perfect. Moreover, darkness and sea in the Bible, are often, almost always symbolic of Satan. Some other Scriptures, such as Matthew 13:35; 25:34 also point to a destruction of a primeval pre-Adamic world that was then:For example, Matthew 13:35; 25:34 could as well be translated ‘from the casting away of the world (cosmos)’ instead of being translated ‘from the foundation of the world’ which is actually an improper translation of the Greek ‘katabole kosmou’. In all instances of ‘foundation’ of any structure, whether it’s of heavens or earth or the heavenly city of Jerusalem, the original Greek word translated as “foundation” is “themilioo” and not ‘katabole’. Even ‘katabole’ used for Sarah’s conception involves the destruction of the ‘sperm’ once united with the ‘ovum’ and it is next followed by metabolism of new life; so also ‘katabole’ of the ‘kosmos’ is followed by the formation and birth of a new ‘cosmos’. The events of judgment of which Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel and Peter talk about cannot refer to any other period of human history beginning from the creation of Adam and Eve. These events must be rightly interpreted as having occurred during the world that was then (2 Peter 3:6-7; Jude 6, 13) under Lucifer’s dominion. And this pre-Adamic sin-laden world is the one that was eventually destroyed subsequent to Lucifer’s rebellion as explained earlier! Therefore, it can be clearly stated that the conditions of Genesis 1:2 are not of original creation but as a result of judgment due to Lucifer’s sin. Again, it is also the result of judgment brought upon pre-Adamic ‘sons of men’ (Proverbs 8:31b) who along with the angels eventually sinned. Even though it is not stated as such in the Bible, the existence of sin in pre-Adamic world can be nevertheless inferred. As such, destruction if not suffering on earth in the world that was then should be due to Lucifer’s sin;

just as destruction and suffering has been in Adam’s world as a consequence of Adam’s sin. Sin, whether that of Lucifer or of his angels or of Adam and his progeny could not be without its dire consequences. The argument is so often made by the six-day creationists that there could not be any suffering and death prior to the sin of Adam. However, Lucifer had sinned prior to the creation of man; and it his sin and that of the pre-adamic races that brought destruction and chaos on earth (Genesis 1:2, cf. Job 38:9) Anyway, it is a biblical fact that Lucifer and his angels kept not their first state but sinned from the beginning. As a consequence of their rebellion and sin, they are, therefore, said to be kept reserved under chains of darkness unto the judgment of the last day (Jude 6). Obviously, Lucifer’s sin and that of the angels and pre-adamic races brought about the conditions of chaos and universal flood and darkness on earth. Such a chaotic situation on earth necessitated God’s phased work of the six days for restoration. As otherwise, such a chaotic condition could never be the state of the newly created earth, notwithstanding the fact that “The most straightforward reading of the verses sees verse 1 as a subject-and-verb clause, with verse 2 containing three circumstantial clauses (i.e., three statements that further describe the circumstances introduced by the principal clause in v. 1)”. To state as such is also to conclude that the Holy Spirit is a part of creation. Another argument raised by the traditional 6-day creationists is that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is subverted if sin and its consequences were prior to the creation week. However, the everlasting Gospel of Jesus Christ is not subverted but has relevant application in cleansing the defiling consequences of Lucifer’s sin, even prior to Adam’s sin. We also need to be aware of the evangelical truth that refers to the reconciling aspects of Christ’s sacrifice in relation to all things and not in relation to men only. (Colossians 1:20). Unfortunately, all of these biblical facts tend to be overlooked or are ignored by the traditional six-day creationists. Or else, the same are wrongly interpreted. All this shows one’s prejudice or bias and a compulsion to comfortably hold on to one’s accustomed and attuned, habitual beliefs. Subsequently, it becomes much more difficult to admit and own and confess and unlearn error than to learn new truth! Anyway, these and other related biblical aspects will be dealt with more comprehensively as well as convincingly in Part Three of this

Systematic Treatise by highlighting biblical facts that have been overlooked or not properly understood; if not, plainly ignored to accommodate one’s traditional belief of a creation in six days, contrary to biblical revelation. Hopefully, the traditional six-day creationists and the modern Young Earth Creationists will come to terms with the biblical facts that hereto have been overlooked rather than to hold on to contradictory assumptions based on the Traditional Six-Day Creationism. To deliberately hold on to such ‘hidebound’ traditional concepts, amounts to indulging in a wholesale denial of biblical truth. It certainly involves a denial of True Scriptural Creationism.

_____________________________________ ______ 1: Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of BIBLE DIFFICULTIES, Zondervan Publishing House, US, 1982, p. 64.

Biblical Creation Truth V/s Theistic Evolution Theistic Evolutionists are in no way faring better. They are equally guilty of their failure to ‘rightly divide the Word of Truth’ and take into account all the scriptural accounts relating to creation. Instead, they have freely chosen to ‘smuggle into Scripture’ evolutionary concepts. They aim to explain how God supposedly brought into existence the complex universe and the rich variety of species on earth with the help of evolutionary concepts. At the same time, they tell us they are not ‘100 per cent sure’ of what they are saying! And, as is the case with atheistic evolutionists, their vague hypothetical conclusions tend to ‘mutate’ in course of time and ‘evolve’ into ever new ‘speculations’; or else, the same remain ‘fossilized’. In the ‘Creation Terminology’ there is not even the slightest indication of any form of evolutionary process as having been created and used by God. There is absolutely nothing in the Scriptures to indicate that God brought the complex universe and life into existence in the course of billions of years. Evolution is totally an absurd idea that has been ‘smuggled’ into

the Scriptures based on a false interpretation of ‘scientific speculations’. We need to have concrete scientific facts to be accepted as biblically supported truth and not any ‘evolving and constantly mutating evolutionary guesses’. The Bible nowhere states that God created some form of evolutionary process and that the heavens or the universe, the earth and all things therein are a product of that evolutionary process. Instead, the Bible clearly states that Man was directly fashioned and created by God as a perfect and highly intelligent being with the ability to rule over God’s creation. Men as we know them today are not the product of lower forms of life resulting from evolution through ‘natural selection’ and or ‘survival of the fittest’. Anyway, as far as the Scriptures are concerned God is not a “MacroEvolutionist” and need never ever be considered as such. He is the CREATOR GOD who creates by FIAT, miraculously, almost always in an instant. As such, theistic evolutionists are guilty of adding to God’s Word by subscribing to atheistic evolutionary concepts which are only guesses popping out of the heads of biblically illiterate evolutionists. Nothing has been biblically demonstrated to prove concretely that God brought into existence matter and life forms by creating and using some form of ‘evolutionary processes’ as falsely assumed by theistic evolutionists. It has been simply and naively assumed as such, as a result of constant exposure to false unscientific speculations (or “oppositions of science falsely so-called”, 1 Timothy 6:20) of atheistic scientists and evolutionists. Instead of allowing the Scriptures to guide them to properly interpret the facts in the “Book of Science and Natural Revelation”, the so-called theistic evolutionists have deified the atheistic theories of cosmic and biological evolution. Next, they have naively consecrated unscientific speculations and unbiblical conclusions to sound theistic. However, they blindly believe evolutionary lies and pseudo-scientific speculations.

No wonder, reflecting on such a deplorable thinking in the Church, “In his essay “Lights of the Church and Science,” Huxley stated, ‘I am fairly at a loss to comprehend how anyone, for a moment, can doubt that Christian theology must stand or fall with the historical trustworthiness of the Jewish Scriptures. The very conception of the Messiah, or Christ, is inextricably interwoven with Jewish history; the identification of Jesus of Nazareth with that Messiah rests upon the interpretation of the passages of the Hebrew Scriptures which have no evidential value unless they possess the historical character assigned to them. If the covenant with Abraham was not made; ---if the ‘ten words’ were not written by God’s hand on the stone tables; if Abraham is more or less a mythical hero; the Story of the Deluge a fiction; that of the Fall a legend; and that of the Creation the dream of a seer; if all these definite and detailed narratives of apparently real events have no more value as history than have the stories of the regal period of Rome—what is to be said about the Messianic doctrine, which is so much less clearly enunciated. And what about the authority of the writers of the books of the New Testament, who, on this theory, have not merely accepted flimsy fictions for solid truths, but have built the very foundations of Christian dogma upon legendary quicksands?’” 1 Galileo did actually prove by presenting concrete scientific data to support his conclusions. However, his were found to be in disagreement with the traditional unbiblical church belief prevailing at the time. Nevertheless, Galileo’s findings were certainly in tune with the biblical revelation. But, unlike Galileo, the so-called theistic evolutionists are still guessing. Instead of using the Scriptures to assess their speculations borrowed from the atheistic theory of evolution, they use evolutionary concepts to substantiate Scriptures. They then boast about evolutionary concepts of which they can never actually be 100 per cent sure. After all, ‘no man can really find out’ all about God’s work. It is unimaginable how any one believing in a Creator God who creates by fiat could at the same time think of God as creating and using false evolutionary processes of chance contrary to His character. At a time when the Bible speaks so clearly of a creation that has been brought into existence by fiat, it is unimaginable how the so-called theistic evolutionists should succumb into being deceived by the so-called scientific evidence in support of evolution which is not an operational science. The so-called evidence doesn’t prove evolution theory and there is no proof of any complex species of life evolving from simple life forms.

At the same time, theistic evolutionists are doubly guilty of taking away from the Word of God what is actually there. This they do by falsely assuming the biblical creation accounts are written by using some kind of literary devices. They boldly teach Christians that the creation accounts in Genesis 1 need not be taken literally. And this they do in order to accommodate their unfounded ‘scientific speculations’ in the Scriptures and thereby make the Scriptures conform to their speculations. Ken Ham fittingly comments about the ills of such a compromise: “In many nations, the Word of God was once widely respected and taken seriously. But once the door of compromise is unlocked, once Christian leaders concede that we shouldn’t interpret the Bible as written in Genesis, why should the world take heed of God’s Word in any area? Because the church has told the world that one can use man’s interpretation of the world, such as billions of years, to reinterpret the Bible, this Book is seen as an outdated, scientifically incorrect holy book not intended to be believed as written. As each subsequent generation has pushed this door of compromise open farther and farther, they are increasingly not accepting the morality or salvation of the Bible either. After all, if the history in Genesis is not correct, how can one be sure the rest is correct? Jesus said, “If I have told you earthly things, and you do not believe, how you will believe if I tell you of heavenly things? (John 3:12)” 2 Theistic evolutionists, instead of blindly ‘idolizing’ and praising an “Unknown God of Evolution”, will do better to answer the series of rhetorical questions God asked Job (Job 38:1 to 41:34). In fact, God confronted Job so as “to emphasize the distance between man and his Creator as well as creation and, therefore, man’s inability to understand even if God explained it all to man”. Theistic evolutionists darken both natural and biblical revelation with their vague unfounded ‘smuggled’ speculations. Instead of interpreting the creation accounts in Genesis literally, they proclaim God as a Creator of Evolution. And then, they want everyone to ‘gasp’, “How Great Thou Art?” for supposedly creating ‘MAN’ after the Image of some ‘Common Unknown Ancestor’. As such, to them, man is not to be any more conceived as a direct product of God’s handiwork after His own image and likeness. Theistic Evolutionists firmly believe man to be a descendant of some anthropoid common ancestor. _____________________________________________________________

1: Quoted by Ken Ham in ‘Couldn’t God Have Used Evolution? August 22, 2007. 2: Ken Ham, ibid).

“The Unknown God of Evolution” Since creation has a beginning, it had to be created by a Supreme Intelligent Agency, even God Almighty, by fiat. Therefore, we can with full confidence and conviction affirm that, “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear” (Hebrews11:3). That is, “God created everything out of nothing simply by the power of His Word” 1 Therefore, instead of blindly accepting “unscientific speculation” to inform us as to “how the universe came into being or how the process of creation has unfolded throughout the history of the earth” which is known to contradict revelation, one will do well to intelligently believe in what God says in His WORD that remains undisputed; that the ‘worlds’ (and not ‘big bang’ or any ‘soup of hydrogen atoms’) were “framed ” by the Word of God; and not “evolved”, or that “new species were continually created by fiat over the course of billions and billions of years”. Evolution, as a process, is in sharp contrast to direct creation during which, as the Bible authoritatively says, the ‘worlds’ were actually ‘framed’, and not evolved. “Framed” translated from the Greek word “katartizo” actually means “finished”, “completed” or “disposed of perhaps with great wisdom and propriety”; as such, to entertain any thought of any evolutionary process for physical things and life to develop by blind chance in the course of time is to indulge in contradictions. By the way, ‘katartizo’ in Greek, meaning ‘framed’ or ‘completed’ or ‘disposed of’ and the Hebrew ‘suwn or siym’ of Job 37:15 has similar meanings, implying an already completed work. “Of course, we do not pretend to inquire HOW all these things were made, for in doing so we should be committing the folly of those who, “professing themselves to be wise – became fools” by prying into things they never could know. For where, we might ask, is the philosopher who could fully describe the growth of even a daisy? Enough for us to know that

the infinite and omnipotent God ‘spoke and it was done; He commanded and it stood fast’” 2 Yes, God commanded; and the entire creation “STOOD FAST” (Psalms 33:9) and not developed or evolved in the course of billions of years through evolutionary process from a ‘soup of hydrogen atoms’! Proponents of “abiogenesis” state that primitive unicellular life forms have evolved from non-living matter in the course of billions of years; and that, from these, complex life forms evolved in the course of more billions of years. One is left to wonder how the guesses of billions of years are arrived at to explain the unexplainable past events. Of course, theistic evolutionists know very well that primitive life did not evolve but directly created. Their problem is to guess as to how primitive life forms further evolved into higher forms resulting in the human brain. At the most, they may speculate that the “development of species over vast periods of time tells us that God either created some form of evolutionary process in the beginning or continually created new species by fiat over billions of years”. However, Nobel Laureate, Professor George Wald scoffs at the absurdity of such a possibility. He states: “Time is in fact the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the ‘impossible’ becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has to wait: time itself performs the miracles”3 Anyway, the lengthy process of evolution does contradict the reality that God is the Creator who creates by fiat. Either we believe that the ‘worlds’ were ‘framed’ and ‘completed’ or else firmly hold on to evolutionary lies with dogged determination. “CREATION by fiat” and the process of “EVOLUTION in the course of billions of years” are definitely antithetical terms; and the tension of their antithetical meanings can never be compatibly embodied; rather, they are terms in sharp contrast, opposed to each other; ‘creation’ being one of established biblical FACT of a completed or finished work (Genesis 2:1) which God looked at and said “very good” (Genesis 1:31) and ‘evolution’ being a mere THEORY developed by human minds to explain “the existence of a well-ordered physical creation and life forms without a Creator”! _______________________________________________________________________ _ 1: Creation and Evolution? op. cit. p. 8.

2: John A. Savage, The Scroll of Time, Kingston Bible Trust, U. K., 2004 Reprint, p. 7. 3: George Wald, “The Origin of Life”, Scientific American, May 1954, 46; quoted by John MacArthur, op. cit. p. 40. 4: Henry Morris, Old-Earth Creationism, www.icr.org.

How Did Matter and Life Really Begin? Theistic Scientists and Evolutionists state that God brought the complex creation into existence, not as described in Genesis 1:1; but that He brought it into being by a simple ‘creative act’, to begin with, in one “big bang”. “Not all believe this, but let’s say for argument’s sake that this is when and how the universe got started”1 , by treating Genesis 1 account as being penned by Moses by using “the standard style and genre of creation epics at the time”2 and that, as such, it need not be taken literally. Next, “At the moment of the ‘Big Bang’ and for some considerable time afterwards, galaxies, stars and planets did not exist. The universe started over billions of years to a kind of soup of hydrogen atoms, and then expanded over more billions of years during which galaxies, stars, planets and other elements of the universe came into existence. Thus the universe became what it is today through gradual development, the natural consequences of God’s original creative act. Perhaps God also did something like that with life on earth. The point is that a process like evolution need not contradict the reality that God is Creator”3! But it does contradict the reality that God is a Creator who creates instantly by fiat. Theistic evolutionists state that there is evidence “to show life on earth is billions of years old”4 and that “breakthroughs in scientific disciplines such as molecular biology have refined the theory of evolution by natural selection”4. They are therefore somehow convinced that “evolution is the most likely explanation for the development of species”6. Biological evolution, therefore, need not contradict that God is the Creator of life. Biological evolution states that “all living things are developed from a few simple forms of life through a series of physical changes. That, the first mammal developed from a type of reptile, and ultimately all forms is traced back to a simple, perhaps single-celled, organism”7.

Are Christians to believe that God has created ‘evolution’? Did God bring into existence the rich variety of species on earth such as the mammals, including Homo sapiens, by ‘natural selection’? Did God next take the Homo sapiens and breathed into his nostrils the “breath of life”, who then became “a Living Soul with a Human Spirit” and named as Adam? How about Eve? Did she also evolve from some simple life form? Or was there some other mechanism of which theistic evolutionists are not as yet aware of? Or is the Genesis account of the creation of Adam and Eve a ‘myth’? We may then ‘blasphemously’ state next that the sinless human Christ “descended”, not from a distinctly and deliberately created Adam (Genesis 5:1b-2; Luke 3:23-38) but from some Homo sapiens whose ‘genealogy’ may be traced back to some “single-celled organism” which may be ‘metaphorically’ termed as a “thing”. Accordingly, Adam of the ‘creation epic’ need not be literally called the “Son” of God (Luke 3:38). However, direct creation and not evolution, is the product of an Intelligent Mind. Unlike evolution that depends on ‘chance’ or external factors for the development of life, direct creation involves pre-programmed planning, designing and execution. That, that which is designed and made, is always the end product of an intelligent thoughtful process; the product had to be first conceived before it was ever made. In other words, intelligent design originates in a mind capable of thinking, conceiving, planning and executing what it conceives and plans and bring it to fruition, accordingly. And that, without waiting, with fingers crossed, for some lengthy evolutionary process to develop by chance things thought of and planned to automatically happen; or to evolve on their own in the course of billions of years. God has not used any evolutionary process in the creation of life or matter; and there are enough ‘gaps’ in the evolutionary theory to be filled up so as for the theistic evolutionists to be 100 per cent sure and be fully convinced. Nevertheless, as long as evolutionists are not 100 per cent sure, Christians are free to argue that “The evolution theory is not only absurd – its so-called proofs are so contradictory that they cause increasing doubt…; But then, some are convinced that “The development of species over vast periods of time tells us that God either created some form of evolutionary process in the beginning or continually created new species by fiat over billions of years. In either case, creation was no cosmic accident”8!

Embarrassingly, it is still “Either and Or”; guesses, nevertheless; the fact is that it simply doesn’t lie “in the power of man’s finite mind to conceive creation; it is a thought which can only be entertained by faith”9. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Evolution and Creation, op. cit. p.7 2: ibidem, p.7

3: ibidem, p.7.

4: ibidem, p.7

5: ibidem, p.7

6: ibidem, p.7

7: World Book Dictionary 8: Evolution and Creation, op. cit., p.

9: C.A.Coates, op. cit. p. 1.

Is It a Planned Instant Creation? Or, Is It a ‘Creation by Fiat over Billions of Years’?

“Hearken unto this, Stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God. Dost thou know when God disposed them? The wondrous works of Him which is PERFECT in knowledge? (Job 37:14-15). To think of the OMNIPOTENT Creator God as depending upon an evolutionary process is biblically untenable if not an insult to His Sovereign Person who speaks and brings into existence instantly by fiat; that is, in an authoritative order or command! God boldly reiterates: “I have made the earth and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded” (Isaiah 45:12) and it “stood fast” (Psalms 33:9); that is, it came into existence, instantly. There is no biblical evidence to tell us “that God either created some form of evolutionary process in the beginning or continually created new species by fiat over billions of years” (Creation and Evolution?, op. cit. p. 6). It is blindly assumed as such to make the Theory of Evolution acceptable to the Bible believing Christian community. But God opposes such ideation!

“Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Where were thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? “Or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? Or who laid the cornerstone thereof; when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:2-7). If the universe has been created through some evolutionary process and is still in the process of “being”, then we may presume that “the sons of God shouted for joy” at a simple creative act such as ‘big bang’ further evolving into a kind of soup of hydrogen atoms. And they must have continued rejoicing as they saw the universe and life forms evolving in the course of some billions of years. And, who knows, they must be still rejoicing to watch the universe and man still in the process ‘being’ and ‘becoming’. Or, else, they must be now wondering as to what next is going to evolve and develop in the next billions of years. It is very clear that the Sons of God or angelic host witnessed a fully developed creation brought into existence by fiat. However, the unbelieving theistic evolutionists find it difficult to accept by faith the biblical truth of an instant creation by fiat. Instead, they assume that God must have created and used some evolutionary process or ‘a creation by fiat’, not instantly, but over billions of years. From where the “billions of years” is deriving its credibility is unknown, so as for anyone to presume it is a reliable scientific fact. If there was really any evolution or ‘creation by fiat through billions of years’, then that must have been the case during the unknown period prior to the earth’s destruction as briefly described in Genesis 1:2. Convinced that matter and life have evolved into the complex forms we find it today, theistic evolutionists are frantically seeking an answer “to the question of the manner of the creative process or how long the creative process took – or whether it is continuing even today”1 As a matter of fact, physical creation is destined to deteriorate and decay in the course of time instead of ‘evolving further’ (Romans 8:2829).This fact, no one familiar with the second law of thermodynamics, will ever deny. “There is evidence now that the whole world and all in it are degenerating and moving toward some climax…, instead of evolving upward into higher and better forms”2

Notwithstanding unproved assumptions of evolutionary theories of life and matter developing or evolving into a better form, “the tendency for decay has been recognized as one of the basic laws of nature. First codified in science, and dubbed as the second law of thermodynamics, it has now been recognized in every system of thought including genetics. This tendency has received the name ‘time’s arrow’ always pointing downhill”3. Accordingly, “One of the very strongest arguments against evolution has always been the tendency for every system, living or dead, individual or societal, moral or mundane, to wear out, deteriorate, or die. As is common to all experience, nothing, absolutely nothing, gets better on its own”4 As such, instead of wondering and speculating as to whether the supposedly created evolution process is ‘continuing even today’, we will do well to ponder and accept God’s revealed truth that “The heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7). _______________________________________________________________________ _ 1: Creation and Evolution? op. cit. p.7). 2: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p.83. 3: John D. Morris, Are Things Getting Better or Are They Running Down? www.icr.org. 4: John D. Morris, ibid.

Theistic Evolution! Is It a Fitting Response to Evolutionism? Did God really first create some form of primitive matter and life endowed with the potential of evolving into complex forms in the course of billions of years? Did man, accordingly, evolve from some lower form of life or was he created just the way the God of the Bible says He did? Theistic Evolutionists “accept the findings of science and see no contradiction between the theory of evolution and a proper understanding of

the biblical account in Genesis 1”1. They state that “revelation of the Bible in no way rules out the possibility of life forms evolving through time”2. Their ‘self-convincing’ argument is that “if the facts show that evolution is the most likely explanation for the development of species, they must come to terms with it”3. However, there is neither scriptural nor scientific evidence to account for ‘the possibility of life forms evolving through time’; nor are there any scientific facts ‘to show that evolution is the most likely explanation for the development of species’, including the so-called homo sapiens or man. Next, in his ‘Editorial’ intelligently captioned “In Search of the God of the Gasps”4, John Halford confidently confronts the skeptics, saying: “Like it or not, the evidence is mounting that evolution through natural selection is the way life develops” 5 and that, after all, “it does now look as if Charles Darwin did not get it all wrong” 6. However, there is no concrete scientific evidence to prove that ‘evolution through natural selection is the way life develops’. Neither John Halford did justice to his contention by providing the necessary evidence to prove that “evolution through natural selection is the way life develops”. Next, according to him, “What the world needs now is not more people to desperately defend the increasingly beleaguered ‘God of the Gaps’”4 by defensively pointing to ‘gaps’ in the evolutionary theory. He is confident that current “research has closed many of those gaps, and others are under investigation”7. As such, skeptical Christians are now called upon to drop any “opposition to the evolutionary theory and accept evolution by natural selection as a valid explanation of the development of life”8 But then, what kind of biblical and scientific evidence is there to concretely prove the development of life by evolution? There is none! Majority of the Christians have no access to any scientific findings or facts to convincingly accept evolutionary theory as a scientific reality. Any ‘dissertation’ highlighting how research has closed many of the gaps in the evolutionary theory and in what way evolution specifically ‘macroevolution’ is God’s mechanism of creation would be of much help to concerned God-fearing Christians. This is necessary so as to convincingly give up any opposition to the evolutionary theory. Notwithstanding the so-called evidence of evolution that seems to be appealing to the theistic evolutionists, it can be convincingly stated that

“Theistic evolution is clearly not the solution to quieting the creationevolution controversy for many reasons. One is because leading educators, scientists and major science organizations are all hotly opposed to any and all worldviews that involve God, and this view now actually faces much more opposition than does creationism”9 Moreover, by blindly accepting unproved evolutionary speculations, theistic evolutionists are actually generating doubts as to the accuracy and appropriateness of all Scriptures in adopting a Christian worldview. “Once you accept evolution and its implications about history, then man becomes free to pick and choose which parts of the Bible he wants to accept” 10 Reportedly, “Huxley mocked those who try to harmonize evolution and millions of years with the Bible, because it requires them to give up a historical Genesis while still trying to hold to the doctrines of the New Testament. He pointed out the various doctrines in the New Testament are dependent on the truths of biblical – Genesis events, such as Paul’s teaching on the doctrine of sin, Christ’s teaching on the doctrine of marriage, and the warning of the future judgment”11. However, the Bible has nothing to state about the age of the universe or of earth. As such, it is the misinterpretation of the Genesis account and not Genesis itself that is in sharp contradiction with scientific speculations and is the cause of much unhealthy debate. Anyway, we are now confidently assured that any “possibility” of “Evolution of Life Forms and Man by natural selection” as “good science” need not conflict with one’s “faith in God”. But then, a conflict with what God authoritatively has to tell us in Genesis 1 and what the so-called ‘good science’ has to sheepily tell us is certainly inevitable. The ‘good science’ that assumes the possibility of Evolution of Life Forms and Man by natural selection is certainly very much at odds with Biblical Creation Science. Nevertheless, in spite of the obvious conflict between Biblical Faith and the so-called good science, theistic evolutionists are at ease even as they assume that the Genesis 1 accounts of creation need not be taken literally. They are quite comfortable in accepting the Genesis creation accounts as a genre of creation epic adopted by Moses to tell people How Great God Is! Subsequently, confident of their theological position built upon the sands of evolutionary myths, a joyful invitation is now made by them to the “best minds to join in the quest for innovation and discovery, and then stand back occasionally from what they are discovering in awe of the God of all

Creation and gasp, ‘How Great Thou Art’!” 12 ____________________________________________________________ 1: Creation and Evolution? op. cit. p.7 2: ibidem. p.7. 3: ibidem. p.7. 4: Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p. 4 5: ibid, p. 4 6: ibid,. p. 4. 7: ibid,. p. 4. 8: ibid,. p. 4. 9: Jerry Bergman. 10: Ken Ham, Couldn’t God have Used Evolution? August 22, 2007. 11: Ken Ham, ibid 12: John Halford, op. cit., p. 4.

“Glorifying God of the Gaps” With the Myths of Evolution? Theistic Evolutionists are convinced by the fallacies of evolutionary theory as if it’s scientific truth and state that they “… cannot afford to hold back our best young people by trapping them in hidebound concepts and anti-scientific worldviews”. According to them, “What the world needs now is not more people to desperately defend the increasingly beleaguered “God

of the Gaps”. We need our best minds to join in the quest for innovation and discovery, and then stand back occasionally from what they are discovering in awe of the God of all Creation and gasp, ‘How great Thou art” 1 In other words, to teach Biblical Creation Truth based upon a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 accounts of creation is to hold on to “hidebound concepts and anti-scientific worldviews” 2. Instead, we are called upon to accept godless theories of Evolution as scientific facts and stand back in awe of the God of the Bible as the “Creator of Evolution”.3 On the one hand, we are told that God has not revealed how He has created everything; on the other hand they smuggle into the Scriptures atheistic evolutionary concepts to tell us HOW God created everything in the course of billions of years. We are now called upon by the Theistic Evolutionists to stand in awe of God, rather the ‘Unknown God, the Creator of Evolution’ and gasp, ‘How great Thou art?’ They want the archaic ignorant Christians to convincingly accept by faith what the High Priests of Evolution has to teach in an attempt to fill in the existing gaps in the theory of evolution; and next, work miracles to bridge the unbridgeable gaps such as ‘between living and non-living matter’ and ‘in the realm of particles, between the electrons constituting the atoms and the atoms themselves’4 and so on, which scientists have not yet been and will never be able to bridge but ‘fall back on a miracle or a hyper- scientific intervention’ by God. Perhaps, to the godly theistic evolutionists, God is no more a Supreme Intelligent Designer and Omnipotent Creator who is able to get things done miraculously by fiat, by mere speaking. Instead, God has been transformed into a Dependent Evolutionist who, in spite of His omnipotent power, chose to depend upon evolution governed by blind chance for the universe and life forms including man to appear in the course of billions of years. No wonder, as pointed out earlier, Thomas Huxley (1825-1895), ‘an ardent evolutionary humanist who popularized Darwin’s ideas’, “eloquently pointed out the inconsistencies of reinterpreting Scripture to fit with popular scientific theory. Huxley mocked those who try to harmonize evolution and billions of years with the Bible, because it requires them to give up a historical Genesis while still trying to hold to the doctrines of the New Testament. What was Huxley’s point? He insisted that the theologians had to accept evolution and millions of years, but he pointed out that, to be consistent, they had to give up the Bible totally. Compromise is impossible”5 Theistic evolutionists do compromise, nevertheless, to their own glory.

Theistic Evolutionists will do well to heed Huxley’s taunt at them and decide either to wholeheartedly embrace evolution or to exclusively adhere to Biblical Christian Faith. For, “But once the door of compromise is unlocked, once Christian leaders insist we shouldn’t interpret the Bible as written in Genesis, why should the world take heed of God’s Word in any area? After all, if history in Genesis is not correct, how can one be sure the rest is correct? (John 3:12)” 6 Even atheistic scientists themselves are not wholly convinced of any truth in the theory of evolution. As admitted by Professor Jerome, “We have no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time. There is none; and I cannot accept the theory that I teach to my students each year. Let me explain. I teach the synthetic theory known as the neo-Darwinian one, for one reason only; not because it’s good, we know it is bad, but because there isn’t any other. Whilst waiting to find something better, you are taught something which is known to be inexact, which is a first approximation.” 7. What a serious indictment that is! So, why should any persons of ordinary intelligence blindly accept the constantly ‘mutating synthetic neo-Darwinian’ theories of evolution knowing they are bad theories having no basis? And why should theistic evolutionists seek to accommodate such bad theories and compromise with biblical truth of creation at a time when the atheistic evolutionists themselves candidly if not shamelessly admit that they have “no acceptable theory of evolution at the present time”? “But the astounding thing is, that persons of intelligence, and of the highest education too, should be so beguiled as to believe in the absurd and nonsensical theory of evolution in these so-called enlightened times” 8 One may easily conclude the so-called theistic evolutionists are also beguiled so as to believe in the unbiblical evolutionary theory. At the same time, as Pastors and godly Christians, they profess to know God as an Omnipotent Creator and then deny Him the power to create by fiat, instantly, and or to re-create and re-shape an existing creation “without form and void” in six literal 24-hour days and rest on the seventh 24-hour day. Is the so-called evidence of evolution so subtly deceitful, so as to lure Christians to accept it as if it is truth? Nevertheless, “The Bible in its entirety condemns the theories of both cosmic and organic evolution. It declares in

no uncertain terms that God created all the material and moral creations, the animate and inanimate things, and that He is the first and last cause of all existing universes and the things therein” 9 The Theory of Evolution intrinsically rejects God, Christ, Holy Spirit and the Bible. It is totally anti-Christian. Instead of acknowledging God as the Creator of matter and life, its proponents substitute and worship ‘blind force’, ‘resident powers’ or ‘deify chance’ to account for the existence of matter and life without the need for any Creator God. Evolutionary hide-bound concepts degrade man to the level of a beast by theorizing that man has descended from some beast-like ‘common ancestor’ or from the so-called ‘ape-men’. As such, it blatantly denies man as being created by God after His own ‘Image and Likeness’. In that sense, Christ who is a historical figure is indirectly degraded to having descended from some ape-man ancestor. Thus, it indirectly degrades God. On what concrete basis theistic evolutionists can come to terms with blasphemous unscientific theories of evolution is difficult to understand? One is left imagining as to what kind of scientific evidence they have come across to convincingly presume man has descended from some imaginary ‘common ancestor’, which in turn, supposedly evolved from some vague primitive cellular forms through the course of billions of years. However, neither man nor plants nor animals have descended from some common imaginary ancestor. “Despite the claims of evolution, the appearance of new species, antibiotic resistance in bacteria, pesticide resistance and sickle-cell anemia are not evidence in favor of evolution. They do, however, demonstrate the principle of natural selection acting on existing traits – a concept that creationists and evolutionists agree on. The creationist model of how life spread across the globe after the Flood of Genesis uses many of the same principles of natural selection and adaptive radiation that are used in the evolution model. One of the main differences is that the biblical creation model recognizes that one kind cannot change into another and that the changes are a result of variation within the created kinds – not descent from a single common ancestor. As a result of the Curse, genetic mutations, representing a loss of information, have been accumulating, but these do not cause new kinds to emerge. Accepting the idea of a single common ancestor denies the authority of God’s Word” 10

It’s amazing as to how theistic evolutionists could allow themselves to be deceived into accepting evolutionary myth of man’s descent from some ape-man and at the same time doctrinally look at man as God’s creation, his ‘fall into sin’ and subsequent redemption of the fallen man from sin and death by the atoning and saving work of Christ. However, “To argue that the Christian can accept evolution on the grounds that the Bible is not to be taken literally, is a surrender to the foes of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Bible and all Christian teachings” 11 In a fitting “Conclusion” to his Article entitled “Theistic Evolution and Creation-Evolution Controversy”, Jerry Bergman succinctly states: “Theistic Evolution is clearly not the solution to quieting the creationevolution controversy for many reasons. One is because leading educators, scientists, and major science organizations are all hotly opposed to any and all worldviews that involve God, and this view now actually faces much more opposition than does creationism. The solution to the controversy is not to adopt a position that does justice to neither the Science nor the Scriptures, but to advocate a position supported by the scientific data, and not science speculation based on naturalism” 12 Further, Bergman quoting Provine “concludes that a person who argues that Darwinism and Theism are compatible is (1) an effective atheist, or (2) one who believes things demonstrably unscientific, or (3) asserts the existence of entities or processes for which no shred of evidence exists” 13 Biblically speaking, “Nothing about the Genesis text itself suggests that the biblical creation account is merely symbolic, poetic, allegorical, or mythical. The main thrust of the message simply cannot be reconciled with the notion that creation occurred via natural evolutionary processes over long periods of time.” 14 To some extent it is true that the “traditional six-day creationism” does not offer a proven, rigorous and valid scientific alternative to evolution. It is based on “a single narrow interpretation of the first chapter of the Bible”15. Nevertheless, the fact that God is the Originator of life and matter remains unchanged. The Theory of Evolution with all of its versions is not truly an “Operational Science” and only deals with ‘imaginary’ ‘Origins’. To be scientifically precise, “We need to be aware of the difference between operational science and origins science. Operational science is the result of experimental data or observations taken in the present, subject to peer review, and capable of repetition. Origins science is an extrapolation

of presently observed phenomena into the past, in a manner which is not repeatable. When evolutionists are criticized for the latter, it is not because the principle of origins science is wrong, but because such a model cannot be accepted as a proven fact. So it is with creationists’ models” 16 Notwithstanding the vague speculations of the atheistic evolutionists relating to the origin of life, it is humanly impossible to explain the origin of life apart from God’s revelation in the Bible. “Research on the origin of life seems to be unique in that the conclusion has already been authoritatively accepted … One must conclude that, contrary to the established and current wisdom, a scenario describing the genesis of life on earth by chance and natural causes which can be accepted on the basis of fact and not faith has not yet been written” 1 7 The Self-existent God is the Creator of life. In other words, beginning with the microscopic viruses, bacteria and unicellular simple life forms to the complex species of flora and fauna, all forms of life have been created by Him. Accordingly, “The only true account of the origin of life on earth is found in the account of the only Eyewitness who was there. The Bible explains that the presence of life on earth is the result of supernatural actions of an omnipotent Intelligent Designer—the God of the Bible. Many complain that accepting this supernatural explanation stops anyone from pursuing knowledge about the natural world, but the presence of a logical Creator provides a reason to look for order in the universe. This point is underscored by the fact that many of the major fields of science were founded by men who believed in the Creator God of the Bible. The only aspect of science that the acceptance of creation excludes is the story of evolution”18 Evolutionists who draw weird conclusions about the origin of life somehow resort to blind faith so as to accept their conclusions as truth. Theistic evolutionists somehow prefer not to interpret the Creation accounts in Genesis literally. This they have to do in order to embrace vague evolutionary concepts. As such, their unscriptural reasoning is in tune with that of the modern skeptics. For, “Skeptics often claim, ‘The Bible is not a science textbook.’ This, of course, is true—because science textbooks change every year, whereas the Bible is the unchanging Word of God—the God who cannot lie. Nevertheless, the Bible can be relied upon when it touches on every scientific issue... It is the Bible that gives us the big picture. Within this big picture, we can build scientific models that help us explain how past events may have come about. “Scientific models, while helpful, must never take the place of Scripture. The scientific model can be superseded. Scripture cannot! If scientific evidence causes a creationist

model to change, we should not let that shake our confidence in the accuracy and authority of Scripture” 19. Next, “Technology has shown us that sophisticated machines require intelligent designers—not random chance. Science and technology are perfectly consistent with the Bible” 20 Prophet Isaiah’s question to theistic scientists and evolutionists who believe in the evolutionary concepts would be: “To whom then will you liken God? Or with what likeness will you compare Him?” It’s high time they listen to God and take His Word relating to creation accounts seriously and interpret the same literally. There is no need to sympathize with God as the beleaguered “God of the Gaps”, and then serve Him with the myths of evolution to fill in the unbridgeable gaps in the evolutionary theory. God’s Word thunders at those who deny its truth and contradict God through evolutionary lies thereby defiling His Holiness and character. “The holiness of God is what drives and limits His revelation of Himself to His creation. Scripture is consistent. Holiness is God's fundamental nature and that unique nature so permeates what God is and does that no action or thought from the Godhead can override it. Humanity will never know holiness until the new heavens and the new earth. We may well experience righteousness in our lifetimes as our hearts long for the presence of the holy God, but God's holiness--God's perfection--can only be believed.”21 Theistic scientists and evolutionists should give up worshipping and glorifying the Unknown God of the Gaps. Instead, they should reverently “gasp” and start serving the God of the Bible, for He alone is: “Holy, holy, holy, LORD God Almighty.... Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created (Revelation 4:8, 11). Gasp it if you can, and wonder! “It is HE that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof (including the theistic and atheistic evolutionists) are as grasshoppers; that stretched out the heavens as a curtain, and spread them out as a tent to dwell in” (Isaiah 40:18; 22). Surely, God didn’t take billions of years to stretch out the heavens like a curtain and spread them out as a tent to dwell in. The God of the Bible, who “IS”, certainly cannot be a Creator of Evolution. The unproven Theory of Evolution is not only unscientific but totally unscriptural, and is a satanic lie. The Bible says it so and that should settle it, once for all, whether theistic scientists and evolutionists agree with it or not. The myths of pagan evolution don’t glorify God but only please Satan. The pure biblical truth of

Genesis and that of the rest of the Bible is what glorifies God! Instead of accepting Genesis and other biblical accounts of creation literally, Theistic Evolutionists have sanctified lies of atheistic scientists. In doing so, they make God a liar. But “Because of His holiness, God cannot lie (Hebrews 6:18), and whenever God reveals anything, He must reveal the truth about Himself and His nature. The Creator God is "Truth" (John 14:6) and the originator of "Lie" is the Archenemy, Lucifer (John 8:44). The opposite of truth, even though it may contain partial truth, is the active agent that opposes God’s truth as it is revealed to His creation. Therefore, the Creator God must reveal truth and cannot "be" untruth. When God speaks, He must speak truth. When God acts, God must act without "doing" error. One of the titles by which Jesus Christ is eternally known is "Faithful and True" (Revelation 19:11). God's holiness demands that the creation not distort anything about God--or about the creation itself. “God could not create a lie -- He could not make anything that would inexorably lead us to a wrong conclusion. Nor could He create processes that would counter His own nature--or that would lead us to conclude something untrue about Him. Evolutionary mechanisms are, by their very nature, both random and nonfunctional. Nothing in naturalist theory "directs" evolution. Vast eons of time, in which chaos "works" and during which death "weeds out" the ineffective, are thought to somehow produce processes and systems of apparent design. No god in this system exists to create anything. Christians who seek to harmonize the biblical revelation of a holy God with the antithetical evolutionary theories are constructing dangerous hybrids that blaspheme the very God they insist they believe in. May God protect us from such thinking” 22 1: J. Halford, Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p.4 2: ibid, p. 4 3: J. Tkach, www.wcg. org. 4: Lecomte DuNuouy, op. cit, p. 5: Ken Ham, Couldn’t God Have Used Evolution? featured in: The New Answers Book, www.answersingenesis.org. 6:Ken Ham, ibid, www.answersingenesis.org. 7: Professor Jerome Lejeune, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org. 8: Savage, J. op. cit. p. 8.

9: Dake, F. J., op. cit. p. 82.

10: Patterson, Evolution Exposed, Biology, 2007; www.answersingenesis.org.

11: Dake, Finis J; op. cit; p. 81. 12: Jerry Bergman, PhD, Theistic Evolution and Creation-Evolution Controversy, www.icr.org. 13: Provine,W, 1988: Scientists, Face It! Science and Religion are Incompatible, Scientist, September, 5 p.10 quoted by Jerry Bergman, op.cit. 14: John MacArthur, The Battle …op.cit; p.18.

15: Creation and Evolution”, op.cit., p.5

16: Paul Taylor, AiG-UK, Can Creation Models be Wrong? September 4, 2007, www.answersingenesis.org. 17: Yockey, H.P., A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology 67:377–398, 1977; quoted by Roger Patterson in “The Origin of Life”, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org 18: Roger Patterson, “The Origin of Life”, www.answersingenesis.org,op. cit.. 19: Paul Taylor, www. answers in genesis.org; op.cit 20:Dr. Jason Lisle, Ph.D., www.answersingenesis.org..

Can

creationists

scientists?

April

2005,

21: Henry Morris III, God's Holiness Demands a Perfect Creation, www.icr.org. 22: Henry Morris III, D. Min, God's Holiness Demands a Perfect Creation, www.icr.org.

**********

Part Three to follow deals comprehensively but not exhaustively with all the three major aeonian Phases or Epochs of the True Biblical or Scriptural Creationism. All the biblical evidence relating to the Creation

Truth that has been briefly highlighted in ‘Part two’ is further examined and dealt with, in detail. A critical in-depth biblical evaluation of the Traditional Six-day Creationism is made. Next, the assumed contradictions in the so-called Gap Theory are examined in the light of clear Scriptural evidence to conclusively prove pre-Adamite Fall of Lucifer and the consequent destruction brought on earth as in Genesis 1:2. The Gap Theory is next convincingly replaced with a relevant Biblically based pre-historical, pre-Adamite Theology having evangelical connotations and much theological significance. Next, the phased work of the six-days is covered by highlighting its prophetic or predictive evangelical significance in relation to God’s dispensational restorative plan through a ‘prophetic week’ of six millennial days under Satan’s rule culminating in the Millennial Sabbath of God’s rule. Finally, the creation of new Heavens and new Earth as predicted in the Bible is dealt with briefly, followed by an ‘Epilogue’ depicting the New Spiritual Creation in Man, the pinnacle of God’s creative works.

PART THREE

EPOCHS or PHASES OF

SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM

Generation, Degeneration And Regeneration of Heavens and Earth

Phase One Creation in the Eternity Past Generation of Heavens and Earth (First Generation) Pre-Adamic Life on Earth Luciferâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Rule on Earth

Lucifer’s Rebellion and Consequences Degeneration of Heavens and Earth Towards

“Biblical Pre-Adamite Theology” Phase Two Creation in the Realm of Time God’s Second Phase of Creative Works Regeneration of Heavens and Earth (Second Generation) Origin of the Seven-Day Week Creation of Sabbath A Literal Seven-Day Week

Phase Three Creation in the Eternity Future Creation of New Heavens and New Earth (Third Generation)

EPOCHS or PHASES OF

SCRIPTURAL CREATIONISM Biblically speaking, there are three different clearly distinguishable epochs or phases of God’s Works of Physical Creation. This fact becomes obvious when we put together all the Scriptures relating to physical creation; that is, those relating to the past works as well as to the prophesied future works. We need to “rightly divide the Word of Truth” differentiating the

creation accounts with reference to their specific periods which obviously constitute the three different phases of the True Scriptural Creationism. Persistent failure to differentiate the Scriptures relating to Creation given ‘here a little, and there a little’, with reference to the creation periods they obviously cover, lies behind the faulty ‘traditional six-day creationism’. Next, this gross failure is compounded by elaborate grammatical conclusions drawn to substantiate that the three ‘circumstantial clauses of Genesis 1:2 are contemporaneous with Genesis 1:1’. Accordingly, it is wrongly believed that the entire universe has been created during the six days of Genesis 1 at a time when the Bible clearly teaches otherwise. The fact that God’s work of the six days (Genesis 1:3-31) is actually a later additional work different from His original instant work of creation by fiat ‘In the Beginning’ (Genesis 1:1) has escaped the attention of the traditional six-day creationists. Next, their failure to distinguish the two creation accounts in Genesis 1 lies behind the prevailing conflict between the traditional belief of a creation in six days and true science. As otherwise, there can be no conflict between science and the biblical creation accounts. Next, the conditions on earth described in Genesis 1:2 were not, as such, in the beginning when God created the universe. God is perfect and His works are always perfect. The conditions of empty wasteland and desolation on earth were not of creation but of judgment as a consequence of Lucifer’s rebellion. Scriptural evidence shows that Lucifer was on earth (Ezekiel 28:13a) along with angels; and that they all eventually rebelled against God (Ezekiel 28:16, Jude 6; 2 Peter 2:4). Failure to appreciate these scriptural truths has only re-enforced traditional hide-bound concepts. In turn, is the failure to recognize evangelically significant truth in Genesis 1. A simple textual analysis of Genesis1 makes it very clear that there is a marked inherent distinction in it. This distinction clearly depicts works of instant creation ex nihilo of a prior parent generation of ‘heavens and earth’ and the distinct phased work of the six days wherein each day’s work is characterized by “And God Said”. The six-day work is, therefore, a work of restoration and of renewal through re-creation. Actually, it is a work of regeneration that brought forth the second generation of heavens and earth. This has been accomplished through renovation of the original creation. The very first verse of Genesis 1 is an independent and distinct verse

in itself which Moses was inspired to write, to briefly describe the creation of the entire universe as it was first created, in the eternity past. The original universe when first prepared (Proverbs 8:27a) was a perfect work of creation and complete, requiring no additional work for its further development as is assumed by the traditional six-day creationists. The fact that the original universe was created as a completed work is biblically relevant seeing that whatever God does is always perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4) and beautiful (Ecclesiastes 3:11) from the very moment it is brought into existence in perfect harmony with His will. Next, this original creation of the universe is in no way a work of the first day of the creation week. In fact, this original creation was in the midst of eternity, in the dateless or ageless past… in ‘timelessness’. This original creation doesn’t mark the beginning of time or the beginning of the first day of the week. Just as the stellar heavens are now in space, in ‘timelessness’, so also the original universe existed, as such, without any reference to time. As such, the conditions on earth described in Genesis 1: 2 cannot be a work of God’s original perfect creation but are a result of judgment. God is not the Author of disorder or chaos and, therefore, the chaos described in verse 2 is not a part of God’s original creation. It was, therefore, in God’s plan to work additionally for six days in order to restore order out of chaos and create conditions of life on earth, all over again. The work of each of the six days, unlike the work of direct creation, is a result of God ordering things by giving express commands to ‘Let things happen or be created’. As such, each of the six day’s work was initiated by a command: ‘And God said: Let There Be!’ And that which God commanded to happen or come into existence, instantly materialized. As such, the first day of re-creation begins with Genesis 1:3 and not with Genesis 1:1. But then, was there any need for God to give specific commands to initiate each day’s work? And to whom God was issuing such commands? The very fact that God commanded to bring into existence things that were not there and or to put those things in order that were in a chaotic condition indicates that the chaotic situation was something that occurred later, on the original once perfect earth. Hence, the specific commands to restore! The chaotic condition on earth wasn’t created by God. It actually occurred as a judgmental outcome resulting in the original perfect and

beautiful earth ending up in chaos and under Satan’s control. Therefore, God had to give specific commands so that the angels could witness the earth’s restoration and redemption from being under Satan’s dominion. As otherwise, there was no need for God to issue any specific commands but simply create and bring into existence through a phased work-course in six days in the absence of any specific commands even as in the beginning. Undoubtedly, Genesis 1:2 describes a situation on earth that occurred as a result of sin. Scriptural evidence as described in Ezekiel 28:16-17 makes it all clear to those who have spiritual eyes to discern spiritual truths that Lucifer’s sin occurred before the creation of Adam. There is not even any slightest biblical indication so as for anyone to presume that Lucifer sinned after Day Seven of the creation week as is taught by the traditional six-day creationists. Yet, such is the prevailing belief amongst the traditional six-day creationists. Accordingly, they believe chaos of Genesis as God’s activity of Day 1. Biblically speaking, darkness covering a chaotic empty or void and barren earth inundated with waters is a result of judgment (Jude 6). Thus, the planned and phased work of the six days is not in any way connected with that of the original creation of Genesis 1:1 nor with the chaotic conditions of Genesis 1:2. It is a work God carried out through six days to restore first the original conditions of life and thereafter re-create new life forms on the barren earth in spite of Lucifer’s opposition. The work of the first six days, in a way, typically characterizes God’s redemptive work following Lucifer’s rebellion and subsequently, Adam’s sin, during the last 6,000 years. It culminates in God’s millennial reign on earth followed by the Final Judgment and the creation of new heavens and new earth, completing the third phase of the True Scriptural Creationism. There is obviously, a generation which is next followed by degeneration and then a regeneration. In other words, we have three Generations!

“Generations of Heavens and Earth” The Bible speaks of “Generations” of “Heavens and Earth” in Genesis 2:4a: “These are the generations of the Heavens and the Earth when they were created”. Why speak of “Generations of Heavens and Earth” if the “Heavens and Earth” of Genesis 1:1 is one and the same throughout?

According to the Scriptures, there is first a “parent generation” of heavens and earth created instantly “In the Beginning” by fiat, distinct and complete. The next “generation” is an outgrowth or ‘offspring’ of the first generation subsequent to a systematic ‘work of six days’. This distinction becomes clear from the Hebrew word for “Generations” in Genesis. The Hebrew “Toledah” or “towledah” in Genesis 2:4a translated as “Generations” means “descent, family, race, history, origin… It refers to what is produced or brought into being by someone, and sometimes the results. It does not include the birth of the individual who started the line of descendants. Therefore, Genesis 2:4a doesn’t indicate the process of how heavens and earth came into existence, but the events which followed their establishment. In other words, it is not a summary of the events which preceded Genesis 2:4.” 1 As such, the ‘generations of heavens and earth’ of Genesis 2:4a include, first, the parent generation of heavens and earth of old (Prov.8:2031, 2 Peter 3:5) that were created ‘bara’ in the eternity past (Genesis 1:1). Next, is the second generation of heavens and earth that were made ‘asah’ (Genesis 2:4b) rather regenerated as in Genesis 1:8 and 1:10, 14-19 during the work of the six days (Genesis 1:3-31). These two generations are summarized by Genesis 2:1: “Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them”. The Hebrew word for “finished” is “kalah” meaning to be “completed, accomplished, ready…”… essentially, “it means to bring a process to completion. It appears both transitively and intransitively throughout the Hebrew Bible. The processes may be either positive or negative, i.e., something may be continually added to until it is full or complete, or something may be taken away from until there is nothing left. It is the total task, working until the job is done.” 2 And that is exactly what God did during the work of the first six days beginning with Genesis 1:3. God makes it very clear that the work of the six days He began on the first day (Genesis 1:3-5) was completed on the sixth day (Genesis 1:31) by adding a fitting conclusion in Genesis 2:1. In no way, this refers to the original creation which involved no process but was created instantly. The creation of the heavens and earth ‘In the Beginning’ involved creating the same miraculously by fiat, ex-nihilo when there was ‘nothing’. It involved no work, so to say, but God ‘willing it’ into existence instantly by fiat (Isaiah 48:13); as such, it is totally a different creation in relation to the phased

‘work of the six days’ that actually involved independent creative processes. The fact of “generations” of heavens and earth God speaks about in Genesis 2:4a remains totally obscured by the traditional concept of ‘six-day creationism’. According to the traditional concept the entire universe was created in six days. This leaves no room to differentiate any ‘generations’ of heavens and earth. However, the very fact that God Himself speaks of “Generations of Heavens and Earth” rules out or does away with the traditional belief of a creation of ‘heavens and earth in six days’ as if it were an actual ‘one-time’ single event. On the other hand, the biblical fact of the plurality of “generations” of “heavens and earth” confirms and establishes the biblical accounts of creation in Genesis 1:1 and those of Genesis 1: 3-31 as totally different accounts, independent of each other. Accordingly, it is biblically accurate to state that the instant creation of heavens and earth recorded in Genesis 1:1 is a completed work of an initial perfect creation by fiat and is prior to the phased work of the six days of Genesis 1:3- 31(cf. Exodus 20:11, 31:17). Traditional Six-day creationists will never ever be able to explain the concept of “GENERATIONS of HEAVENS and EARTH” by insisting the entire universe was made in six days. A proper exegesis of Genesis 2:4a indicates two ‘generations’ of heavens and earth consisting of an earlier ‘parent generation’ (Genesis 1:1) of the dateless past and the subsequent ‘younger generation’ (Genesis 1:3-31) of some 6000 years back, originating from the ‘parent generation’. The third and the last generation of the heavens and earth is yet in the future and will be created as prophesied in Isaiah 65:17, 66:22; 2 Peter 3:13 and Revelation 21:1. All these three generations of the heavens and earth constitute three distinct creation epochs!

_________________________________________ 1: Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit. p.1652.

2: Spiros Zodhiates, ibid, p.1600.

“Where were thou when I founded the earth? Declare, if thou hast understanding. Who set the measures thereof -- if thou knowest? Or who stretched a line upon it? Whereupon were the foundations thereof sunken? Or who laid its corner-stone, when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-7, Darby Translation, 1889). ******* “When He prepared the heavens I was there; when He ordained the circle upon the face of the deep; when He established the skies above, when the fountains of the deep became strong; when He imposed on the sea His decree that the waters should not pass His commandment, when He appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by Him as His nursling, and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him; rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth, and my delights were with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:27-31; Darby Translation, 1889). *******

Phase One

Creation in the Eternity Past Generation of Heavens and Earth (First Generation) Pre-Adamic Life on Earth Lucifer’s Rule on Earth Lucifer’s Rebellion and Consequences Degeneration of Heavens and Earth Towards

“Biblical Pre-Adamite Theology”

“When He prepared the heavens, I was there, When He drew a circle on the face of the deep, When He established the clouds above, When He strengthened the fountains of the deep, When He assigned to the sea its limit, So that the waters would not transgress His command, When He marked out the foundations of the earth, Then I was beside Him as a master craftsman; And I was daily His delight, Rejoicing always before Him, Rejoicing in His inhabited world, And my delight was with the sons of men” (Proverbs 8:27-31) Scriptures taken from the New King James Version. Copyright © 1979, 1980, 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved).

First Generation of Heavens and Earth Original Perfect Creation To those who might ask Theistic Evolutionists as to ‘Why would God have created a process like evolution?’ Dr. Joseph Tkach, of Grace

Communion International, responds: “We could equally well ask of those who interpret Genesis 1 as a literal, six-day creation, ‘Why would Creation take God six days? Couldn’t He have done it all in one instant?’” 1 And, that is exactly what God did, “In A Beginning”, by creating instantly by fiat! To be precise, God did create the original heavens and the earth ‘all in one instant’ by fiat, as is recorded in Genesis 1:1. In no way does it cover the creation account in Genesis 1:3-31relating to the work of the first six days. Unfortunately, this biblical fact has not been acknowledged by the sixday creationists and has not been recognized by the theistic evolutionists. It involves rightly dividing and separating the Word of Truth stated in Genesis 1:1 from that of Genesis 1:2 and 3-31. These Scriptures when interpreted independently with the help of other related Scriptures, ‘given here a little, and there a little’, definitely prove that the original creation of heavens and earth was perfect. God spoke it into existence and it stood fast. However, prejudice somehow has to play its role to keep oneself from openly acknowledging the truth of an earlier ‘perfect creation’. After all, the belief of ‘traditional six-day creationism’ has become deeply ingrained in the hearts and minds of those who have been exposed to it. Moreover, it has been believed as such throughout the church history. After all, how could the church and all the theologians be ever wrong, all along? The human tendency is always to resist truth that contradicts one’s established belief systems and that, even when one once confronted with biblical facts is able to see that his or her beliefs are biblically untenable. Next, attempts are made to seize on certain Scriptures apparently supporting one’s beliefs and from which one next concludes he or she is right even as such Scriptures are interpreted through the grid of one’s beliefs, erroneous though they be. For example, it is very often defensively stated that Moses confirms the creation of original heavens and earth in six days by quoting Exodus 20:11 and 31:17. However, ‘heavens and earth’ of Genesis 1:1 differ from the ‘heavens’ of Genesis 1:8, 14-19 and the ‘earth’ of Genesis 1:10. As such, when Moses states that “God made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them in six days and rested on the seventh day”, it is obvious that he is actually referring to the work of the six days described in Genesis1:3-31 and not directly to the original creation. Next, when Jesus states that “from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female” (Mark 10:6), He is talking about the creation

of Adam and Eve as ‘male’ and ‘female’ from the beginning of the phased six days’ work of creation of Genesis 1:3-31 if not from the beginning of their creation as ‘male’ and ‘female’ on the sixth day. Similarly, when Jesus states that there shall be affliction “such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God created unto this time, neither shall be” (Mark 13:19), He did not mean to say from the beginning of the original creation but from the beginning of the creation of the phased work of the six days. Unlike the traditional 6-day creationists, Jesus was fully aware of two inter-related “generations of heavens and earth” (Gen.1:1, 2:1,4a) having distinct beginnings of their creation. One, the first generation of heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 having a ‘beginning’ ‘in the eternity past’. The other, the second generation of heavens and the earth having a ‘beginning’ on the 2nd and 3rd day made during the phased creation work of the six days. The phrase “beginning of creation” needs to be understood from the meaning of the Hebrew word “reshith” translated ‘beginning’ in Genesis1:1. It actually refers to “the initiation of a series of historical events” that involved the creation of the first generation of heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. This is followed by the second generation of heavens and earth during the work of the six days. “Creation” in Greek “ktisis”, in a passive sense refers to what is created in general; the ‘sum total of what God has created, the entire creation (Mark 10:16, 13:9; Romans 1:20; Hebrews 9:11; 1 Peter 2:13; 2 Peter 3:4) and, in particular, it ‘refers specially to mankind as God’s creation (Mark 16:15; Colossians 1:28)” 2 Next, “A Beginning” in Genesis 1:1 refers to the actual ‘beginning’ of God’s physical Works of Creation in the eternity past (Proverbs 8:22-31). It has no reference whatsoever to any ‘beginning’ in relation to ‘time’. Time, actually began with the first day of the creation week as in Genesis 1:3-5. During the phased work of the six days God created the second generations of ‘heavens and earth’ and all that in them is ever since. This second generation of heavens and earth is obviously an outgrowth of the first. As such, what God actually created and made rather ‘regenerated’ during the six days of Genesis 1:3-31 is in addition to what God originally perfectly created ‘In the Beginning’ in ‘timelessness’. It is subsequent to the chaos on earth described in Genesis 1:2 which was a later outcome. Biblical Creation Truth, as such, interprets Genesis 1:1 with full conviction, by stating that it describes the creation of a perfect, fully

developed universe by fiat. In other words, “God of His own free will and by His absolute power called the whole universe into being; evoking into existence what was previously nonexistent. (See Psalms 33:6, 9; 102:25; Isaiah 45:18; Jeremiah 10:12; John 1:3; Acts 14:15; 17:24; Romans 4:17; Hebrews 3:4; Revelation 4:11). If we concede the absolute power of God, we must accept His power to create and destroy as stated in the Scripture. There are many problems which the finite mind cannot completely grasp. We accept those things by faith (Hebrews 11:3).” 3 All that can be actually stated about the original universe from the Scriptures ‘here a little and there a little’ is that it was created ‘perfect’ and ‘beautiful’. After all, whatever God does according to His plan is always perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4) and beautiful (Ecclesiastes 3:11). This is a clear biblical fact; and to think otherwise and state that the original creation was incomplete with chaos on earth covered with waters and darkness so as to hold on to traditional beliefs is totally unscriptural if not blasphemous. However, it has not been revealed as to the exact nature and physical composition of the original heavens and earth as they were initially created nor any man can actually find it out. All that can be said is that God “…hath made everything beautiful in his time:… and, that no man can find out the work that God maketh ftom the beginning to the end” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). Man’s attempt to find out about the “work that God maketh from the beginning to the end” is bound to be a futile exercise; a fruitless effort. Atheistic scientists and evolutionists can only guess and speculate but in vain as to the origins and the exact nature of the vast incomprehensible universe. However, what is observed by the scientists relating to the present universe does not necessarily mean the universe was as such from the moment of its original perfect creation. What is scientifically observed and studied of the present universe is actually what has been re-created later (Genesis1:3-31) subsequent to the chaos of Genesis 1:2 during which the original creation was subjected to uselessness (Romans 8:20). Actually, it is impossible for anyone to find out about the real nature of the original universe of Genesis 1:1. As a matter of fact, whatever is currently discovered about the universe and related findings in astronomy actually indicate the physical aspects of the universe as it has been since its re-creation following the chaotic condition on earth as in Genesis 1: 2. Further, recent findings only confirm that the “creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in

hope…” as stated in Romans 8:20; 22, subsequent to Adam’s fall. Traditional Six-day Creationists and Theistic evolutionists will do well to interpret appropriately all the Scriptures relating to creation in Genesis and elsewhere in the Bible. “We need to be in the faith of God’s creative wisdom and power” and accept the biblical fact which states that “In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth” at its face value. We should not interpret the same according to traditional beliefs! Traditional six-day creationists have overlooked, all along, the biblical fact of two independent creation accounts in Genesis 1. They have mixed up these two accounts as if the same were one event. As a consequence, the ‘traditional six-day creationists’ have come up with erroneous conclusions about the age of the earth as well as have distorted scientific facts about the solar system and the rest of the universe. Thus, their erroneous conclusions have been the target of attack by the atheistic and theistic scientists and evolutionists, all along. Theistic evolutionists, on the other hand, hastily adopted the absurd atheistic evolutionary concepts as if evolution, rather macro-evolution, has really occurred. However, there are evolutionists who, themselves, are not wholly convinced and know that evolution is not really a scientific fact. As such, theistic evolutionists will do well not to speculate that the universe has evolved with some “big bang” or from a ‘soup of hydrogen atoms’ culminating into a fully developed universe with the suns, moons, stars, planets, galaxies, and so on. Next, that by some mysterious processes of organic evolution, “the vegetable and animal kingdoms have mysteriously evolved from some lower forms of life to what they are today.” To assume as such, is to display one’s ignorance of biblical truth. Biblical creation facts when interpreted appropriately convincingly rules out any evolution. The concepts of evolution and chance forces would sound strange to the biblical authors who knew God as a Creator God who creates perfectly. It is of primary importance for the traditional six-day creationists, theistic scientists and evolutionists to convincingly come to terms with the fact of two independent creation accounts in Genesis 1 itself. Accordingly, next interpret scientific evidence within the framework of the two creation accounts taking into account the chaotic conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2. To adopt such a biblical creation framework convincingly one will

have to renounce traditional unbiblical presuppositions. And then one has to confidently choose to attune and align with the biblical truth of two independent creation accounts. This can be only achieved by shedding away one’s bias or prejudice! Unfortunately, we “aren’t interested in hearing anything that doesn’t support what we have already determined is true.” But, irrespective of whether one acknowledges two independent creation accounts in Genesis 1 or not, the Bible is very clear about it and that settles it. Accordingly, it can be convincingly accepted that God did create the original heavens and earth in a perfect physical condition according to His perfect plan and, as such, it was not some vague formless matter. And given the fact that God is a Creator who creates perfectly or does things perfectly, the condition on earth stated in Genesis 1:2 cannot be a part of the original creation. As such, the prevailing hypothesis of the six-day creationists that the earth when originally created was in an imperfect condition of ‘tohu’ and ‘bohu’ is biblically and theologically untenable. When God created the Heavens and the Earth in A beginning, it was a completed perfect creation with nothing lacking in it, so as to necessitate by implication, further work for its development. The entire universe (the merism: heavens and earth) has had to consist of everything that then existed in timelessness and now exists anywhere in space and in time. Obviously, it includes all the physical matter including disintegrated matter (supernova) as well as light, electro-magnetism, radiation and all other forms of energy. And right away from the beginning of creation, the vast universe with everything in it, is sustained and maintained by God’s power. Of course, the physical creation is undergoing change through disintegration having been subjected to futility and decay consequent to Lucifer’s rebellion and later on, as a consequence of Adam’s sin. In other words, the present regenerated physical creation is subjected to futility or uselessness. Accordingly, it is eventually going to be by a new and permanent creation. When the Bible states that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, it logically means that He created it all with everything that we now know of and everything we may never come to know about the vast universe. Accordingly, our solar system has been a part of the universe from the beginning of creation. So also all the sextillions stars of which more than 100 billion stars comprise our giant spiral shaped Milky Way Galaxy has been a part of the universe. Next, “Studies of distant space with optical and

radio telescopes indicate that there may be about 100 billion galaxies in the visible universe. Galaxies tend to be grouped together into clusters, and some clusters appear to be grouped into super-clusters.” 4 Obviously, our unique solar system with all its planets, the moons, asteroids, comets, etc has been in existence along with the earth from the beginning and not from the fourth day of the creation week as assumed by the Traditional six-day creationists. God created a fully organized universe from the beginning itself. He did not create the so-called stellar heavens of the outer space without the solar system supposedly believed to be created on the fourth day and the earth on the first day contrary to Genesis 1:15. It is a well known fact that “our earth is organized into a solar system, which is a part of a highly organized group of stars called a galaxy, which is part of a highly organized family of galaxies called clusters which, in turn, are organized into an enormous group of clusters called supercluster.” 6 The solar system was not created on the fourth day 7. On the fourth day, God positioned the sun and the moon and the stars also to align in such a way so as to restore order out of chaos. And, the pristine earth was not void and empty in the beginning of its creation but was inhabited with life. ____________________________________________________________ 1: Speaking of Life, with Dr. Joseph Tkach; link: www.speakingoflife.org. 2: Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit. p. 1636. 3: Spiros Zodhiates, op.cit. p.1.

4: World Book Encyclopedia

5: Gleason L. Archer, Jr. Encyclopedia of BIBLE DIFFICULTIES, Regency Reference Library, A Zondervan Publication, USA, 1982, p.61 6: Jeremy Walter, In Six Days, Ed: p. 11 7: Jack W. Langford, The Gap is Not a Theory, www.separationtruth.org, Section 1, 2010

Pre-Adamic Life on Earth Any discussion or even a casual academic mention of pre-Adamic life on earth prior to Genesis 1:2 as a reality quickly invites scorn and ridicule. And the reason for such ridicule is that that such a thing is never known to

be officially taught in the history of the professing Christian Church. Any teaching of pre-Adamic life would be obviously contrary to the Traditional Six-Day Creationism which is almost as infallible as the Bible; so much so, any thing contrary to such traditional thinking is considered to be heretical. On the other hand, theistic evolutionists have no problem in accommodating pre-Adamic life in their creation theology. However, their accommodation is not biblically based but rather by embracing evolutionary theories of life. Pre-historical, pre-Adamic life on the primeval earth prior to Genesis 1:2 is a biblically-based reality that cannot be simply ignored if we are to faithfully abide in the Word. Scriptural references such as Proverbs 8:27-31, Ezekiel 28:1b-18; 31:8-18, Isaiah 14:12-14, 2 Peter 3:6, Jude 6 point to both angelic or spirit life as well as biological life on earth prior to Genesis1:2. These Scripture references cannot be accounted for otherwise as referring to any historical period on earth since the creation and fall of Adam and Eve. Initially, God willed (Proverbs 8:27a) and created the heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. God prepared, rather willed first and then made the heavens by wisdom (Psalms 146:4-5). He stretched out the earth with a dry land above the waters (Psalms 136: 6; 2 Peter 3:5b) and “girdled the ocean (the deep) with the horizon, NAB”. He strengthened the fountains and issued a command to the waters of the deep (or sea) not to transgress His decree (Proverbs 8:27b-29). All these Scriptures in no way parallel the creation account in Genesis 1:3-13 as stated by John MacArthur, op.cit, p. 88. Instead, they do briefly illustrate the creation of original heavens and earth “in the beginning” (Genesis 1:1) “when He marked out the foundations of the earth” (Proverbs 8:29b), in the absence of any chaos and darkness. It was, therefore, a perfect creation (Deuteronomy 32:4) and in order. Next, Isaiah 45:18 states that the earth was not created in vain but to be inhabited. It can be inferred that the original earth itself was partly of dry land inhabited by vegetation and animal life (cf. Proverbs 8:31) and partly covered with waters forming the seas teeming with aquatic life. As such, it can be convincingly stated that God re-created plant and animal life during the creation week seeing that all life forms were created after their ‘original kind’ 1 that had to be really in existence prior to their destruction. As otherwise, the newly created life forms during the first six days would not be ‘after any of their specific kind’ if the same were created for the first time. It doesn’t make any biological sense to state that a variety of fully developed plant life as stated in Genesis 1:12-13, aquatic life as

stated in Genesis 1:20-22 and animal life as stated in Genesis 1:24-25 were created ‘after its particular specific kind’. As such, there had to be an earlier plant life as well as aquatic and animal life of the same kind that was wiped out necessitating its re-creation ‘after the same kind’. It could be appropriately argued that the term ‘after its own kind’ to actually mean that the different life-forms would be reproducing ‘after their own kind’ 2. But then, that is not what is actually stated in Genesis 1:12-25. Of course, the different life forms that were re-created after their original kind do reproduce after the same kind. This has been the case ever since their re-creation. But that which was re-created was after its original kind. Concerning pre-Adamic human life it can be convincingly stated that pre-Adamic men were in existence on the original earth. This pre-historical fact is substantiated by Proverbs 8:31! Proverbs 8:31 talks about the ‘habitable part of the earth’ which was in fact inhabited by pre-Adamic men in whom the ‘Wisdom of God’ rejoiced (cf. Proverbs 8:31a). As such, as stated further, Wisdom’s ‘delights’ were in the ‘sons of men’ (Proverbs 8:31b) who were pre-Adamic men of a specific kind. It could be argued that the ‘habitable part of the earth’ and the ‘sons of men’ mentioned in Proverbs 8:31 as referring to ‘the habitable part of the earth’ of Genesis 1:10 and that the ‘sons of men’ in whom the Wisdom of God delighted as the Adamic sons of men. However, God’s Wisdom would never rejoice in the earth that has been accursed since Adam’s fall. Nor could there have been any group of men, at any time, in whom Wisdom could have delighted (with the exception of God’s elect cf. Deu.10:15; Num.14:8; Pro.11:20) seeing that the “imaginations of men’s hearts were being evil continually” ever since the fall of Adam. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Gaines R. Johnson, The Bible, Genesis and Geology, www.kjvbible.org 2: Jack W. Langford, Personal Communication, by eMail dt.28/12/2011

Those who think Proverbs 8:31b cannot refer to any Adamic sons of men interpret the same as being ‘anticipative’; meaning, “that Wisdom, as anticipatively taking form in Christ as Man should be the delight of the Deity in all its operations”(J. T.; Names of Divine Persons, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, p.26). However, others interpret it differently: “In the past eternity the wisdom of God rejoiced, by anticipation, in the habitable part of the earth, and found its delights with the sons of men, Proverbs 8:31. In the

coming eternity this will have its complete fulfillment in a scene where everything is based upon redemption, and where no failure can ever come.” (Charles A. Coates, Miscellaneous Works…, Vol. 37 op. cit, p.37). However, the above arguments cannot have any standing in the face of an objective content analysis and a thorough exegesis of Proverbs 8:2231. Again, an appropriate exegesis will clearly show that Proverbs 8:31b refers to a specific kind of ‘pre-Adamic sons of men’ of old: First of all, Proverbs 8:22-31, as a contextually independent textual unit, refers to the creation of the original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1as the same was then witnessed by God’s Wisdom. In no way, these Scriptures describe a “creation that perfectly parallel the Genesis account”, particularly that which is narrated in Genesis 1:3-13 as is assumed by the traditional 6-day creationists (cf. J. MacArthur, The Battle…, op. cit. p. 88). Next, based on its content analysis, Proverbs 8:22-31 may be divided into two sections: First, Proverbs 8:22-26 testify to the pre-existence of God’s Wisdom, even before there was any primal physical creation. Second, Proverbs 8:27-31 narrate precisely, as witnessed by “Wisdom”, the original creation (of Genesis 1:1, which is certainly different from Genesis1:3-31). Accordingly, Proverbs 8:22-26 describe Wisdom’s pre-existence, even prior to God’s physical ‘works of old’ (v.22b); that is, before ‘ever the earth was’ (v.23b); ‘when there were no depths’ (or sea, cp. v.24a); ‘when there were no fountains abounding with water’(v.24b), even ‘before the mountains and the hills were settled’(v. 25), even ‘before the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest dust of the world’ (v.26) were brought into existence. “God’s Wisdom” precedes the beginning of all creation; whether this creation is just 6, 000 years back or long before that, in the eternity past, is to be determined from the Scriptures themselves. God’s Wisdom witnessed a perfect creation. Obviously, Wisdom rejoiced in the earth’s habitable part. Proverbs 8:27-31 describe the ‘preparation’ (Hebrew: ‘kuwn’), and then the ‘establishment’ of perfect ‘heavens’ (v.27a) and earth (v. 30). “Although Proverbs 8:27 says that God “prepared” the heavens, Proverbs 3:19 shows that He has also “established” (fixed) the heavens and earth. The main idea (underlying the Hebrew word: kuwn) is to bring something into an incontrovertible existence.” (Spiros Zhodhiates, op. cit. p.1600).

As such, Proverbs 8:27-31 describe a creation of an original perfect earth, with a firm foundation (v.29b). Next, God strengthened the fountains of the sea and next decreed limits and commanded that the sea should not break His decreed limits (v.27-29). At the same time, He established the clouds above (v.28a) so as to cover the ‘habitable part of the earth’ (v.31). Therefore, the ‘heavens’ of v.27a and the earth of v. 29b definitely refer to the perfect heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. Certainly, the ‘heavens’ of v.27a and the earth of v. 29b are not the same ‘heavens’ and ‘earth’ that were re-created (Genesis 1:8, 10). Proverbs 8:27-29 talk about ‘setting’ (Heb: chaqaq: meaning ‘to establish, to ordain,) ‘a compass upon the face of the deep (sea), ‘when He also gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass His commandment’(v.29a). This is precisely, ‘when He appointed (Hebrew: ‘chaqaq’) the foundations of the earth’ (v.29b). At the same time ‘He established the clouds above’ and ‘strengthened the fountains of the deep’ (v.28). All these works refer to the original creation (Genesis 1:1) when the heavens were established and the foundations of the earth were laid. None of these original works could be said to parallel with any of the works of restoration of Genesis 1:3-31on an already established earth. Subsequently, as Proverbs 8:31 states, God’s Wisdom rejoiced in the ‘habitable part of His earth’; and further, it is stated that Wisdom’s delights were specifically with the “sons of men”. Now, the term ‘habitable part of the earth’ is translated from a single Hebrew word “tebel”. “It is the earth (moist, inhabited), the globe and its inhabitants (i.e. all the people on earth, Ps. 9:9; 24:1; 33:8; 96:13; 98:9), land, the habitable part of the world (Job 37:12; Ps.90:2; Prov. 8:31; Isa.14:17). (Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit. p. 1651). Obviously, the ‘habitable part of the earth’ inhabited by the ‘sons of men’ in whom Wisdom delighted (Proverbs 8:31) has to be the original ‘earth’ or ‘land’ of Genesis 1:1. It is not the restored ‘dry land’ of Genesis 1:10 subsequent to Adam’s fall when it was accursed (Genesis 3:16). “Tebel” is the same original Hebrew word which in Proverbs 8:26c is translated as the ‘world’. Next, the phrase ‘the dust of the world’ actually should have been translated as ‘the descendants of the earth’ just as the ‘dust of Jacob’ in Numbers 23:10 mean ‘the descendants of Jacob’. Contextually speaking, the clause ‘habitable part of his earth’ in v.31a and ‘dust of the world’ or ‘descendants of the earth’ in v.26c are synonymous. As such, these clauses refer to the ‘sons of men’ of v.31b in whom God’s

Wisdom is said to have taken ‘delight’. The ‘sons of men’ of Proverbs 8:31b necessarily have to be the men who inhabited the habitable part of the original premeval earth. Proverbs 8:31b confirm that the ‘sons of men’ in whom God’s wisdom delighted were created much before the creation of Adam. Accordingly, the ‘sons of men’ of v.31b are pre-Adamic human beings that originally lived on earth (Genesis1:1) which fact is also confirmed by the fossils. Such a conclusion will sound ‘heretical’ to the traditional six-day creationists who do not believe in any kind of life as existing on earth prior to Genesis 1:2-31. However, Proverbs 8:22-31 does indicate that life on earth including human life prior to Genesis 1:2 did really exist. Moreover, it is nigh impossible that there could have been at any time since the Fall of Adam any ‘sons of men’, as a whole group, in whom Wisdom could be said to have taken ‘delights’ seeing that there ever being “none” that “did good”. Undoubtedly, the ‘sons of men’ mentioned in Proverbs 8:31b must be ‘pre-Adamic men’ ‘after their own kind’ in whom God’s Wisdom took delight for their being created and equipped with wisdom to begin with. And that was as long as they were sinless, of course. These ‘sons of men’ that inhabited ‘the habitable part of the earth’ in whom God’s Wisdom rejoiced have been collectively called as ‘the dust of the world’ in v.26c meaning ‘the descendants of the earth’ just as the Israelites who were the descendants of Jacob were called the ‘dust of Jacob’ in Numbers 23:10. Therefore, these pre-Adamic ‘sons of men’ must have been created directly though not after the likeness and image of God but as moral beings ‘after their kind’. The pre-Adamic ‘sons of men’ in whom God’s Wisdom delighted had to be like Lucifer, perfect. In a way, they could be considered as a “type” of the future “Adamic sons of men” whom God would create next after His image and likeness. This would be, of course, subsequent to the failure of the pre-adamic men to live up to God’s standards and remain holy. Obviously, the pre-Adamic ‘sons of men’ had to be the subjects under Lucifer’s dominion and rule on the primal earth. However, they eventually sinned once Lucifer sinned and fell. Could this conclusion be proved wrong? It can be proved from the Scriptures that Lucifer along with some angels was placed on the original earth for a definite purpose according to God’s plan. It may be inferred that Lucifer was placed in an earlier ‘Garden

of Eden’ specially created ‘In the Beginning’ on the original earth wherein was his throne and from whence he ruled. Lucifer and certain angels were definitely placed on the original earth of Genesis 1:1 and that, for a specific purpose. Obviously, earlier to this, Lucifer as the “anointed cherub that covereth” and his angels were in heaven where they served God long before they were placed on the earth of Genesis 1:1. Next, as the “anointed cherub that covereth” and “whose covering was of precious stone” Lucifer, as succinctly stated by Charles A. Coates, “represented responsibility as standing before God to reflect what God as Creator is. I suppose every item in the creation in some sense reflects God, but it is not all covered with precious stones; this great creature was, so that he represents some feature in the creation that was superlative; he stood out as representative of creation in the most exemplary way. The precious stones represent and reflect what is of the Creator in the creature”. Lucifer and all the angels were created much before the creation of the physical universe. They had to be created before the creation of Genesis 1:1 and perhaps were created the same time when God created the ‘heaven of heavens’, even the ‘heaven of God’s Throne’. Could this be just 6,000 years back? Certainly not! For, God who inhabits eternity has been in existence from eternity to eternity and had to have the ‘Heaven of His Throne’ from eternity to eternity. Accordingly, the myriads of angels and the heavenly host had to be created in the dateless past serving God from eternity to eternity and not just from some 6,000 years back. Lucifer’s erstwhile rule on earth even as now is best depicted through earthly rulers. For example, the Kingdom of Pharaoh in Egypt is compared to a cedar tree whose flourishing growth portrayed Pharaoh’s worldwide influence that made him to boast. Similarly, the same flourishing cedar tree that symbolically represented Pharoah’s rule could be confidently stated, according to the Law of Double Reference, to figuratively best describe Lucifer’s primeval rule on earth (cf. Ezekiel 31: 8-18).

Lucifer’s Rule on Earth His Rebellion and Consequences It is a biblical fact that God, who inhabits eternity, created first the angelic hosts in the eternity past to serve Him (Revelation 5:11-13). As such,

the angels had to be already in existence before any physical creation. They were there to rejoice at God’s creation of the earth (Job 38:4-7). Next, Lucifer and some angels were placed on the primeval earth after its creation (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6) before the creation of Adam. Therefore, the period beginning with the original creation of the heavens and the earth until the cataclysmic change in Genesis 1:2 may be called the “Anthe-chaotic Age— the Dispensation of the Angels and Pre-Adamic men.” The primeval earth when originally created was substantially a dry land, ‘spreading forth, above the waters’ (cp. Isaiah 42: 5; 44:24) and not that the waters were stretched all over, upon the earth, as in Genesis 1:2. Or as attested by 2 Peter 3: 5 “ …by the Word of God, the heavens that were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water ” when first created. As such, in the beginning (Genesis 1:1) itself, the earth has had a dry land standing out of the waters that was obviously suitable for the habitation of life. The command to “Let the Dry Land Appear” in Genesis 1:9 proves that the original ‘dry land’ had eventually submerged. Undoubtedly, the dry land of the primeval earth had to be inhabited (Proverbs 8:31a) by plants and animals. There had to be pre-adamic perfect ‘sons of men’ also dwelling on earth in which the ‘Wisdom of God’ took delight (Proverbs 8:31b). As otherwise, since the fall of Adam there could never be at any time sinless and perfect ‘Adamic sons of men’ in whom collectively God’s Wisdom could be said to have taken delight. Of course, God took delight in those few He chose to be the objects of His delight. Next, Scriptures clearly state that Lucifer, at one time, ruled on earth (Ezekiel 28:11-17; Isaiah 14:12-17). Obviously, those angels placed on earth had to be his subjects along with the pre-adamic ‘sons of men’. Lucifer, as one of the three Cherubs, was full of wisdom and perfect in beauty (Ezekiel 28:12b). Next, as an angelic being, with a free will, he was perfect from the day he was created (Ezekiel 28:15a). As the anointed Cherub, he ‘covered’ (Ezekiel 28:14) God’s throne in the heavens prior to his assignment on earth. Lucifer when on earth ‘has been in Eden, the Garden of God’ (Ezekiel 28:13a). He had also his throne on earth, from where he ruled. In fact, the eventual greatness and sudden downfall of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, which as described in Ezekiel 31 is compared to the greatness and fall of a flourishing ‘Cedar of Lebanon’. The same symbolism could also be said to have portrayed Lucifer’s rule figuratively depicting his sinful pride and

consequent downfall through rebellion. Lucifer’s pomp and glory is portrayed by the symbolism of a flourishing cedar of Lebanon. Technically, the Garden of God in Eden mentioned in Ezekiel 28:13a, 31:8-9, 16-18 isn’t the same as the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:8-15.The Garden of Genesis 2:8-15 in which Adam was placed is not the same as the one mentioned in Ezekiel 28:13a or 31:8-18 as is wrongly assumed. The Garden of Genesis 2:8 is actually that garden which God next created after the destruction of the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 31. This is simply speculated from the fact that the Garden of Genesis 2:8 is said to be planted eastward of a particular place already then geographically known as Eden (Genesis 2:8). As such, it had to be a specific location somewhere eastward in some original familiar place called Eden wherein also earlier was the original Garden of God mentioned in Ezekiel 28:13a; 31:8. Isaiah 14:12-14 describes the Fall of Lucifer. This fall had to be when he was in the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13a and not in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:8, some time after Day 7 of the creation week as is wrongly assumed. Precisely as stated earlier, “Jesus’ use of v. 12 (Isaiah14) to describe Satan’s fall (Luke 10:18; cf. Rev.12:8-10) has led many to see more than a reference to the king of Babylon. Just as the Lord addressed Satan in His words to the serpent (Gen. 3:14, 15), this inspired dirge speaks to the king of Babylon and to the devil who energized him. See Ezek.28:1217 for similar language to the king of Tyre and Satan behind him.” 1 Obviously, in the Adamic Garden that was planted eastward of the original place Eden, Satan was there as a subtle serpent. He was not there as Lucifer unlike in the earlier Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13a, 31:8 from where he ruled and whose rule is compared to that of a flourishing Cedar of Lebanon (Ezekiel 31:2, 8-18). It was in the Garden of God of Ezekiel 28:13a that Lucifer eventually sinned and not when he was in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 3:1-15 as wrongly assumed by some. 2 For, in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 3:1-15 he was definitely already there as Satan in the guise of a serpent and not, any more, as a shining Lucifer, perfect in his ways. As to when exactly Lucifer sinned is not specifically mentioned in the Bible. But it may be inferred from relevant Scriptures that sin came into existence within the period between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. It’s only during this undefined period all the related Scriptures discussed earlier could be said to fit in. “The story of the beginning of sin is nowhere related explicitly in

the Word; but certain passages seem to hint so strongly, that the following theory has long been held to explain them. Apparently God first peopled the universe, or at least our part of it, with a hierarchy of holy angels, of whom one of the highest orders was (or contained) the cherubim. One of them, perhaps, the highest of all, was ‘the anointed cherub that covereth,’ who was created beautiful and perfect in his ways. This cherub knew that he was beautiful, but pride entered his heart and the first sin in the whole history of eternity occurred. Pride led to self-will (Isa.14:13-14) and self-will to rebellion. This great cherub became the adversary (‘Satan’) of God and apparently led other angels into rebellion (cf. 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6).” 3 Contrary to what is stated above, Henry Morris states: “Satan’s sin and fall, however, was in heaven on the “holy mountain of God”, not on earth. There is, in fact, not a word in Scripture to connect Satan with the earth prior to his rebellion. On the other hand, when he sinned, he was expelled from heaven to the earth. The account in Ezekiel says: “Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee… therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty; thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground (or ‘earth’, the same word in Hebrew)” (Ezekiel 28: 15-17) 4. Nevertheless, Isaiah 14:13-14 definitely states that Lucifer was on earth when he first entertained the prideful thoughts of conquering God’s throne. He was very much on earth from where wanting to be ‘like the Most High’ he ascended into the heavens but was cast down to the earth (verse 15). No wonder, Lucifer next turned into Satan was already on earth in the guise of a serpent before the creation of Adam and Eve. Lucifer rebelled against God when he was on earth thereby incurring judgment resulting in chaos on earth surrounded by darkness as in Genesis 1:2 Traditional Six-day creationists somehow overlook the Scriptures relating to Lucifer’s rule and his subsequent rebellion on earth that brought chaos on earth and subjected the entire universe to futility or uselessness. Since God created a perfect universe to begin with, the chaos on earth spoken of in Genesis 1:2 cannot be of creation, but of judgment. And since the Scriptures speak of Lucifer’s rule on earth and of his subsequent rebellion long, long before the creation of Adam, then the chaotic conditions on earth had to be logically of a later occurrence as a consequence of

Lucifer’s sin and that of the angels under his administration on earth. Whether young earth creationists agree with it or not, the six-day work and the creation of Adam were occasioned by Lucifer’s fall. Lucifer’s sin and its consequences were foreseen and accordingly the 6-day plan was conceived. As such, it is the “world” of the angels, animals, plants and ‘sons of men’ who once inhabited the earth is what Peter actually talks about as “the world that was then”. It is in this world that Lucifer and his subjects sinned. This sinful world was next destroyed by flood (Psalms 104:6-9 read with Job 38:10-11). The flood referred to here is certainly not Noah’s flood. The original dry earth, to begin with, was created to be inhabited (Isaiah 45:18) and was therefore certainly inhabited before the flood of Genesis 1:2 and the work of the six days culminating with Adam’s creation (Genesis 1:3-2:25; Isaiah 14:12-14; Jeremiah 4:23-26). The earth, therefore, was originally created with a dry land and was not totally flooded by waters nor covered up with darkness as in Genesis 1:2, which is a later condition. As such, on the original earth itself that God created in the beginning, there was a ‘dry land’, ‘the habitable part of the earth’(Proverbs 8:31) at one place; and the ‘deep’ or the ‘depths of the sea’ located in some other place ‘when He gave to the sea His decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth’ (Proverbs 8:29) in the ‘beginning of His way’. It is from where the waters did break the original bounds to cover the earth (Genesis 1:2) subsequent to Lucifer’s rebellion along with that of his angels and the pre-Adamite men. Undoubtedly, conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 were not the same as that of original creation but were as such as a result or consequence of sin. “The word kosmos in 2 Peter 3:5-7 meaning some form of social system, ‘that then was and then destroyed’ embraces the whole pre-Adamic earth to which all fossils and remains belong. The actual findings of science regarding pre-historic animals and mammals, the age of the earth, its rock formation, and other facts can be recognized only if we believe the Bible’s revelation of pre-Adamite life.” 5 These fossils were not of some simpler forms of life evolving gradually into complex forms. It is a known fact that “many fossils come from a great catastrophe, being entombed in the strata instead of being slowly buried by sedimentation over millions of years” as is falsely assumed by the evolutionists. Anyway, “We find proof of two universal floods on

earth, one in Lucifer’s day (Genesis 1:2; Isaiah 14:12-14; Jeremiah 4:2326; 2 Peter 3:5-7) and another in Noah’s (Genesis 6:11-8-14,2Peter 2:5).” 6 These two universal floods are uniquely different from each other. The “World”, or “Kosmos” as in Greek, meaning ‘inhabited living systems’ of which Peter speaks about in 2 Peter 3:6 is not the same one that was deluded during Noah’s flood. During Noah’s flood the world that began with Adam was not totally destroyed in that Noah and his family along with animals, birds, etc were kept alive in the ark. So also, this flood did not destroy totally the aquatic life or the flora that existed on earth. A cursory reading of Job 38:8 makes it clear that the waters originally did not cover the earth. But the waters did engulf the earth (dry land) much later on undoubtedly as a consequence of Lucifer’s rebellion. Which means, during the creation week, God caused the dry land to appear again by shifting the waters to form the seas. Only in this context can we interpret and understand Job 38: 8 wherein God asks Job “… who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth as if it had issued out of the womb?” This was not the case at all, as such, during Noah’s flood. As a result of the sea bursting forth from the womb or from its primordial location, God decided again to fix a limit to it on the third day of the creation week: “When I fixed my limit for it, And set bars and doors; when I said, ‘This far you may come, but no farther, and hereto your proud waves must stop’.” (Job 38:10-11). Such a command implies that the sea waters were in a particular place (in the womb) and subsequently burst forth engulfing the earth (Genesis 1:2). This would not be the case if the earth was originally covered with water, all over. No such command was ever given to the flooding waters to return back to their original location during the universal flood of Noah’s time; instead, the waters gradually abated. Next, during the Lucifer’s flood, according to Psalms 104:5-9 the dry land of the original earth was fully “covered” (Hb. Kasah: to conceal) by the deep. So also, the waters “stood above the mountains” even as during Noah’s flood. However, relevant Scriptures do differentiate the two floods. But unlike Noah’s flood during which the waters gradually abated (Genesis 8:9-13), during Lucifer’s flood as stated in Job 38:10-11 God rebuked the engulfing waters to return to their original location. The flooding waters on God’s rebuking “… fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away, they go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto

the place which thou hast founded (Heb. Yasad: built up, set) for them; thou hast set a bound that they turn (Heb. Shuwb: to turn back; to return from where they came) not again to cover the earth.” (Psalms 104:7-9). The Scriptures cited above referring to the universal flood do not refer to Noah’s flood which was to a large extent caused by torrential rains. These waters were not rebuked, taken off nor hastened away supernaturally in one day (cf. Genesis 1:6-12, Psalms 104:7). Instead, these waters abated or receded gradually and taken off in the course of several months through natural processes (Genesis 8:1-14). Moreover, during Noah’s flood, all the aquatic life could not have been destroyed; fowls and animals were saved, and vegetation survived without much harm (Genesis 6:20, 8:17) even when it remained totally submerged for many days. As such, it could be convincingly stated that “The flood of Noah lasted over a year, yet vegetation was not destroyed. But in Lucifer’s flood the fruitful place became a wilderness (Jeremiah 4:3-26). New vegetation had to be planted /created, for the earth was totally desolate (Genesis 1:1112; 2:5, 8-17). This proves that Lucifer’s flood was on earth longer than Noah’s and, without doubt, as judgment for a more serious rebellion.” 7 “We therefore, conclude that Genesis 1:1-2 proves a pre-Adamite world that was eventually destroyed in a worldwide flood, which necessitated the making of the present Adamic world so that the original purpose of God concerning the earth (Isaiah 45:18) could be realized.” 8 The ‘Book of Stone’ or Geological Science also confirms the existence of pre-Adamic life on earth and its subsequent destruction by a global flood. As such, “By way of silent yet eloquent witness to the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator, the sedimentary rocks uncovered by the geologist tell us that the waters were filled with life, that fishes and numerous aquatic animals of gigantic size and curiously shaped, once swam there, that amphibious animals disported themselves, and birds extraordinary for size and kind, trod those ancient sands and left their footprints behind them.” 9 Leaving aside geological evidence, revealed biblical evidence is in itself sufficient enough to confirm the truth of pre-adamic life and its destruction. Not all biblical scholars are equally convinced about Lucifer’s rule on earth and of his subsequent rebellion or that the chaos described in v. 2 is as a result of his fall. “As for the reference to the earth’s being ‘waste and void’ (Heb. tohu wabohu) in Genesis 1:2, it is not altogether clear whether this was a subsequent and resultant condition after a primeval catastrophe,

as some scholars understand it (interpreting the verb hay etah as ‘became’ rather than ‘was’. Those who construe hay etah (‘was’) as ‘became’ understand this to indicate a primeval catastrophe possibly associated with the rebellion of Satan against God, as suggested by Isaiah 14:10-14.” 10 Nevertheless, as elaborated and explained as above, there is sufficient prime scriptural evidence to substantiate the existence of pre-historical, preAdamite life on the primeval earth. As otherwise, the Scriptures referred to above to account for the existence of pre-Adamic life cannot be adequately and convincingly explained with reference to any events on earth in Adam’s world or ‘kosmos’ subsequent to his fall. In other words, apart from any ‘pre-historical, pre-adamite, biblically revealed gap’ of considerable length of time, the foregoing biblical and geological facts clearly portraying pre-Adamic events leading to ‘primeval catastrophe’ prior to Genesis1:3 cannot be historically accounted for. It is nigh impossible, both biblically and theologically, to interpret and explain convincingly the aforesaid events recorded in the Scriptures as having any spiritual relevance. The same events cannot be accommodated in any other historical period of the ‘kosmos’ or the ‘world’ that has been until now, and that has descended from Adam. Such lacunae should lead one to formulate ‘biblically-based gap theology’ by completely shedding away one’s prevailing ‘unholy’ bias towards the so-called ‘gap theory’. _________________________________________________________ 1: John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, USA, 1997, see foot note re: Ezekiel 28:13, p.1191 2: ibid; - footnote re: Isaiah14:12-14, p. 977 3: Merrill C. Tenney, General Editor, and J.D. Douglas, Revising Editor, New International Bible Dictionary, Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, US, 1987, p. 271. 4: Henry Morris, 5: Dake, Finis J. op. cit. p. 1 9: Walter Scott, op. cit. p. 14

6: Ibid, p. 83

7: ibid, p. 83

8: ibid, p.80

10: Gleason L. Archer, Jr., Encyclopedia of BIBLE DIFFICULTIES, Zondervan Corporation, US, p. 65-66.

TOWARDS A

BIBLICAL GAP THEOLOGY

Towards Pre-Historical Pre-Adamic Theology (Biblical Gap Theology) The “Gap Theory” assumes a lengthy ‘gap’ of indeterminate period of

geologic time, between Genesis1:1 and 1:2-3, comprising of billions of years based on the geological evidence in the fossil record. “According to the gap theory, God created a fully-functional earth in verse 1. That ancient earth ostensibly featured a full spectrum of animal and plant life, including fish and mammals, various species of now-extinct dinosaurs, and other creatures that we know only from the fossil record.” 1. Next, “Proponents of the gap theory suggest that verse 2 ought to be translated, ‘The earth became without form, and void.’ They speculate that as a result of Satan’s fall, or for some other reason, the prehistoric earth was laid waste by an untold calamity. (This presupposes, of course, that Satan’s fall or some other evil occurred sometime in the gap between Genesis1:1 and 1:2). Then, according to this view, God created all the life-forms that we now see and thus remade earth into a paradise in six days of recreation.” 2 The ‘Statement of Faith’ of ‘www.answersingenesis.org’ and the proponents of other diverse Theories of Creationism state that the “Gap Theory has no basis in Scripture” and that it has no theological relevance. Surely, there couldn’t be any measurable “gap of time” before the creation of Day 1, even as the elusive “time” we measure on earth began with Day 1. Nevertheless, there are sufficient Scriptures that describe events that can be only convincingly accommodated as having occurred during a Biblical period comprising of ‘white space’ between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and ‘black space’ between Genesis1:2 and 1:3. More, the Book of Stone – or Geology provides fossil evidence that can be only accounted for by the ‘intervals of white and black space’ between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3; and that may be done without resorting to any ‘indeterminate chronological slots’. Anyway, even apart from any relevant fossil record relied upon by the Gap Theorists, the Scriptural evidence in itself, relating to events on earth that can be explained only as having occurred prior to the works of Genesis 1:3-31, demand a proper theological explanation. As such, these prehistorical pre-adamic events we find recorded in the Bible provide sufficient basis to convincingly formulate a sound ‘Biblical Gap Theology’. Scripturally-based “Pre-Historical Pre-Adamic Biblical Gap-related Theology”, by implication, has evangelical connotations of profound spiritual significance. When properly understood and appreciated, Biblical Gap Theology provides doctrinal background with which to meaningfully appreciate God’s works of the first six days. Apart from any such relevant pre-historical Biblical Gap Theology, the work of the six days becomes

inconsequential, having no precise meaning and purpose nor any spiritual significance. Biblical Gap Theology confirms that the Traditional Belief in a ‘Creation of Cosmos in Six Days, some six to ten thousand years ago’ is biblically unfounded and evangelically insignificant. The same belief fails to account for the biblically recorded pre-historical events. Anyway, Genesis 1:2 is of theological relevance when accounted for within the framework of Scriptures recorded elsewhere in the Holy Bible, such as Proverbs 8:22-31, Job 38:9-11, Psalms 104:6-9, Isaiah14:12, Ezekiel 28:12-18. These events can be only explained as having occurred during the time lag or unknown period between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3 with a changed state on earth as described in Genesis 1:2. Apart from any such position, it is not at all possible to appropriately interpret these Scriptures. As such, the work of the six days described in Genesis 1:3-31 is a later work of physical redemption and restoration from the chaos and darkness. It is substantially a six-day divine work having tremendous evangelical significance. Biblically as well as theologically speaking, “… ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’… Then in the second verse we find things fallen into a state of ruin. ‘And the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep’. This was certainly not as it was created -- for we are expressly told that ‘not as waste [the same word as in Genesis 1:2] did he create it’ (Isaiah 45:18). … A solemn change had come about between the first and second verses of Genesis 1.We do not know what length of time elapsed between those two verses….. In verse 2 we find on earth disorder and darkness. “It is in such a scene that God's next activities are presented as taking place – activities which come to an end on the sixth day, so that on the seventh day God rested . This indicates at the very outset the whole subject of Scripture. It is the unfolding of how God has worked, and will work, in a scene of moral disorder to bring about a state of things in which He can rest -- a scene of order and life and fruitfulness where all will be under the dominion of Man in His image and after His likeness.” 3 Theologically and evangelically loaded nature of the phased six days’ work distinguishes it from the work of an original instant creation. Traditional Six-day and Young-Earth Creationists owe it to God to accept the fact of a ‘distinct, completed creation phase’ (Genesis1:1) followed by a ‘changed state’ (Genesis 1:2). This state is in no way a constituent of the original creation notwithstanding any grammatical connection between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. And, rooted in the state of ‘chaos and darkness on a flooded earth’ in Genesis 1:2 are theological facts that lie

behind God’s redemptive-restorative work of the six days. These basic facts substantially affirm a radical Evangelically-Based Theology of Creation. Anyway, arguments provoked by the controversial “Gap Theory” and resorted to repudiate any “pre-historical period” between Genesis1:1and 1:3 deserves our attention. These arguments aim to refute the claims of any preAdamic world or social system on earth under Lucifer’s rule and its destruction following Lucifer’s sin before God’s work of the six days. The same arguments can be convincingly addressed and resolved only if we are wiling to shed away our preconceived traditional notions and consider the much overlooked but relevant biblical and scientific facts without any bias. Obviously, these arguments are prompted by one’s core traditional belief of a ‘creation in six days’, mistakenly assuming the chaotic conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 as comprising of ‘God’s activity on Day One’. However, traditional creational thinking is hopelessly misleading being errant. It is stated that the so-called “gap theory” of ‘indeterminate geologic time’, “poses enormous biblical and theological problems”. At the same time, it is admitted that it “allows for a straightforward literal interpretation of the creation days of Genesis 1” 4. In a similar vein, Ken Ham states that “Believing in the gap theory presents a number of problems and inconsistencies, especially for a Christian.” 5. Though some of the problems and inconsistencies may be real so as to render the “Gap Theory” as defective, the core problems experienced by the traditional six-day creationists are not at all warranted though certainly understandable. Understandable, because such imaginary problems and inconsistencies are subjectively experienced by those who interpret Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3-31 within the framework of the traditional six-day creationism. When viewed in the light of ignored biblical truth, these problems are baseless. Anyway, the unwarranted problems and inconsistencies are confidently addressed hereinafter, so as to convincingly replace the “Gap Theory” with a Biblically-based Gap Theology, having evangelical overtones:-

#1: The Grammar of Genesis 1:1–2

“Many adherents of the gap theory claim that the grammar of Genesis

1:1–2 allows, and even requires, a time-gap between the events in verse 1 and the events in verse 2. But…the most straightforward reading of the verses sees verse 1 as a subject-and-verb clause, with verse 2 containing three circumstantial clauses (i.e., three statements that further describe the circumstances introduced by the principal clause in verse 1). The Hebrew conjunction “waw”, meaning “and” at the beginning of verse 2, is a “waw copulative,” which compares with the old English expression “to wit.” This grammatical connection between verses 1 and 2 thus rules out the gap theory. Verse 2 is in fact a description of the state of the originally created earth: ‘And the earth was without form and void.’ (Genesis 1:2a)”. (Ken Ham, www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/gap-ruin-reconstruction-theories). See also Weston W. Fields 6 and M. W. J. Phelan 7. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We should not allow our limited knowledge of Hebrew grammar and syntax to cause Scripture ‘here a little’ to contradict Scripture ‘there a little’. We do come across Scriptures in the Bible that are grammatically connected to each other but which, when studied together as a single textual unit based on their grammatical connection, actually contradict each other. Examples of such Scriptures include Genesis 1:1-2, Isaiah 14:14-16, Ezekiel 28:12-13 and so on. The principle to be adopted in such a situation is to rightly divide the Scriptures that are grammatically connected to each other but then are clearly seen to contradict each other when studied together as a unit. There is a significant lack of understanding of the Hebrew Grammar and Syntax of Genesis 1:1-2 amongst biblical scholars. This is obvious from the difficulty experienced in translating Genesis 1:1-2. Hence, we come across diverse, sometimes contradictory, translations of these first two verses in the Bible. How do we resolve this difficulty in properly understanding the intended meaning of these first two verses in the Bible? The principle to be adopted is to obey 2 Timothy 2:15c and rightly divide the Word of Truth which is grammatically connected rather than allow the connected scriptures to contradict with each other. And, to rightly divide

such scriptures we must let the Bible interpret the underlying meaning and subsequently divide. It is well known to all biblical scholars that the merism: ‘heavens and earth’ in the Hebrew Scriptures means “totality of all creation”. It has the sense of “a completed perfect creation showing forth the glory of God” (Psalms 19:1-6). As such, we should not allow chaos of 1:2 to contradict the intended true meaning of ‘heavens and earth’ in Genesis 1:1 because of any grammatical connection between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. In other words, chaos of Genesis 1:2 cannot be considered as a work of perfect creation in spite of the grammatical connection between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. To state as such is to impugn the character of God whose works are always perfect. Genesis 1:2 containing ‘three circumstantial clauses’ that ‘describe the circumstances’ supposedly ‘introduced by the principal clause in verse1’doesn’t really mean that Genesis 1:2 ‘is in fact a description of the (actual) state of the originally created earth’, notwithstanding any supposed grammatical connection. In fact, it is a brief description of the circumstances on earth, to wit: ‘chaotic earth without form and void, darkness upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters’ that came to be later on earth, subsequent to its original perfect creation. To conclude that the ‘three circumstantial clauses’ of Genesis 1:2 describe the ‘state of the originally created earth’ just because they are connected to Genesis 1:1 by the conjunction ‘wau copulative’ is absolutely illogical. Certainly, the ‘Spirit of God’, moving upon the surface of the waters, doesn’t belong to the state of the originally created earth because of the ‘grammatical connection between verses 1 and 2’. As such, any supposed grammatical link between verses 1 and 2 in no way implies Genesis 1:2 is a description of the actual ‘state of the originally created earth’. Again, it is a gross hermeneutical error to state that the three phrases in v. 2, namely, ‘without form, and void’, ‘darkness was on the face of the deep’, and ‘the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters’ are used “to describe the original state of the earth” and to further state that “A similar barrenness no doubt characterized the whole universe.” 8 It is stated that “The construction of the Hebrew phrase that opens verse 2 is significant. The subject comes before the verb, as if to emphasize something remarkable about it. It might be translated, ‘As to the earth, it was formless and void.’ Here is a new planet, the very focus of God’s creative purpose, and it was formless and void.” 9 But, the construction of

the phrase that opens v. 2 does not emphasize something remarkable about ‘the earth as a newly created planet’ but about a planet that was in a chaos. The state of chaos and darkness on a flooded earth in Genesis 1:2 cannot be interpreted to be the actual ‘state of the originally created earth’ because of any supposed grammatical connection with Genesis 1:1. The chaos and darkness on earth in Genesis1:2 needs to be differentially and factually interpreted as circumstances occurring on earth later on. It has nothing to do with the originally created earth just as the ‘Spirit of God’, ‘moving upon the face of the waters’ has no connection whatsoever with the chaotic circumstances in Genesis 1:2. As such, it is totally misleading to state Genesis 1:2 is the ‘state of the originally created earth’ of Genesis 1:1, on the same premise that the Spirit of God is not a “state of the originally created earth”. Now if it is wrong to conclude that “Spirit of God is a state of the originally created earth” in spite of its grammatical connection with verse 1, then it is also equally wrong to conclude that the other two circumstantial clauses are an actual state of the originally created earth. Similarly in Ezekiel 28:12, in spite of the grammatical connection between the clauses, we know we cannot interpret this Scripture by stating that the King of Tyrus actually ‘sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, perfect in beauty’. Even though this particular clause is actually addressed to King Tyrus, and grammatically speaking it should refer to King Tyrus, yet we cannot at all attribute these characteristics to King Tyrus. Instead, they are appropriately attributed to Lucifer. Similar is the case in Isaiah 14: 4-12; in spite of the grammatical connection in this passage, we will never state that the King of Babylon is Lucifer. As such, in spite of the grammatical link, it is improper to state Genesis 1:2 is the condition of the earth in Genesis 1:1. Next, according to the NIV translators, “__ the vast majority of prose sentences in OT Hebrew begin with one of the two Hebrew forms for the word ‘and’. The word for ‘and’ appears even when there is absolutely nothing preceding to which the sentence logically connects. In fact, six books of the OT (Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, Ezra, Ruth and Esther) begin in Hebrew with the word ‘and’, though they obviously do not follow anything. Accordingly, it is now recognized by Hebrew grammarians that ‘and’ at the beginning of a sentence is virtually the equivalent of the use of capitalization at the beginning of English sentences.__ it simply means that ‘and’ is only sometimes and certainly not a majority of the time, the best translation in English” 10. As otherwise, “The simple English sentence beginning with a Capital letter will do nicely in most cases.” 11 Accordingly,

NIV translators “reduce the number of occurrences of ‘and’ (in Genesis 1) to eleven” as compared to KJV translation with a ‘total of thirty times’.

In spite of the fact that Genesis 1:2 contain three clauses that describe the circumstances introduced by the principal clause in Genesis 1:1, NIV translators saw it fitting to separate Genesis 1:1 from Genesis 1:2. Accordingly, NIV Verse 1: “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the earth” is independent of Verse 2: “Now the earth was (Or ‘possibly became’- NIV foot note) formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” The NIV translation of Genesis 1:1-2 allows no contradiction between the contents or the subject matter of the two independent verses. However, when the two verses are linked together with a copulative ‘waw’ or ‘and’ as in the KJV the contradiction and the subsequent misinterpretation is inevitable. Even otherwise, “and’ is used 153 times in Genesis 1-2 to separate the 102 recorded independent acts of God. Verse 2 is as independent of verse 1 as to time and subject matter as all the other separate acts of God. Verse 1 refers to the whole universe being created and inhabited in the dateless past, while verse 2 refers to chaos because of sin. Verses 3-31 picture the restoration of the earth as before chaos, and its second habitation with present man and the earth and water creatures brought into being about 6,000 years ago.” 12 The content of Genesis 1:2 describing the chaos on earth is at total variance with the contents of Genesis 1:1 describing a creation which, as defined by the Hebrew merism: ‘heavens and earth’, had to be ‘perfect and complete’. As such, biblically speaking, any relevant grammatical link or connection between the two verses becomes inconsequential. We need not allow the ‘chaos’ of Genesis 1:2 to contradict with the Hebrew merism “heavens and earth” (Genesis 1:1), meaning a ‘completed perfect creation’. Next, the hermeneutical principle to consider the “context, Context, CONTEXT” during exegesis of Scriptures need not be necessarily applicable to every single Scripture or textual unit. If that be the case, then there is no need to “divide the Word of Truth” (2 Timothy 2:15) which is very essential to obey, seeing that the Word of Truth relating to any biblical subject is given “here a little and there a little” (Isaiah 28:10, 13) in the Bible. As such, when any grammatically connected Scriptures contextually contradict, analyzing the immediate context is of no use. We must simply obey God and rightly divide and separate the contradicting scriptures so as to preserve their true original biblical sense. Therefore, it is hermeneutically appropriate to divide and separate Genesis 1:1 from Genesis1:2.

Anyway, Traditional Six-Day Creationists who are firmly convinced and believe in a “creation of the cosmos in six days some six to ten thousand years ago” will somehow hang on to their traditional beliefs in spite of the contradictions. Subsequently, any other biblically relevant view will not be easily accepted as biblical truth because it simply doesn’t agree with one’s ingrained traditional beliefs. Tradition, by all means, reigns supreme. Nevertheless, it is biblically inconsistent to subjectively conclude that the ‘grammatical connection between verses 1 and 2 rules out the gap theory’, defective though it may be. For an in-depth and thorough refutation of the views held by Weston W. Fields that the “Gap is Grammatically Impossible”, the reader is recommended to read in this book, ‘Appendix A’, reproduced from a Personal Communication made to me by Jack W. Langford. However, notwithstanding traditional beliefs, Biblical Gap Theology based on a proper exegesis of Genesis 1:1, 1:2 and 1:3 with the help of other Scriptures relating to the events that can be solely accounted for as having occurred during the period between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3 has much relevance and profound evangelical significance. ________________________________________________________ _ 1: John MacArthur, The Battle for the Beginning, op.cit; p.75

2: ibid, p.75

3: Charles A. Coates, An Outline of Genesis, op.cit. p.2 4: John MacArthur, Jr., The Battle…op. cit, p.75. 5: Ken Ham, www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/ gap--ruin-reconstruction-theories 6: Weston W. Fields, Unformed and Unfilled, Master Books, USA, 2005 7: M. W. J. Phelan, The Genesis ‘Gap Theory’, Its Credibility and Consequences, Twoedged Sword Publications, UK, 2005 8: John MacArthur, The Battle……, op. cit. p.74, 73. 9: John MacArthur; ibid, p.74. 10, 11: Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, “How to Read the Bible for All its Worth”; OM Books, Indian Reprint 2000, A. P., India, p. 42. 12: F. J. Dake, op. cit. p. 76.

#2: “The gap theory flatly contradicts Exodus 20:11: ‘For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day’.” (John MacArthur, The Battle for the Beginning, op. cit. p. 76). -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May be, some “Gap Theorists” attempt to accommodate the theories of evolution between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 so as to explain and account for the fossil record of billions of years. However, ‘Gap Theology’ propounded briefly in this treatise aims to convincingly explain the biblical realities of Lucifer’s rule and pre-Adamic life on earth prior to Genesis 1:2 and the subsequent destruction consequent to Lucifer’s fall. But, in no way does it contradict Exodus 20:11 which actually summarize God’s later additional work of the first six days of creation, re-creation. The apparent contradiction is due to faulty interpretation of Exodus 20:11. This faulty interpretation is made based upon traditional assumptions. As such, we need to interpret Exodus 20:11 with the help of related relevant Scriptures. That is, if we rely on the Scriptures in Genesis 1: 8, 10 and 14-18 to interpret the Scripture in Exodus 20:11 and in 31:17 instead of interpreting the same with the myths of ‘defective six-day creationism’, then it will be clear that Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 doesn’t speak of the original Heavens and the Earth of Genesis 1:1 which were first created (bara, in Hebrew) by fiat, ex nihilo, outside of any measurable time. Instead, it will be confidently ascertained that Exodus 20:11, 31:17 speak of Heavens of Genesis 1:8, 1418, and of the dry land named Earth of Genesis 1:10, and of the Sea(s) of Genesis 1:10 which God made (rather re-ordered, ‘asah’ in Hebrew, from previously existing material) and all that in them is, in six days, which after He saw the same, and said “very good” (Genesis 1:31). It’s only in the atmospheric ‘heavens of Genesis 1:8 of day two’ and on the dry land called ‘earth of Genesis 1:10 of day three’ and in the ‘sea of Genesis 1:10 of day three’ do we find ‘all that in them is’, that is, the flora and fauna, which God made on the third, fifth and sixth day’. Certainly, all what God created during the six days was not a constituent of the earlier original perfect creation of Genesis 1:1. ‘All that in them is’ refers to all what God brought into existence in the atmospheric heavens and on earth and in the seas during the work of the six days of Genesis 1:3-31. As such, Exodus 20:11 has no direct reference to heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1.

The above Scriptures make it very clear that the ‘heavens’, ‘earth’ and the ‘sea’ of Exodus 20: 11 are not the same “heavens and earth” of Genesis 1:1. Accordingly, the Bible speaks of ‘generations’ of heavens and earth in Genesis 2:4a, distinguishing thereby the heavens and earth that were created earlier (Genesis2:4a) from those that were made later (Genesis1:8, 10; 2:4b) In an attempt to refute the above distinction, Ken Ham pointedly states that “bara and asah are used in Scripture to describe the same event. For example, asah is used in Exodus 20:11 to refer to the creation of the heavens and the earth, but bara is used to refer the creation of the heavens and the earth in Genesis 1:1. The word asah is used concerning the creation of the first people in Genesis 1:26 – they did not previously exist. And then they are said to have been created (bara) in Genesis 1:27.” 1 It is true that at times bara and asah are used in Scripture to describe the same creation event. But in Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 asah is definitely used to refer to the “heavens” of Genesis 1: 8, 14-18 and to the “earth” and to the “sea” of Genesis 1:10 which God MADE out of existing things, during the Creation Week. In NO WAY do these refer to the “Heavens” and the “Earth” of Genesis 1:1 or to the “waters” covering the earth of Genesis 1: 2 which God created instantly “In the Beginning” out of nothing, ex nihilo. Both the words “asah” and “bara” are used in Genesis 1: 26-27 to describe the creation of the first people. This is because in the “creation of man”, ‘Adam’ was first formed (asah) out of the existing material and then God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life thereby creating (bara) the ‘human spirit’ in him (1 Corinthians 2:11). There could be no other way to consider the use of both these words to describe the creation of man after God’s Image and Likeness. Both the words ‘asah’ and ‘bara’ may not always be necessarily being able to be said to be used synonymously. Again, both words ‘bara’ and ‘asah’ are used synonymously when referring to heavens and earth. This is because of the heavens and the earth that were created (bara) out of nothing ex nihilo in the beginning and the ‘heavens’ and ‘earth’ and the ‘sea’ that were made during the creation week out of the existing material as in Genesis 1:8, 10-18. In certain Scriptures God speaks of the permanence of heavens and earth. And in certain other Scriptures He speak of their transience. This apparent contradiction can be resolved by the fact that the original creation of Genesis 1:1 is permanent

whereas those re-created in Genesis 1:8 for man’s habitation are transient. When God Himself clearly distinguishes the heavens and earth He first created by fiat in the beginning (Genesis 1:1) from those He made during the six days (Genesis 1:8, 10-18) then why should we hesitate to accept the distinction God Himself makes? Anyway, we should never allow our wrong interpretations based on any traditional concepts to fit into the Scriptures so as then to passionately hold on to the traditional six-day creation, ONLY. We can, therefore, conclude that Nehemiah 9: 6 refers to the ‘heaven of heavens’ and to the ‘heavens and earth and the sea’ of Genesis 1:8, 10-18 which are, of course, a part of the original heavens and the earth of Genesis 1:1, created ex-nihilo. Anyway, the Bible speaks of “Generations” of Heavens and Earth (Genesis 2:4a) distinguishing the ‘heavens and earth’ that were originally created (Genesis 1:1) from the ‘heavens and the earth’ that were made (Genesis 1:8, 10, 12-18; 2:4b). Next, there will be a third new “Generation” of “heavens and earth” when once created and or made after the Millennium and final judgment. Moreover, there are three kinds of heavens: one, the atmospheric heavens (Genesis 1: 8); second, the stellar heavens (Genesis 1:1a) and third, the heaven of God’s throne, wherein Paul was taken (2 Corinthians 12:2, 4). The fact that the words ‘bara’ and ‘asah’ are used interchangeably in the Hebrew Scriptures and that in some places they are used in synonymous parallelism doesn’t mean we can ignore the distinction between different ‘generations’ of heavens and earth or that there are three kinds of heavens. As accurately stated by Henry Morris, President of the Institute for Creation Research, USA: “In the first chapter of Genesis, both types of activity are stressed, the account finally concluding with the summary: ‘All His work which God created and made’ (Genesis 2:3). The two types of work are almost synonymous when referring to the divine activity but not quite (otherwise ‘created’ and ‘made’ would be redundant). Specifically, the three acts of true creation in Genesis are the creation of the physical elements of the cosmos, the entity of biological life, and the spiritual image of God in man (Genesis 1:1, 21, 27). These entities God simply called into being, ex nihilo, by His Word. Everything else He made, or formed, or let be, out of the three basic entities that were specially created. He is both Creator and Maker of all things and we should worship Him as such.” 2 God created the heavens and the earth by fiat in Genesis 1:1. He also made the

visible heavens of Genesis 1:8, 14-19 and the earth and sea of Genesis 1:10. It is very clear that there are two distinct creation phases in Genesis 1. It should be obvious that Exodus 20:11, 31:17 are not talking of the original perfect creation of Genesis 1:1 at all, which God created (bara) and brought into existence ex nihilo, not in six days but instantly. After all, it surely had to be a perfect and beautiful creation for “HE is ROCK; His work is perfect” (Deuteronomy 32:4). Next, “He hath made everything beautiful in his time: also He hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end” (Ecclesiastes 3:11). As such, “The original creations of God include the heavens, the earth, and all things therein as first brought into being. They were made perfect the first time. Genesis 1:1 refers to the dateless past or the beginning of the creative ages (Job 38; Psalms 8:3-8; 19:1-6; Proverbs 8:22-31; Acts 17:24-26; Colossians 1:15-18; Hebrews 1:1-12; 11:3; Revelation4:11). In the beginning, the dateless past, and not in 6 days about 6000 years ago, God created the heavens, including the sun, moon and stars–all the heavenly bodies in space and the earth as a dry land.” 3 ‘Biblically-based Gap Theology’ unlike the ‘Traditional Six-Day Creationism’ doesn’t contradict Exodus 20:11. Instead, it is very much in agreement with it. It all depends on how one chooses to interpret the same. When viewed through the lens of traditional concepts it looks like the heavens and earth God created in a beginning as in Genesis 1:1 are one and the same the Scriptures talk about that were made during the work of the six days. But, when viewed through the pure lens of Scriptures, one can easily confirm that the heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 are not one and the same described in Genesis 1: 3-31. It should be obvious to any unbiased mind, spiritual or unspiritual, that Exodus 20:11 actually and precisely refer to the ‘heavens and earth’ that were made in six days. Biblically speaking, the work of the six days begins from Genesis 1:3 and not from Genesis 1: 1. As such, in no way Exodus 20:11 has any reference to the original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. ‘Traditional Six-Day Creationism’ after all contradicts both Biblical and Natural Revelation and should, therefore, be rejected. _____________________________________________________________ 1: Ken Ham, www.answersingenesis.org 2: H. Morris, www.icr.org

3: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p. 76.

#3: “If the fossil record is to be explained by an interval in the white space between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, that means death, disease, suffering and calamity were common many ages before Adam fell. Yet Scripture says Adam’s sin was the event that introduced death and calamity into God’s creation: Through one man sin entered the world and death through sin. (Romans 5:12).” (John MacArthur, ibid. p. 75-76). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Romans 5:12 states that death, as a consequence of Adam’s sin, entered into the world of men of which Adam is the federal head. After all, the Holy Bible basically deals with the sinful descendants of Adam. This fact, in itself, doesn’t rule out pre-adamic life. Nor does it rule out existence of sin and death prior to Adam. In fact, there are Scriptures to account both for sin and its consequences prior to Adam’s sin or fall. As such, sin did not originate with Adam. It originated with Lucifer’s rebellion, who ‘sinneth from the beginning’ (1 John 3:8) subsequent to Genesis 1:1. And the ‘wages of sin is death’. It is spiritual death resulting in eternal separation from God. Christ says He saw “Satan as lightning fall from heaven” (Luke 10:18) during which fall (Isaiah14:12), destruction on earth, as well as in the heavens, cannot be ruled out. Apart from any destructive consequences of Lucifer’s sin and that of the fallen angels and pre-adamic men prior to the creation of Adam, the chaos described in Genesis 1:2; Jeremiah 4:23-27; 2 Peter 2:3-6 cannot be accounted for on earth as a product of some creative acts of God at the beginning of the original creation (Genesis 1:1). Anyway, Lucifer’s sin (Isaiah 14:13-14; Ezekiel 28:15) and the sin of angels (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6) resulted in their ‘spiritual death’- eternal separation from God. The sins of pre-Adamic men brought death without any suffering but in a swift destruction (Heb: abad, Ezekiel 28:16) along with the rest of the pre-Adamic creation. Accordingly, “…we have clear and indubitable evidence in the organic remains before us, of fossils, bones, skins, flesh, skeletons, etc that the creation disentombed by the geologist did not come as it is now from the Creator’s hands. To any who would question the wisdom of a pre-Adamic creation, we would say, have you ever reflected on the goodness of God in turning the primeval vegetable world into coal?” 1 All

this fossilized geological evidence recorded in the ‘Book of Stone’ is not the same as that which is available subsequent to Noah’s flood. Suffering, calamities, disease and death in our world down through the ages are as a consequence of Adam’s sin as well as a consequence of our individual private sins. However, the consequence of sins of the pre-Adamic men must have been swift destruction and death without there being any prior disease and suffering. As such, we need not assume that death, disease, suffering have been common throughout the history of pre-Adamic men. Unlike the calamities, suffering, disease and death that are now as a consequence of sin since the fall of Adam, we need not assume it had to be also as such in the pre-Adamic life. Like the angels who were created directly, so also the pre-Adamic men must have been created directly after their own kind. All these men, in whom the Wisdom of God delighted (Proverbs 8:30) must have continued to live perfectly sinless lives before they were wiped out as a result of their subsequent sin. The Wisdom of God took delight in the pre-Adamic men as they were sinless and perfect just as the angels were perfect before they sinned. There is no biblical record of any men living sinless lives in Adam’s world in which God’s Wisdom could be said to have taken delight. There never have been any perfect men on earth since the Fall. All men are born tainted by Adam’s sin. As such, there could not have been any perfect men on earth at any time, barring the few individuals comprising of God’s elect. It is a scriptural fact that there were nations of men under Lucifer’s rule on earth. Next, Lucifer’s subsequent boastful pride and mis-rule led to his rebellion and downfall. And just as he led the angels under his rule to sin, so also obviously he did lead the once perfect pre-Adamic men to rebel and live in sin. So eventually, swift destruction and death without necessarily any ongoing suffering and disease had to be a consequential reality. This fact may be biblically established by applying the hermeneutical principle or Law of Double Reference to Ezekiel 31:3-18 depicting Lucifer’s primeval Edenic rule and fall. Lucifer’s arrogant rule (Ezekiel 31:3-15) ended up in the destruction of pre-Adamic life during which Lucifer was “brought down with the trees of Eden unto the nether parts of the earth” (Ezekiel 31:16-18). These Scriptures cannot refer to any period on earth in Adam’s world. The trees of Eden here should refer to pre-Adamic life. At

the same time, based upon the principle of “Double Reference”, these trees should symbolically refer to Lucifer and pre-Adamic men of renown. As otherwise we have no record of there being any such trees in Adam’s world. Ezekiel 31:14-15 demonstrate that pre-adamic life on earth was wiped out as an aftermath of Lucifer’s rebellion. So also, pre-Adamites who sinned along with Lucifer were also crushed to death as a consequence. The fate of Pharaoh to whom Ezekiel 31 is addressed resulted in a similar defeat. After all, the same Lucifer who ruled and deceived the pre-Adamic nations under him was very much active influencing Pharaoh’s rule. Lucifer’s goal is to exalt himself. And to exalt himself he sways the rulers of this world bringing them under his control. Eventually, his misrule ends up in destruction. The fossil record in the Book of Stone can, therefore, very much relegated to the destruction depicted in Ezekiel 31. Accordingly, the ‘Carboniferous Period’, defined by pale-anthropological data of fossil record, cannot be an aftermath of Noah’s flood. Geo-chronologically, Carboniferous Period logically has to cover a much longer period. Certainly, it has to be a period that is much longer than the period which is comprised of from the period of Noah’s flood down to our times. “If, then, the voice of science urgently demand a vastly longer period for the formation of its numerous strata than that wrongly marked in our Bibles, and, further, that vegetation must have flourished, light and heat existed, and land animals at least lived under conditions not furnished by the present state of things since man was created, What is the natural conclusion? Why, that our thoughts, our previous habits of thinking and speaking, are wrong, not the Word of God!” 2 We can, therefore, confidently state that based upon Fossil Record and Biblical revelation, swift death and destruction if not disease and suffering, was a reality prior to sin and death entering into Adam’s world. It is only in this context it could be stated that Satan knew what it meant to die so as to tempt Adam and Eve to commit sin and die. On the other hand, Adam had not yet witnessed the reality of death. Death, perhaps, became more of a reality once he witnessed it after Cain killed Abel. For any sin and death to enter into Adam’s world, both sin and its consequence death necessarily had to exist prior to Adam’s sin and consequent death. _____________________________________________________________

1: Walter Scott, op.cit. p.15 2: Walter Scott, op. cit. p.15.

#4: A related theological problem posed by Henry Morris, Founder and President Emeritus of the Institute for Creation Research, USA, is that: “…the wonderful saving gospel of Jesus Christ is essentially subverted and destroyed if we must accept the vast ages of the evolutionary cosmologists and geologists, with their eons-long spectacle of suffering and death as recorded in the global fossil graveyard. Sound theology must say no to any such concession! Fossils speak of death and death results only from sin and judgment.” (Henry Morris, op.cit; link: www.icr.org). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anyway, without accepting ‘the vast ages of the evolutionary geologists with their eons-long spectacle of suffering and death’ as a reality, the nature and rare composition of a ‘global fossil graveyard’ demonstrate sudden destruction and death. This could be only as a result of judgment following Lucifer’s sin, that of his angels and pre-adamite men. It’s only after seeing the reality of physical death of the pre-adamite men, Satan could know the gravity of sin’s penalty so as to induce Adam to sin and die. Even otherwise, the wonderful saving gospel of Jesus Christ cannot be said to be essentially subverted and destroyed. The entrance of sin into the original pre-Adamic world, subsequent to Lucifer’s rebellion, is not without its defiling effects. As such, the need for Christ’s blood to appease God’s wrath and cleanse the defilements caused by Satan’s sin on heavenly things was necessary (cf. Hebrews 9: 23b) even before the fall of Adam. Therefore, the Gospel is not subverted; rather, its propitiatory value, with its appeasing and cleansing aroma, was a spiritual necessity and therefore relevant even before Adam’s sin entered into the world! Biblically based pre-Adamic Gap Theology upholds the spiritual value of the everlasting gospel of Jesus Christ (Revelation 14: 6a). His ‘slaying as a sacrificial Lamb of God even before the foundation of the world’ (Revelation 13:8c) was symbolically necessary to cleanse the defiling effects of Lucifer’s sin. And, that was necessary even long before ‘Adam’s sin’ entered into the world of humanity, much later. Jesus’ death doesn’t pay the penalty of Satan’s sin. But it does cleanse and remove the defilement of the heavenly things (Hebrews 9:23b) caused by Satan’s sin (Ezekiel 28:18a;

Revelation 12:8) who once inhabited the earth and eventually left his habitation to usurp God’s throne, thereby defiling the heavenly things. If this be not the case, then one has to explain how heavenly things are defiled. We are accustomed to owning only the defiling effects of Adam’s sin whilst overlooking such effects caused by Lucifer’s sin. However, the slaying of the Lamb figuratively even before the foundation of the world, becomes much more relevant because of the defiling effects of Lucifer’s sin. As a matter of fact, ‘Biblical Gap Theology’, instead of undermining the gospel faithfully upholds the same at its very foundations. Figuratively, the shed blood of Christ, the Lamb that was figuratively slain before the foundation of the world cleanses all and any defilement caused not only by Adam’s sin but also by Satan’s sin. As otherwise, how could a thrice Holy God of Integrity ever allow Satan to present himself before His throne (Revelation 12:8, 12d)? Or, even have a dialogue with him (Job 1:6, 2:1, 7) apart from the propitiatory and purifying value of Christ’s shed blood? Unfortunately, the flawed theology of ‘limited atonement’ places its focus on limiting the efficacy of Christ’s shed blood solely for the cleansing of sins of the elect. But, it fails to appreciate the universal cleansing effect of Christ’s blood that was very much figuratively in operation even before the foundation of the world. Defilement of heavenly things caused by Satan’s sin needed then and still need a ‘better sacrifice’ for their cleansing and purification (Hebrews 9:22). As such, it is a sound gospel truth. Not only has it made a provision by “the substitutionary death of Christ as the awful wages of man’s sin” for the believer’s forgiveness and justification but also it has immense efficacy in cleansing the heavenly things (Hebrews 9: 23). Symbolically, Christ’s sacrifice for propitiation precedes its substitutionary purpose. It became figuratively necessary from the casting away of the pre-Adamic world (katabole kosmou, Matthew 13:35) even before Adam sinned. It is Lucifer’s sin that existed before Adam entered into this world once Adam gave in to Satan’s temptation. Satan’s pre-existing sin next entered into man’s world. Moreover, God’s plan for the atonement of human sin and redemption of mankind from its bondage to sin has its focus upon the consequences of Satan’s sin which are described in Genesis 1:2. As such, the physical work of the six days figuratively marks the proclamation of the everlasting Gospel of Salvation through its ‘object-lessons’. Definitely, it is essentially a work

of physical restoration. In a way, the six-day work involves earth’s physical redemption from its chaotic state which parallels man’s redemption from sin’s chaotic spiritual consequences.1 Undoubtedly, the physical work of the six days is symbolic of the spiritual work of God in the darkened and chaotic human hearts. This spiritual work is evident in the hearts of the redeemed souls, through the course of the ensuing six millennia whilst living under Satan’s dominion and his deceptive mis-rule on earth. Traditional six-day creationists will not easily accept the spiritual reality of the symbolic aspects of God’s Work of the six days followed by rest on the seventh day as something of prime evangelical significance and importance. Nevertheless, Hebrews 4 very clearly brings out the evangelical significance of God’s work of the six days pointing to a future millennial spiritual rest. No wonder, the phased work of the six days is characterized by physical redemptive and restorative acts. The earth under ‘slavery’ to satanic chaos is made free, rather redeemed, from the ‘chaos’ during the first three days. Next, following a reorganization of the solar system on the fourth day, life is restored on earth and in the sea on the fifth and sixth day. For a detailed explanation of the rich spiritual symbolism of God’s work of the first three days and the subsequent work of the next three days, the reader has much to gain by visiting: www.separationtruth.org. 2 The fact that life was restored on earth through re-creation is clearly evident. Light was restored on earth through God’s commanding it out of darkness; dry land was restored by commanding the waters to return to its former place constituting the sea/s. So also, life was restored by giving express commands to the earth and the sea to bring forth into existence living forms ‘after their kinds’ that formerly existed and was next wiped out. “This is why the specific phrasing of "after his kind" or "after their kind" is used by the Spirit in describing the Lord's regenerative work.” 3 Human life, however, was next created “after God kind”; that is, in the image and likeness of God. And, the re-created new “Generation” of “heavens and earth” were placed under man’s dominion. And, God saw every thing that He had created and made during the six days and said “Very Good”. It was an evangelical declaration by God. But it doesn’t rule out the existence of evil prior to Adam! After all, darkness was still there! ____________________________________________________________ 1, 2: Jack W. Langford, The GAP Is Not a Theory, www.separationtruth.org, 2010

3: Kaines Johnson, The BIBLE, Genesis and Geology, www.kjvbible.org , p.13

#5: “In Genesis 1:31, after God had completed all His creation, He declared it ‘very good’ – which would not be a fitting description if evil had already entered the universe.” (John MacArthur, op. cit; p. 76). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Evil did enter into God’s original creation the moment Lucifer sinned and became Satan. Period! “Evil had come into the universe the moment Satan said "I will", and it became the great question in the universe 1.” Next, “When the Lord says of Satan, that he was a liar from the beginning, that goes back a long way” 2. As such, Satan, personification of evil, was already present in the Garden of Eden, as a subtle serpent, ready to tempt Adam and Eve. And, since satanic-evil was there, there was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, whose fruit Adam was commanded not to eat, failing which ‘dying he would die’ (Genesis 2:17). If evil had not then had entered the universe, then the command to Adam to responsibly avoid eating of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is irrelevant. What God saw and declared ‘very good’, was everything that He had made during the six days. And, that which He created and made during the six days is clearly specified in Genesis 1:3-30 which God then looked at and said, “very good” (v.31). That, of course, doesn’t include “darkness” which is symbolic of the evil forces of spiritual darkness. And, God never called ‘darkness’ good. Therefore, God Himself separated the existing darkness from the “light’ which is symbolic of righteousness, truth, and peace, and therefore “good”. As such, what God specifically created and made during the six days of the creation week was good as compared to the chaotic conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 that were not good but were evil or bad. Lucifer who became Satan and the angels who became demons were not created during the creation week. Lucifer and the angels that sinned were created before the creation of the universe (Job 38:7). Next, Lucifer did actually rebel and sin and became Satan (Isaiah 14:12-14) before the work of the six days. Evil which is symbolized by darkness in the Bible existed prior to Genesis 1:3-31. Satan was on earth in the Adamic Garden of Eden as a subtle sly serpent. However, what God created during the six days does not include darkness. And, of course, it does not include the Serpent as an instrument of evil, though it was certainly ‘good’ as a creation of God when created on the sixth day. It’s when Satan got inside the serpent, to deceive

and tempt mother Eve, the serpent became a ‘symbol of evil’! Traditional Six-day Creationists cannot accept the fact of Lucifer’s rebellion and fall as occurring prior to the creation week. This is because Lucifer’s rebellion prior to the work of the six days does contradict their defective doctrine of six-day creationism. However, Lucifer sinned from the beginning, long before the creation of man, as can be ascertained from Isaiah 14:12-14, Ezekiel 28:12a-19, Jude 6, 1John 3:8, Revelation 12:9. Certainly, all these Scriptures do not suggest that Lucifer sinned after Day Seven so as for the traditional six-day creationists to confidently state that he did not sin before the creation week. Anyway, “… in the light of the first Epistle of John… sin existed at that time, (i.e. during the creation week) but it did not exist in connection with man nor in relation to the creation brought before us in the opening of Genesis and which God pronounced to be ‘very good’. Sin existed already in relation to Satan; he was the original sinner – he ‘sinneth from the beginning’ or ‘outset’, but there was a created scene down here without sin.” (J. Pellatt, op. cit. p.150). Evil already had entered the universe much before the work of the six days. It was characterized by ‘waste’ and ‘emptiness’ and the disappearance of the conditions of life. The original dry land was covered by ‘waters’ and ‘darkness’. God’s work during the first six days, therefore, involved restoring the lost life-conditions. Accordingly, God declares His later works as “very good” thereby distinguishing the newly created good conditions from those that were not good or, rather, were ‘evil’. As otherwise, it wasn’t necessary, in fact it was meaningless for God to specifically declare the newly created life-conditions as ‘good’, if there were not earlier ‘evil’ or ‘very bad’ conditions in sharp contrast to the re-created ‘good’ conditions. Darkness, after all, wasn’t good even at the end of the six-day work. The very fact that God declares His works of the six days as ‘very good’, proves that whatever existed on earth as described in Genesis 1:2 was ‘not really good’ but ‘very bad’ or ‘evil’ in His sight. Accordingly, the chaotic evil conditions on earth in Genesis1:2 could not have been created but were a result of judgment of the ‘evil one’. And it is these ‘evil’ conditions that God takes into account and restores those that were ‘good’ for the habitation of life. Accordingly, He set the earth free from the ‘evil one’. However, God didn’t eradicate all evil or its consequences at that time. _______________________________________________________________________ _

1: C. A. Coates, Miscellaneous Works…Vol. 30, p. 26.

2: ibid, p. 26

#6: Ken Ham argues differently: “__some theorists put the fall of Satan in this supposed period (Genesis 1:1 and 2). But any rebellion of Satan during this gap of time contradicts God’s description of His completed creation on day 6 as all being “very good” (Genesis 1: 31)”. (www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/gap-ruin-reconstructionTheories #fnList_1_22). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The argument is not necessarily biblically warranted, or just. The very fact that God specifically describes His works of the six days as ‘very good’ implies that it was not all well, or ‘very good’ on earth, prior to God’s work of the six days. And, rightly so; as otherwise, God would not separate the light from the darkness; ‘darkness’ wasn’t good! But, in no way ‘darkness’ prior to Genesis 1:3-5 ‘contradict completed creation on day 6 as all being “very good” (Genesis 1: 31).’ As such, rebellion of Satan before Genesis 1:2 need not contradict God’s description of the six-day creation as very good. God states His six-day physical re-creation as ‘very good’ including the serpent created on day six. “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made” (Genesis 3:1). Satan turned serpent and the fallen angels are not a part of the physical creation; as such, there is no contradiction. But, the fact that the serpent was more subtle from the day it was made indicates that Satan was already there on day six. Actually, when was Lucifer created? And when were the angels created? Were they created during the work of the six-days? The angelic host was created before the universe of Genesis 1:1 which in turn was created earlier than the Heavens of Genesis 1:8 and Earth and the Sea of Genesis 1:10.The same is ascertained by the fact that the angels shouted for joy when God laid the foundations of the earth (Job 38:7). Next, as noted by John Mac Arthur, “In eternity past, before men were created, before the earth was formed, worship was taking place. Referring to the angels, Nehemiah 9:6 says, “The heavenly host bows down before Thee.” That is their activity, and it has been their activity from their creation.” 1 On the one hand, we are told the heavenly hosts were created during the creation week, on the other hand they tell us worship by the heavenly host was already taking place in the eternity past? How do we put these two together?

As such, the assumption that the angels must have been created during the creation week of Genesis 1:3-31 is biblically untenable, and falls flat. Was Lucifer ‘sinless and perfect’ when in the Garden of Eden at the time of Adam’s creation? Or was he there already as Satan even before day 1 inhabiting darkness as described in Genesis 1:2 cf. Jude 6? When did Lucifer actually sin? And where was he when he and the angels sinned? Was he in heaven? 2 Or on earth? Did Lucifer sin first and then tempted Eve to commit sin? Did Lucifer sin after Day Seven as assumed by the traditional and young-earth six-day creationists? 3 According to John MacArthur “Satan’s fall must have occurred sometime between the end of creation (marked by that glorious day of rest on day seven) and the events described in Genesis 3 ---which appear to have come very soon after the creation of Adam and Eve, before they had conceived any offspring.” 4 If we were to merge the biblical six-day creationism of Genesis 1:331 with Genesis 1:1, then one could agree with the six-day creationists that Lucifer and his angels sinned soon after Day Seven --- “very soon after the creation of Adam and Eve, before they had conceived any offspring”. However, Lucifer did not sin after Day 7 of the creation week but very much earlier. For, it is clearly evident from Genesis 1:24-25 that the Serpent of Genesis 3:1, symbolic of the Evil One, was created and already there earlier on Day Six. “Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made”. Revelation 12: 9, 20:2 interpret the ‘Serpent’ to be Satan or Devil and 2 Corinthians 11:3 states that it is the serpent who beguiled Eve. Obviously, Lucifer must have had sinned before Day Seven and not after; for he was already there as a subtle Serpent by Day Six. Thus the serpent symbolized willy -nilly Satan from its very creation on Day Six. And since the Serpent was already there to tempt, God commanded Adam soon after his creation on Day Six not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Lucifer and the angels under him sinned when they were on earth and not when they were in heaven. As such, the “Angels who kept not their first state, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness (cf. Genesis 1:2?) unto judgment of the great day.” (Jude

6).The record of Lucifer’s sin is found in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28. These two passages make it clear that Lucifer’s rebellion was not in heaven; nor it could be in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2:8 soon after Day Seven. But the traditional six-day along with young-earth creationists drunk with the mixed wine of traditional concepts will not accept it because it is too painful. In the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13a in which Lucifer was placed some time after his creation, he is symbolized as a beautiful Tree. He was more beautiful than all the other trees in that Garden of the Lord. He was so much beautiful that all the other trees in the Garden envied him (Ezekiel 31:9). And, that was of course long, long, before his fall. Next, in the Garden of Eden of Ezekiel 28:13a in which Lucifer was placed, every precious stone was his covering. He was also given a throne from where he said “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. I will also sit upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the North. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14: 13-14). And that was exactly when he rebelled and sinned against God, when he was on earth. He was not then in heaven. Are we to conclude that Lucifer acted on his pride and sinned when in the Garden of Eden of Genesis 2: 8? If this be the case, then we will have to conclude that Lucifer sinned between day 3 and day 6; for it was on day 3 that the Garden of Eden had to be created and on day 6 we find the subtle serpent symbolizing Satan created along with other beasts. However, it is unimaginable that Lucifer could have sinned in neither such a short time; nor even some time after Day 7or even before Adam and Eve could conceive any offspring. It is not only unimaginable humanly speaking, but it is also theologically and doctrinally unreasonable and most certainly it is biblically inaccurate and therefore untenable. Unimaginable, because Lucifer who was created full of wisdom could not be so foolish so as to end up in sin in such a short time. How long was it when Lucifer sinned before Adam and Eve could conceive any offspring? Wisdom required that Lucifer take time to consider the pros and cons of rebelling against God. Next, he still needed much more time to mobilize the support of other angels. Next, he had to have some idea about God’s throne in heaven before he could ascend up to conquer it assuming he and his angels were on earth soon after their creation.

Doctrinally unreasonable, because God who is in sovereign control would never ever simply allow Lucifer to sin against Him that soon at the cost of compromising His sovereignty; and that too, soon after completing the work of the six days; that is, “soon after the creation of Adam and Eve, before they had conceived any offspring.”

Biblically untenable, because: (i) There is not even a slightest hint or indication in the Bible stating that Lucifer and all the angels were created during the work of the six days. On the other hand, Job 38:7 definitely and conclusively proves that the angels were already created earlier so as to be there to witness the creation of the earth and shout for joy. Therefore, they could not have been created during the six days. After all, earth’s foundation was not laid during any of the six days but long before the creation of the first day. (ii) Lucifer and the angels were in heaven after their creation. They ‘were on the holy mountain of God’. And that was long before the creation of heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1. Next, after the creation of heavens and earth Lucifer and the “non-elect” angels were placed on the ‘habitable part of the earth’. Lucifer was ruling on earth when actually the thought of conquering God popped up in his mind, dwell on it and then ascend into the heavens where God’s Throne is. He thus rebelled and fell. (iii) At one time before his fall, Lucifer was one of the three Cherubs that were anointed and covered God’s throne in the heavens (Ezekiel 28:14). “You were the anointed cherub who covers; I established you”. This could not be really the case if he and the other angels were created during the creation week and were on earth soon after their creation. There wasn’t any God’s throne on earth at any time for Lucifer to cover it as anointed cherub. (iv) Lucifer could not be then upon the holy mountain of God in the heavens, walking up and down in the midst of the stones of fire: (“you were on the holy mountain of God; you walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones” Ezekiel 28: 14), if he were created during the creation week and was on earth soon after that. There wasn’t any holy mountain in the Garden of Eden or anywhere on earth, prior to the establishment of Mount Zion as far

as the revealed biblical record is concerned. (v) Lucifer could not be cast out of the mountain of God as a profane creature at any time after his creation and before he sinned (Ezekiel 28: 16b), if he were created during the creation week and was on earth, soon after that. The truth is he wasn’t in heaven but on earth when he revolted. (vi) There was no throne in the Garden of Eden of Adam’s time for Lucifer to occupy and take charge (Isaiah 14:13b); instead, Adam was given the charge to tend and keep the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2: 15). As a matter of fact, Adam was required to obey God and qualify to rule on earth by defeating Satan - who was there as a subtle serpent. However, Adam succumbed to Satan’s temptation by disobeying God, and brought humanity under Satan’s government ever since then. (vii) There were no nations on earth soon after the creation week which Lucifer (before he became Satan) could weaken (Isaiah 14:12 c) so as to cause them to sin. These very nations on earth that he ruled eventually led to his pride to the point of exalting himself and rebel against God (cf. Ezekiel 31: 8-18). Isaiah is not talking about any other nations on earth whom Lucifer weakened and caused to sin. It should be obvious from the above facts based upon “the clearest account of Satan’s rebellion given in Ezekiel 28:11-19” and “Isaiah 14 that sheds more light on Satan’s fall” that, in no way, Satan’s fall could be said to have occurred soon after Day Seven. Nor it could be stipulated from the above Scriptures that Satan’s fall occurred in heaven. To state as such is to contradict Isaiah 14 which ‘sheds more light on Satan’s fall’ wherein Lucifer states: “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High”. It was at this time when iniquity was found in him. Before his fall, Lucifer had to be on earth from where he did ascend into the heavens so as to ‘literally usurp the throne of God’ in the heavens. It is only then from where he fell even as the same was witnessed by Christ. Satan could not appear ‘suddenly and unexpectedly in Genesis 3:1’ from nowhere. He was on earth as a rebel angel cast out of heaven back to earth during which the chaos on earth surrounded by darkness was the result. If we are to carefully exegete the account of Satan’s rebellion in Ezekiel 28:11-19 along with that of Isaiah 14:12-15 then it becomes pretty

difficult to assign Satan’s fall ‘sometime between end of creation and the events described in Genesis 3’. Traditional Six-day Creationists have no option but to come to terms with the above biblical facts which cannot be denied. As such, they have no scriptural reason to reject “pre-Adamic gap theology”! To reject the biblically-based ‘pre-historical pre-adamic gap theology relating to facts that can be only accounted for as having occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3’ is to unwarily reject truth having its roots in biblical revelation. Sound wisdom requires that we accept the plain truth manifested in the light of the above and other biblical facts highlighted hereinafter. Accepting the biblically-based “gap theology” doesn’t mean one should be converted into an ‘old-age creationist’ or become a ‘progressive creationist’. The age of the earth or that of the universe is not a biblical issue. It should not be an issue seeing that the Bible is totally silent about it. One may reasonably be satisfied with either an old-age earth or a young earth once we come to terms with the theological relevance of biblical events that occurred before the creation of time. However, we cannot overlook geological and cosmological evidence relating to the age of the universe. ‘Biblical gap theology’ basically deals with and focuses upon events relating to the ‘chaos’ in ‘timelessness’ as having theological and evangelical relevance. Could be there no consequences on earth, if not in the heavens, of Lucifer’s sin? If Adam’s sin could have its consequences and bring a curse on earth how grave should be the consequences of Lucifer’s sin? Moreover, along with Lucifer the angels on earth and pre-adamite men also sinned. Undoubtedly, the conditions on earth as described in Genesis 1:2 are of judgment and cannot be of original creation, which was perfect. And, as it has been proved above, Lucifer was on earth from where he sinned resulting in chaos and darkness and a flooded earth. Accordingly, the imaginary “gap” against the background of “timelessness” comprising of the “white space” between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 covering the pre-Adamite life and the “black space” between Genesis 1:2 and 1:3 covering the chaotic conditions with a universal flood and darkness on earth (Genesis 1:2) is assuredly a biblical reality – a fact and not a ‘theory’, having theological and evangelical implications and connotations.

As such, “The first verse of the Bible is a separate and independent affirmation”. The use of “AND” in verse 2, is “as independent of verse 1 as to time and subject matter as all the other separate acts of God. In fact “and” is used 153 times in Genesis 1 and 2 to separate the 102 recorded independent acts of God.” (J. Finis Dake, op. cit. p.76). However, it is not revealed in the Bible as to how long it was before God executed His work of the six days. As stated by Charles A. Coates, “We do not know what length of time elapsed between those first two verses; possibly the long periods of which the geologists and biologists speak might come in there” 5 Anyway, it is not necessary to know nor can we ever know as to how long the period was between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Nevertheless, Scriptures leave no doubt as to the existence of prehistorical, pre-Adamite life on earth. Next, it is scripturally also clear that Lucifer ruled on earth prior to Genesis 1:2 and that he eventually sinned and fell. Lucifer sinned in the ‘Beginning’ (1 John 3:8b). Consequently, the chaos of Genesis 1:2 is the curse upon earth, evidenced by fossil record. If ever there was any biological evolution then it could be only prior to Genesis 1:2. The fact that life existed prior to the works of Genesis 1:3-31 is a biblically based reality. However, we are not told in the Bible as to how pre-adamic life was created, or whether any evolutionary process was set in operation. The “Book of Stone” has much to tell us. Genesis 1:2 describes the changed conditions on an otherwise once perfect original earth created in the eternity past. We find the earth ‘waste and void’, flooded with waters and covered with darkness. These chaotic conditions on an earlier perfect earth are not of direct creation, but of a later judgment; a ‘primeval catastrophe associated with the rebellion of Satan against God’. _________________________________________________________ 1: John MacArthur, Jr. The Ultimate Priority, Moody Press, USA, 1983, p.24. 2: John MacArthur, The Battle for the Beginning, op.cit. p. 200; 3: Ken Ham, ibid.. 4: John MacArthur, ibid, p.200.

5: C.A.Coates,An Outline of Genesis, op.cit. p.3 6: W. Scott, op. cit; p. 17. 7: ibid p.16.

#7: “While it is reasonable to assume that God’s creation referred to in Genesis 1:1 was ‘perfect,’ this fact is not actually so stated until after v.10 … mentioned again in Genesis 1:12,18, 21,25, and 31. In the light of these citations, it would be difficult to maintain that God’s creative work in Genesis 1:2 ….was not really ‘good’; As for the reference to the earth’s being ‘waste and void’ (Heb. tohu wabohu) in Genesis 1:2, it is not altogether clear whether this was a subsequent and resultant condition after a primeval catastrophe, ---possibly associated with the rebellion of Satan against God. It must be understood, however, that there is no explicit statement anywhere in Scripture that the primeval fall of Satan was accompanied by a total ruin of earth itself; it is simply an inference or conjecture, which may seem persuasive to some Bible students but be somewhat unconvincing to others.” (Gleason L. Archer, Jr. op.cit. p. 65-66). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is not at all necessary to reasonably assume that ‘God’s creation referred to in Genesis 1:1 was perfect’. It was, indeed, certainly perfect and beautiful seeing that whatever God creates and does, it is always perfectly beautiful. As such, it had to be reasonably perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4) and beautiful (Ecclesiastes 3:11) in consonance with God’s glorious perfect character. As a matter of fact, the Holy Spirit did not even see it fitting or necessary to qualify God’s creation in Genesis1:1 as ‘good’ or ‘very good’ or ‘perfect’. There wasn’t anything imperfect as yet. It was expected that it would be well understood to be as such by those who would know God as an Intelligent Designer who creates everything perfect and beautiful to bring Him glory, honor and pleasure (Revelation 4:11). So, why then reasonably assume it was somehow perfect? It was certainly perfect! However, the chaotic condition on earth in Genesis 1:2 was not good at all because it was not ‘God’s creative work’ but a consequence of sin. And, it is from the chaotic conditions that God set forth His hand to restore the original good life-promoting conditions on earth. As such, God saw it necessary to distinguish His six-day creative work in Genesis 1:3-31

as ‘very good’. This was necessary because it was additional work to restore the ‘goodness’ of God’s original creation (Genesis 1:1) that was lost subsequent to Lucifer’s rebellion resulting in chaos and darkness on earth (Genesis 1:2). The very fact that God after restoring the original conditions designates them as very good proves that the conditions on earth in Genesis 1:2 were in no way good but evil. Period! As otherwise, it would be of no spiritual significance at all for God to declare His own works of the six days as “very good” seeing that His works are always very good. As such, God declares His works of the six days as ‘good’ so as to differentiate the same from the existing satanic ‘evil’. Genesis 1:2 is not at all a ‘creative work’. To describe it as a ‘creative work’ is a contradiction in terms. There was nothing ‘creative’ and ‘good’ in Genesis 1:2 as compared to all that was created and declared ‘very good’ (Genesis1:3-31). And, when the chaos is compared to a perfect creation in Genesis 1:1 only the imperfection of chaos and darkness becomes obvious as is briefly described in Genesis 1:2. Next, God is not the Author of chaos or confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33). “…the earth was waste and empty, and darkness was on the face of the deep. This was certainly not as it was created – for we are expressly told that ‘not as waste [the same word as in Genesis1:2] did He create it’ (Isaiah 45:18). As such, a solemn change had come about between the first and second verses of Genesis 1” 1 The conditions in Genesis 1:2 were: “As to the earth, it became (Hebrew: hayah) formless (tohuw) and void (bohu) and darkness was upon the face of the deep”. Now ‘tohu’ signifies a ‘wasteland, a desolate place’ and ‘bohu’ means ‘empty or void’; which means before the earth became a wasteland and empty, it had to be a fruitful land. These chaotic conditions are the same as in Jeremiah 4:23-26 and Isaiah 34:11which are descriptive of judgmental outcomes. As a matter of fact, as it has been succinctly pointed out by John MacArthur tohu and bohu, “picture God as architect of judgment, using a plumb line of tohu, which is kept taut by weights made of bohu.” 2. As such, Genesis 1:2 is surely a display of judgmental outcomes. Next, in the Scriptures, the sea is a symbol of the Devil and his power. Obviously, the original sea symbolizing Lucifer’s power broke forth the limit that God hath set upon it. As a result, typifying Satan’s rebellion, the sea advanced and engulfed the entire earth; so that, at the time of re-creation,

God had to set bounds upon it. “The waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they fled; at the voice of Your thunder they hastened away” (Psalms 104:6-9). This Scripture doesn’t refer to Noah’s flood during which the waters were not rebuked but gradually receded in the course of time. As such, Psalm 104:6-9 definitely refers to a pre-Adamic flood on earth. When God first created the primeval earth the waters were in one place forming a vast ocean: “When He drew a circle on the face of the deep, when He established the clouds above, when He strengthened the fountains of the deep, when He assigned to the sea its limit, so that the waters would not transgress His command, when He marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside Him as a master craftsman; and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him.” (Proverbs 8:27-30). Proverbs 8:27-30 doesn’t describe ‘creation with words that perfectly parallel’ the Genesis 1: 6-10 account. It refers to the original creation ‘when God marked out the foundations of the earth’ (Proverbs 8:27b), when He ‘assigned to the sea its limit’ symbolizing Satan’s limited power well under God’s control. It is the limit that God set upon the sea in the beginning (Proverbs 8: 29) that it broke forth (Job 38:8, 10; Genesis 1:2) symbolically portraying Lucifer’s rebellion. As such, God had to rebuke the sea for breaking its decreed limit (Psalms 104:7). And in response to such rebuke, the waters fled; at the voice of God’s thunder they hastened away (Psalms 104:6-9) to their original place (Job 38:8-11) causing the dry land to appear again as in Genesis 1:9-10 in obedience to God’s command. Moreover, “The waters covering the earth in a flood as a result of Lucifer’s rebellion were ‘more devastating and lasted longer than Noah’s flood, for it destroyed even vegetation (Genesis 2:5-6; Jeremiah 4:23-25), while the one year and 17 days of Noah’s flood did not. (Genesis 8:11, 22)” 3 Genesis 1:2 is a precise description of chaotic conditions on earth which were a consequence of Lucifer’s sin. Both ‘darkness’ and the ‘waters’ covered the earth depicting satanic ‘take-over’ of the earth. “Thus the sea may symbolize the Abyss, the source of demonic powers that are opposed to God” (Revelation 9:1). This view agrees with the OT images of the sea as the origin of the satanic sea monsters (the dragon).” 4

And, no wonder, we do not find the sea and darkness any more in the new earth (Revelation 21:1) once the Devil is cast into the fire. As such, “The sea – the source of the satanic beast (Revelation 13:1) and the place of the dead (Revelation 20:13) will be gone. The sea serves as an archetype with connotations of evil. Therefore, no trace of evil in any form will be present in the new creation.” 5 “In Scripture, all instances of obscuring the sun and bringing consequent darkness, and the two past cases of universal floods are revealed to be the result of judgment, not creation.(Genesis 6:8-8:22; Exodus 10:21-23; Isaiah 5:30; Jeremiah 4.23-26). All predictions of such future darkness depict judgment (Matthew 8.12; 24.29-31; Revelation 6.1217; 8.12; 9.2; 16.10; Isaiah 13.10; Joel 2.30-3.16; Amos 5.18-20). Could we say that Genesis 1:2 is an exception and the only place in Scripture where darkness and universal flood on the earth are not an act of judgment? If then, as in other cases, these are the result of judgment, Genesis 1:2 definitely proves there was a pre-Adamite world which was destroyed by flood.” 6 There is sufficient Scriptural evidence to prove the primeval fall of Satan was accompanied by ruin on earth. It is not simply an inference or mere conjecture that seems to be persuasive only to some. All one has to do is to read Isaiah 13:10, Joel 2:31, Rev.16:10 and it will be obvious that what is predicted to happen in the end is declared in the beginning itself. How long the changed state in Genesis1:2 lasted exactly we are not told because it is not essential for us to know and no man can find out nor is there any need to guess. “The secret things belong to God”! So, why guess? All we can say is that “those huge rocks, from 15 to 20 miles deep, (were) formed of accumulated and countless millions of particles of matter, and arranged in successional layers of formation periods of time as vast as to defy human calculation.” (Walter Scott, op. cit. p.16). The huge rocks of remote ages are known to have formed the bed of the ocean, and others of dry land, covered with rich luxuriant vegetation, serpents and reptiles of enormous length, birds with giant wings, giant animals and mammals that, perhaps, looked like human beings over whom Lucifer was given dominion. And all of these turned into “fossilized fuel stone” in the course of time, having been subjected to the pressures of a sudden disastrous catastrophe. The fossil fuel cannot be accounted for with reference to any life on earth since Genesis 1:3-31; or, since the universal flood of Genesis 6.

Even otherwise, the conditions on earth as Genesis 1:2 states can not be accounted for other than that being of judgment. And it was a judgment resulting from Lucifer’s rebellion and that of the angels and pre-adamite nations that sinned with him. This is very well covered by the fact that preAdamic men, created perfect, under Lucifer’s influence, allowed pride to bring their downfall (Ezekiel 31: 8, 9 read with verse 14, in keeping with the Law of Double Reference) and, therefore, their consequent judgment. Briefly, “Geology clearly… establishes the truth of a creation prior to Adam, but no conflict need thereby be apprehended between science and the Mosaic or rather Divine account of creation. The first verse of Genesis refers to the original creation of heavens and earth, and is an independent statement entirely apart from what follows; the second verse shows the earth in a ruined state, yet, at a period prior to man; while from verses 3-31 we have the earth got ready in six literal days as a dwelling for man.” 7 From the Genesis 1 record, “In verse 2 we find the earth a scene of disorder and darkness. It is in such a scene that God’s movements and activities are presented as taking place – activities which come to an end on the sixth day, so that on the seventh day God rested.” 8 Accordingly, the ‘Gap Theology’ is undoubtedly biblically relevant; and God’s phased restorative work of the six days is evangelically typical and very significant. Evangelically and theologically speaking, subsequent to Genesis 1:2, “In ‘the earth ... that is waste and empty’, with ‘darkness ... on the face of the deep’, we behold a scene in which God could find no pleasure or rest -a striking figure of the state of man as fallen under the power of sin, Satan, and death, and without the knowledge of God. But it is blessed to see that, though God could not rest in such a state of things, He did move and work there. ‘The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters’”. The Hebrew word “rachaph”, meaning “hovering, to brood, relax,” is translated ‘fluttered” in Deuteronomy 32:11 and ‘shake” in Jeremiah 23: 9. “The word used is suggestive of affectionate interest, for it is the same as in Deuteronomy 32:11, ‘As the eagle stirred up its nest, hovered over its young’. It has something to say of the solicitude of divine love which would put forth its activities where all was ruin in order to bring about conditions which could be pronounced 'very good', and in which God could rest. “Before the work of the six days began there was this primary movement of the Spirit of God. In a fallen and ruined world, where all have come under

sin and death, there must be a movement of the Holy Spirit in the souls of men as the starting point of any result for God. The new birth must be effected; otherwise divine light would shine in vain. There is nothing in man that God can trust until men are born anew. Of the natural man it is said, ‘There is not a righteous man, not even one; there is not the man that understands, there is not one that seeks after God ..., Romans 3:10 - 18. “Therefore God has to prepare the way for divine light to come in by that mysterious operation which cannot be traced. It is needful that ye should be born anew. The wind blows where it will, and thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and where it goes: thus is every one that is born of the Spirit’, John 3:7, 8. “The preaching of the gospel would effect nothing if God did not move sovereignly in the souls of men by His Spirit causing them to be born anew. Man, the fallen sinner, is, as such, hopelessly lost, for he does not desire God, and when the light of God in Christ is brought to him he rejects it.” 9 In a way, we find God’s Spirit hovering ‘upon the face of the waters’ as if to ‘incubate’ the waters covering the earth, in a prelude to bring forth fruit of the next phase of God’s creative acts, culminating in the creation of new men - Adam and Eve, in the Likeness and in the Image of God.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

1: Charles A.Coates, op.cit. p.2 2: John MacArthur, op. cit., p. 74 3: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p.76. 4: Frank E. Gaebelein, General Editor, The Exposi tor’s Bible Commentary, Regency Reference Library, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 1981; p. 323. 5: ibid. p. 593. 6: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p.79. 7: Walter Scott, op. cit. p. 200.

8: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p.2. 9: C. A. Coates, An Outline of Genesis, op. cit. p. 3.

*******

Phase Two, presents the six-day work of restoration of conditions of life necessary for the habitation of flora and fauna, followed by the creation of Adam and Eve. As a matter of fact, the work of the six days is not a work of direct creation; rather, God sends forth His Spirit and renews the face of the earth (Psalms 104:30) and restores the original conditions. As such, it will be noticed that each day’s work of the six days is marked out and distinguished from each other and also from the earlier work of instant creation by the phrase “And God said”! Next, it could be concluded that each day’s work was predominantly redemptive and restorative as is obvious from the express commands given to the cosmic forces of darkness, under Satan’s control, to “Let Things Be” or to “Happen” so as to liberate the earth from being enslaved under satanic chaotic conditions and subsequently restore the original life conditions for the sustenance of new life on earth. From an analysis of the nature of the six days’ work, it becomes obvious that these works, more or less, bring into existence what was originally there in the original creation but got destroyed once Lucifer, his angels and the pre-adamite men sinned. It was a work of liberation or redemption of the physical creation that was taken away captive by Satan subsequent to his rebellion. God deliberately planned to carry out His work of physical redemption through six days so as to typify His work of spiritual redemption through the course of six millennial days. As otherwise, it was not necessary for God specifically to work through some six days but create everything instantly by fiat just as in the beginning.

The redemptive and restorative aspects of Godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s physical works of the six days are dealt with in detail in the section to follow, without meaning to spiritualize in any manner. At the same time, the evangelically predictive nature of the work of the six days, which distinguishes it as a totally different work from that of the instant work of original creation by fiat, is accordingly addressed next, affirming a radical evangelical theology of creation.

Phase Two

Creation in the Realm of Time

Second Phase of Creation The Weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Work Biblical Six-Day Creationism (Genesis 1:3-31; 2:1-4a) Creation of the Sabbath The Origin of the Seven -Day Week

A Literal Seven-Day Week

THE WEEK’S WORK

“From the chaos of the first earth (Gen.1:2) until its readjustment (Gen.2:2) were seven days¾ a week’s work. This is not a record of creation, but of the readjustment of the chaos for the following eon. There are three distinct creations recorded in the first chapter of Genesis. Each was perfect, as all God’s creations perforce must be. The first included the heavens and the earth. Isaiah tells us (Isa.45:18) that the earth was not created “without form” or “vain” (Heb. theu, in both passages). It became so through Satan’s interference. The six days’ work was occupied principally with making it fit to be inhabited again. This was a material creation. The next creation was on the fifth day (v.21). Living souls are created in the waters and in the air. The third creation was humanity (v.27). The bulk of subsequent revelation deals with man’s readjustment after Satan had contrived his overthrow, just as the six days dealt with the restoration of the earth. Seven periods, or “days” in the moral history of mankind, each commencing with an “evening” and ending with a “morning,” corresponding to the week’s work demanded for the material restoration of the earth. The material is a parable of the moral. Each of the Divine activities on the six days pictures the work of a period of earth’s history. It is a delight to thus trace God’s handiwork and find the program, as it were, all laid down at the very start.” 1

_____________________________________________________________ 1: A. E.Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A.

CREATION WEEK The WORK of the SIX DAYS and the SABBATH The second phase of God’s works of creation is described in Genesis 1:3-31 and Genesis 2:1-4a, 7, 21-24. It introduces the creation of a literal seven-day week during which the next events were brought about by God in six literal days followed by Rest on the Seventh Day. Genesis 1:3-31through Genesis 2:1-4a is the first ever compact proto-evangelical biblical message proclaimed through relevant archetypical object-lessons of the true biblical six-day creationism culminating with the Seventh Day Sabbath Rest. It portrays prototype works with symbolic message loaded with evangelical connotations pointing to God’s spiritual works for man’s salvation through the course of six thousand years followed by a millennial spiritual rest. It’s rather a mystery that the traditional six-day creationists have failed to capture the essence of proto-evangelical truth of the true six-day biblical creationism in Genesis 1:3-31 account. Or else, instead of aligning with the truth, they continue to hold on to the erroneous belief in a ‘physical creation in six days’ by clubbing together all the Scriptures in Genesis 1:131 contrary to the plain biblical revelation of true scriptural creationism. But then, was there any need for an all-powerful, sovereign, CreatorGod to utter specific commands through the course of six days, beginning with Genesis 1:3? Anyway, He did command to bring to fruition conditions on earth that are conducive to the sustenance of physical life. The very fact that God issued commands (cp. 2 Corinthians 4:6a) to bring into existence life-sustaining conditions on earth beginning with the work of the first day in Genesis 1:3 differentiates it from His earlier works of creation.

After all, in the beginning, God simply willed or desired it and the whole universe consisting of the heavens and earth came into existence. Thus it was created by fiat. It had to be a perfect and beautiful creation. To think of it as otherwise and or to state that the lifeless chaotic condition described in Genesis 1:2 as if it were the actual created imperfect state of the original creation is to remain enslaved to contradictions and doctrinal errors. As such, in no way the actual work of the six days includes in it the original creation of Genesis 1:1. This fact automatically rules out the assumption that the chaotic conditions of Genesis 1:2 are a work of creation. Moreover, to state that the barren chaotic conditions on earth as if the same were of the actual original creation in need of development through the course of six days is to impugn the character of God. The fact is that God’s works are always perfect. His planned creative works are always perfect, complete and beautiful requiring no further development. The very fact that God issued specific commands such as “God said: Let…Be” on each of the six days of re-creation/renewal (cf. Psalms 104:30) against the background and circumstances of Genesis 1:2, indicates that the lifeless barren conditions on earth briefly described in Genesis 1:2 are not of original creation. As such, these are later judgmental outcomes subsequent to the initial perfect creation next subjected to bondage and decay. As otherwise, it was of no particular theological significance at all for an all powerful God to issue such commands through the course of the six days. God could simply will it, and bring it all into existence instantly by fiat. However, God set His hand to restore order out of chaos in six days, by giving specific commands to “Let… ‘things’… Be”. “Let is used 14 times in Genesis 1 and 1,497 times elsewhere in the Bible, and in no case is an original creative act implied. The sense is made appear or made visible, expressing permission and purpose in connection with already existing things. The light, firmament, waters, earth, darkness, and all other things mentioned here were already in existence but had been thrown into chaos, and the laws which previously governed them had been made void because of sin. Now, in restoration to perfection, God merely commands and the sun gives light again, as it did all through Lucifer’s kingdom (Jeremiah 4:23-26; 2 Peter 3:5-7). Thus the light of days 1, 2, 3 came from the sun as has been the case every day since. Cp. let in Genesis 13:8; 18:4; 24:14-18; Matthew 7:4; 13:30; 27:22; John 14:1; Philippians 2:5 for the true sense.” 1 And. rather than create it all instantly by fiat again, God set forth His

hand to carry on His next phase of creation through a course of deliberately planned specific works through six prophetically meaningful days. At His appointed time, through a planned period of six days God first realigned the heavens and refashioned the chaotic earth. Next, God commanded the earth and the sea to bring forth new forms of life; both flora and fauna after their original kind on the renewed earth, so as to make it habitable for Man whom He would next create. Unlike the pre-historical Pre-Adamite Men who were perhaps created after their own kind, this time, however, God created Man after His own Image and Likeness, as the pinnacle of His creative works. All these works, which God could otherwise produce in an instant by fiat, instead were carried out in the course of six literal days. And then, the weekly Sabbath was created by God’s resting on the seventh day. God’s purpose in doing so was to create time, as we measure it on earth in seven-day weeks. The phrase “from the beginning of the creation” used in the New Testament (Mark 10:6, Romans 1:20, etc) obviously refers to the entire period in ‘timelessness’, from the beginning of the creation of the heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 to the completion of the seven-day week. This first week marks the actual beginning of time and a weekly cycle. Who invented the seven-day week? On what basis the seven-day week could be accounted for historically since the beginning of human history? The theory of evolution has no answers other than to depict the seven-day week as a human invention of no particular significance. However, the biblical account of six-day creation crowned with God’s seventh-day rest or the Sabbath marks the beginning of the weekly unit of time ever since. Accordingly, “Days and nights, lunar months, and solar years, are natural divisions of time; and may be easily supposed or accounted for, by the diurnal revolution of the earth, the appearance of the moon, and the annual course of the sun; but weeks of seven days cannot have the shadow of a reason assigned for their observance, except on the ground of the primeval institution of the Sabbath on the seventh day of the creation, and handed down by tradition to all parts of the world.” 2 As a biblically-based historical fact, the recurring week of seven days remarkably stands as a mute testimony vindicating God’s works of the first six days followed by the seventh-day rest. It is a perennial reminder pointing to God’s six-day work of re-creation, notwithstanding man-made clumsy theories of evolution. As has been appropriately expressed, in the first

creation week we come across “The very first use of ‘sevens’ to denote time is found in Genesis chapters one and two. That very first group of sevens has delineated the days of the week since the beginning of human history. However, in the course of time, and down through the ages, “Man certainly has messed with the years and the calendars (so no man today can know EXACTLY what year it really is), but that seven-day week system has survived from Adam until today. No wonder - it was ordained by God from the beginning of this creation.” 3 The seven-day week figuratively set forth a time frame for Lucifer or the Devil to carry on his soul-damaging, spiritually destructive work for six millennial days. At the end of six millennial days, Satan will be forced to rest during the seventh millennial day. During this time God will establish His Kingdom on earth and reign through Christ and the saints. As such, the work of the six days and the seventh day Sabbath are prophetic in nature. In other words, “The bulk of subsequent revelation deals with man’s readjustment after Satan had contrived his overthrow, just as the six days dealt with the restoration of the earth. Seven periods, or “days” in the moral history of mankind, each commencing with an “evening” and ending with a “morning,” corresponding to the week’s work demanded for the material restoration of the earth. The material is a parable of the moral. Each of the Divine activities on the six days pictures the work of a period of earth’s history. It is a delight to thus trace God’s handiwork and find the program, as it were, all laid down at the very start.” 4 Logically, the works of the six days do not include the creation of the Heavens and Earth of Genesis1:1.The same were already created instantly, by fiat. The very nature of the work of the six days culminating in the Sabbath Rest demonstrates God’s decreed planned intervention to re-create life on earth that was rendered ‘void and empty’. It is figurative of God’s spiritual work of six millennial days. It was a physical work that was, in a way, prompted by Satan’s rebellion and its consequences and during which re-creative period conditions for human life were restored. Again, it is a Work of God to nullify the works of the devil. It involved the execution of His foreordained decreed plan for mankind in spite of satanic opposition. It included first the physical work of re-ordering a disordered creation resulting from Lucifer’s rebellion followed by the

Sabbath day of physical Rest. And, therefore next, the six-day work is figurative of the spiritual work of six millennial days basically against the nefarious evil works of Satan who will end up in exile during the Millenium. As already stated, the phased Work of the Six Days is in addition to the original work of creation of Genesis 1:1. It rules out the traditional belief of six-day creationism. Moreover, the very nature of the works of the first six days is loaded with evangelical typology. And this theological fact in itself establishes the pre-historical fact of an earlier original perfect creation by fiat (Genesis1:1) prior to the works of the six days. Lucifer’s rebellion and judgment resulted in chaos caused by universal flood and darkness (Genesis 1:2). It necessitated God’s decreed six-day planned intervention (Genesis 1:3-31). The purpose of the spiritual work is the creation of the New Man in Christ. In view of what is highlighted thus far it can be boldly stated that the Traditional Six-Day Creationism and its modern versions such as YoungEarth Creationism and related Theories of Creationism as well as the DayAge Old and or Progressive Creationism, etc., cannot stand the test of Biblical Truth relating to Creation. Biblical Creation Truth is given ‘here a little and there a little’ in the Bible and the same should be properly interpreted without any bias resulting from traditional hide-bound erroneous concepts. ________________________________________________________________________________________________

1: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p. 76. 2: Joseph S. Exell, The Biblical Illustrator, Genesis, Vol.I Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA; p.123. 3: The Sevens (7) of the Bible in Time and Nature 4: A. E.Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A.

TRUE BIBLICAL SIX-DAY CREATIONISM (Genesis 1:3-31; 2:1-4a)

The Work of the First Day “And God said, ‘Let there be light: and there was light’. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day” (Genesis 1:3-5). ******* It was all dark on earth! As stated in Genesis 1:2, darkness was ‘upon the face of the deep’ upon the waters covering the earth. Obviously, there must have been light in the heavens, even as God dealt with darkness on earth by simply stating ‘Let there be light’ on earth. As such, the first thing in the creation week that God did was to command the already existing Light in the heavens to shine forth through and out of darkness on the earth. That is, God caused the earlier existing light that was obscured to shine forth displacing darkness on one side of the rotating earth for a particular period and called this bright period Day. There was an equivalent period of darkness on the opposite side which He called Night. Thus, day and night periods were set in motion on earth. Accordingly, God set in operation laws to regulate recurring cyclical periods of ‘evenings’ alternating with periods of ‘mornings’ (Genesis 1:3-5) on each side of the earth even as the earth spins around its axis . John MacArthur states “What form this light took is not clear.

Whether it was merely an ethereal glow or a light that emanated from a specific place is nowhere stated. Actual lights, such as the sun, moon, and stars, were not created until the fourth day. These were permanent light bearers. But light itself, the reality of light, was created on day one. And instantly it separated day from night.” 1 But the very fact of recurring day and night periods from Day One itself and ever since, to be precise, demand an earth spinning around its axis reflecting the light of the sun forming the daytime and accordingly, regular cyclical day and night periods. The earth, from the very first day, had to be in its correct orbit so as to rotate around an existing sun for the day and night periods to be in full operation. As otherwise, the phenomena of recurring day and night periods cannot be explained. It would be scientifically inappropriate to account for the existence of the first three days in the absence of any solar system, as such. It could not be any different the first three days before the sun was actually made to appear brightly on the fourth day. A cloudy sky (Gen. 1:7), therefore, must have been cleared following a downpour (Genesis 2:5-6). With the earth spinning around its axis and as a consequence of this spinning motion, “the sun appears to move from east to west, causing day and night on earth. The ‘day’ side of the earth faces the sun, and the ‘night’ side faces away from the sun. As the earth spins eastward, some parts of the earth move from the night side to the day side. People who live in these regions see the sun ‘come up’ in the east. Other parts of the earth move from the day side to the night side. People living there see the sun ‘set’ in the west” 2. It is unscientific to imagine that this pattern of day and night periods the first three days and until the fourth day was due to some other factors, not regulated by earth’s spinning around its axis without facing any sun for the occurrence of cyclical ‘day and night’ periods during the first three days. Some modern day adherents of Traditional Six-Day Creationism pose and answer their own question “How could there be light before the sun was created?” as follows: “How could the light exist on Day 1 before the sun was created on Day 4? “First, realize that light can exist without the sun. Candles, fires, flashlights, glowworms, car headlights, matches, and many other objects give off light without the sun. All that was needed for light to exist on the first day was a light source . The sun and moon are light-givers, but they are not the only light-givers.

“Light energy first: God activated light energy first, then great masses of material were gathered together and set burning in complex chemical and nuclear reactions, and the sun and moon were created to serve as light bearers, or light-givers, for the earth. Second, in the book of John, chapter 1, we are told that Christ is the light of the world, and “the world was made by Him” (John 1:10). This is true not only in a spiritual sense, but also in a physical sense. At the time of creation, God was the light source. “This may have been through the massive energy He used to create the cosmos, through the marvelous electromagnetic force system with short-wave radiation (ultraviolet, x-rays, etc.) and long-wave radiation (infra-red, radio waves, etc.), or through some other force God created . God is light: In 1 John 1:5 we are told that “God is light” and in Him is no darkness at all.

“Dr. Henry Morris made an interesting point about this passage when he said that because God is light, dwelling in light (1 Timothy 6:16), He did not have to create light. But God did create darkness (Isaiah 45:7) “as the initial state of the unformed and uninhabited earth (Genesis 1:2).” He created the primeval darkness to form a division between day and night. Physically, God is the light of shining glory. Intellectually, He is the light of truth. Morally, He is the light of holiness . He is also the light of life (John 3 1:4), and of true guidance (John 8:12).” “Was not light already existing?” The answer is easy. Light may exist independently of the sun. There is, e.g., the light of phosphorescence, the light of electricity, the light of incandescence, the light of chemism, atom clashing with atom, and 4 discharging light at every collision.”

Now, even after a simple cursory reading of the above answers any unbiased person will be left wandering as to what is the real answer to the Question: “How could the light exist on Day 1 before the sun was created on Day 4?” Was it merely an ethereal glow? Or did God activate light energy first and then let great masses of matter ‘burn in complex chemical and nuclear reactions’ until the fourth day? And, is it after that did God create the sun, moon and the stars on the fourth day? Or did Christ, the ‘Light of the world’ became the ‘Source of Light’ in a ‘physical sense’ at the ‘time of creation’? Since we are told in 1 John 1:5 that ‘God is Light’ are we to conclude that ‘Physically, God is the light of shining glory’ and therefore, ‘because God is light, dwelling in light (1 Timothy 6:16), He did not have to create light’? But, in Isaiah 45: 6, 7 He also says that He did create light as well as darkness not necessarily on the first day but even much prior to that of the

first day. As such, it is wrong to state that just because ‘God is Light, dwelling in light’ ‘He did not have to create light’. But He did create light before Day 1 and, as such, light was in existence long before the first Day. What God actually did on the first day was to command the existing light to re-appear out of darkness. The light that was there prior to the first day was rather obscured by thick clouds causing total darkness as described in Genesis 1:2. It is also unbiblical to state that ‘Physically, God is the light of shining glory’. God is essentially Spirit and His Light is spiritual and not physical. Are we to conclude that when God gave the command to “Let there be light” He commanded ‘His light of shining glory’ to shine forth out of darkness in the form of some kind of physical light? Without a shadow of doubt, it may be convincingly stated that when God created the heavens and earth in the beginning as in Genesis 1:1, the stellar heavens must have been surely shining brightly with physical light. It is unscriptural to assume the “heavens” of Genesis were all in darkness. Accordingly, the sun when first created had to emit light and its light along with the light of the rest of the stellar heavens had to shine upon the earth. As such, when initially created, the sun was not a ‘dark body’; if it were so, then the stellar heavens created in the beginning also had to be dark and so also the whole universe could be said to be in total darkness. But the fact that physical light was already there is obvious from 2 Corinthians 4:6: “God who commanded the Light to shine out of darkness.” As such, Light had to be there so as for God to command it to shine on earth out of the prevailing darkness. God did not ‘create’ Light on the first day. Spiritual light was already there in God’s Kingdom; physical light must have been on earth from the very beginning of the creation of the heavens (Genesis1:1) which includes our solar system and the sextillions of stars. Anyway, total darkness in the original perfect creation is biblically unimaginable. It is unimaginable that God would create universe with starry heavens without any physical light; the very word ‘star’ implies a shining brilliant object. The original heavens and the earth God says He created in the beginning must have been definitely shining bright with sextillions of stars. A perfect God who is LIGHT would essentially create stellar heavens shining with physical light symbolizing His spiritual light. After all, even before the physical creation of Genesis 1:1, God created the Angelic Hosts. The Angelic hosts or Heavenly Hosts are also called bright shining stars.

Lucifer himself is called the Morning Star and his name means “Light Bearer”. However, once Lucifer sinned, the physical light on earth was cut off by obscuring it from its heavenly sources. As a result, the whole earth was covered with darkness. It is symbolic of Lucifer’s judgment in losing spiritual light once having lost the brightness of his original wisdom by sinning. The anti-type of this judgment is also meted out to Pharaoh, King of Egypt, wherein God says: “I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark, I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light; All the bright lights in heaven will I make dark over thee, and set darkness upon thy land, saith the Lord GOD” (Ezekiel 32:7-8). Obviously, that was what God did as described in Genesis 1:2, soon after Lucifer’s fall. God’s commanding the light to shine out of darkness on the first day has rich imagery and spiritual symbolism conveying evangelical truths. It portrays the appearance of Gospel Light subsequent to Adam’s sin that brought him and humanity under spiritual darkness of sin. The Bible itself interprets here a little and there a little the rich spiritual symbolism, though briefly. As such, in the first millennial day itself, we find the spiritual light of God’s promises of a coming Savior shining brightly dispelling the spiritual darkness in the hearts of believing men, of old. “Light is made first. Not heavenly light, but earthly. It may need faith for some to accept the fact of light on earth before either sun or moon, but the moral counterpart is easily comprehended. Before God revealed Himself from heaven, He had written righteousness upon men’s hearts so that their conscience testified as to what was right or wrong. This period begins with the judgment of Adam and coincides with the economy of conscience” 5. And in our times, “God commanding light is very significant of the bringing in of Christ, for all true light that has shone for man has been the light of Christ. All through the Old Testament the light was shining more and more in promise, but now that Christ has come, and has died and risen, and been glorified at God’s right hand, there is perfect day. ‘It is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ,’ (2 Corinthians 4:6). That is the full glory of the light. “But the light was ‘good’ from the very outset: how good, for example, was the light of Genesis 3:15 and 22:18! “When light was brought in ‘God divided between the light and the darkness’. This is a fundamental principle; light and darkness could not go on together. Satan is always

trying to mix them. But Paul says, ‘Be not unequally or overly yoked with unbelievers; for what participation is there between righteousness and lawlessness? Or what fellowship light has with darkness? And what consent of Christ with Beliar, or what part for a believer along with an unbeliever’” (2 Cor. 6:14-15). The rejection of Christ has left the world, as such, in darkness, but He is coming again, and will bring in the day. In the meantime believers are of the day – sons of light. Hence they have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. People in the world may talk of progress and increased light, but the sons of light regard it as darkness because Christ is not in it. They confess Christ, and stand in separation from the moral darkness around them.” 6 And that includes staying away from the unfruitful works of darkness of atheistic and theistic evolutionists who instead of letting the light of biblical truth to shine forth darken it by their so called ‘scientific speculations’. In doing so, they call ‘Light’, darkness and ‘Darkness’, light! “Light and the Gospel compared: --I: THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE METAPHOR:1. Light and the gospel resemble each other in their source and Divine resemblance. 2. Light and the gospel resemble each other in their adaptation to the end designed. 3. Light and the gospel resemble each other in their purity. 4. Light and the gospel resemble each other in their inseparable connection with joy and happiness. II: THE WILL OF GOD RESPECTING IT:1. That man should have the light of salvation. 2. That His Church should be the light of the world. 3. That the world should be filled with the light of the gospel of Christ. (1) Now the gospel is adapted to all the world. It is as much suited to one part of it as to another. (2) It is expressly said that it is designed for the whole world. “I am the light of the world.” “Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” (3) The whole world shall finally enjoy its saving rays. “This gospel of the kingdom”, &c. (See Isa.11:9, 60:19 and Hab. 2:14). III. APPLICATION:1. Have you the light of Divine grace in your hearts? 2. Have you this light in your families? 3. Have you this light in your neighborhood? 4. Are you assisting to enlighten the world? (J. Burns, D. D).” 7 _____________________________________________________________________________________

1: John Mac Arthur, The Battle for The Beginning, op. cit. p. 79.

2: World Book Encyclopedia 3: www.creationtips.org 4: Joseph S. Exell, The Bible Illustrator, GENESIS , Vol.I, Baker Book House, Michigan, USA, . 5: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, CA , U.S.A 6: A. Coates, op. cit. p. 5, 6. 7: Joseph S. Exell, The Bible Illustrator, GENESIS, Vol.I, op.cit, p. 37.

The Work of the Second Day “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 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. And God called the firmament Heaven(s). And the evening and the morning, the second day.” (Genesis 1:6-8). ******* On the second day, God made the firmament or a vast expanse so as to separate the already existing waters below from those of the waters above it. God then named this newly constructed vast open expanse as Heavens (Genesis 1:8). “So the imagery of Genesis 1:6 is that of a vast expanse, a protective layer that overlays the earth and divides the waters below (the sea of water that covered the earth) from the waters above (which could refer to atmospheric water, clouds, and water vapor; or it might describe some kind of ice-crystal or water-vapor canopy that encircled the antediluvian world). In other words, the expanse in-between – the firmament – includes the earth’s atmosphere. God called this expanse heaven (v.8). It seems to refer primarily to the sky immediately above us – the atmospheric heavens.” 1 The atmospheric heavens of Genesis 1:6-8 are different from the vast stellar heavens comprising of the known and unknown billions of galaxies. Thus the Hebrew merism: ‘heavens and earth’ includes the stellar heavens’

of the outer space. But, these were not created during the creation week along with the earth on Day 1. The heavens and the earth of Genesis1:1 were created ‘in a beginning’ of God’s creative works in the eternity past. The atmospheric heavens of Genesis 1:6, 8 and the dry land called earth of Genesis 1:10 are the very ‘heavens’ and ‘earth’ God says in Exodus 20:11, 31:17 that He made during the work of the six days. Accordingly, it is unbiblical to presume that Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 include the stellar heavens of the outer space, and next assume that the same were created on the first day. In fact, they were created ‘In A Beginning’ by fiat in the eternity past. And, that could be some billions of years in the past if we are to believe the testimony of Science. 2 John Mac Arthur, Jr., in tune with the traditional position of six-day creationism, states that “According to Genesis 1:1, the heavens of outer space had already been created. So, the firmament described in verses 7- 8 is the earth’s atmosphere.” 3 But Genesis 1:1 doesn’t state that the heavens of the outer space were created on Day 1which began as described in Genesis 1:3-5. The actual work of the six days began with Genesis 1:3-5. As such, this fact as stated earlier rules out the creation of the universe during the work of the six days. Therefore, the Heavens of Genesis 1:8 and the Earth of Genesis 1:10 are not the same as Heavens and Earth of Genesis 1:1 The original heavens and earth were created even before there were any day and night periods prior to the first day. Such recurring periods might have been there from the beginning of the creation of the heavens of the outer space during Lucifer’s reign on earth. The atmospheric heavens of Genesis 1: 8 and the dry land called earth of Genesis 1:10 together with the stellar heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 actually comprise the second generation of ‘heavens and earth’. These are the same heavens and earth ‘that are now’ of which Peter speaks about (2 Peter 3:8). Next, along with the physical Light re-appearing on the first day, the firmament or the atmospheric heavens created on the second day bring in other physical conditions for the sustenance of physical life on earth:“1: The atmosphere is the great fund and storehouse of life to plants and animals; its carbonic acid is the food of the one, and its oxygen the nourishment of the other; without its carbonic acid the whole vegetable kingdom would wither, and without its oxygen the blood of animals, ‘which is the life thereof’, would be only serum and water.

“2: It is a refractor of light. Without it the sun’s rays would fall perpendicularly and directly on isolated portions of the world, and with a velocity which would probably render them invisible; but by means of the atmosphere they are diffused in softened effulgence through the entire globe. “3: It is a reflector of light. Hence the mysterious, beautiful, and poetical blue, contrasting and yet harmonizing with the green mantle of the world. “4: It is the conservator and dispenser and modifier of heat. By its hot currents constantly flung from the equatorial regions of the world, even the cold of the frigid zones is deprived of its otherwise unbearable rigour; while the mass of cold air always rushing from about the poles towards the equator quenches half the heat of tropical suns, and condenses the vapour so needful to the luxuriant vegetation. 5: It is the great vibratory of sound, the true sounding-board of the world, and without it the million voices and melodies of this earth would all be dumb; it would be soundless desert, where an earthquake would not make a whisper. (If there were no atmosphere … all commercial, educational, and social intercourse would be at an end, as men would not be able to hear each other speak). “By its pressure the elastic fluids of animal bodies are prevented from bursting their slender vessels and causing instantaneous destruction. Its winds propel our ships, its electricity conveys our messages. By the aid of its warm gales and gentle dews the desert can be made to blossom as the rose. (John Cobley)” 4 “But the atmosphere with which the Creator has surrounded the earth is wonderful also in its composition. The two elements of which it chiefly consists --- oxygen and nitrogen --- are mixed in definite proportions, as 20 to 80 in 100 parts. If this proportion were but slightly altered, as nitrogen destroys life and extinguishes flame, the result of any perceptible increase of it would be that fires would lose their strength and lamps their brightness, plants would wither, and man, with the whole animal kingdom, would perform their functions with difficulty and pain. Or if the quantity of nitrogen was much diminished, and the oxygen increased, the opposite effect would be produced. The least spark would set any combustible in a flame; candles and lamps would burn with the most brilliant blaze for a moment, but would be quickly consumed. “If a house caught fire, the whole city would be burnt down. The animal fluids would circulate with the greatest rapidity, brain fever would soon set in, and the lunatic asylums would be filled.

“A day is coming when the ‘elements shall melt with fervent heat.’ God has but to subtract nitrogen from the air, and the whole world would instantly take fire; such is the activity and energy of the oxygen when left uncontrolled (Brewer).” 5

Symbolically, the separation of waters on earth from those of the waters that were above sets forth a division between the spiritually dark things on earth from those of the spiritual things in the heavens ‘Above’. “Like the fifth day, its sphere is the waters and the expanse. The waters above are separated from those beneath the heavens. During the economy of Conscience, the light of nature is replaced by the knowledge of evil, which spread to such an extent that mankind had to be destroyed by the deluge.” 6 The separation of waters above from the separation of waters below has much to convey, in principle, the separation aspect of Christian life. Thus this physical separation “… speaks morally of a heavenly character of things brought in, which becomes the native air in which faith can breathe freely. Just as God gave the light of Christ in precious promises, He also gave from very early days to His saints the thought of what was heavenly, and this became a very separating principle, as we see in Hebrews 11:8-16. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to whom Promises were made looked for a Heavenly City. They breathed the atmosphere of heavenly hopes, and its separating power made them ‘strangers and sojourners on the earth’. This dividing principle between what is ‘under’ and what is ‘above’ has made its power known from that day to this, and has marked off the saints as heavenly in hope.” 7 _____________________________________________________________ 1: John MacArthur, Jr., op. cit. p.89. 2: Edward McCrady, Religious Perspectives in College Teaching in Biology, Hazen Foundation, New Haven, 1950?, pp. 13-25. Quoted by Arthur C. Custance in Science and Faith, Volume VIII: The Doorway Papers, a Zondervan Publication, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 1978, p. 23 3: John MacArthur, op. cit., p. 89. 4: Joseph S. Exell, op.cit, p. 48-49 5: ibid, p 49.

6: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, op. cit. 7: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 7.

The Work of the Third Day “And God said, ‘Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear’: and it was so. And God called the dry land, Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called He Seas; and God saw that it was good. “And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth; and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in it, after its kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day.” (Genesis 1:9-13). ******* On the first day, God commanded the existing light to shine out of darkness (2 Corinthians 4:6). Similarly, on the second day, God commanded the existing original dry land to appear again. God commanded the waters under the atmospheric heavens, covering the earlier dry land, to be gathered together into one place even as they were before, so as to let the originally created dry land to appear again. God named the dry land appearing again as “Earth” and the waters that were gathered together into one place in obedience to His command as “Seas”. The command to the waters covering the earth to gather into one

place as they were before Lucifer’s rebellion, is aptly poetically described in Job 38: 8,10-11: “… who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth (obviously after Lucifer’s rebellion), as if it had issued out of the womb?... And said, Hitherto shall thou come, but no further: and there shall thy proud waves be stayed?” The Book of Job, whose human author is unknown, was written long, long before Moses wrote the Genesis account of creation. The specific command given to the waters to move to their ‘original’ place proves that the waters in the beginning of creation were not totally covering the earth as is commonly assumed by the Traditional Six-day Creationists. No such command was ever given to the waters during Noah’s universal flood. Instead, the waters during Noah’s flood gradually abated. As such, what is stated in Job 38:8, 10-11 doesn’t apply to Noah’s flood. During Noah’s flood in a way the sea didn’t break the limits set upon it as such, contrary to God’s command given to it as in Job 38:8 and 10-11. Instead, the fountains of the deep or the sea were set loose causing the sea waters to engulf the earth. Moreover, heavy showers of rain water from the above also constituted Noah’s flood. Next, Psalms 104:7 also contributes to our knowledge of Lucifer’s flood of Genesis 1:2. Then, obviously, the waters that engulfed the earth as is described in Genesis 1:2 were subsequent to Lucifer’s rebellion. Pride dominated him to the point of exalting himself above God. He attempted to dethrone God by ascending up into the heavens from his habitation on earth. Lucifer’s pride and rebellion is symbolized by the sea breaking its limits flooding the earth Subsequently, on the third day of the creation week, God specifically ordered the waters flooding the earth to gather into one place. Remember, these waters had sprung out of the womb of the earth to engulf it with their proud waves, symbolizing Lucifer’s pride. The sea with its proud waves also symbolically depicts satanic power of angelic evil forces. No wonder, the legion of demons, whom Jesus rebuked, on possessing the swine got themselves next drowned in the sea, their familiar home. Ever since God gave His command on the third day, the waters have been restrained to remain in the place originally appointed for them as per God’s earlier decree (Proverbs 8:29). For this purpose, even as before, God set in operation sun’s gravitational pull to keep the waters in their appointed place. This then proves that the sun had to be created earlier and

not on the fourth day; unless one wants to assume that God kept the waters in one place by creating some special force or by His power, if we are to believe in the hypothetical creation of the sun or of the solar system on the fourth day. Symbolically, during the second millennial day, “This is marked by the separation of the waters from the land and by the seed; fit picture of the dispersion of Babel, when all the nations were disposed according to the number of the Sons of Israel. Then Abraham emerges and a land is given him and a Seed promised. Thus from the very beginning to the end of revelation the waters denote “peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues” (Rev.17:15). Israel is the only stable foothold in all the earth, although in their present condition, scattered amongst the nations they are like a mountain cast into the sea (Matt.21:21)” 1. Next, God commanded the earth or the dry land to bring forth grass, herbs and fruit bearing trees producing fruit with seeds to reproduce after its own kind. As pointed out earlier, God states that the earth brought forth grasses after its kind and seed-bearing fruit trees ‘after their own kind’. Logically, creation of grass and fruit bearing trees ‘after their own kind’ proves that the newly created grass and fruit-bearing trees were after their original kind. “Their kind”, therefore, had to exist earlier, prior to Genesis 1:2, adorning the original Garden of Eden as well as the ‘habitable part of the earth’ of Genesis 1:1 in which the Wisdom of God rejoiced. Otherwise, how the newly created grass and fruit bearing trees could be ‘after their specific kind’ if the same were created for the first time? Obviously, there had to be an earlier creation of grass and trees of the same kind. Most definitely, there had to be an earlier multi-varied vegetable and plant life on earth which got flooded at the time of Genesis 1:2. Accordingly, God commanded the earth to bring forth and the earth brought forth fauna after its original kind. And, God saw and declared that it was good. If ever there was any biological evolution, then the same could be relegated to life that existed in the earlier earth before it was flooded. In no way, the present flora could be said to have been evolved as the same was created on the third day. And, for the last six thousand years the same has been reproducing after its own kind. Ongoing reproduction down through the ages definitely rules out evolution.

Whatever the evidence one may discover in favor of evolution, if it be found to be true, then it could be concluded that there might have been some evolutionary process in operation in the pre-adamic world. The same should not be of any concern to Christians. In all probability, unless proved otherwise, even the earlier creation had to be instantly by fiat. We simply do not know. Only geological evidence, if definitely found to support such a conclusion could tell us and thereby fill the gaps in our knowledge. Figuratively speaking, God’s creative works on the third day, in a way, symbolize the spiritual works of the third millennial day. It was during the third millennial day, God did set aside Israel as a nation – as a dry land. It was separated from those of the other Gentile nations symbolized by the sea-waters under Satan’s dominion. Israel as a nation is referred to as a vine which God has planted and takes care of. Next, it is also symbolically referred to as a fig tree. Undoubtedly, God had His people in mind. It was precisely on the third millennial day, “Jehovah gave them the Passover – a plain typical lesson as to their own state of death and judgment, and that God’s promises and covenant could be only established on the ground of death of Christ for them.” 2 In the dry land we may see a figure of what subsists in stability and becomes fruitful to God. It may be taken as typical of the special place which Israel had as divinely called, separated from the nations around them, and ordered by God. We cannot fail to see in Scripture how distinctive was the place of Israel, and how it was God’s thought that they should be a divinely ordered and fruitful people, so as to show forth His praise before the nations.” But now “Christ has come in infinite grace into the death that lay upon man; but He has emerged from death to become the stable and imperishable foundation of an order of things marked by fruitfulness and life. We can be to Another now, even to Him ‘who has been raised up from among the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God’ (Romans 7:4).3 And, “consequent upon the dry land appearing, we find ‘herb producing seed’ and ‘fruit-trees yielding fruit after their kind, the seed of which is in them’ on the earth. Nothing but what stands in relation to Christ is really stable or fruitful for God. The church is in relation to Him now; Israel will be in a future day; then having as sure mercies of David in a risen Christ they will be stable and fruitful for God’s pleasure. Meanwhile the saints of the Assembly have that place.” 4

________________________________________________________________________________________________

1: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A 2: C. A. Coates, An Outline of the Book of Genesis, op. cit. p. 9. 3: C. A. Coates, ibid, p. 9. 4: A. C. Coates, ibid, p.10.

The Work of the Fourth Day “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years; And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. “And God made (the) two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: the stars also. “And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day” (Genesis 1: 14-19). ******* As assumed by traditional six-day creationists, nowhere in Genesis 1: 14-19 it is stated that God created the original sun, moon and the stars ex nihilo on the fourth day. To state as such, is to contradict their own belief that God created the ‘stellar or starry heavens of the outer space’ earlier, supposedly on the first day of the creation week. Shockingly, all the traditional six-day creationists do not speak the same thing but contradict

each other proving thereby their assumptions are not biblically based. Biblically speaking, neither the ‘stellar or starry heavens of the outer space’ were created on the first day nor the ‘sun, moon and stars’ were created on the fourth day. Such an assumption is arrived at through misinterpretation of biblical facts. And, this is made to accommodate traditional beliefs relating to the original creation supposedly in six days. If we let the Bible speak to us (exegesis), it will be certainly obvious that on the fourth day of the creation week God issued the command to the existing heavenly lights (sun, moon and stars). This was done to reorganize the solar system and the other astral objects. This rearrangement set in operation the newly created firmament called heavens (Genesis 1:8) which are totally different from the stellar heavens God created in the beginning. Exodus 20:11 refer to these heavens that were made on the fourth day. Accordingly, God made the two great lights – the sun and the moon – that were already created in the beginning and whose light was obscured, to take designated positions in the solar system. This was done so as for the sun to rule the day and for the moon to rule the night along with the stars. This arrangement would continue to function in a regular cyclical manner, thereby setting in operation regular cyclical annual seasons. Genesis 1: 16 doesn’t state that God created two great lights on the fourth day. Rather, it states that God made the already existing two great lights, that is, the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light and the stars also to rule the night. Next, Genesis 1:17-18 state that God set them accordingly, not only to rule and distinguish day and night periods but also to ‘let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and for years’ (v.14). The round earth of Genesis 1:1 was already in existence prior to the dry land called earth of Genesis 1:10 that was made to appear on the third day. Obviously, the sun, the moon and the stars had to be earlier in existence having been created in the beginning along with the earth. As otherwise, the earth could not be simply in existence apart from the solar system seeing that it is maintained in space by sun’s gravitational pull. On the fourth day, the solar system was rearranged and the sun, moon and the stars were made to take their assigned positions or orbits in the vast expanse of the firmament. The fact that there was ‘an evening’ and ‘a morning’ the very first day

shows that the light of the first day necessarily had to be of a pre-existing sun. After all, the same feature of ‘evenings’ and ‘mornings’ characterized the subsequent days of the creation week and all the days ever since after that first week. It is unimaginable that the gravitational laws governing the ‘evening’ and ‘morning’ periods of the first three days were different from that of the laws governing such periods from the fourth day onwards. As is now well known, “The earth spins around its axis, an imaginary line that connects the North and South poles. The spinning motion makes the sun appear to move from east to west, and causes day and night on earth”. As such, logically sunlight had to be the source of light from the first day itself. As such, the first three days and three nights had to be as a result of the earth’s spinning around its axis, whilst revolving in its orbit around an already existing sun. However, the sun, moon and the stars were not made wholly visible until the fourth day. As such, on the fourth day the solar system was set in order so that the sun, moon and stars could be next seen. Not only the Sun and the Moon but even the whole Solar System and the Milky Way must have been rearranged on the fourth day. Thus, they took their assigned positions to mark the cycle of day and night (verse 16) periods started on the first day. They were also set to rotate with precision so as to be starry signs in the skies; and also mark and set definite regular cyclical periods characterized by seasons, lunar months, and the solar years. In addition to spinning around its axis and traveling around the sun the earth also moves with the sun even as the sun circles the Milky Way. The entire system has been regulated by gravitational laws as from the beginning of the creation. This fact rules out their creation on the fourth day. The spectacular movement of the entire solar system in perfect unison and precision circling Milky Way galaxy makes the entire system complete. This aspect similarly rules out the creation of the sun, moon and stars on the fourth day. The Bible merely states that God “made (the) two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; the stars also”. This Scripture doesn’t state that the ‘two great lights and the stars also’ were actually created on the fourth day as is wrongly assumed by the six-day creationists. If the stars were actually created on the fourth day , then of what the stellar heavens created in the beginning were made up of? The logical answer should be obvious. One of the strongest proofs that the sun, the moon and the stars were not actually created on the fourth day but in the dateless past along with the

earth “In the Beginning” is ascertained by the scientific fact of earth’s motion around the sun in its God-appointed orbit. Obviously, the earth was kept in its place by the gravitational pull of the sun. Not only the earth but the other planets also travel around the sun because the force of gravitation pulls them toward the sun. That is, through the force of gravity, the sun controls the orbits of all the planets including the planet earth around it in perfect precision, and that as it was from the beginning. Next, the earth’s gravitational pull keeps the moon traveling around it instead of flying off into space. And, just as the earth revolves around the sun, the sun revolves around the centre of Milky Way galaxy. It is not at all imaginable that the earth, in the beginning, was simply kept floating solo in space without the sun’s gravitational pulling. This would be the case if the sun, stars and planets of the solar system were created on the fourth day. Unless, all these facts are disproved, the belief that the solar system was created on the fourth day is biblically and scientifically untenable. If the sun was created on the fourth day, then what maintained the earth in space during the first three days without the sun’s gravitation? “Gravitation is the power that holds all the bodies in their own orbits in space. They orbit with unerring precision so that man can accurately foretell, hundreds of years in advance, their location in the heavens, and the exact hour, minute and second when eclipses will take place” 1 “The earth,” you remind me, “is a constituent part of the solar system; as such, it necessitates from the beginning the contemporaneous existence of the sun, to hold the solar system in balance, and to keep earth itself in its orbit; but if the sun was not created till the fourth day, what becomes of the astronomic teaching that the earth has been from the beginning an integral part of the solar system?” Again the answer is easy. Observe first, that our passage does not assert that God created --that is to say, caused to come into existence for the first time --- sun, moon, and stars, on the fourth day. All that our passage asserts in this matter is this: God on the fourth day for the first time caused sun, moon, and stars to become visible. Remember that light is not an essential, constituent part of the sun. For aught we know, the sun itself may be a dark body, as indeed the “solar spots” have led some astronomers to think. Moreover, surveying the sun as the centre of gravitation for the planetary system, the sun can fulfill its gravitating office equally well whether luminous or not.” (Joseph Exell).

We can imagine that there could be a solar system without the planet earth. But we cannot visualize the existence of earth without a solar system, as would be the case, if the sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day. As such, we can confidently state that the solar system was created

earlier ‘in the very beginning’ and not on the fourth day. As otherwise, we’ll have to assume that God had set in operation different laws, the first three days, to keep the earth created in the beginning floating solo in space without any supporting solar system. However, the earth could not be in any motion without the sun with its gravitational pull, to begin with, for the earth to be in its appointed orbit. This fact rules out the creation of the sun, moon and the stars on the fourth day; but maintains the position that these astral bodies were only rearranged that day, so as to better brighten and regulate the day and night periods as well as the seasons in addition to being signs in the sky. Nonetheless, traditional and young earth six-day creationists firmly believe the sun, moon and stars were created on the fourth day. After all, it is stated in Genesis 1:14-16 that God made two great lights to rule the day and night periods and thus divide the day from the night on the 4th day (v. 19). Actually, the Scriptures concerned doesn’t state that God made two great lights on the fourth day. It simply states that God made two great lights for specific purposes as described in Genesis 1:14-19 without actually stating as to when they were created. It is wrongly assumed that these lights were made on the fourth day; rather, they were set in the firmament on the fourth day so that from then on they could fulfill the purpose for which they were created in a very precise manner. Genesis 1:16 doesn’t state that the greater and the lesser light, that is, the sun and the moon, were created on the fourth day. It states that “God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: the stars also”. Objectively, “Genesis 1:14-19 reveals that … God parted the cloud cover enough for direct sunlight to fall on the earth and for accurate observation of the movements of the sun, moon, and stars to take place…with a view to their eventually functioning as indicators of time (“signs, seasons, days, years”) to terrestrial observers. The Hebrew verb wayya’as in v.16 should better be rendered “God had made the two great luminaries, etc”, rather than as simple past tense, “(God) made” 2. To state that these two special lights and stars were created on the fourth day is to contradict known facts relating to the functioning of the solar system as pointed out earlier. But, once we come to terms with the fact of Lucifer’s reign on earth it will be obvious that these were created earlier.

Figuratively speaking, ‘the Greater Light’ and ‘the Smaller Light’ portray the spiritual events of the fourth millennial day of Satan’s rule on earth. “Like the first, this day records the introduction of light. But now the light is not in the earth but over it, deposited in heavenly light bearers. The sun and moon and stars are first seen upon the earth. Just so in the administration of the Law and in Messiah’s and the apostles’ ministry. The law was like the cold, lifeless, reflected light of the moon. Christ’s presence was like the sun. He was the Light of the World. The apostles were like stars. Twelve stars crown, the Sun clothes and the moon is beneath the feet of the woman, Israel (Rev.12:1)” 3. Christ, the Sun of Righteousness, as the Greater Spiritual Light shone forth on earth towards the end of the fourth millennial day. But, as Eternal Light, Christ was in existence from eternity to eternity. And so, the physical sun had to be in existence from the very beginning of God’s creation. And the Church, as the lesser spiritual light, has been reflecting the light of Christ since its appearance in the midst of spiritual darkness of the fourth millennial day (Luke 2:32).“This seems clearly to intimate the thought of God that the earth should be in the light of what is set in the heavens, and under heavenly rule or influence. Jesus glorified is the great light in the heavens. When He was here ‘the dayspring from on high’ visited men, and He was ‘the Light of the World’, but the moral darkness in which He appeared was so dense that it did not apprehend the light. He is now as a risen and glorified Man in heaven, and in the world to come He will shine forth publicly as the Sun of Righteousness. But now those who believe on Him are in the light of His shining. Therefore, ‘Wake up thou that sleeps… and the Christ shall shine upon you (Ephesians 5:14).” 4 As mentioned earlier, “Christ is the Sun of the spiritual universe, and all other light is His light reflected, whether in the Assembly, or Israel, or individual saints. While the sun is absent the moon shines; so heavenly light now shines through saints of the assembly; and by and by when the moon has gone the stars will appear. The lights are made, and set, to rule. It will be so in the world to come; the nations will walk by the light of the heavenly city. There will be no insubordination or lawlessness; they will walk by the light of God which shines in the city. In the present day the assembly rules in the sense of shedding abroad holy and divine influences upon men. There is a shining out of divine light from those who are walking in righteousness, holiness and love. The saint in the light of Christ is clothed with shining

armor; he has on the armor of light, and it affects people. How often those in difficulty or danger are glad to have a Christian near them.” 5 “Then we have the thought of the lights being ‘for signs and seasons, and to divide between the light and darkness’. In a moral sense, the Christian should be intelligent as to times and seasons. The sun set in this world by its rejection of Christ. Now the Assembly is a luminary as the vessel of the Holy Spirit; there is a divine Person dwelling here in the saints, and divine light is shining for men through a vessel that corresponds anti-typically to the moon, its light shining through saints.” 6 When we resort to God’s own interpretation of biblical symbols we cannot be guilty of allegorizing the Scriptures. When we consider the works of God on the fourth day in the light of its rich imagery as illustrated ‘here a little and there a little’ in the Bible, who would willingly want to ignore what God Himself interprets to enlighten our spiritually dark minds? Listen: “In the sun we have the most worthy emblem that the visible universe presents of Him, who, with the word of His power, kindled up its glories, and with the strength of His right hand established it in the heavens. And the analogies between the sun of nature and the Sun of Righteousness are both striking and instructive. 1. In the opening scene of the fourth day we have a fine image of the advent of the Redeemer of men. On that morning the sun burst forth in its unveiled glories, irradiating the new-made earth, and revealing upon its face scenes of loveliness and grandeur which could be neither seen nor known before. So arose the Sun of Righteousness upon the world of mankind, an object as wonderful and as new in His person, and character, and office, as the great orb of day when it first came forth to run the circuit of the heavens --- pouring a flood of light from above upon benighted humanity, and opening up to them views of truth, happiness, and immortality, such as the world had never known or heard before; and, like the solar light, while revealing all else, remaining Himself a glorious mystery. 2. As the natural sun is the centre of the system of creation, so the Sun of Righteousness is the vital centre of revealed truth and religion. 3. As the sun shines by its own light, so the Son of God poured the light of truth from the fountain of His own mind. The instructions He imparted were neither derived from tradition nor borrowed from philosophy. He was a self-luminous and Divine Orb, rising upon the darkness of the world, shedding new light, and revealing new truths to bewildered humanity. 4. As in the pure sunbeam we have combined all the colors of the rainbow in their due proportions, so in Christ we find all virtues and graces harmoniously blended in one perfect character. 5. As the sunlight, on whatever foulness or corruption it may fall, remains uncontaminated, so the Son of Man, amid all the temptations, guilt, and depravity of earth, continued pure and unspotted. 6. As the light of the sun is unlimited and inexhaustible, so also are the healing and saving beams of the Sun of Righteousness. 7. As the sun’s law of gravitation extends over the whole solar system, so the law of love, proceeding

from the Sun of Righteousness, extends its authority over the whole family of man. Gravitation exercises its dominion alike over the mightiest planet and the minutest asteroid; so the Divine law of love, with equal hand, imposes its obligations upon kings, and peasants, and beggars; its authority is no less binding in courts and cabinets than in churches and families, its voice is to be heeded no less by the diplomatist sent to foreign realms, than by the preacher who remains among his flock at home. To all it speaks alike, in the name and in the words of its Divine original, Love one another, as I have loved you.” 7 ________________________________________________________________________________________________

1: Dake Finis J, op. cit. p.83.

2: Gleason L. Archer, op. cit., p.61.

3: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A. 4: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 10. 5: ibid,p.12.

6: ibid, p. 12.

7: Joseph Exell, The Biblical Illustrator, op. cit,

The Work of the Fifth Day “And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moved, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw it was good. “And God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth’. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day” (Genesis 1:20-23). ******* Before the creation of any living creatures, God established the necessary conditions to sustain life on earth. Subsequently, He created the grass, herbs and fruit bearing trees. Next, God brought about the realignment of the solar system. During this realignment, the sun, moon and stars were set in proper order so as to make seasons possible. This was necessary for the proper growth of both flora and fauna. As such, “The first four days may be regarded as giving the establishment of the conditions of life; then on the fifth and sixth days life itself is introduced. The conditions of life are light,

atmosphere, food and rule.” 1 On the fifth day, God commanded the waters to bring forth aquatic creatures. He commanded and through the exercise of His creative power, God created and, the “waters brought forth, abundantly, after their kind”. In other words, God created sea creatures of all kinds, and also birds or ‘winged fowl’ to fly above the waters in the atmospheric heavens. The water creatures were created ‘after their kind’. So also, the fowl of the air or winged birds that God created were ‘after their kind’. In other words, whatever creatures in the waters and the birds of the air God created was of the ‘same original kind’ that was earlier on the ‘habitable part of the earth’ prior to the chaotic conditions of Genesis 1:2. The re-current phrase ‘after a particular kind’, repeated ten times in Genesis 1:11-25 confirms the creation and existence of earlier life of a similar kind. In no way, the term ‘after their kind’ in these Scriptures has any reference to reproduction, per se. 2 Figuratively speaking, “The light in which spiritual life is possible is the revelation of God. Then the atmosphere suited to those who know God is found, as we have already observed, in the circle of the brethren, where spiritual affections are in activity. Then life must be sustained by food; this is very essential. John 6 speaks of food – the bread of life. And, finally, there is heavenly rule; there is no lawlessness in the sphere of life. Darkness, ignorance of God, idolatry, hatred and lawlessness; all that is death. But when the light of God is brought in, love and obedience are set in movement in an appropriate atmosphere, and sustained by suitable food, and under heavenly rule, and there is life.” 3 Life is re-created on the fifth day and we see a variety of fishes and great whales and other creatures swarming in the waters. Next, the skies were adorned with birds and fowl and every winged creature. These new living forms definitely were – after the same kind – that is, similar to those that were created earlier and were subsequently destroyed, at the time of Lucifer’s rebellion. It is their dead remains in fossilized forms are now discovered and hence the long ages attributed to these fossils could be true. The Bible doesn’t record the creation of any unicellular and other simple forms of life during the work of the six days. In all probability, the primitive life forms created earlier continued to exist in spite of the deadening chaotic conditions of Genesis 1:2. Anyway, this is mere speculation which could be true or not.

Further, “As the fourth day corresponded with the first day so the fifth day corresponds with the second day. Both concern the waters and the heavens. Now, however, it is life in the waters and in the heavens. “We have seen how the nations are pictured by the waters, and Israel by the land. After Peter tells the apostles and elders of the reception of the gospel by the nations, and Paul and Barnabas declare what signs and wonders God had wrought among the nations through them, James recalls the fact that when Israel is restored there will be nations “upon whom His Name is called” (Amos 9:12), showing that some of the nations of that day will have believed previous to Israel’s restoration. Is not this the life in the waters? And this life was the subject of prophecy. Isaiah speaks concerning Him, “A slight thing is it for you to become My Servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, And the dispersed of Israel to restore, Behold, I give you also for a light to the nations, To become My salvation unto the ends of the earth” (Isa. 49:6, C.V.). “And moreover, the nations, under Paul’s early ministry, receive spiritual life. The dove is the type of the Holy Spirit even as other “birds of the air” represent evil spirits. So that spiritual life is most aptly represented by life in the air, which was a part of the fifth day’s work. “The fact that spiritual life is continued among the nations during this dispensation of the Secret does not interfere with the absolutely secret character of this administration. “Each day’s work abides. We enjoy light within and from above; we

have conscience and revelation. The separation of the “waters above” from the “waters beneath” (the second day’s work) still continues. The separation of the dry land from the waters is still in evidence, for the mountain even when cast into the sea can not be dissolved in it. So that while the work of the present economy is concerned primarily with heaven’s restoration (of which the “Week’s Work” knows nothing) we enjoy the fruit of the five previous days’ work and especially that aerial life which brought us to the borders of the celestial realms.” 4 The creation of complex life on earth “… is a remarkable step in the creative process…. Verse 21 explicitly says ‘God created them’ and “rules out the possibility that these creatures evolved through some ages-long process. Together with the description of how God decreed their existence by speaking the command, it demands that we understand the origin of these

creatures as an act of fiat creation, not an evolutionary process.” 5 The creation of the fifth day, to some extent, figuratively displays God’s spiritual works of the fifth millennial day. “The fish in the sea represent men in their natural state and element, from which they have to be taken if they are to enter into the blessing of God’s Kingdom. The Lord makes those who follow Him ‘fishers of men’ (Matthew 4:19), and the seyne cast into the sea is one of the similitudes of the kingdom of the heavens. In this connection we find there are good fish and worthless, the good fish representing those in whom there is divine work, who can be gathered into vessels. And no doubt the net full of great fishes drawn to the land in John 21 is a figure of the great gathering for millennial blessing in another day. The net does not break then, and there is no suggestion of any worthless fish in that net. While speaking of the sea we may remark that in the new earth ‘the sea exists no more’ (Revelation 21:1). “The sea, and the life connected with it, is only for time; but the earth continues in the eternal state, it speaks of what is stable and abiding, what is really of a spiritual order. The spiritual alone is eternal.” 6 Moreover, “On the fifth and sixth days we view a scene teeming with life. God, having established the conditions of life, takes pleasure in exuberance of life, and in growth and increase. ‘Living souls’ are such as can enjoy the conditions of life. God’s thought even as to unintelligent creatures was that they should enjoy the conditions in which they were placed on earth. As soon as living souls were created He blessed them; it was His first moral act; and the evidence of His blessing was fruitfulness and increase. This is the unfailing accompaniment of the energy of life. The conditions of life in a spiritual sense are now established, and our exercise should be to avail ourselves of them. In doing so, we shall enjoy the blessing of God.” 7 The coming of the dove, even the Holy Spirit at the beginning of the fifth millennial day and entering into men’s hearts, is further seen spreading the Gospel Truth on the fifth millennial day, even unto our day. ________________________________________________________________________________________________

1: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p.12. 2: Jack W. Langford in a Personal Communication dated 20 th January, 2012 stated that the expression “after their kind” is “only an expression of reproducing ‘after their kinds’”. However, the same expression “after a particular kind” in Genesis 6:20, 7:14;

Leviticus 11:14-16, 19, 22, 29 certainly doesn’t refer to reproducing “after a particular or specific kind”. Rather, the expressions in these Scriptures refer to a specific category of the “same kind” that would be there at that particular or at any other time. Similarly, the expression “after its/their kind” in Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25 doesn’t refer here to any reproduction of the same kind even though all living organisms are known to reproduce after their own kind, ever since. Instead, in these Scriptures the earth was commanded to bring forth (reproduce?) grass, herbs, plants and fauna “after their particular kind” which were there at an earlier time, definitely prior to the chaos of Genesis 1:2. 3: C. A. Coates, op. cit., p. 12, 13. 4: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A. 5: John MacArthur, Jr., The Battle for the Beginning.…; op. cit. p.125. 6: C. A. Coates, op .cit. p. 14.

7: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 12.

The Work of the Sixth Day “And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind; and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind and cattle after their kind, and every thing that crept upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good” (Genesis 1:24-25). “And God said, ‘Let US make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that crept upon the earth’. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moved upon the earth” And God said, 'Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that crept upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day (Gen. 1:26-31).

******** God caused the earth or the dry land to bring forth all kinds of living creatures as well as the creeping creatures on earth including all kinds of reptiles; and every living creature He created was declared as ‘good’. However, once sin entered into the world defiling God’s creation, God designated certain creatures as clean and certain others as unclean. “Then the living creatures of the earth are seen in the vessel which descends ‘as a great sheet, bound by the four corners and let down to the earth,’ for Peter’s instruction in Acts 10. Peter had to learn not to call any man common or unclean. He had to learn the wide scope of grace, its universal bearing, and to see that God had brought in the cleansing for men by the death of Christ so that even Gentiles might have the forgiveness of sins, and receive the Spirit through faith in Christ risen.” 1 The work of the sixth day culminates in the creation of Man, named Adam and then his wife Eve, towards the end of the sixth day. Genesis 5:1-2 complements and crowns it all by stating that “In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him; Male and female created HE them; and called their name ADAM, in the day when they were created”. “The sixth day corresponds with the third. Both deal with the land.

Now, however, we have life on the land, and the Seed is seen as a Man. So it will be. Even in these, the closing days of this eon, the nations have rejected God just as Israel did before them. God will return to His earthly people and all Israel shall be saved. Then He will bring forth the second Man, the last Adam (of whom the first was but a feeble figure) Who will rule the whole earth to His glory.”2 God’s work on each day of the creation week has been purposeful. Next, each day’s work is predictive. Each day’s work, therefore, points to specific future redemptive and saving works during the six millennial days under Satan’s control. As such, having predictive symbolism, we have “On the fifth day the waters swarming, and on the sixth day the earth bringing forth living souls. Both the fish of the sea and the living creatures of the earth have been taken up by the wisdom of God as figures to set forth the present working of His grace. “All the work of the six days, up to the point of man’s creation, was to provide a sphere where man could be set in dominion according to the thought of God. The creation of man was a most solemn and deliberate act.

God, as it were, takes counsel with Himself as to it. ‘Let US make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the fowl of the heavens, over the cattle, over the whole earth’. “Adam was ‘the figure of Him to come’; everything is to come under the dominion of Christ. In Psalm 8 it is said of the Son of man, ‘Thou hast made Him to rule over the works of thy hands; thou hast put everything under his feet: sheep and oxen all of them, and also the beasts of the field; the fowl of the heavens, and the fishes of the sea, whatever passes through the paths of the seas’. Every created being will be made subject to Christ. And we see in Adam as a figure the character of the influence which He will bring to bear. It is of interest to see that here the woman is, so to speak, included in the man. ‘Let US make man in our image… and let them have dominion… God created man… male and female created He them’, “… the assembly (CHURCH) is included in CHRIST; before the world’s foundation God had chosen the saints in Christ; Ephesians 1:4. ‘Having made known unto us the mystery of His will …; to head up all things in Christ… in Him, in whom we have also obtained an inheritance, being marked out beforehand according to the counsel of His own will’. That answers to what we are reading in Genesis. We see Christ in universal Headship at the end of Ephesians 1, and the Assembly with Him and His fullness.” 3 “‘No man hath seen God at any time’, John 1:18. That made it necessary that One should come in as the Image of the invisible God. ‘The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him’. The God whom no one had seen has now been seen perfectly in a Man, One in whom has been fully set forth all that God is. “It is necessary to be guarded when we speak of 'likeness' in relation to Christ because we must ever remember that Christ is God. And no doubt we may see the wisdom of the Spirit in the fact that though He is definitely spoken of in the New Testament as the 'image' of God, He is not so spoken of as the 'likeness'. “But we may contemplate Him as the blessed anointed Man who moved in love God-ward. ‘The Christ loved us, and delivered himself up for us, an offering and sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savor’, Ephesians 5:2. And He is able to give impulse to all that comes under His influence so that it may be found in moral correspondence with God.

“He will not only as the 'Image' irradiate the whole universe with the light of God, but He will give such an impulse God-ward that there will be 'likeness' -- perfect moral correspondence -- with God in the whole vast system of which He will be the glorious Head. This 'likeness' will all be derived from Him. God is going to bring all under the domination of that blessed Man. And He dominates by love, for if He is the Image of God He is necessarily the setter forth of the love of God, for God is love. Image is the revelation side, and likeness is more the perfect correspondence with the revelation in a Man. Everything is to come under the influence and domination of that Man, and under His rule and Headship everything will be held for the pleasure of God. As we come under His rule and Headship everything is adjusted. “One under the rule of Christ will be a good husband, father, mother, child or servant; whatever natural relation he is found in will be filled for the pleasure of God; and he will be right in the sphere of spiritual things too.” 4 “It is blessed to consider that a day is coming when God will rest in a scene which is the product of His own work -- a scene brought under the influence of Christ, where everything is sustained by living food in the energy of life, and marked by fruitfulness and increase. God will then find pleasure in the result of His own work.” 5 If we really take the time and effort to study the Genesis record of creation, it will be clear that there is in fact an original direct creation briefly described in Genesis 1:1 in the eternity past. How long this creation has been in existence is not revealed in the Bible. There is not a “single line in the Scriptures” or “in the Volume of Nature informing us as to the antiquity of the globe.” 6. All we can say is that: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, filling the later with animal and vegetable life, as the “the Book of Stone” bears witness. When it was created, and how long it thus existed, Scripture does not inform us.” 6 As a matter of fact, no one will be able to convincingly inform us about the ‘ages’ of the earth or of the universe seeing that the same were created in the midst of eternity past The age of the earth and or of the universe assumed to be about six to ten thousand years is erroneously concluded from the chronological work of Bishop Usher. His work, however, covers the recorded history of man and

has nothing to do with the age of the earth or of the universe. As such, “The measures of time in the book of Genesis refer to the age of man, not to the earth at all; and hence it was an unhappy blunder of that otherwise able and accomplished chronologist, Archbishop Usher, to date the first verse of the Bible at 4004 B.C., for which there is not the slightest authority in the sacred text.” 7 Or, as stated by Spiros Zhodiates “It is the work of Archbishop Ussher,…. His chronological labors were directed toward affording an idea of the time that elapsed between certain events in recorded history. For this purpose he took the year 1 A.D. – the beginning of the Christian era – as his starting point, and calculated backwards as far as reliable recorded history afforded good working ground. He reckoned as far back as 4004 B.C., and then, finding no more available material in the form of history, either written or inscribed, he had to stop. He did not mean to imply that he had reached the point of creation at all.” 8 Illusory Space-Time Continuum emerges from ‘Timelessness’. As such, no scientific discovery or any speculation relating to long ages, should ever disturb us. Again, such a situation perfectly “meets the demands of science for time and terms of life, unknown to man since he became a tenant on the earth; for between the two first verses of Genesis, you are welcome to measures of time as long as you choose, and to evolve principles and conditions of existence which could only apply to pre-Adamic earth.” 9 No one may suppose that such an “interpretation is offered to save credit of the Word of God; its statements are absolutely perfect, and it is well to know that many centuries before geology could be counted as a science, and before she ever presented a single difficulty, such early writers as Augustine, Basil, Origen, and others held that the first verse of Genesis and the six days of creation were entirely distinct.” 10 _______________________________________________________________________________________

1: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p.14. 2: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A. 3: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 13-16. 4: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p.19. 5: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p.20. 6: Walter Scott, op. cit. p.10.

7: Walter Scott, op. cit. p.15. 8: Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit., p.1. 9: Walter Scott, op. cit. p.10. 10: Walter Scott, op. cit. p.10.

Creation of the Sabbath We finally come to the seventh day; the day on which God rested ‘from all His work, which He had made’. By resting on the Seventh day, God created the weekly Sabbath (Genesis 2:2-3). God did not whimsically rest on the seventh day; nor did He rest on the seventh day so as to set an example for man to physically rest on the seventh day after working for six days. The creation of the weekly Sabbath was in accordance with His perfect plan. As such, from the beginning itself only the physical rest on the seventh day (and not on any other day of the week) has had and still has evangelical overtones. The Seventh Day is evangelically unique. Young Earth Creationists teach that God created everything in six days and then rested on the seventh day so as to set a pattern of six workdays followed by a day of rest. Actually, the weekly pattern portrays an evangelical message. When God created the heavens and earth it had to be perfect, and so, necessarily, a completed creation. Lucifer’s rebellion brought judgment on earth resulting in chaos. It is from this chaos that God set forth to liberate the earlier dry land and make it suitable for vegetation, animal life and human life. God did this all in six days. He rested on the seventh day after His works of physical redemption and restoration. Thus He established a pattern of seven day-week not necessarily to set an example for man to work for six days and rest on the seventh day. The physical work of the six days was meant to portray men’s labor against sin.

The seventh day rest was to signify believing man’s rest in Christ. He who is in Christ ceases from sin and enters into God’s rest. Next, the weekly pattern portrays God’s Saving Work during the course of six millennial days followed by a millennial Sabbath rest. During this millennial Sabbath the earth will be free from Satan’s misrule and enjoy peaceful God’s rule. The very fact that God rested on the seventh day shows that the work of the earlier six days was in fact an additional work. In a way, it was a work of physical liberation during which the earth subjected to chaos consequent to Satan’s rebellion was set free for man’s habitation. It was a real physical work against the evil forces of darkness during which God restored the original life conditions on earth. And, God saw that it was now very good, and then rested! In a symbolic way, it pointed to God’s work against the spirit forces of darkness for six millennial days, followed by the sabbatical rest for a thousand years. During this millennial Sabbath of God’s rule on earth Satan will be forced to take rest. “The Ruin-Restoration of the earth was a foreshadow of what would happen to Adam's fallen race: Judgment and death for sin, and then a restoration and new birth for those who receive the light of Christ. It reveals the Gospel message to all people, in all nations, for all times.” 1 From another figurative point of view, as explained by C. A. Coates, “The judgment session in the garden introduced the first day, the flood the second, Babel the third, Egypt’s plagues the fourth, Israel’s rejection the fifth, the Dispensation of Judgment the sixth and the final judgment of the Great White Throne ushers in the eternal Sabbath. This is the day which He will bless and sanctify, and He will rest in all the work which He had created in order to make it. Each item of earth’s restoration called forth God’s approval, but the heavenly firmament called forth no such commendation (Gen.1:7). But, at the last, when we displace Satan’s sovereignty in the heavenly regions then all will be indeed: Very Good! 2 Evangelically speaking, “The seventh day is figurative of the time when everything will be put into suitability to God’s pleasure; it speaks of the millennial rest of the wide creation. The seventh day stands in relation to the preceding six days in which God had worked in a scene where disorder and darkness had been, but He finally brought suitability to His pleasure” 3.

Accordingly next, the weekly Sabbath “has in view the millennial age when all will be so ordered as the result of divine working that rest will be brought into the very scene where all the disorder and darkness have seen. It will be a triumph of God in relation to all the conditions which have come in here as the result of sin and Satan’s power.”4 “The7th Day was proclaimed as something VERY special from the very first two chapters of the Biblical account. Let us look closer at the importance of the Seventh Day in relation to time. ‘And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. “And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made."(Genesis 2:2-3 KJV) "For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it."(Exodus 20:11, KJV). ‘It [is] a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.’(Exodus 31:17, KJV) “With the context of those verses in mind, look at the following verses: ‘But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8 KJV). And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and [I saw] the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received [his] mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years’."(Revelation 20:4 KJV) “The latter verse speaks of a time yet future, when the Lord Jesus Christ will reign on the Earth with man for a period of 1,000 years before the final judgment, the final destruction of Satan and Death, and the beginning of eternity future. What these verses tell us is that the seven 24hourdays of Genesis are a prophetic "type" which when multiplied by 1,000, gives us the length of time of the Biblical history of man from Adam until the end of time as we know it. In other words, 7,000 years is the length of all human history (but not all natural history) both past and future on this present Earth. The past part of that human history to the

present is roughly 6,000 years according to the Biblical chronology. That means there are yet another 1,000 years ahead, which equates to a 1,000year "Sabbath" of rest(day 7, see Hebrews 4:9 ) when the Lord Jesus Christ will return, reign, and rest from His redemptive work on the Earth as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords: ‘Blessed and holy [is] he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.’ (Revelation 20:6 KJV)” 5 The seventh day Sabbath portrayed the ‘Spiritual Rest in Christ’ that would be experienced by those who would believe in Him. It is thus fulfilled in those who are truly converted and are ‘in Christ’ as a saved people. Next, the seventh day Sabbath portrays the saints’ spiritual rest in God’s Kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Hebrews 4: 9, 11). The Bible is silent about any Sabbath observance by resting from all physical work prior to the establishment of the nation of Israel. However, once the Israelites were set free from their bondage in Egypt, “The Sabbath was afterwards a very important institution, a special link between God and His people”5, Israel. “Accordingly, it was to be observed as a day of rest as a reminder of their deliverance from Egyptian bondage (Exodus 20:8-11). It was also a sign of covenant relationship between God and His people (Exodus 31:17)”. At the moment, only those who are in Christ are the true worshippers of God. These worship Him in spirit and in truth without enforcing upon themselves the observance of any specific day. In Christ, they labor against sin and eagerly look forward to be received into glory at Christ’s second coming and enjoy rest. Christians are not commanded to observe any particular day of the week as a day of rest and worship. The Christian Greek Scriptures are silent about keeping any particular day as day of physical rest and worship. “The day early Christians observed, not by commandment but by choice, was the first day, Sunday. The physical and spiritual benefits of a rest day can be realized on any other day as well as on a Saturday. Christ and no Apostle commanded to keep the old Jewish Sabbath or any other day, but did command all men not to be bound by any particular day. (Romans 14:5-6; Galatians 4:9-11; Colossians 2:14-17)” 6 Christians are not required to observe the Sabbath as in the “Old Testament” times. Nor are the Christians commanded to observe Sunday as

a day of rest. They fulfill the Sabbath requirements of physical rest when once they accept Christ as their Savior in whom they are to find their spiritual rest and freedom from sin, Satan, and the world under Satan’s misrule. As such, the seventh day physical rest according to the Hebrew Scriptures is fulfilled by spiritual rest when those under the Sabbath law believe in Christ and are indwelt by the Spirit of the Risen Christ. The spiritual realities relating to the seventh-day Sabbath observance do find their expression through faith in Christ. These spiritual realities indicate that God’s work of the six days culminating in Sabbath rest is a type of God’s work for man’s deliverance from the power Satan whose sin brought chaos and disorder on earth that was earlier created perfect. It was not simply to establish a pattern of seven-day week did God create during the six days and rest on the Seventh day. As such, these aspects confirm the truth of an original perfect creation and a later additional work of the six days followed by Sabbath rest. The foregoing account thus expounds the mystery of the evangelical truths that lie embedded and dormant in the work of the first six days. The planned and deliberate work of the six days retrospectively points to God’s redemptive works. The pattern of six-day work coupled with the seventh day Sabbath does make a proper evangelical sense. The original perfect creation, once subjected to futility, had to be restored to accomplish God’s purpose through Man! _ ____________________________________________________________ 1: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 21. 2: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A. 3: C. A. Coates, ibid, p. 21. 4: C. A. Coates, op. cit. p. 21. 5: The Sevens (7) of the Bible in Time and Nature 6: Dake, Finis J., op. cit.

A Literal Seven -Day Week From the preceding account, it should be clear that the Creation Week was made up of seven literal days. “The fact that God named the light day and the darkness night, ending each day with evening and each night with morning proves the days and nights of the six days were as literal as all days and nights since then” 1 As such, Genesis 1 account is not a mere ‘literary device of creation epic’ adopted by Moses to make a ‘radical declaration that the God of Israel, completely unlike all the gods of the nations, did not emerge from anything, nor was He ever part of the universe’ 2 . Next, the Genesis account is not a mere poetic sublime manifesto of the true God as stated by Gleason Archer. According to him, “Genesis 1 is a sublime manifesto, totally rejecting all the cosmogonies of the pagan cultures of the ancient world as nothing but baseless superstition. The Lord God Almighty existed before all matter, and by His own word of command He brought the entire physical universe into existence, governing all the great forces of wind, rain, sun, and sea according to His sovereign will. This stood in stark contrast to the clashing, quarreling, capricious little deities and godlets spawned by the corrupt imagination of the heathen. The message and purpose of Genesis 1 is the revelation of the one true God who created all things out of nothing and ever keeps the universe under His sovereign control.” 3 Gleason Archer poses some pertinent questions that deserve our attention and biblically appropriate response. He asks: “Is the true purpose of Genesis 1 to teach that all creation began just six twenty-four-hour days before Adam was “born”? Or is this just a mistaken inference that

overlooks other biblical data having a direct bearing on this passage? … To be sure, if we are to understand Genesis 1 in a completely literal fashion -which some suppose to be the only proper principle of interpretation if the Bible is truly inerrant and completely trustworthy -- then there would be no possibility of reconciliation between modern scientific theory and the Genesis account…. Yet Genesis 1 allegedly teaches that creation took place in six twenty-four-hour days, at the end of which man was already on the earth.” 4 However, the Bible itself interprets each single day as made up of “an Evening and a Morning”. Each morning of light-period is called “Day” and each evening of darkness is called “Night” (Genesis 1:5). This very clearly distinguishing fact itself rules out any other interpretation. Anyway, those who insist that the days of the creation week are not to be taken literally are certainly wrong. “Are there not twelve hours in the day?”(John 11:9a). Is it “unbiblical” or ‘unscientific’ to “insist on a literal interpretation” of a seven-day week, of seven 24-hour periods, as described in Genesis 1:31-2:3? It is certainly unbiblical to presume that the seven days of Genesis 1 were not each of 24 hours in length. God’s Word clearly de fines each day as such, beginning with Genesis 1:5. By the way, what discoveries in science prompt theistic evolutionists to deny the creation of a literal 24-hour seven days week? When did the “seven–day week” originate or how did “time” in the midst of ‘timelessness’ or ‘eternity’ evolve? Reasoning further, Gleason Archer states: “The second major aspect of Genesis 1 is the revelation that God brought forth His creation in an orderly and systematic manner. There were six major stages in this work of formation, and these stages are represented by successive days of a week. In this connection it is important to observe that none of the six creative days bears a definite article in the Hebrew text; the translations “the first day,” “the second day,” etc., are in error. The Hebrew says, “And the evening took place, and the morning took place, day one” (1:5). Hebrew expresses “the first day” by hayyom hari’son, but this text says simply yom’ ehad (“day one”). Again, in v. 8 we read not again hayyom hasseni (“the second day”) but yom seni (“a second day”). In Hebrew prose of this genre, the definite article was generally used where the noun was intended to be definite; only in poetic style could it be omitted. The same is true with the rest of the six days; they all lack the definite article. Thus they are well adapted to a sequential pattern, rather than to strictly delimited units of

time.” 4 However, poetic style of expression in Genesis 1 in no way implies that there were six major stages of work. Rather, it simply confirms the truth of six literal days, albeit, in a ‘poetic style’. On the other hand, by doing away with a literal week, we’ll be doing away with the seventh day Sabbath, which is typical of the millennial rest soon to come. As stated earlier, the creation week is figuratively predictive of the six millennial days during which Satan is allowed to labor. But, in the seventh millennial day he will be forced to stop his labor of deceiving the nations and take a compulsory millennial rest. Yes, Satan himself will then be forced to take millennial rest in a ‘bottomless pit’ (Revelation 20:2-3), no more free to deceive the nations as he is doing right now, working overtime! Symbolically, each single day of the creation week is figurative of the six millennial days of Satan’s rule and man’s struggle against sin, sinful influences of the world, and Satan himself. At the same time, each single day also symbolically portrays God’s spiritual work in the hearts of those predestined to be saved during the course of the first six millennial days. As such, by doing away with a literal creation week, the theistic evolutionists are doing away with the evangelical truths portrayed by God’s work of the first six days of the creation week. God created the time as we measure it today in regular periods of “24hour days, seven-day weeks, lunar months, and solar years”. Beginning with the first week of Genesis 1, He did it by rearranging the solar system and stars in relation to the earth (Genesis 1:14-18); and may be, the entire Milky Way was also rearranged to that effect. “The word ‘evening’ means dusk or night and ‘morning’ means dawn or break of day and each is always used in a literal sense. This proves that the day and night and light and darkness are literal days and nights and regular periods of 24 hours regulated by the sun, moon, and stars as commanded in Genesis 1:14-18; 8:22, Job 38:12; Psalms 19:2; Jeremiah 31:35-37; 33:19-26” 5 Whether one takes the seven-day creation week literally or not, God’s Word itself interprets the creation accounts of the second phase as having taken place in six literal 24-hour days. Exodus 20:11 clearly states that “… in six (24 hour) days the Lord made {or re-fashioned or renewed (cf. Psalms 104:20) a disorderly and desolate earth of Genesis 1:2} the heaven and the earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh (24 hour) day”. However, as proved earlier, the original perfect heavens and earth

were created instantly by fiat, “In the Beginning”, in the dateless past. We need to keep in mind that the Bible interprets its own Scriptures, ‘here a little, and there a little’. We dare not add to it any of our own private interpretations based on traditional beliefs. Nor should we desperately indulge in ‘unscientific’ and ‘unbiblical’ speculations and then foolishly ‘smuggle the same into the Scripture’ by wrongly interpreting even the General Revelation. However, instead of allowing the Scripture, ‘here a little’ to interpret Scripture ‘there a little’, traditional six-day creationists and theistic evolutionists and others have been wrongly interpreting the creation accounts through the grid of traditional beliefs. It is actually wrong to interpret the Biblical account of the “creation of heavens and earth” by fiat out of nothing (ex-nihilo) as stated in Genesis 1:1 and accepted by faith as such in Hebrews 11:3 as if it is a constituent of God’s activity of Day 1. It is also unbiblical to further assume it is ‘one with’ or the ‘same as’ the next Biblical account stated in Genesis 1:3 to 2:4b relating to a later subsequent work of re-creation. This work of renewal involved‘re-shaping’ of a chaotic and empty desolate earth and re-ordering of the solar system and the creation of new life forms. Biblically speaking, Genesis 1:3 to 2:4a creation record “presents a wide –angle view of all seven days of creation and deals with the creation of man and woman as a single act. Then, in Genesis 2:4b-24 the author zooms in on the sixth day, giving details which were not possible in an overview like chapter1. The separate origins of man and woman are brought into sharp focus. Therefore, chapters 1 and 2 are not chronological, but 2:4b-24 presents in greater detail some of what 1:24-31 merely summarizes.” 6 Unfortunately, tradition-bound six-day creationists have overlooked some of the important aspects of Biblical Creation Truth. On the other hand, those who insist that the six days of the creation week should not be taken literally have only added to the confusion. Next, six-day creationists have hopelessly mixed up the two distinct creation accounts in Genesis, erroneously assuming it all to be a single comprehensive creative act completed in a brief six-day period. Accordingly, they will not at all accommodate Lucifer’s rule prior to his fall of which the Bible clearly talks about in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12c-18. Neither are they able to convincingly prove that Lucifer’s fall was sometime after the seventh day.

It may be convincingly stated that the “Scripture not once asserts a creation in six days; it is written, ‘in six days the Lord made heaven and earth’ (Exodus 20:11). The word “create” strictly used, is applied to the production of things by the Word or work of God, apart altogether from any pre-existing materials or matter (Hebrews 11:3), while the word “made” signifies to shape or form existing material; these are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created (‘bara’ in Hebrew, same as in Genesis 1, verse 1); ( but were refashioned) in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens” in six days (Genesis 2:4). The distinction between “creating” and “making” is all-important in considering the mutual relations of geology (or of astrophysics or paleontology) and the Scripture account of creation.” 7 Notwithstanding any blindly accepted vague “scientific speculations” and conclusions drawn there-from, “The evidence of astrophysics about the age of the universe and from geology and paleontology about the age of the earth” does not prove an evolutionary process. Rather, it supports the biblical witness and “throws light and confirms the fact of a pre-Adamic instant creation (Genesis 1:1, that may have lasted for ages) ---- of that world without a human inhabitant, which had undergone various violent catastrophes”. All this destruction was a consequence of Lucifer’s rebellion (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:15; Luke 10:18). But, it was subsequently made fit for the creation of man out of the redeemed dust of the earth. God is SPIRIT who inhabits ETERNITY. He is outside of time and space but is Omnipresent. The original pre-Adamic heavens and earth were brought into existence in eternity past in a fully developed, completed state. As such, the question of billions of years doesn’t even arise as there could be no time factor in the realm of “eternity”, the way we measure time on earth. So one is left wondering as to how the ‘evidence of astrophysics about the age of the universe and from geology and paleontology about the age of the earth’ in countless ‘billions of years’ is arrived at. True empirical sciences demand specific verified facts and not some fancy speculations. Even to speak of any age of the universe is futile, since it was created in ‘timelessness’ – in the dateless or ageless past. As such, the unscientific guesses are untenable seeing that the universe was created in the eternity past and not in any measurable time-period the way we measure time in relation to the earth’s movement around the sun. In fact, no man can ever accurately find out the age accurately. Accordingly, the guesses of billions

of years should not bother us at all. Nor do we have any scriptural warrant to presume that the earth and the universe are about 6,000 to 10,000 years old. As such, ‘young earth’ or ‘old universes’ are not biblically based concepts. Even otherwise, if the speculated age of the universe and life on earth in billions of years be considered as true and factual, then we may rightly conclude that God created the universe to be as old as it is found to be as stated by the scientists; just as He created fully grown flora and fauna and a fully developed man to begin with. If not, How old Adam and Eve were on the day they were first created? How old were the fully grown flora and fauna on the day the same were created. If there were atheistic scientists at the time of the appearance of Adam, they would have calculated Adam’s age according to his appearance. Contrary to atheistic and theistic speculations, there is now no further development but deterioration as a consequence of sin. As such, the question of “whether it (evolution other than micro-evolution) is continuing even today” doesn’t arise. Next, theistic evolutionists are somehow convinced that “The Bible only tells us that God is Creator; it says nothing about how He created.” That is, “They accept that Genesis 1 tells us that God has created all things, but recognize that Genesis 1 does not tell us how the creation process has unfolded or how long it has taken to unfold” 8 Now, that is totally a baseless, if not blasphemous, false conclusion. After all, God does tell us that He created it all ‘In A Beginning’ by fiat. And, as far as re-creation is concerned it is clearly stated in Exodus 20:11 that He completed His work in six literal days. During the course of the six days, He simply commanded and the earth brought forth the flora on the third day; and the waters brought forth the fishes and the birds on the fifth day, and so on. Anyway, it is obvious that the theistic evolutionists have allowed themselves to be deceived into believing and accepting evolutionary lies disguised as scientific truth. May be, theistic evolutionists are presuming that God did not tell us how He created man. But God does tell us that He created Man out of the dust of the earth in Genesis 1:26-28 and 2:7. And, next He tells us that by putting man to sleep, He removed his rib and created the woman out of the man’s rib (Genesis 2:21-23). That is HOW God says He created the first Man and Woman! Definitely, Adam and Eve (both called ‘Ad-amah’ in Hebrew) did not

gradually evolve in course of time from some unknown mysterious fanciful “common ancestor”. Nor does the Bible say that primordial life evolved and developed into the various species over a very long period of time by Natural Selection. Adam and Eve are not some imaginary mythical figures that evolved from some common ape-like ancestors of the remote past. It’s a satanic lie, like it or not, to do away with the real humanity of Christ. Most assuredly, and frankly speaking, “There is no conflict between science and the Bible. Real scientific discoveries must be distinguished from theories, however. Science, especially geology, is still in its infancy and the testimony of rocks uncertain. True statements of God’s Word must also be distinguished from man’s interpretation of them. When men finally agree on the age of the earth, then place the many years over the historical 6,000 years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, there will be no conflict between the book of Genesis and science” 9 And finally, wherein would the theistic evolutionists attempt to fit in the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life in their imaginary evolutionary processes? Are these also some mythical figures conveniently adopted by Moses to give finishing touches to a sublime manifesto? They are left with no option, but somehow conclude these trees need not be taken literally. Instead, they would perhaps accept the same as mythical objects of some Creation Epic not to be taken literally. Likewise, they may also state that the heavenly things and characters of the heavenly city, New Jerusalem, as well as the future heavens and earth spoken of in the Bible as some unfounded myths not to be taken literally. They need not, along with the atheistic evolutionists, accept the miracles of Christ as well as His Resurrection from the dead as literal and supernatural events. ________________________________________________________________________________________________

1: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. p. 83. 2: Creation and Evolution? op. cit. p. 8 3: Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, op. cit. p.15 4: Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, op. cit. p.30

5: Dake, Finis J., op. cit. p. 83. 6: Spiros Zodhiates, op. cit. p.1 7: Walter Scott, op.cit. p. 18. 8: Creation and Evolution?, op. cit. p. 8). 9: Dake, Finis J., op. cit. p. 76.

CONCLUSION Unfortunately, the proponents of Young-Earth Creationism and the modern adherents of the Traditional Six-Day Creationism have failed to recognize the evangelical aspects of God’s physical works of the six days. They cannot, as long as they are unwilling to acknowledge the biblical truth of an instant perfect creation briefly described in Genesis 1:1. Subsequently, they cannot or will not recognize and admit the fact that the chaos mentioned in Genesis 1:2 is not a work of creation but of judgment. They will not accept the fact that God actually next worked again for six days so as to restore life conditions and create man after His own image and rest on the seventh day. Anyway, in the light of Biblical Truth ‘here a little and there a little’ the evangelical truths that are hidden in the very first chapter of Genesis clearly stand out. These evangelically-based truths cannot be simply ignored. In the mouth of two or three witnesses, any truth not only stands confirmed and affirmed but its complementary facets also become beautifully manifested. This makes it possible to get a comprehensive view of the multi-faceted truth. So also is Biblical Creation Truth. In addition to quoting earlier those who saw God’s six-day work as typifying God’s spiritual work of six millennial days, it will be equally fitting to quote at length what J. Taylor has to write in connection with God’s work of the six days and the subsequent 7th day Sabbath. He states as follows:

The book of Genesis gives us the origin of things. The beginning here, no doubt, refers to the same period as is referred to in John 1. It is the outset of the divine operations. In John 1the Person of Christ is the subject. In the beginning He was there. ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God’.(John 1:1). The point in Genesis 1 is to connect the physical universe, what man is cognizant of, with God. Verse 1 stands alone; it is not included in the operations of the six days. Of the time that may have elapsed between verses 1 and 2, God has not been pleased to tell us, but the second verse reveals a condition that one could not believe was the original state of the earth as created by God. Chaos and darkness marked it. This state aptly describes that which resulted from sin in the moral system of things. Therefore the operations of the successive days serve to show how that out from a chaotic moral state God can bring the most perfect order. Chaos and darkness describe the state of man's soul as away from God, but God acts in this state, and the result is that the soul reaches His rest. God said, ‘Let there be light’. (Gen. 1:3). This passage is directly connected with the gospel in 2 ians 4. Direct divine creative power is needed in the moral system of things so as to bring order into it, and to render it suitable to God's rest; this power is always in accord with the testimony presented to us. I think that each day suggests a certain feature of the testimony, and the order in which the work of each day occurs accords with that in which the truth is received into our souls from the time the light first reaches us. “‘The Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters’ (Genesis 1:2). I think we may connect this with John 3. At the end of John 2 it is stated that the Lord knew what was in man; He did not commit Himself to men. That is, there was nothing to trust in man; but the early part of chapter 3 answers to the hovering of the Spirit. It is the sovereign action of the Spirit so as to produce something for God where there was nothing. That of which a man born again realizes the need at the outset is light. In verse 3 we get light. Here it is no question of the kind of light. When a person is in darkness he wants light. The presence of Christ as the true light here brought out fully the darkness and disorder which prevailed in the moral state of things; hence the need for the sovereign action of the Spirit, and the gospel (the light commanded, as it were) following in John 3. The first day, therefore, is analogous to the gospel as first presented to one born anew. As to the second day: ‘And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters and God called the firmament Heaven" (Genesis 1:6, 8). There can be no doubt that there is a moral point in this; that is, at a

certain time in the history of a soul heaven comes into view. Christ is in heaven. When He was down here, He connected the souls of His people with heaven. In the second day there is indicated another sphere, as distinct from the earth, and this came out very clearly in the Lord's ministry. ‘Rejoice because your names are written in heaven’(Luke 10:20); ‘your Father which is in heaven’(Matthew 5:45); ‘the Son of man which is in heaven (John 3:13). The earth comes into view in its own place. When we get clear as to heaven we are prepared for the earth. We see in John 3 how heaven takes precedence of the earth. On the third day great stress is laid on what suggests resurrection. ‘And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth’.(Genesis 1:11). Fruitfulness is in resurrection, ‘Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God’ (Romans 7:4). The fourth day is a wonderful day for Christians: Christ is now known in heaven as the source of light and rule. The light of the first day, doubtless, came from the sun; this is so, at any rate, if applied morally, for there is no moral light save what comes from Christ. The first day may be taken to represent Christ as here on earth, and the light shone on all. Christ as Man here inaugurates the day, and henceforth the day always attaches to Him, so that when the Lord withdrew from the earth there was a formal separation of light and darkness. In the first day it is light as such: what it was, or its source, is not stated. The light appearing, it is separated from the darkness. The day really went with Christ, and the earth is left in total darkness. But the fourth day provides for this, for the ‘lesser light’ was to rule the night. The lesser light points to the church, and inasmuch as the moon is not light in herself, she cannot be light to the earth during the night unless she remains in the light of the sun; so the church cannot be light now unless it abides in the light of Christ. The lights in the heavens were to be for signs and for seasons. Seasons have reference to the course of things on earth. Eras of this world have largely been introduced by certain human events; but divine eras are regulated by Christ in heaven. The stars are representative of Christ, and also of the saints individually. Scripture speaks of them in this way. Christ

is the bright morning Star, and ‘they that turn many to righteousness’ shine ‘as the stars for ever and ever’(Daniel 12:3). It is just possible that stars may take in the Jewish remnant in the latter days. The value of the stars is particularly seen during the night when the moon is hidden. When the church is removed there will still be light, though not so bright. In the fourth day we come into practical righteousness as recognizing Christ as Lord in heaven. In the fifth day we get life in a visible energetic way. ‘Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven’ (Genesis 1:20)-- the activity of life in an intelligent way, one might almost say, although man has not yet come into view. It is the introduction of life. Following the course of the days in chapter 1, viewing them as indicating the order in which God works in men's souls so as to lead them into His Sabbath, it is evident that the sixth day brings the work to an end; for on this day man is created so as to exercise dominion over all that had been made. This was the completion, or top-stone, of what God had designed. ‘God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them’ (Genesis 1:27). In type this is Christ and the church as seen in (Ephesians 1). “When this shall have been literally accomplished, when Christ and the church are set over all things, God's rest shall ensue. God will ‘rest in his love’ (Zephaniah 3:17) but He shall rest because His work is completed. The Sabbath is cessation from labor (Genesis 2:2-3). On our side, on the side of human desire prompted by the Spirit, there is nothing more to be prayed for when the King's Son is recognized as on the throne. ‘The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended’ (Psalms 72:20). We learn from (Exodus 31:17) that on the seventh day God ‘rested and was refreshed’. This may be applied to Christ as Man here on earth, for in Him God rested. There was the expression of the Father's delight, and the Spirit descended and abode upon Him. But in the full thought of it, the Sabbath refers to the period when God shall rest (all His counsels accomplished) in a renewed creation headed up in Christ. Chapter 2 (Genesis) deals specially with man, his origin and nature: the scene of delight designed by God for him; the law by which he was to be governed there; his intelligence as indicated in his naming the animals, etc. and finally the origin and nature of her who was to be his companion. It is Christ and the church brought very close to our eyes. Chapter 1:26, 27 foreshadows Christ as man according to God's counsels, but chapter 2 presents the historical side. Viewed in this light, the church is derived from Him. Adam's intelligence is particularly seen in the name he gives

the woman: ‘This time’, he says, ‘it is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh: this shall be called woman, because this was taken out of man’ (Gen. 2:23). He recognized himself in her. The source whence she is derived is the view of the church which this type furnishes.” 1

God’s revealed Biblical Truth is multifaceted; this is true of creation truth as well. As such, another spiritual aspect of God’s Creation Truth in Genesis 1 wonderfully displays another beautiful facet of the same Creation Truth. This aspect of creation truth does beautifully describe God’s original intent for truly converted Christians: that the regenerated, converted and restored Believer’s Life in Christ is truly a life of Separation. A true Christian’s life is a sanctified life dedicated to God and to His service. Such a dedicated life requires a pursuit of holiness. God’s works of the first three days symbolically portray the principle of spiritual separation in the life of a true Christian. And only such separated Christians, in fellowship with those who are separated and sanctified by truth, truly abide in Christ and bear much spiritual fruit. The separation aspect of the first three days of physical creation followed by three days of productive fruit-bearing land as typical of a true Christian’s life of separation and fruit-bearing is convincingly explained by Jack W. Langford as described below: “THE DOCTRINE OF SEPARATION BEGINS IN THE VERY FIRST CHAPTER OF GENESIS”

The “truth” about the Christian’s “separation” unto Jesus Christ the Lord actually begins with the physical creation as described in the inspired record of Genesis chapter one. Herein we read of the breathtaking events in the first week of the physical creation of God. In six successive days God formed and made the physical heavens and earth as suitable for mans’ habitation. The seventh day God ceased from His work. When one looks carefully, he will see that the first three of those days can be characterized by the word “division” or “separation.” Furthermore, the second three days are characterized by God filling the sphere of separation created in the first three days. Most Christians do not realize that the separation God ordains in their lives is pictured and patterned after the separation God ordained initially in the physical creation—and this fact should illustrate how vitally important the subject is—God is still “creating” today and God is still ordaining “separation” today. Separation Truth is a vital part of Creation Truth.

In II Corinthians 5:17 we are told “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a NEW CREATION; old things have passed away; behold all things have become new.” Here we discover that God is still in the “creation” business. In fact, the apostle Paul had already stated (II Cor. 4:6) that this “New Creation” process had begun just exactly like the original physical creation process began—“For it is God Who commanded light to shine out of darkness, Who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” This revelation takes us back in our minds to the creation week. “THE SPIRIT OF GOD MOVED UPON”

We also need to remember that this week of renewing the earth begins with the activity of the Holy Spirit of God—“…and the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters” (Gen. 1:2, literal translation). The earth was said to be “without form and void”—literally “waste and empty.” In addition, the whole globe was submerged in “water” and smothered by total “darkness.” It was over this bleak and abysmally darkened chaos that the Spirit of God, like a bird, was literally “fluttering” (see Deut. 32:11; Isa. 31:5 & Gen. 1:2). The Psalmist of old reflected upon this scene by his words, “You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; and you renew the face of the earth” (Ps. 104:30). So it was with the Spirit’s activity, God spoke and said “let there be light” (Gen. 1:3) and the six days suddenly began. The activity of these days was accomplished by the power of the Spirit of God. So it is, as unregenerate persons our sin-darkened hearts and chaotic lives were moved upon by the Holy Spirit of God, bringing to us the message of God’s compassion and mercy, in order to persuade us to repent and believe the gospel (II Thess. 2:13; Eph. 1:13 & Heb. 10:29). Thankfully, when we first trusted in Christ for soul salvation there was a transformation. At that point in time we were instantly made “new creations in Christ.” And then the beautiful process of our “separation” began. As Paul stated in II Corinthians 5:17,18 “…old things were passed away; behold, all things have became new—and all things were of God.” “God Who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, Who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge…” In the Genesis creation account there quickly followed a— THREE-FOLD SEPARATION

As I said before, the first three days of God’s creative work of renewal can actually be characterized by the word “separation.” On each of the days God “divides” specific elements.

On the first day God not only created light, but He also “Divided the light from the darkness (verse 4).” So it is, in that great “separation” passage of II Corinthians 6:14-7:1, Paul says in a preliminary manner on the subject of separation truth, “And what communion has light with darkness?” What was true in the physical creation, that light cannot cooperate with darkness, is most certainly true in the spiritual creation. The spiritual realities that we see and learn in Christ are a light that removes the darkness of Satanic influence. This is first of all the light of spiritual realities chasing away the darkness of man-made religious superstition from our souls. There is only a God-ordained “division” (or separation) between light and darkness, either physical as in the physical creation, or spiritual as in the spiritual new creation. Thus the very first lesson in the Bible for a newly born Christian is to recognize the separation between spiritual light and truth and spiritual darkness and error. This is fundamental and is repeated for us many times in the Scriptures. This is one of the foremost types in the Bible. God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth” (I John 1:5,6). This truth is emphasized by many Scriptural references. It would serve well to read all of them. See John 1:5; 3:19; 12:46; Acts 26:18; Col. 1:13; Eph. 5:11-13; 6:12; Rom. 13:12; I Cor. 4:5; I Thess. 5:5-8; Luke 22:53; I Pet. 2:9 & I John 2:8-11. One who walks “in the light” is walking in separation. When a person is regenerated, his whole outlook on life changes. Traditional prejudices and hatreds are replaced by “the love of God that is shed abroad in our hearts” (Rom. 5:5). The believer’s whole outlook on life changes as it is illuminated by the truths in the Word of God under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Perhaps the most shocking illumination is the exposure of what true Christianity really is. The major conflict in the life of Christ was between Himself and the religious leadership of that day. Nevertheless, when a sin-darkened mind has been illuminated by the truths from the Word of God, the light of those truths will illuminate a totally new pathway in life. It is clear from all these Scriptures above that a Christian must be cognizant of the necessity of being separated from spiritual darkness in life and religion. Unless that separation is put into practice, a believer cannot walk in full and complete fellowship with Almighty God, Who saved him from the guilt and penalty of his sins. The whole battle between Christianity and the Devil is the battle between light and darkness. Spiritual darkness is first of all religious subterfuge and invention; no matter how pious and pretentious is its appearance, it is nevertheless labeled by God as “DARKNESS” to be avoided. It is incompatible with the true light of God’s revelation.

On the Second day God divided the “waters below” from the “waters above” (Gen. 1:6-8). God established an expanse or atmospheric “heaven” between the oceanic waters covering the earth and the water vapor that would form a cloudy canopy around the earth. It will become obvious why this separation is God-ordained in the works of the last three days. First of all, the oceanic waters will be the sphere for all the fish and various forms of sea life that God will make. The water vapor above will be a primary source for the nourishment and growth of the fruit bearing vegetation that God will plant on the earth. In addition, the atmospheric heaven will also provide the breathing space for all the various life forms that God will later place on the surface of the earth. Thus, this separation was essential for providing two separate spheres for the physical existence of the different forms of life on the new regenerated earth. Like the light and the darkness of the first day, wherein the spirit of God later attaches spiritual significance of good and evil, so it is that the two watery elements are also spoken of in a figurative sense in later Scriptures. These become very significant. The clouds above and the water below are sometimes spoken of as two separate companies. On the one hand, God’s presence is repeatedly described as being characterized by a cloud or with the “clouds of heaven.” See for instance—Exo. 16:10; 19:9,6; 24:16-18; 34:5; 40:38; Num. 11:25; Job 26:9; 22:14; Psalm 18:10-12; 78:14; 104:3; Isa. 19:1 & Nah. 1:3. In addition the heavenly hosts are sometimes depicted as clouds or being in the clouds—Dan. 7:10 & 13; Matt. 17:5; 24:30 &26:64. Joyously, the saints themselves are said to be “caught up in clouds”—I Thess. 4:17. And in another place the saints of old are described as “A great cloud of witnesses”—Hebrews 12:1. Therefore the cloudy canopy over the earth is figuratively spoken of as representative of God’s presence, the company of angelic hosts and of the saints themselves. On the other hand, the waters below are often used to depict the restless sea of earth’s humanity. “The wicked are like the troubled sea when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt”—Isa. 57:20. The four great world empires as different beasts are said to arise out of the sea of humanity—Daniel 7:2-7. In addition, Christ spoke of the turbulences that will come upon mankind during the “great tribulation,” just prior to His second coming. He thus spoke of the terrible unrest among mankind in terms of “the sea and the waves roaring”—Luke 21: 25. In one of Christ’s parables He spoke of the “drag net” that was cast “into the sea” and “gathered of every kind.” After being drug to the shore, the “good” are separated and collected in vessels, whereas the “bad” are segregated out and destroyed—Matthew 13:47-50. Therefore, we can see

from the Scriptures that in a figurative sense, the oceans and seas represent troubled, restless humanity. Now it is true that for the time being we are in this wicked world, yet God has placed it into our hearts that we are not really a vital part of it. We are temporarily only strangers and pilgrims on this earth who are witnesses to the world of God’s grace and mercy in Christ. Not only is there going to be an ultimate separation between the saved and the lost into two different eternal spheres, but also the spiritual significance of the separation that took place on the second day of the “Creation Week” speaks to us of a present “separation” that should exist between the saved and the lost. The fellowship and association of believers together to strengthen one another is one of the paramount truths of the church of Jesus Christ. When one is saved, “born again” into the family of God, he will instinctively enjoy fellowship with God and with God’s people. The old comrades of his lost estate will no longer have the attraction that they once had. The believer will no longer have the appetite for the ungodliness that he once enjoyed. Consequently, his old friends will seem to slough off as he walks in his new life in Christ. He will search out and associate with fellow Christians who enjoy the things of God. This is illustrated by the new converts on the Day of Pentecost, as recorded in Acts 2. They “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and in prayers…now all who believed were together…” (Acts 2:42 & 44). The exhortation of Hebrews 10:25 is paramount, “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching.” On the third day God divided the land from the waters and the dry land appeared. In addition God caused the land to spring forth with all manner of fruit bearing vegetation. The third day’s work will therefore speak to us of separation so as to bring forth fruit unto God. The darkened waters that had submerged the earth speak of judgment and death. The second verse of Genesis chapter one described the earth as being in a condition of “waste and emptiness” (literal translation). Whenever those two Hebrew words, tohu wa bohu, are used together, it meant judgmental destruction (see Isa. 34:11 & Jer. 4:23). Thus, some careful teachers of the Scriptures have pointed out in the past that the first scene after the initial creation of the universe (Gen. 1:1) is a scene of destruction and judgment. In addition to the earth being “waste” and “emptied,” it is submerged under waters and the whole was plunged into intense darkness. Many have referred to this as the original “chaos” out of which God brings “order” and “form.” Remember also that the Spirit of God, by later revelations at which we have already looked (see the first

day), likened this to the condition of a soul-darkened sinner under Satanic influence emerging into light and regeneration. And now on the third day, the segregating of the waters into the oceans, the rising and appearance of the continental land mass, and the placing of a great variety of vegetation upon the land mass speaks of the believer’s new life and fruitfulness unto God. As to the resurrection and separation of our new life to a place of fruitfulness in Christ, the principle is expressed in the words of the apostle Paul in Romans 6:1-23. We will just select a few excerpts of that beautiful passage which describes the believers’ identification with Christ in His DEATH, and then also RESURRECTION to a position of FRUITFULLNESS in our lives before God. “For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection…knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him…but the life that He lives He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God… “For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regards to righteousness.What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? “For the end of those things is death. But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your FRUIT to holiness, and the end everlasting life.” TheApostle Peter spoke of the believer’s past life in these words—“For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries. In regard to these, they think it strange that you do not run with them in the same flood of dissipation, speaking evil of you” (I Peter 4:3,4). Then in his second letter Peter adds that beautiful description of the fruitfulness that should exist in the life of a Christian— “Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, by which have been given to us exceeding great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor UNFRUITFUL in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ” (II Pet. 1:2-8).

“THE SECOND THREE DAYS COMPLEMENT THE FIRST THREE DAYS”

Amazing as it may seem, when one carefully reads the first chapter of Genesis he will note that, on the first three “days” of activity, God absolutely does not actually create any physical substance whatsoever. In the first verse of Genesis one, God created the whole universe, that is, the whole heavens and earth. Of course this involves the physical substance of the universe. But then upon the activity of the Holy Spirit over a darkened chaos (verse 2), God speaks three successive “days” (24 hour time periods) into existence (verses 3-13). During these three days there is not any physical substance created. Instead, God is carefully, progressively and systematically preparing environments as we have seen above. In the first three days God is FORMING environments and in the second three days God will be FILLING these environments. We can also express this in another manner. The first three days are characterized by the word SEPARATION, because in each case God divides or separates two distinct spheres. The second three days are characterized by the word PREPARATION, because God is filling each of these spheres in preparation for earth’s inhabitants. Once the areas of separation have been established, God proceeds to fill, in an orderly fashion, each of those spheres. On the fourth day God will fill the earth’s day and the night with luminaries, the sun, moon and stars, which will function to rule the day and guide the night. On the fifth day God will fill the air with birds and God will fill the seas with fish. On the sixth day God will fill the land with animals and finally create mankind who is designed to rule over all. So, in all of this there is a perfectly planned sequence. Nothing is haphazard or just thrown together accidentally. Not only is there a divine system to God’s physical creation but there is also a divine system to God’s spiritual creation as well. Let us briefly observe each of these second three days. On the fourth day God orders or arranges the sun, moon and stars in relationship to the earth. It has been noted by Hebrew linguists that the word which is used only by God and means to “create” (bara), is not used in this arrangement on this day. This word was already used in verse one in relationship to the heavenly spheres; therefore it is not repeated here. The sun, moon and stars had already been brought into existence in verse one (“In the beginning God created the heavens”). Rather the word we translate “to make” (asah) is used—“God made the sun, moon and stars.” This Hebrew word most often simply means “to arrange or set in order.”

God thus forms or arranges (makes) already existing materials or spheres previously created. By this we would understand that the chaos which involved this earth, described in verse two, also involved the heavenly spheres as well. Therefore, on the fourth day God sets in order and arranges the sun, moon and stars to properly function in relationship to the earth. The function of the sun, moon and stars in relationship to the earth is spelled out. They “divide the day from the night,” are for “signs and seasons, and for days and years” and “lights” in the heavens. In addition they are said to “rule” the day and the night (verse 16). Thus the operation of the day and night time periods made on the first day are now governed and directed by the function of the sun, moon and stars made on the fourth day. This function will serve to guide and direct the overall operations of the miracle of life on this physical earth. We have seen that the spiritual significance of the light and darkness made on the first day found its parallel in man’s consciousness of right and wrong, good and evil, the will of Satan versus the will of God and “children of light” versus “children of darkness.” Now on the fourth day, typically, God actually sets guidelines that direct man’s consciousness so that it is not haphazard. Man’s conscience must be in tune with the guiding instruments that God has specially designed. Conscience would be worthless unless it is calibrated to respond to the standards God has ordained. The typical or symbolic use of the sun, moon and stars is also well spelled out in the Scriptures. In addition, the spiritual significance is in perfect accord with, and parallel to, the physical function of these spheres in the sky. We first see the spiritual or figurative significance of the sun and moon in the dream of Joseph as recorded in Genesis 37:8-11. Joseph dreamed that the sun and moon and the eleven stars would bow down before him. Jacob immediately interpreted the dream as having reference to Joseph’s own father as the sun, his mother as the moon and his brothers as the stars. The dream was not difficult to interpret. It was unthinkable in Jacob’s mind that the two supreme guiding influences, the sun (father) and the moon (mother), would bow down before one of lesser importance over whom they rule. Indeed, the father and mother are the first and immediate influences that God has set in our lives to guide and direct us from childhood. This theme plays an important part in the book of Proverbs. “My son, hear the instruction of your father, and do not forsake the law of your mother…” (Prov. 1:8). The father and mother are first and immediate in the echelon of those who bring to us the guiding truths of the Word of

God. Woe be to those who would scorn this guidance—Prov. 20:20 & 30; 17. Indeed, the Word of God itself is represented by the sun, the moon and the stars. That great Psalm which expounds to us the central theme of the Law of the Lord—“the Law of the Lord is perfect” (Psalm 19)—begins with the introductory message from the heavenly spheres that speaks to all mankind on the face of the whole earth, “Day unto day utters speech, and night unto night reveals knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard” (verse 3). As one goes on to read this Psalm he is held in awe as to the perfection, beauty and grandeur of its messages. And make sure of one thing—in obedience to them “there is great reward” (verse 11). Looking through a great telescope into the unfathomable depths of the starry heavens is like looking, by the Spirit of God, into the unfathomable mysteries of the Word of God. In both we see the startling arrangements and magnificent glory of spectacular truths. On the fifth day God fills the two separate spheres He ordained on the second day—the waters beneath and the atmospheric heaven above. Both spheres now swarm with unique forms of life. The ocean now swarms with fish and sea creatures. Likewise, the sky above is filled with the flying fowl of every variety and kind. These are the same fish and fowl that man knows today. No doubt their original beauty and perfection were even more astonishing than what we see after the millenniums of the curse have left its scars on God’s original beauty. The amazing thing about these two life forms is that they both characteristically defy the laws of gravity. The fish by their very unique characteristics possess amazing buoyancy which allows them free access to the very depths or the heights of the watery deep. They pass through the dark curtains of the deep with smooth, seemingly effortless speed and grace. There is nothing man has ever tried to imitate as complicated and difficult as the engineering that goes into a submarine. And yet the modern submarine is but a clumsy imitation of those efficient creatures of the sea. On the other hand, the birds of the air soar with unbelievable perfection through the currants of the air and sky. They seemingly mock the law of gravity with their uncanny ability to wing their way through every ballet performance imaginable in the sky. What person is there who has never stood in admiration of these heavenly gliders and acrobats? Even the Wright brothers who lay on the hillside to watch carefully their amazing performances, realized man could never equal their perfection of control over the physics and efficiency of flight. The smooth contours in the elegant design of the birds have been carefully acknowledged by our crafty flight engineers in even our most advanced airplanes.

It is interesting that the two forms of animal life that Almighty God first creates on this newly regenerated earth both amazingly depict “victory.” From the darkness of the chaos of the second verse of Genesis one, God raises up the double image of victorious life. This is undoubtedly like the truth emanating out from the depths of the darkness of death when our blessed Savior arose from death to bring life and immortality to light through the gospel. “If any man be in Christ, he is a new creation” (II Corinthians 5:17). Christ was victorious over death and that victory is thankfully transferred to every blood-bought believer. Amazing as it may seem, the two emblems of Christianity, according to Church history, became the fish and the dove. The fish, in all probability, became an emblem because the first Disciples of Christ were fishermen. Peter and his brethren just so happened to be of that employment in life (Matt. 4:18-22). And so today we often see the fish emblem to indicate a Christian or Christianity. And then, since the Holy Spirit of God took the “form of a dove” (John 1:32) when He came down upon Jesus Christ to inaugurate and empower a new ministry, the dove, likewise, came to be used, even in early Christianity, as emblematic of this new Divine institution composed of Christ’s followers. Today we often see it used by different churches and theologies as emblematic of Spirit inspired forms and functions of Christianity. Herein the inspired words of the apostle Paul should ring out in our remembrance, because it ties everything together— “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death” (Rom. 8:2). The most significant testimony of Christianity is that real, Biblical Christianity spells “Victory.” Thank God, the One who engineered the original creation has likewise engineered in every believer the buoyancy to overcome the laws of sin’s gravity. On the sixth day God brings to a grand finale the week of renewal. Not only is the animal kingdom on earth all made and perfected, but over them all man is brought into existence with the supreme significance of having “dominion” (Gen. 1:26 & 28) over every living thing on the earth. Man is said to be created and made in the very image and likeness of God. Consequently, it is not difficult to see the spiritual significance of the sixth day’s work. God has ordained that the “new creation in Christ” be so equipped as to “Reign in Life” (Romans 5:17). The spiritual truths exemplified by the work of God on the previous day spelled out “victory.” Because of victory the believer can be “more than a conqueror” (Rom. 8:33-39). Indeed, the apostle Paul tells us that “all things aare yours” in Christ (I Cor. 3:21). Because the believer places his faith totally in Christ, it is as it were that we are created “into the image of the One Who created [us]” (Col. 3:9,

10), and again, the believer “has been created in the likeness of God” (Eph. 4:24). In addition, every believer is “God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them” (Eph. 2:10). In summary it is stated “Grace is now reigning through righteousness” (Rom. 5:21). What an amazing and spectacular sequence of blessings and provisions. Not only is the believer created in the very image of God, but he is also created to “reign in life.” Please keep in mind that in the overall design of God, the work of these last three days is clearly built upon the “separation” exemplified in the work of the first three days. And so it is also true that Divine guidance through the Word (day 4), victory in life (day 5), and the reigning dominion through grace, are all brought to us by virtue of the principles of separation. Only when the believer sees and walks in the principles of separation can there be the fullest blessings from God, and the fulfilling of the purpose of God for us in living out the “New Creation.” (2) _______________________________________________________________________ 1: J. Taylor, Snr, Volume 2, “Readings in Genesis”, New York, 1908, (reprinted from Vols. I and II "Mutual Comfort", 1908/9) Pages 263 to 268. 2: Jack W. Langford , www. separationtruth.org

PHASE THREE

Creation in the Eternity Future Creation of

New Heavens and New Earth

CREATION Of

New Heavens and New Earth Theistic Evolutionists are of the opinion that “The Bible only says that God created all things that exist; it does not speak to the question of the manner of the creative process or how long the creative process took – or whether it is continuing even today” (Creation and Evolution? op. cit; p. 7). However, the Bible states that God saw everything that He had created and made in the course of the six days and declared it all as “very good”. This truth nullifies the myth that creative processes are continuing even today. Atheistic and theistic scientists are aware that “There is evidence now that the whole world and all in it are degenerating and moving toward some climax or judgment, instead of evolving upward into higher and better forms. The tendency of atoms of high atomic weight to break up into other atoms of lower weight seems to be the universal tendency of all matter. Scientists declare that this is also true in the vegetable and animal kingdom.” (Finis J. Dake, op. cit; p. 83). What does the Bible actually reveal? “For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travailed in pain together until now” (Romans 8:22). As a consequence of Adam’s sin, the present creation is subjected to futility and eventual dissolution. As such, the heavens of Genesis 1:8, 14-19 and the earth of Genesis 1:10 that are now are kept in store reserved unto the day of

judgment and the final perdition of ungodly men. Biblically speaking, the present creation is doomed to decay and eventually end up in dissolution! The heavens and the earth, “which are now”, which have been restored and re-fashioned in the creation week, “by the same Word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3.7). Next, Peter tells us that the ‘day of the Lord will come … in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up’ (2 Peter 3:10). Other Scriptures also confirm and complement Peter’s predictions about the approaching destruction on earth and in the heavens (Revelation 21:1). However, once the heavens and the earth ‘that are now’ are destroyed, God will create new Heavens and a new Earth and there will be no more any sea. Apostle Peter looked forward to the creation of new heavens and earth according to God’s promises in the Old Testament. He states: “Nevertheless we, according to His promise look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelled righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13). Accordingly, Apostle John says “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea” (Revelation 21:1). Isaiah 65:17 states: “For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind”. Again, God comforts His people by assuring them of their permanence in His Kingdom just as the new heavens and the new earth that He will make after the end of the millennial reign will remain permanently: “For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain” (Isaiah 66:22). The Question that remains to be answered by Theistic evolutionists is this: “Will God create the New Heavens and the New Earth with another “Big Bang’? Or will God create “soup of hydrogen atoms” and then let it gradually develop and expand into new galaxies in the course of billions or trillions of years and ‘the creative process continue endlessly in the future’? But then, God creates by fiat. He will certainly vindicate to His glory His creative power by creating the new heavens and new earth by His sheer command. This new creation will be witnessed by the resurrected saints or ‘Sons of God’ and then they will ‘shout for joy’. Theistic evolutionists perhaps assume that God will use some

evolutionary process to bring into existence the promised new creation. May be they also speculate that the ‘lake of fire’ destined for Satan and his angels and for the incorrigible wicked will be evolving from some ‘soup of exploding hydrogen atoms’ in the course of billions of years after the Final Judgment. There can be no end to biblically unfounded assumptions once the mind is given over. However, biblically based speculations are edifying. Notwithstanding our speculations which may be right or wrong, God is going to vindicate His power by creating new heavens and a new earth instantly by fiat. This awesome event will be also witnessed by all the atheistic evolutionists who are saved by God’s grace. And the new creation will prove to theistic evolutionists that God creates by fiat, not by evolution.

New Heavens and New Earth The Eternal Inheritance of the Saints God worked in a phased manner for six days and rested on the seventh day. This He did in order to portray symbolically His works of salvation in the course of six millennial days and of spiritual rest during the millennial Sabbath. However, when it comes to creating the new heavens and earth, it will not be in six days, but instantly by fiat just as in the beginning. The original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 were created instantly by fiat after the creation of the angels. Lucifer and his angels, who were first in heaven along with other angels after their creation, were then next placed on earth in a Garden of Eden (Ezekiel 28:13) to administer God’s rule. However, Lucifer himself did not submit to God’s rule over him. Instead, in the course of time, he attempted to dethrone God and conquer the heavens. As a result, Satan’s attempted but aborted celestial invasion caused chaos on this earth and the wreckage of the universe. God next renewed (Psalms 104:30) the face of the earth in six days for the habitation of man (Genesis 1:3-31). In doing so, God first dispelled prevailing darkness by commanding the existing stellar and solar light that was obscured to shine upon the earth. Accordingly, He created simultaneous day and night periods. Next, He created the atmospheric Heavens (Genesis 1:8) and restored the original dry land and named it ‘Earth’ (Genesis 1:10). Subsequently, He re-created life-conditions on earth that were necessary for

the sustenance of flora and fauna as well as for the habitation of man. Finally, God created man. But unlike the pre-adamite men who were perhaps created after their own kind, “God now created man in His own image and likeness”. He then placed the man in the newly re-created Garden of Eden “to dress it and to keep it” (Genesis 2:15). “Male and female created He them; and blessed them, and called their name Adamah, in the day they were created” (Genesis 5:2). But what is Adamah or Man? And, why did God create man, more so ‘In His Image and After His Likeness’? What was required of Man – Adam and Eve --- when God first created them? And, what was their potential reward from eternity to eternity that they would inherit as result of their obedience? God created man a little lower than the angels. Initially, before his fall man was given dominion or rule over all the works of God’s hands. As King David in Psalms 8:6 states, “Thou - God - madest him – man – to have dominion or rule over the works of Thy hands: Thou hast put all things under his feet”. So man was given dominion and ruler-ship over all things and destined to be crowned with honor, majesty, and glory (Hebrews 2: 7-8). To achieve such a supreme potential it was required of man that he qualify and have all things put under him. Hence, God purposed that man learn to have “dominion over the fish of the sea, over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moved upon the face of the earth” (Genesis 1:2628). Man was given dominion – rule over the earth – over every living thing that moved or crept upon the earth – Serpent included -- before he could be finally crowned with glory and honor. Accordingly, God commanded the first man not to eat of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. Yes, Adam was placed in the Garden of Eden to have dominion even over Lucifer – then changed to Satan by rebellion against God – and bring him eventually under his feet. This required man’s obedience to God and that he be always under God’s government (Genesis 2:16-17) and rule. The first man – Adam – was asked to conquer Satan by rejecting his rule – which was now in opposition to God. By rejecting Satan’s rule, man was to qualify to have all things put under his feet – and there was nothing to be kept back that would not to be put under his feet, once qualified. But what happened? Adam – weak as he was – failed to resist satanic

influence and faithfully obey God. By obeying Satan, he disqualified himself from being in charge of God’s creation that was put under him. Instead, he brought himself and his progeny under Satan’s rule. Thus, man became enslaved to sin. He lost therefore his potential ruler-ship over all things. Satan then regained his lost ruler-ship bringing sinful men under his control. And as a consequence of satan-induced Adamic rebellion, the restored physical creation was next brought under bondage to decay subjected to futility (Romans 8:20-21) and uselessness even as before. Although man obeyed Satan, God’s purpose for man did not fail nor was it revoked. Satan’s temptation and Adam’s yielding to it by disobeying God couldn’t nullify or thwart God’s purpose for creating man. Man’s rebellion was anticipated and accordingly God would carry out His plan. God’s purpose for man to inherit all things was however delayed. It required the second Adam, even Christ, to regain what first Adam lost and the working out of God’s plan accordingly. Therefore, “Now we see not yet all things put under man” (Hebrews 2: 8). Instead, we see Satan regaining his lost ruler-ship and dominion over this earth (Luke 4:5- 6). Next, Adam by obeying Satan became his subject and subsequently, all humanity became enslaved to Satan and sin and death. Nevertheless, God has been working out His plan, giving hope to man. As such, though we see not yet all things put under man, we see, “Jesus – the second Adam – who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned already with honor and glory” (Hebrews 2:9). Jesus not only accomplished what Adam failed to accomplish, but also “by the grace of God tasted death for every man” thereby freeing man from death that man had incurred upon himself by disobeying God. Satan is still in control and, therefore, we see not yet all things put under man. However, Satan’s purpose to rule the world has been defeated by Jesus. Accordingly, Satan became disqualified from being the ruler of this world. And through the substitutionary work of Christ man regained his lost potential. As such, what has been lost as a consequence of Adam’s sin is now appropriated by man by placing his faith in Christ. But what exactly is that supreme potential? Is it to inherit for eternity ‘all things’ that we see now not yet put under him? Does God promise to give saints the present heavens and the earth to accomplish their potential of eternal ruler-ship with Christ? Does the Scripture “Thou hast put all things

in subjection under his feet” imply in the slightest they are to be used by man for eternity once God’s plan on this present earth is accomplished? There are many scriptures in the Bible which clearly tell us that the present earth and the heavens will be destroyed. Instead, new heavens and earth will be created. It is important to consider all these Scriptures first and accordingly conclude about man’s awesome potential. Hebrews 2:6-8 doesn’t describe that the present earth and heavens will be given to man to be used for eternity. It just describes how all things are put under man’s subjection. Instead, we see now not yet all things put under him. However, Scriptures clearly tell us that the present heavens and earth will be burnt and removed from their place instead of being given to man. King David wondered about the heavens (Psalms 8:3) as we do and wrote “The heavens declare the glory of God: and the firmament showed His handiwork” (Psalms 19:1). He was inspired to tell us in Psalms 102:25, “Of old hast thou laid the foundations of the earth; and the heavens are the work of Thy hands. They shall perish, but Thou (and hence, the spiritual man in Christ cf. Psalms 21: 4) shall endure; yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as vesture shall thou change them, and they shall be changed”. Paul also was inspired to quote the same Scriptures to the Hebrew Christians as in Hebrews 1:10-12, “And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the works of Thy hands: They shall perish: but Thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; And as a vesture shall Thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and Thy years shall not fail”. Do these Scriptures really mean what they state? Did Paul merely quote the Scripture from Psalm 102 to contrast the transience of the present earth and heavens with the permanency and agelessness of its Creator without really meaning to be taken it literally? Do the words ‘perish’, ‘fold’, ‘changed’ do not really mean what they actually should mean? When we look into the starry heavens it becomes pretty difficult for us to believe that all these works will be destroyed. But to God who “stretchest out the heavens like a curtain” (Psalms 104:3), they are totally insignificant – like an old garment to be folded up, burnt, and replaced by a new one. There is no Scripture to tell us that the present heavens and earth will

be given to man for ever. Instead, Isaiah 51:6 asks us to lift up our “eyes to the heavens above and look upon the earth below. The heavens shall vanish like smoke and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever and my righteousness shall not be abolished”. Immutability of God’s salvation and righteousness is contrasted with the impermanence and mutability of the present creation. Obviously, the present groaning temporary creation will be replaced by a new and everlasting one. Will God destroy only ‘the surface of the whole earth’ by burning it as taught by some? Or will everything be burnt up and vanish like smoke exactly as God says in Isaiah 51:6? Anyway, whether God meant the original heavens and earth of Genesis 1:1 or whether only the heavens of Genesis 1:8 and the earth of Genesis 1: 10 that are now will be burnt up is somewhat uncertain. This uncertainty demands that we interpret the relevant scriptures by keeping in mind that there are two generations of heavens and earth co-existing at the moment. In all probability, the heavens and the earth that are now as described in Genesis 1:8 and 10 will literally burn on the day of the Final Judgment. During this time, all the ungodly wicked along with Satan and his angels will be thrown into the lake of fire – soon after the White Throne Judgment is over (cf. 2 Peter 2:9, Jude 6, Revelation 20:10). It is during this time that the atmospheric heavens and the earth shall be abolished rather than the original heavens and the earth which are destined to remain forever. As stated by Peter in 2 Peter 3:10: “The Day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away (disappear) with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat. The earth also and the works therein shall be burned up”. And, again in verse 12: “Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the Day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved and the elements shall melt with fervent heat”. Next, Paul states in Hebrews 12:26: “Whose voice then shook the earth, but now he hath promised saying, ‘Yet once more, I shake not the earth only, but also heaven’, And this word, ‘Yet once more’, signified the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken, may remain”. The shaking of heavens and earth before and at Christ’s second coming as prophesied in Haggai 2:6,

Revelation 6:14, 15 seem to be only a type of what is yet to come in the immediate future. God has not promised to give the saints the present heavens of Genesis 1:8 and the earth of Genesis 1:10 for eternal ruler-ship after the millennium is over. Once God’s will is accomplished on this earth according to the Scriptures all the physical works of God which are seen now will disappear, being temporary (2 Corinthians 4:5-6). And, once the present visible heavens and earth are dissolved, God will create new Heavens and Earth by fiat, perhaps instantly, neither in six days nor in billions of years. Even now, the present earth is still in the hands of Satan and his angels who carry on with their evil works. Therefore, Satan says he has power to give the present earth to whomsoever he wants (Luke 4:5-6). But, that power is limited. It is given to him only for a short time. Satan’s time is running short (Revelation 12:12). Soon he will have his ruler-ship on this earth taken away from him and then imprisoned for 1000 years. After that, he will be set free for a while when he will attempt his final attack to conquer the kingdom of God (Revelation 20:7-9). But, he will be thrown into the lake of fire along with all the ungodly men – when it will be also the time for the present earth and the heavens to pass away (Revelation 20:11). Christ, being the Creator and Sustainer of all that is, will uphold the present universe by the Word of His power, until the end; after which, the heavens and the earth that we see now will be burnt up to give place to the new. As Peter says, “The heavens and the earth which are now, by the same Word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:7). The Scriptures are quite clear and, therefore, the present heavens and the earth will be burnt up into smoke and vanish and there will be no more place for them (Revelation 20:11). So, what then does God promise to give us to be used for eternity if the present physical creation is to be really burnt up? What is man’s eternal inheritance that Abraham and the saints of all ages eagerly looked forward? Psalms 8:6 and Hebrews 2:8 state that God has set man over the works of His hands and has put all things in subjection under his feet. And 2 Corinthians 4:15 says: “All things are for our sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God”. Next,

Colossians 1:16 states that “…by Him were all things created, that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him”. Aren’t now all the things put under Christ’s feet except the ONE who is in supreme authority? Yes, “For He hath put all things under His feet. But when He saith all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is expected, which did put all things under Him” (1 Corinthians 15:27). As such, all things put under Christ include everything (Colossians 1:16). And as co-heirs with Christ, all these things are ours. “For all things are yours: whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas, or the world (Gr. Kosmos), or life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are yours. And, you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (1 Corinthians 3:21-22). Therefore, all things that are put under Christ and to become ours include the things that are temporal and those things that are eternal, not subject to corruption. Now, which things are given to us to accomplish our potential of eternal ruler-ship with Christ? Are we called now, to set our hope upon the things we see – the present heavens and earth – as our inheritance for eternity, as assumed by some? No, for Paul says, “We look not at things which are seen; for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal” (2 Corinthians 4:18). “Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold all things are become new” (based on hope, cf. Romans 4:17). “And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to Himself by Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:17). And through Christ “All things are ours” (1 Corinthians 3:21) and are for our sakes (2 Corinthians 4:15 and there will be nothing that will be left out. But now we see not yet all things put under us. Now we only “know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail until now: and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit groan inwardly as we wait for the adoption ( our birth) as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:22-23). The whole creation now sustained by the Word of His power “waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God: for the creation was subject to futility (uselessness), not of its own will but by the will of Him who subjected it in hope; because (based on hope), the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children

of God” (Romans 8:19-21). The whole creation is now groaning being subjected to futility or uselessness. But the creation will be set free even as the saints will be set free. Together with the saints, the creation that is now groaning will obtain its glorious liberty. As to how the creation will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain its glorious liberty is the same as to how the saints who are now in bondage will be set free to enter into glory. And, that is by the redemption of their bodies as born sons of God. God will not preserve our present mortal bodies for eternity. “We know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house which is from heaven. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life” (2 Co.5:1-4). The whole creation is groaning and so we are groaning. We will be set free from bondage to decay when we are changed (1 Corinthians 15:51-52) to glory and given new bodies (1 Corinthians 15:44). So shouldn’t we conclude that the creation too will be set free from its bondage to decay – being temporarily subjected to futility even as our mortal bodies and changed by a new glorious creation even physical – free from bondage to decay and, therefore, eternal? Yes, the present creation we see now subjected to futility will pass away after all things are fulfilled. “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” said Jesus. We are therefore to set our hope on things not seen (2 Corinthians 4:15) – things to come – based on God’s promises. “For we are saved by hope (so also, God’s creation subjected to decay, cf. Romans 8:19); but, hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man sees (as the present visible universe), why does he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not then do we with patience wait for it.” (Romans 8:24-25). Therefore, as Peter says, “We, nevertheless, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth” (2 Peter 3:13). And that is our blessed hope as far as our eternal reward is concerned. God promises to those who overcome an inheritance that is incorruptible (1 Peter 1:4; 2 Peter 1:4). For “as flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit corruption” (1 Corinthian 15:20) – being things temporary – subject to decay. God

promises therefore new heavens and a new earth – not merely old heavens and earth made new (or renewed). That awesome promise is found in Isaiah 65:17: “For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind” (as it will be all removed). The new heavens and the earth unlike the present temporal heavens and earth will remain for ever and ever and, therefore, will be eternal (Isaiah 66:22). The promise to make all things new for the saint’s inheritance is also made in Revelation 21:5: “And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new” to be then inherited by all those who overcome (v.7). Lucifer and his angels were the first to inhabit this earth and were placed on this earth to administer God’s government. They failed to submit to God’s will and are now, therefore, kept reserved to face the judgment. Next, this earth has been the testing ground for the first man (Adam and Eve). So also, it has been the testing ground for Jesus Christ – the second Adam and for all those who have been called. And it will be there till its end, for all those who are yet to be called of God – now and in the Millennium and for those who will be resurrected at the Final Judgment. The unsaved dead who have never heard about Christ are yet to be tested. That will be during the period of the Final Judgment, once resurrected. None of those who have been called of God looked to this earth as their permanent inheritance. For all those “died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things, declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that (country or earth) from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. “But, now they desire a better (country or earth or heaven), that is, a heavenly: wherefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He hath prepared a city for them” (Hebrews 11:13-16) and likewise, God will create new heavens and a new earth. (Isaiah 65:17). Once the present earth serves God’s purposes it will be burnt to make place for the new earth; and thus the new earth will abide for ever (cf. Deuteronomy 4:40; Psalms119: 90; Ecclesiastes 1:4) will remain forever (Psalms 104:5; Isaiah 66:22). The present visible universe is there to remind us as a type of what is to come – the eternal new heavens and earth, even as the present earthly

Jerusalem (country of Hebrews 11:13-15) is a type of the New Jerusalem to come from Above – even as the first material Adam was a type of the second Adam – Jesus Christ. The earthly man is to be replaced by a heavenly man, earthly Jerusalem by an eternal heavenly Jerusalem, earthly Zion by a heavenly Zion and so the present temporary heavens and earth will be replaced by a new heavens and a new earth to be used for eternity.

The New Physical Creation Exactly when will all the new things promised be created? When will God create the new heavens and the new earth setting free the present creation subject to futility or decay? And what is to take place before that? All of God’s physical creation that is now has been groaning in travail since Adam’s fall. We who are groaning in our fleshly bodies are waiting now hopefully to put on immortality because “flesh and blood cannot inherit the Kingdom of God”. And the creation that is now subject to decay will be changed too “for corruption (the present creation as our bodies) cannot inherit incorruption” (1 Corinthians 15:50). We will put on immortality at Christ’s second coming (2 Corinthians 15:23). But the present creation with many changes brought upon it, before and at Christ’s second coming, will continue to exist until all things are fulfilled according to the Scriptures. God said to His Son, “Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Hebrews 1:13). So Jesus is now ‘sat down on the right hand of God’ (doing the work of High Priest); “from henceforth expecting till His enemies be made His footstool” (Hebrews 10:12-13). That means, not only the whole creation and the saints are travailing as they wait for their change but even Jesus Himself is travailing as He is waiting to see the saints and His creation redeemed and made free from all bondage (Isaiah 42:14). But that waiting will not be for long! “For the LORD shall go forth as a mighty man, He shall stir up jealousy like a man of war: He shall cry (like a travailing woman), yea, roar; He shall prevail against His enemies” (Isaiah 42:13). And very soon Daniel 7:13-14 will be fulfilled and God’s Kingdom will be set up on earth – and then “the Kingdoms of this world will become the Kingdoms of our LORD and of His Christ” (Revelation 11:15; 20:2-4) establishing the millennial rule on earth – the dream of all the

prophets and the saints of all dispensations. It is after the millennial rule that the time will come for Jesus to put down completely and for ever, all His enemies. “…Jesus must first reign (Daniel 7:18), till He hath put all His enemies under His feet” (1 Corinthians 15:24; Matthew 25:31); as well as judge along with the resurrected saints who will be then ruling under Him. During this judgment period, the Devil and the fallen angels will be judged too, and then finally will be cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:20), along with all the ungodly (Revelation 21:8; Matthew 13:41-42, 25:41). Thus the author of death and hell will be cast into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14). And along with him, the last enemy – death – will be destroyed too (1 Corinthians 15:25-26) in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:14). “As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world” (Matthew 13:40). All that Satan and his angels had worked for will be annihilated (Daniel 7: 26; Rev. 20:10). The time for the saints to receive rewards will then come. “Then the redeemed of the LORD shall return and come with singing unto Zion, and everlasting joy shall be upon their land. They shall obtain gladness and joy and sorrow and mourning shall flee away” (Isaiah 51:11). “Then the King shall say unto them on His right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34). Then He shall have delivered up the Kingdom to God, even the Father” (1 Corinthians 15:24) and the “righteous shall shine forth as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father” (Matthew 13:43). Thenceforth “… they shall be His people and God Himself shall be with them and be their God”. (Revelation 21: 3b) and “there shall be no more pain: for the former things have passed away” (v.4b). Again it is written: “And I saw a great white throne and Him that set upon it, and from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away (as smoke?), and there was no place found for them” (Revelation 20:11). “And He that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new” (Revelation 21:5). If God created the present heavens and earth and gave the same to his first created sons – the angels – will He not create new heavens and earth for His own begotten and reborn sons who will be far above the angels? All things, whose temporary types are now, will be made new and everlasting. They that overcome shall then inherit all things (Revelation 21:7) and “the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most

High, whose kingdom is - not only for a millennium - but is an everlasting kingdom, all dominions shall serve and obey Him” (Daniel 7:27). Everything will be given to the saints. “For unto the angels hath He not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak” (Hebrews 2:5). Of course, the children of the kingdom will be given and put under Jesus who will say, “Behold I, and the children which God hath given me” (Hebrew 2:13). “For it pleased the Father that in Christ, should all fullness dwell” (Colossians 1:19). And “when all things will be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). And, as from the beginning of Millennium, henceforward, and for ever more “the government shall be upon His shoulders” and “the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end” (Isaiah 9: 6,7). Even so, AMEN!

EPILOGUE MAN’S NEW CREATION IN CHRIST

MAN’S NEW CREATION Theistic Evolutionists devotedly want to “Thank God for Evolution”1. They are fervently hoping that “an understanding of the process of evolution will actually enhance and intensify our appreciation of what God has done and is doing” through theistic evolution, of course. Not only “Theistic Evolutionists believe in a Creator God, but also endorse evolution as an explanation for the development of life. Many believing scientists hold this position, and the argument is well thought out” 2. Not only the ‘argument’ is well thought out but it also sounds very convincing; yet subtly deceitful! It should be obvious to any unbiased scientifically trained mind as well as to the educated lay people that there is no real substance in the ever-changing Theory of Evolution and can never be there. “My response asks, is evolution, defined by scientists as the development by natural means of all life from one or more forms originally produced by abiogenesis, true? Only when we prove evolution do we need to concern ourselves with "harmonizing" evolutionism with theism. Evidence that this level of proof has not been achieved includes the long list of scientists and others who have abandoned Darwinism because they became convinced that the scientific evidence does not support it”.3

Moreover as “Ernest Haeckel said, ‘It entirely excludes the supernatural process, every prearranged and conscious act of a personal character. Nothing will make the full meaning of the theory of descent clearer than calling it the non-miraculous theory of creation’. Thus the evolution-theory leaders are clear that no true evolutionist can be a Christian or a Believer in the Bible. There is no place for God in evolution, hence no need of a belief in sin, or a Savior, heaven or hell.” 4 __________________________________________________________ 1: Michael Dowd, Viking, 2008 2: John Halford, I’ve been reading…Theistic Evolution, Christian Odyssey, op. cit., p.21 3: Jerry Bergman, Ph.D. Theistic Evolution and the Creation-Evolution Controversy, www.icr.org 4: Finis J. Dake, op. cit. 80-81.

The Theory of Evolution is a religious system subtly inculcated into the educational system as if it were a true science albeit superstitiously accepted by blind irrational faith. Actually, it is the work of those taken captive by the god of this world who openly and daringly deny the true God of the Bible. As such, the zealous high priests of evolutionary faith dressed in a scientific garb are actually serving the god of this world who is the father of the evolutionary lies. These lies are presented in the form of scientific speculations instead of presenting scientific facts to prove the theory of evolution in general and the ‘Descent of Man’ from some ‘common ancestor’, in particular. According to the theory of evolution, man is not different from the animals – just a “mere material, mechanical, or animal”. However, “The presuppositions of man’s strict materialism are based not on evidence (which cannot prove or disprove the immaterial) but on denial by prebelief. The theory of spontaneous emergence of man’s distinct qualities is found insubstantial. More substance is claimed for an older view of a Creator revealing to man, who is His creation, a purpose for his uniqueness”.5 Theory is only a theory – it’s what we think, or a mere scientific speculation! “I am afraid that those of us who teach and research in psychology often mislead our students on the matter of what is known about man and what can be known about man through scientific methods. We are prone to simplify issues and over-interpret data; we are reluctant to emphasize the limits and tentative nature of scientific proof. Perhaps we do so because we simply do not know better or perhaps it is because we wish to

enhance the importance of our research. Whatever the reason, the regrettable result is that scientific evidence is too easily equated with truth by many students and the general public. What is realized amongst scientists, but poorly communicated to the public, is that proof by scientific methods always includes the possibility of error”. 6 Surprisingly, all these aspects are ignored by the theistic evolutionists whilst embracing the atheistic theory of evolution. What is now left is to boldly proclaim from the pulpits that God will be developing and evolving saints in the course of the next billions of years and forget the “rapture” and the “resurrection of the dead” and the creation of New Heavens and Earth. _____________________________________________________________ 5: Mark P. Cosgrove, op. cit. p.64

6: Marty J. Schmidt, op. cit. p.71-72.

WHAT IS MAN? “All the work of the six days, up to the point of man's creation, was to provide a sphere where man could be set in dominion according to God’s thought. The creation of man was a most solemn and deliberate act. God takes counsel with Himself as to it: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over the whole earth, and over every creeping thing that crept on the earth’. The first revealed thought as to man was that he was to be the image -- the visible representative -- of God in the universe. God intended this peculiar dignity and greatness for the creature of His delight.” 1 Scientific exploration is of no use at all in viewing and answering the question: ‘What is man?’ According to the current scientific view, “Man is a biological machine – complicated and intelligent – but machinery nonetheless”. Admittedly, “The mystery of human nature has been debated through the centuries. Some theories have been helpful to man, others harmful. Surprisingly, the accumulated wealth of knowledge from the past several thousand years has advanced us only slightly in our understanding of human nature.” 2

In spite of our advanced technology in the fields of psychology and biology, “The difficult study of man still seems far from resolved. Dr. J. A. Wheeler, professor of physics at Princeton, indicated in an article for American Scientist that scientists still hope for a breakthrough in the difficult study of man. He said: ‘Today no mystery more attracts the minds of distinguished pioneers from the field of molecular biology than the mechanism of brain action. Participating in the exploration are workers from fields as far removed from one another as neurophysiology, anatomy, chemistry, circuit theory and mathematical logic. Many feel that the decisive step forward is waiting for an idea, an as-yet-undiscovered concept, a central theme and thesis. Whatever it will prove to be, we can believe that it will somehow touch the tie between mind and matter, between observer and the observed’. Unfortunately, no breakthrough in the understanding of man’s nature seems near.” 3 The search for truth especially in the understanding of human nature if we are to remain objective demands answers. We need answers to questions relating to the physical realities which can be empirically studied and accepted. Again, we need unbiased answers to questions relating to unseen realities, physical or spiritual, that cannot be observed but have to be ascertained from the revealed Truth and then accepted by faith. Unfortunately, neither true Science nor Philosophy can explain man’s awesome ability in creative thinking or his brain’s ‘amazing powers of abstraction’. However, “What characterizes man, as Man, is precisely the presence in him of abstract ideas, of moral ideas, of spiritual ideas, and it is only of these that he can be proud. They are real as his body and confer to this body a value and an importance which it would be far from possessing without them. If, therefore, we want to give a meaning to life, a reason for effort, we must try to revalorize these ideas scientifically and rationally.” 4 Comparative studies of mammalian brains indicate that man’s brain is in no way different from other mammalian brains. There is nothing extraphysical in the human brain to account for its ability to think creatively and engage in abstractive reasoning when compared to the brains of other mammals, such as the whales having much larger brains than humans. On the other hand, mammals having brains much larger than the human brain and having all the parts or components that make up their brains the same as human brains are known to be dumb, rather than intelligent. The human mind is “more than biological machinery that we can take

apart and study – just as we might take apart a clock and examine its workings”. Evolution by natural selection cannot account for the appearance of intelligence in human beings or explain the human brain’s ‘amazing powers of abstraction’; which brings in another unbridgeable gap between animals and human beings vindicating creation and debunking evolution. John MacArthur states, “… God created man” (v. 27). Man became “a living being (Hebrew, nephesh)” (Genesis 2:7). Like the animals, he moved and breathed and was a conscious life-form. But there the similarity ended. This was a creature that was unlike any other created being. Lower life-forms could never evolve into this. And the distinctiveness of this creature is perfectly reflected in the purposes for which God created him.” 5 Man stands unique and distinct and simply doesn’t belong to the dumb animal kingdom. Unlike animals, he knows; and knows that he knows! Obviously, “Man’s unique capabilities are impossible to explain by any purely biological theory. The theory of evolution, for example, would predict gradually reduced versions of all man’s abilities in the animal forms below him on the phylo-genetic tree of life. However, there is no gradual transition from animals to man. So obvious are the discontinuities with regard to thought and personality in the proposed evolutionary sequence that some scientists and philosophers have proposed that these unique capabilities have spontaneously emerged from matter, But, if there is a biological mechanism that can account for the emergence of capabilities like self-conscious thought, it has eluded our search.” 6 Undoubtedly, “The materialistic, mechanical, and animal view of man is not only inadequate to explain man, but it is also destructive to him. In a world obstructed by an inadequate view of man and his problems, a fresh look at the nature of man is a most pressing need.” 7 As a matter of fact, “Science has a particularly difficult time dealing with issues of free will v/s determinism, and the immaterial soul v/s the material brain, because science is necessarily limited to the study of physically determined processes and reductionistic explanations. It is not unscientific to recognize these limits.” 8 To be honest and true to ourselves, “Let us not be afraid to admit that man is more than science can measure”. Admittedly, there has to be a ‘non-physical component’ that aids the human brain in its thinking capacity that distinguishes MAN as totally different and superior than animals. And this undeniable ‘non-physical component’ is what makes man self-conscious, other-conscious and God-

conscious. Further, man’s deliberate choice to accept or to ignore spiritual realities further confirms the presence of a non-physical spiritual component. Animals cannot grasp spiritual realities so as to accept or reject the same. In the Bible, the ‘non-physical component’ that aids the human brain in its pursuit of knowledge – both physical and spiritual knowledge - is called the “Spirit in Man” (1 Corinthians 2:11). And, according to the Bible, the ‘spirit in man’ is what actually aids the human brain to grasp and acquire the knowledge of the physical realities and spiritual realities around him, in a way no animal can. As such, “It signifies the appearance of a new discontinuity in nature, a discontinuity as deep as that which exists between inert matter and organized life.” 9 Theistic evolutionists will do great service to atheistic evolutionists if they do their best in filling this insurmountable gap or ‘discontinuity in nature’ and serve the ‘beleaguered God of the gaps’. Scientists will never be able to explain the supposed evolution of man with ‘amazing powers of abstraction’ from any so-called common but ‘dumb ancestors’ without making themselves sound foolish if not plain arrogant. It is the ‘non-physical component’ rather the ‘spirit in man’ which equips the man with ‘abstract intelligence’. Next, it moves the hearts of men to delve into the realm of the “spiritual” and the “supernatural”. “The Christian view maintains that the ultimate description of the nature of man must be one that embraces his entire being and purpose. His physical nature must be properly related to the physical world if his needs are to be met; and, in the same way, his immaterial nature must be properly related to himself, his neighbor, and his Creator if his most essential needs are to be met. This is in good agreement with our psychological assessment of man.” 10

Animals cannot grasp/understand and acquire knowledge of physical realities because they lack the kind of ‘spirit” that is in humans. They are not, therefore, self-conscious or other-conscious or God conscious, the way men are. These human mental and soul-related aspects are a distinguishing feature that separate intelligent man from dumb animals. And the ensuing realistic ‘gap’ or ‘discontinuity’ can never ever be explained and accounted for with any scientific evidence other than by indulging in ‘speculations’. However, highly prejudiced atheistic scientists and evolutionists allow prideful bias to restrict them from delving into the spiritual or to appreciate man’s spiritual thirst for the supernatural. Embarrassingly, “Modern uneasiness arises mainly from the fact that intelligence has deprived man of

all reason for existence by destroying, in the name of science still in the cradle, the doctrines which up till now gave a meaning to individual life, a reason for effort, a transcendent end to attain.”11 Highly prejudiced atheistic scientists and evolutionists will do to themselves a favor by coming to terms with the spiritual realities of which secular science is unaware of. And the only reliable source of spiritual realities is the Holy Bible – the revealed Word of the One who is supremely intelligent and omniscient. Christian Psychologist Mark. P. Cosgrove convincingly concludes that “the more human nature is studied scientifically, the more apparent it becomes that the best description we have of man is not new at all. In fact, it is thousands of years old; and it is revelational, a disclosure by the Creator to His creation. The Christian view of man has long recognized the material and immaterial aspects to man’s existence, his ability to make responsible and irresponsible choices, and the image of God in his being.” 12 According to the Bible, man has not descended from some common dumb ancestor but is a distinct creation of God. And, God created Man after His own Image and Likeness. As such, “The first revealed thought as to man was that he was to be the image -- the visible representative -- of God in the universe. God intended this peculiar dignity and greatness for the creature of His delight. But in this disclosure of the divine mind we must look beyond Adam to the One of whom he was the figure. “God's thought was to have a glorious Head of the whole living system, able to dominate all things and to hold them for His pleasure. Christ is the "image of the invisible God, firstborn of all creation (Colossians1:15) That is, when He comes in He takes the first place as Adam did in figure. Everything is to be gathered together in One; whether the heavenly or the earthly, all is to be centered in Christ. Indeed nothing is right in the universe that does not centre in Christ.” 13 Man is uniquely different and distinct: “Adam was "the figure of him to come"; everything is to come under the dominion of Christ. In (Psalm 8) it is said of the Son of man, "Thou hast made him to rule over the works of thy hands; thou hast put everything under his feet: sheep and oxen all of them, and also the beasts of the field; the fowl of the heavens, and the fishes of the sea, whatever passes through the paths of the seas". Every created being will be made subject to Christ. And we see in Adam as a figure the character of the influence which He will bring to bear.” 14 As such, “The Christian view of man has long recognized the material

and immaterial aspects to man’s existence, his ability to make responsible and irresponsible choices, and the image of God in his being. ….Today, after all the scientific data has been discussed, we still declare with the psalmist: “What is man, that Thou art mindful of him? And the son of man, that Thou visitest him? For Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honor’ Psalm 8:4-5 KJV.” 15 Man’s unique potential lies in the fact that he or she is the Image – Bearer of his or her Maker, even God. However, through willful rebellion, man has miserably marred the Image of God in him. As a result, he is spiritually dead to ‘spiritual realities’. And no one who is spiritually dead can know spiritual realities just as a physically dead person cannot know of anything that is around him. The spiritually dead person has to be revived from his spiritual death if he is to grasp spiritual realities. Having been created in the image and likeness of the invisible God, man’s unique potential is to be in the spiritual family of God. Being all spiritually dead, no man can be in the spiritual family of God, per se. He needs to experience a spiritual rebirth and share the Divine Nature. As such, man’s awesome destiny is to share the Divine Nature and be spiritually reborn to inherit God’s Kingdom. However, one cannot achieve his or her unique potential on one’s own whilst willfully continuing in rebellion. A person who is in willful rebellion is spiritually dead and as such he cannot share the Divine Nature without experiencing a spiritual rebirth. In other words, “Just as a stone cannot develop and develop until it becomes a plant; there is nothing from the inanimate kingdom that can develop into the animate kingdom. And regardless of your theory of evolution or your phase of evolution, there is nothing in the animate kingdom of which man is the head that can do anything to become part of the Spiritual Kingdom.” 16 He is spiritually a dead stone and simply cannot. But God can! He can convert stones into bread (cf. Matthew 4:3-4) or is ‘able of stones to raise up children unto Abraham’ (Matthew 3:9). And this He can do not by any slow vague evolutionary process but by fiat, just as He commanded and the earth brought forth the flora and the fauna. After all, He created the original human beings from the dust of the earth. Thankfully, it is not in God’s plan to raise children unto Abraham out of inanimate stones. His plan is to use the existing rotten human clay and mould it from the ‘inside out’ through the work of the Holy Spirit in the

hearts of redeemed men and women. And that is exactly what God has been doing through the risen Jesus Christ since the last 6000 years of human history. And, God has been doing that in spite of all satanic religious deception and human opposition, all along. And right now, God is busy creating “from the outside in” a new life inside man and help him be a member of His Spiritual Kingdom. But this new spiritual creation is on His terms. It is by the work of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of spiritually revived men and women who respond to God in a loving obedience that is in-keeping with His revealed will for man. That is, it is in those few men and women, who having been once regenerated, repent and accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior! And in doing so, God replaces the stony heart in man with His own heart through the indwelling spirit. Such, are said to be spiritually reborn who will then live forever. To briefly summarize what has been stated so far, God’s purpose for creating man after His own image and likeness is to allow him to eventually inherit His Kingdom. However, man on his own cannot achieve such a goal seeing that he is a sinner cut off from God. As such, there is nothing man can do to inherit God’s Kingdom. Nevertheless, God Himself has made a provision to enable any sinful man inherit His Kingdom. In order to deliver man from being in bondage to sin, God himself through the sacrificial and substitutionary death of Christ made payment of sin’s penalty which is death and eternal separation from God. As such, any sinner who recognizes God’s saving work on man’s behalf and accepts the same by saving faith is promised the gift of eternal life in His kingdom. _______________________________________________________________________ 1: C. A. Coates, op.cit. p.14-15. 2: Mark P. Cosgrove, The Essence of Human Nature, Zondervan Publishing House, USA, 1977, p.11. 3: Mark P. Cosgrove, op. cit. p.10, 14. 4: Lecomte Du Nuoy, op.cit. p. 5: John MacArthur, op. cit. p.162 6: M. P. Cosgrove, op.cit. p.67.

7: ibid,. p.68.

8: Mary J. Schmidt, Response: The Essence of Human Nature, op. cit. p.72

9: Lecomte Du Nuoy, op. cit.p.65). 10: M.P.Cosgrove, op. cit. p.69 11: L. Du Nuoy, op. cit. p.72 12: M.P.Cosgrove, op.cit. p. 5 13: C.A.Coates, op. cit.p.15. 14:M.P.Cosgrove, op. cit. p. 69. 15:C.A.Coates, op.cit. p. 15 16: Urlick Jelinek, op.cit. p. 15

A NEW CREATION IN CHRIST Ever since the fall of Man in Adam and all along, God has been laboring in the darkened hearts of men and women to make them into a new creation through the work of the Holy Spirit and outshining of Divine Light in them. Apart from divine light in them, human beings cannot grasp and understand spiritual realities without the ‘Spirit of God’ in him (1 Corinthians 2:12-16). And the Spirit of God is given only to those who obey Him (Romans 5:12); and only such can understand the spiritual realities and perceive biblical revelation with conviction and accept it by faith. Charles A. Coates in his book “An Outline of Genesis, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, 1991, p.4, states as follows:

In a spiritually fallen and ruined world, where all have come under sin and death, there must be a movement of the Holy Spirit in the souls of men as the starting point of any result for God. The new birth must be effected; otherwise divine light would shine in vain. Of the natural man it is said, ‘there is not a righteous man, not even one; there is not one that seeks after God….. There is no fear of God before their eyes’, Romans 3:10-18” 1 “Therefore God has to prepare the way for Divine Light to come in by that mysterious operation which cannot be traced. ‘The wind blows where it will, and thou hearest its voice, but knowest not whence it comes and

where it goes: thus is every one that is born of the Spirit’ John 3:7-8. The preaching of the Gospel would effect nothing if God did not move sovereignly in the souls of men by His Spirit causing them to be born anew”.1 God knew the end from the beginning. You see the first page of Scripture and the last are in perfect harmony with each other. We get the tree of life and the river in Genesis 2 and the tree of life and the river in Revelation 22. Now that shows me from the beginning to the end God has the same things before Him. God does not change His ways. His dispensations may change but God does not. Undoubtedly, the Tree of Life represents Christ our Life and the river is symbolical of the Spirit of God. You see two things in Christianity: the first, Christ is the object, and God never gives us any other object but Christ in that sense; and the second, the Spirit is an indwelling Person; that is, as we sometimes say, we have the Spirit subjectively to dwell in us, and so in that way our souls, being watered by the river, shall be a fruitful garden for the Lord.”1

Next, in yet another book “Miscellaneous Ministry”, Vol. 30, op. cit. pp.13-18, Charles A. Coates, states further as follows: That is why the Spirit is given, to be the river of God in our souls, making us fresh and bright and full of spiritual energy towards Christ and towards God. Now it is a wonderful thing that when Christ came into this world He was introduced in the same way in all the four gospels. In each gospel He is introduced to us as the One who baptized with the Holy Spirit. Is not that very striking? It is quite true Christ did not actually give the Spirit until He was glorified, but everything that transpired in the life of Jesus Christ was in view of this great fact that He was going to give the Spirit to those that believe. But the gift of the Holy Spirit is a thing many Christians leave out of account altogether. They hardly think of it. They know perhaps there is something about it in Scripture but they know nothing about it in their souls. I put it to every Christian, 'Do you know anything about the gift of the Holy Spirit in your own experience?' I do not ask how many books you have read on the subject, or how much you know from the Scriptures, but do you know anything about the river of God in your soul? That is a plain home question. There is such a thing as the river of God in the soul of the believer. As I have said, you find when Christ came into this world, He became the object of attraction. He was in this world an attractive object, a divine object, and souls were attracted to Him. We see two of John's disciples follow Him as thus attracted, and they say, "Rabbi ... where abides thou?" (John 1:38). Then there was in the same chapter Simon, and then

Nathaniel, and in chapter 3 Nicodemus; these were all thus attracted; also the woman of Samaria in chapter 4. Beloved friends, God's object in attracting souls to Christ was and is that they might receive from Christ the Holy Spirit; that they might receive from Christ the well of living water flowing in their souls. That is the river of God of which this river in Genesis 2 is the emblem. Well, the first thing is to be attracted to Christ. I am speaking now to a company of believers and it is my sincere hope that every one in this company has been attracted to Christ. We have received a great many blessings as believers through Him. If we have forgiveness of sins it is through Christ; if justification, it is through Christ; if peace with God, it is through Christ. There is not a single blessing we have but we have it through Christ. But what is the effect that all this is intended to produce? It is intended to make Christ precious to our hearts. It has been God's great thought for us to make Christ precious to our hearts so that our hearts may be taken out of the world and from ourselves by the preciousness of Christ. And suppose we are attracted to Christ, what do we find? That He baptizes with the Holy Spirit and gives living water. He sends the Comforter. He says, "He that believes on me, as the scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water" (John 7:38). Now I want every Christian to see this; the gift of the Spirit is not a small thing, not a secondary thing, not a thing that comes in as it were by the way. It is the one great thing in Scripture, that we are drawn to Christ in order that we may receive from Christ the gift of the Holy Spirit. Well, what is the effect of the gift of the Spirit? I must be very brief now, but I would like to leave upon every heart the immense effect of the gift of the Spirit. We see in John 4, when the Lord was with the woman at the well, He says to her, "Whosoever drinks of the water which I shall give him shall never thirst for ever" (verse 14). The first action of the Spirit of God in our souls is to keep us, if I may so say, green and fresh towards Christ, to keep us from being withered. There are several scriptures in the Old Testament in which God speaks of the souls of the saints as a well-watered garden. Now God has a garden, and your soul and mine is the garden of the Lord where the tender plants are growing. And as in Genesis the river of God waters the garden, so the Spirit waters us now. Not only is the tree of life the object of my faith and love; but there is the river, God's blessed Spirit, to water the garden now.

How, let me ask, is your soul getting on? Are you dry and withered, or green and fresh, spiritually green and fresh? The psalmist could say, "I am like a green olive-tree in the house of God" (Psalm 52:8). It is a great thing to be green there. But there is no natural tendency in you or me to keep bright and fresh towards Christ. How often we find a young convert comes to Christ and the blessed God makes Christ precious to him, and he goes away perhaps from a meeting with his heart happy and his face shining with joy. He has made acquaintance with Christ, and he goes out into the world, and what is the natural course of things? Very much like a sovereign among a lot of lead bullets. What happens? Do the bullets become shining like the sovereign? Oh, no, the sovereign soon gets to look as dull as the bullets. That is the effect of the influences here. The spiritual shine is taken out. Thus we often see a young convert get dull, so that we can hardly trace any difference between him and a world-ling. Now the Spirit is given to exclude the possibility of that by springing up as a well in our soul. The Spirit is thus the divine spring, the river of God to flow in the soul, to water the garden, to keep it green and fresh, and a fruitful evergreen for God. Oh, what a wonderful thing it is to have the river of God in the soul! What a reality it is! Perhaps you say, 'I know nothing about it'. Well, I want every soul to realize that the gift of the Spirit, as the river of God in the soul of the believer, is a great reality. And I believe if your soul accepts that, you will go away with an exercised heart and never settle down until God has made it good to you. You find in John 14 that the Lord speaks to His disciples for the first time of their love to Him. He had spoken before of His love to them, but here He says, ‘If ye love me, keep my commandments. And I will beg the Father, and he will give you another Comforter, that he may be with you for ever". (Verses 15, 16). The Comforter was given in connection with the fact that there were some in this world who loved the Son of God. These are the people who receive the Spirit, people who love the Son of God, and the Spirit comes in to maintain the heart of the believer in freshness of affection for the Son of God. Is not that a wonderful thing, a blessed thing? It is a comfort to me that I am kept not by some effort of mine. If my heart is kept for Christ in the smallest measure, it is kept by the Spirit of God. The river of God is there flowing in the soul of the believer. In John 15:26 He says, ‘He shall bear witness concerning me’. The Spirit is the spring of all testimony for Christ. If a man or a woman is in any way in testimony for Christ in this world, it is by the Spirit. And remember, the

testimony of Christ in this world is a wonderful thing. I do not mean merely people preaching Christ -- thank God for such -- but if they do so really it is by the Spirit. But there is a far more effective testimony than that, and that is Christ living in this world, living in the hearts of His saints. If Christ can be seen thus living in His saints in this world, with all those beautiful, heavenly, spiritual characteristics and graces that came out in Christ in perfection now coming out by the Spirit in His saints, is not that a reality? What brings out all this beautiful fruit? It is the river of God flowing through the garden of the soul to make it fruitful and to bring forth the fruit of the Spirit --- love, joy, peace and so on -- that the moral traits of Christ may be reproduced in the believer through the effect of the river of God in the soul. Then in John 16:14 He says, "He shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine and shall announce it to you". God has a wonderful world before Him, not this present world of Satan's power. He has another world, different altogether from this, in which Christ will come out as the Centre and Sun. It is God's coming world of blessing and glory, and the Spirit is going to be the all-pervading power of that world. That is what we get in Revelation 22, the tree of life in the midst of the street of the city of God, and of the river which flows out from the throne of God and of the Lamb. There is a time coming when Christ will be the tree of life for the universe of God. Heaven will find its life in that blessed Person and earth will find its life in that blessed Person. And God will gather together in one all things which are in heaven and earth in Him. God will bring heaven and earth to feed upon eternal life. And not only will that, but the river of God be the vitalizing power, the refreshing power of heaven and earth. As the hymn says, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;By the Spirit all pervading, Hosts unnumbered round the Lamb'. (Hymn 14). The river will flow out refreshing the universe. What blessed things there are to come, and Christians are in the secret of them now, by being brought into the knowledge of Christ, and brought into the current of the Spirit, so that they are in the knowledge of God's mind in this the day of Christ's rejection. How wonderful it is to see on the first page of Scripture that God gives us a thought of everything which is to come to pass in time and eternity in the tree and the river, Christ and the Spirit, showing He had everything ready for His own pleasure. And if God has effected anything in my soul it must be by Christ and the Spirit: Christ objectively, and the Spirit subjectively forming me in correspondence with the One I look at objectively. May God give us all to see the meaning of the tree and the river.

God forbid that the Divine Light of His Truth both in the Nature and in His written WORD is not eclipsed by the atheistic evolutionary ideas, the truthfulness of which they are not 100 per cent sure and are, therefore, still groping in the darkness. And if the ‘light that is in them be darkness, how great is that darkness?’ (Matthew 6:23) “Take heed, therefore, that the light in thee be not darkness”. (Luke 11:35). Next, “…what fellowship has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:15). To state it firmly, but lovingly, “Any denial of God and His plan for man in Scripture will damn the soul. If some through ignorance of the Bible think that they can believe in evolution and the Bible at the same time, they are highly deceived by Satan, the deceiver of the world (2 Corinthians 4:3-4; 11:14-15, Revelation 12:9). One cannot know the statements of both the Bible and evolutionists and believe both, nor can he be neutral. He must take a stand either for God and the Bible or for evolution and guesses.” 1 Frankly speaking, there is no room at all in Biblical Christianity for any vague ‘scientific speculations’ or wild guesses in the garb of ‘scientific evidence’ to adorn Christian life. These are actually unscientific speculations rather myths that are resorted to fill the ‘gaps’ or to tie the ‘missing links’ in the evolutionary theory. But then, those who resort to these myths they do so with the same kind of irrational faith one places in religious myths. As long as these myths remain unproved, theistic evolutionists need not speculate they will be looked upon as ‘ignorant, unscientific or downright stupid’. Or else, they owe it to God to prove that the evolutionary theory is really true, so that the ignorant Christians can be fully convinced of the evolutionary truth and accept the same as the tenets of their Christian faith! Anyway, woe be unto me, if I “put darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20), knowingly or unknowingly, and in the process beguile unstable souls or act as a ‘stumbling block’ to their simple faith; or else, deliberately “continue to rob multiplied thousands of children of simple faith in God and the Bible without a sting of conscience” by “degrading man from creation by God in the image of God to a monkey ancestry”. ____________________________________________________________ 1: Dake Jennings Finis, op. cit. p. 81

APPENDIX “A” Concerning the Hebrew Grammar of Genesis 1:1-2 By Jack W. Langford “Sometimes what appears to be a very bold, pontifical statement is made usually by one who is strongly engaged in establishing a certain opinion. Quite often this has the effect of numbing the motivation of any who would oppose that view. Whether this is done intentionally, either in an honest effort to open minds, or whether this is done in an effort to confuse the honest investigator, remains to be seen. Nevertheless, such a pontifical statement is made by Weston W. Fields in his book Unformed and Unfilled, on page 86. There he confidently asserts, after a study of the Hebrew grammar of Genesis 1:1 and 2, that the gap is “grammatically impossible.” Of course, if this is true, we might as well close our Bibles and go home, because it appears the matter is settled. However, I think we all realize that pontifical statements do not always survive scrutiny. In his younger years, Weston Fields was a student of Dr. John C. Whitcomb, who taught Hebrew at Grace Theological Seminary in Winona, Illinois. John Whitcomb, of course, co-authored the book The Genesis Flood along with Henry M. Morris in 1961. This book, probably more than anything else, spawned the modern Young Earth Creationist movement. Later Arthur C. Custance of Canada produced the book Without Form and Void in 1970. Custance advocated not only a strong historical basis, but primarily a strong linguistic basis, for what had long been called the gap theory. Weston Fields’s Unformed and Unfilled of 1976, as I understand, was actually the title of his doctoral thesis. It very obviously was an attack

on the work of Arthur Custance, and secondarily, it aimed to confirm the conclusions of his teacher, Dr. Whitcomb. Others in the Young Earth Creationist movement have picked up on this rather pontifical statement and echoed it. For instance, more recently Dr. Jonathan Sarfati of the Creation Ministries International has confidently stated, “The Gap Theory . . . has not the slightest basis in the Hebrew of Genesis. In fact, it seriously violates the tenets of historical-grammatical exegesis” (pamphlet, The Gap Theory). One would think that men who make such bold statements like this must be very confident, if not infallible. I can assure you, a little investigation proves that they are anything but infallible.

First of All, Surprising as it may seem, the fact of the gap is not dependent upon any grammatical exegesis of the first or second verses of Genesis 1:1 and 2. As demonstrated in the first SECTION of my study The Gap Is Not a Theory, the fact of a gap is mandated by the clear hermeneutic simplicity of observing the larger picture of the first chapter of Genesis. Herein the actual boundaries are revealed concerning the nature and work of the “six days.” The inspired Scriptural framework for each of the six days is clear and irrefutable. The actual work done on each of the six days is specific, simple, clear, and, again, irrefutable. Simply put, you cannot have a first day unless you have light. There is no light in verse 2. The first day begins in verse 3 with the words “And God said let there be light.” We found that this is the only allowable interpretation of the passage—if taken literally! We also found that this is how it has been long portrayed in historic Judaism. No matter what “grammar” one uses, whether Hebrew, Greek, or English, the conclusion is the same. The first day does not begin until verse 3, and that leaves verses 1 and 2 in other epochs of time. Consequently, the condition of the earth as designated in verse 2, and whatever the relationship of its three clauses are to verse 1, does not determine the beginning of the first day. At best, it only determines the setting for the inauguration of the first of six successive days in the work of renewal of the earth. The earth already existed “without form and void (lit.,

waste and desolate), and darkness was upon the face of the abyss, and the Spirit of God hovering over the face of the waters” before the “six days” began. In addition, there is no statement in verse 2 to the effect of just how long the earth existed in this condition prior to the beginning of the first day. Such is stated in every edition of the Pentateuch & Haftorahs distributed in Jewish synagogues throughout the English speaking world today. In addition, there is no indication in verse 1 of how long ago God initially “created the heavens and the earth.” Hence, the gap or gaps are implanted in the revelation. Field’s Explanation Now let us look at the statement by Weston Fields. In explanation for his assertion, Weston Fields makes the following observations regarding the second verse: “We conclude, therefore, that Genesis 1:2a consists of a noun clause which is circumstantial (subordinate and explanatory) to the main verb of 1:1. This means that 1:2 is a description of the earth as it was created originally, not how it became at a time subsequent to creation (pg. 80). He continues to describe the “And” that begins the second verse The waw copulative is also known as waw disjunctive (because it breaks narrative sequence) or waw conjunctive (because it adds circumstantial details). We have chosen to use the term waw disjunctive in our discussion because that best describe its usage in Genesis 1:2 (pg. 82). Gesenius also states that ‘the noun-clause connected by a waw copulative to a verbal-clause, or its equivalent, always describes a state contemporaneous with the principle action . . ’ These are very important statements, for if Genesis 1:2, as both lexicons and grammars testify, is an explanatory circumstantial noun-clause, describing a state contemporaneous with the main verb, then there is absolutely no possible way of salvaging the Gap Theory, a theory which must assert that 1:2 describes a state subsequent to the action of the main verb if it is to survive. The grammar of verse two forces us to say that the earth was created unformed and unfilled, while the Gap Theory alleges that it should say the earth became unformed and unfilled after (perhaps centuries after) it was created! It is grammatically impossible!” (pg. 85 and 86).

Thus, Mr. Fields presents what he assumes is an ironclad argument that would most certainly prevent the idea of a gap between verses 1 and 2

of Genesis 1. As I said before, others have picked up on this argument and have repeated it as the sure death-blow to what they call the gap theory. The only problem is Even before young Weston Fields made his pontifical assertion another older Hebrew scholar, of higher caliber at the time, had already corrected this faulty assumption. Of course, most do not realize that this whole argument presented by Weston Fields is based upon the assumption that verse 1 supplies the “verbal clause” for the waw disjunctive of verse 2. As we shall see, it is verse 3 that supplies the “verbal clause” and not verse 1. We will note this important fact as discussed by Edward J. Young in his book Studies in Genesis One, written in 1964, which apparently was overlooked by Fields. First of all Young brings out that the traditional and orthodox position concerning verse 1 is that it is NOT a “dependent clause” with the main statement to be found in verse 2. If such were the case it would lead to the reading “When God began to create the heaven and the earth, the earth was without form and void . . .” Now it is a fact that there are some new translations which render the first verses in this manner. However, and on the contrary, the orthodox understanding is that Genesis 1:1, as it stands in the traditional Masoretic text, constitutes an “independent clause” which is not dependent upon verse 2—it stands alone, and is so translated by every ancient version. In chapter 7 of his book, Weston Fields himself contends very effectively for this traditional position. In other words, Genesis 1:1 must be translated “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (PERIOD).” Verse 2 with its waw disjunctive is better translated “But” or “Now,” and it actually begins a new thought! This is the way it is translated in the LXX (250 BC), Josephus (First Century), etc. Edward J. Young, in his Studies in Genesis One, emphasizes “The first verse of Genesis therefore stands as a simple declaration of the fact of absolute creation” (pg. 7). Having established that foundation, he goes on to

ask the question, “What, however is the relationship in which verse 1 stands to the following?” He begins his answer by pointing to the three circumstantial clauses of verse 2 and states, “The particular time in which this three-fold condition was present is to be determined by the finite verb, with which these three clauses are to be construed.” This, of course, is the same principle that Fields later observed. However, Young gives us some added information that Fields failed to mention; namely, that there are two possible answers. The Answer Young then answers the question as to which verse supplies the verb thusly: “There would seem to be two grammatical possibilities. In the first place, the three clauses might be construed with the ‘created’ of verse 1. If that were the case, the meaning would be that when God began the activity expressed by ‘created’ the three-fold condition described in verse 2 was already present . . . We should simply be told that when God began to create, there was the world before Him, desolation and waste, covered with darkness and water, the Spirit brooding upon it. The work expressed by ‘created’ whatever else it might be, could not be that of absolute creation. Although such a construction is grammatically possible, it is to be rejected as unsuitable to the context” (pg. 8, underlining mine. I have also replaced the Hebrew verb script with the English “created”). Young continues, “The second possibility is to construe the three circumstantial clauses with the verb ‘And God said’ of verse 3. We may then paraphrase, ‘At the time when God said, “Let there be light,” a threefold condition was in existence.’” (Again, I have replaced the Hebrew verb script with the English—“God said.”) He goes on to give examples in the Old Testament of circumstantial clauses which precede the verb with which they are to be construed, e.g., Gen. 38:25; Num. 12:14; Josh. 2:18; 1 Sam. 9:11; 1 Kings 14:17; 2 Kings 2:23; 6:5, 26; 9:25; Job 1:16; Isa. 37:38 (page 9). In conclusion, Young states, “Verse one is a narrative in itself. Verses 2–31 likewise constitute a narrative complete in itself. In this narrative the first verb is ‘And God said [Eng.].’ No previous verb in the perfect appears”

(pg. 11). In this case, verse 2 is understood as circumstantial to verse 3 rather than to verse 1. In addition, Edward J. Young cites other earlier German Hebrew scholars who support his observation, such as Otto Procksch (1913), Karlheinz Rabast, Helmuth Frey (1953), etc. Therefore, Young explains, the purpose of verse 2 is to state the condition of the earth at the time when God says, “Let there be light.” In this regard, he states (pg. 30), “It is true that the second verse of Genesis does not represent a continuation of the narrative of verse 1, but as it were, a new beginning. Grammatically, it is not to be construed with the preceding, but with what follows” (underlining mine). It is to be noted that Edward J. Young was not a gap theorist. His observations are objective and factual as to what he, as a Hebrew scholar, sees and understands the text to be saying. Bruce Waltke, in his work The Creation Account in Genesis 1:1–3 (BSac., July 1975, p. 226), states that he believes “this is the only viewpoint that completely satisfies the demands of Hebrew grammar.” Along with him, Von Rad, Genesis (pg. 47), says “verse 2 consists of three clauses that are circumstantial to verse 3 and describe the condition of the earth when God spoke.” Allen P. Ross as well (Creation and Blessing, Grand Rapids, Mich., Baker Pub. 1996) more recently says, “This construction signifies that verse 2 is not the result of a development from verse 1” (pg. 103). He further states that “the syntax (waw-disjunctive) argues against that sequence”—that is, the idea that God created the earth “without form and void” (pg. 106). On page 721, he further explains concerning the first word of verse 2—“Verse 2 begins with the standard formation of a disjunctive waw . . . The waw introduces clauses here that are circumstantial to the main verb of the narrative, wayyo-mer [And God said] of verse 3. While most circumstantial clauses are placed after the clause they modify, Davidson says that at times the concomitant event or clause is placed first with the effect of greater vividness (A. B. Davidson, Hebrew Syntax [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902], § 141, p. 188).” Arthur Custance was, therefore, absolutely right when he defended his view as recorded in the Creation Research Society Journal (Vol. 8, No. 2, Sept., 1971, page 137), “in Genesis 1:2 at the time that the writer has in mind, as he sets out to describe the reconstitution of the earth [verse 3], it

had become a ruin [verse 2].” Furthermore Custance brings out how “the LXX . . . translate(d) the waw of Genesis 1:2” with the Greek conjunction de. Custance says, “Liddell & Scott give ‘but’ as the prime meaning. ‘It is used to call attention to the fact that the word or clause with which it stands is to be distinguished (their emphasis) from something preceding.’ Thayer says that it is a ‘particle, adversative, distinctive, disjunctive . . . it is added to statements opposed to the preceding statement . . . it opposes things previously mentioned or thought of.’ This is exactly my point.” In his work of 1976, Weston Fields himself acknowledges this fact which is taken from the Septuagint (LXX) translation. He says on page 83, “Furthermore, for the disjunctive idea there would have been no better word in Greek [than the Greek de]. Thus, there can be no doubt that the translators of the LXX understood the significance of the Hebrew waw disjunctive” (pg. 83). The translation by Josephus in the first century further substantiates this particular conclusion. Josephus gave the translation, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. But when the earth did not come into sight, but was covered with thick darkness and a wind moved upon its surface, God commanded that there should be light” (emphasis mine). Notice that not only does Josephus begin the waw of verse 2 with “But” (de in Greek) to disconnect and distinguish it from the first verse, but he also immediately connects the second verse (by a comma) with the “command” of God in verse 3. This, obviously, again shows they not only understood the significance of the waw disjunctive, but also that they connected it with the verb of verse 3 and not that of verse 1. Consequently, the requirements of the Hebrew grammar are not only satisfied, but there is demonstration of the proper connection with verse 3 from the very beginning. Other present-day Hebrew scholars could be cited, but this should suffice. “Context is sovereign” It has been properly observed by others in time past that the context of a given passage of Scripture is the foremost authority for understanding and establishing the meaning of a specific passage. Furthermore the contextual understanding is open to any person with or without scholastic education. It is possible that language experts can miss the revelation found within the

whole of context by focusing too closely at some speck of text. This has been stated by another in the following words: “Contextual sense is available to anyone who understands the passage with or without knowledge of the original language. A language expert who misses points of context is not as competent as one working from translations but who gets the big picture right. Best of all, of course, is the language expert who also gets the big picture right. But context is sovereign for establishing the meaning and, with care, anyone can determine that.” This was stated by Gorman Gray, from his book The Age of the Universe (2005), pages 170 and 171. Consistency The position of Weston Fields is actually the loser any way he chooses to take the passage. On the one hand, he labored to prove that only a waw consecutive could indicate sequential order. Since this is not the type of waw found in verse 2, he postulates that verse 2 could not possibly be sequential to verse 1. Instead, he assumes that verse 2 is the condition of the earth set out in the time frame of verse 1. Therefore, he pontificates there could be no gap between verses 1 and 2. However, lo and behold, the waw consecutive does show up as the very first word of verse 3—“And (waw consecutive) God said let there be light.” Consistency demands that, according to Fields’s own argument, verse 3 is SEQUENTIAL to verse 2. Of course, by now we all know what that means—there is a gap between verse 2 and verse 3! At the time the earth existed in the condition described in verse 2, God spoke light into existence in verse 3 to inaugurate a new time period beginning with six successive days of renewal. Verse 2 states one time period of unknown duration, whereas the waw consecutive of verse 3 SEQUENTIALLY inaugurates another time period of specified duration. But then, on the other hand, in emphasizing that the “and” beginning verse 2 is the waw disjunctive, he unwittingly proves that verse 2 is not to be connected to verse 1, because, if anything, whether in the Hebrew or the Greek, that is precisely what a waw disjunctive, or the Greek de does—it disconnects. So inadvertently, whether he likes it or not, he has a gap between verses 1 and 2 for sure! Surprisingly, as it turns out, it is more surely the Young Earth Creationist position that is both “contextually and grammatically impossible.” So actually, in these first three verses of Genesis 1 we have three distinct time periods revealed if we take the Scriptures literally: (1) That time period when the whole universe, that which is expressed by the words

“heavens and earth,” was originally created. Every other time these words are used in the Scriptures in connection with their origin or creation it speaks of a finished, orderly product. How long ago this was done is probably beyond our comprehension. The original creation took place simply, “in the beginning.” (2) That time period in which the earth existed in a state of waste and emptiness, submerged under water, and smothered in darkness, until the moving of the Holy Spirit above the waters, and the voice of God activated the first day. (3) That time period, wherein in six successive days God prepares the already existing world for man’s habitation. Herein began chronicled time for mankind on earth.

APPENDIX “B” Charles A. Coates eloquently brings out very beautifully the rich evangelical and spiritual symbolism underlying the imagery of the physical works of the first four days of Genesis 1, as follows: “Christ has brought in what I may call the conditions of life, and I think we get them in figure in Genesis 1, so that He might prepare the way to bring life into the world. It is very interesting to see that there are four conditions of life in Genesis 1. For instance in verse 3, ‘God said, Let there be light. And there was light’. Thus, Light is the first condition of life. If light could be excluded from the earth for a very short time all animal life would come to an end, for light is the first condition of life; and that is the first thing in creation; and that is the first thing Christ brings in. There is no natural life apart from light, and no spiritual life apart from spiritual light, and Christ brings it in. He brings in the knowledge of God in grace, and that is the first thing I need as a poor dark sinner. What is the good of talking to me about man's intellect? I want the light of God; and where is it? I find it in Christ. We read in John 1:4, ‘In him was life, and the life was the light of men’. And in John 8:12 He says, ‘I am the light of the world’. And now He is risen and glorified at God's right hand, the apostle Paul can say, ‘Because it is the God who spoke that out of darkness light should shine who has shone in our hearts for the shining forth of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ’ (2 Corinthians 4:6).

Beloved friends, light has come in and has come into every Christian's heart. It is the first condition of life. There is no spiritual life if no light. How do you know God? You know him in Christ. Christ is the image of the invisible God. You look at Christ and you see in Him the fullness of the Godhead dwelling in a Man; God revealed in a man and that man His beloved Son. Thank God for it. We are not in ignorance of God; He has made Himself known in His beloved Son. ‘No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him’ (John 1:18). That is light. Now look at verse 6 of Genesis 1 ‘And God said, Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it be a division between waters and waters’. It is really the atmosphere. God thus created the atmosphere -- first light and then the atmosphere. I suppose every child can see that if there was not an atmosphere there could be no life. We require an atmosphere to breathe. Now Christ has brought in a new atmosphere for us to live in, and if I may so describe it, I should say the atmosphere of a Christian's life is made up of peace and love. When Christ came into this world these two things, peace and love, came in His blessed Person. Divine peace and divine love came in for the first time. He brought the atmosphere of it. How wonderful that is! And He then introduced His disciples into that atmosphere of heaven. I have no doubt one thing the disciples knew while with Him was what it was to breathe the atmosphere of heaven. When the Lord asked them, ‘Will ye also go away?’ Peter answers, ‘Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast words of life eternal’ (John 6:67, 68). He knew then what it was to breathe the atmosphere of heaven around that blessed Person. But then to have it fully we must go on to resurrection; the ground of peace was not laid until Christ died; but then every disturbing element was removed, every foe defeated, and the blessed Victor comes into the midst of His disciples with that sacred brow decked with the laurels of triumph and says, ‘Peace be to you’ (John 20:19). It was a new atmosphere, an atmosphere of peace. What a wonderful thing, thus to be brought into peace! And by whom? By Christ. Who could bring a poor sinner like me into peace but Christ? And He has done it, blessed be His Name! And divine life and love,

never known in this world until Christ died (I mean in its fullness), has now come. Scripture says, ‘Herein as to us has been manifested the love of God, that God has sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him’ (1 John 4:9). Love came out thus, and now the proper atmosphere for your soul and mine is the love of God. That is the atmosphere in which we can live. Christ has brought it to us. We have not to reach the love by some kind of effort. You may read religious books with this object. There is one entitled The Imitation of Christ written by a man who lived many years ago, where we may read a great deal about the love of God, and which puts people on the line of making effort to reach the love of God. I do not think this of any use; the love of God has been brought to us by Christ and made known to us by His death. And thus it becomes the atmosphere in which my soul can live. We look now at verse 11: ‘And God said, Let the earth cause grass to spring up’.... What we get on the third day is the grass, the herb, and the fruit trees, and these were intended to be food for man and beast. That is another condition of life. How long should we live if we had no food? And it is a wonderful thing to see how Christ has brought in divine food for us, spiritual food. And really everything that God has established in Christ is intended to be the food of our souls. Do you think we could feed our souls on the newspaper? I think some Christians get shriveled up by reading so much of the literature of this world, and thus they lose their taste for divine food. I do not think anyone can enjoy the food of Egypt and the food of Canaan at the same time. If you relish the food of Egypt you will not relish the food of Canaan. In one word, Christ is the food of His people, and that is the food God gives to us, and He has sent His servants to feed His flock with it. Every bit of divine food is the ministry of Christ in some way or other. He sets before us that blessed Person for nourishment of our hearts in divine intelligence of Him. Is not that a condition of spiritual life? I am sure it is, and if a person does not feed on divine food, he can know nothing about divine life. One thing more as to the fourth day, verse 16, ‘And God made the two great lights, the great light to rule the day, and the small light to rule the night’. That is, if life is to be sustained in nature, everything must be under proper control. Suppose things were not under proper control, suppose the

law of gravitation ceased to act for five minutes, what would be the result? The whole universe would go to destruction. The created universe all depends on the law of gravitation, and according to that law, the sun rules the solar system, and everything is held in its place by the sun. The sun rules everything because all the influences that make this world habitable are under the rule of the sun. The seasons, seed time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, are all under the rule of the sun. Now there is something like that in the spiritual world. Christ is the Sun of the spiritual world. Nothing is right that is not regulated by Christ. It is a wonderful thing to see the place Christ has in it. God has put Christ at His right hand and He is there as the Head of all principalities and powers, angels and authorities and powers being made subject to Him; and Head over all things to the assembly, which is His body. He is the great Head and Centre of God's universe, and until our souls come into their proper relation to Christ, we are lawless, because we are not under rule, and if we are not under rule we do not enjoy life. It is one of the conditions of life; there should be rule. We are all thankful in this country for a measure of wise and righteous government. That is why the conditions are so much better than they are in some countries. Now, what a blessed thing to be under the rule of Christ. You see, Christ has died that He might deliver us from the power of the law that we might be married to Him, and that we might come under His control. That, I suppose, is why the wife is to be subject to her husband; she is under rule in that way, not a legal rule, but a rule of love. In the same way the assembly and the individual believer are under the rule of Christ; hence the first breath of spiritual life is expressed in the words "What shall I do, Lord?" (Acts 22:10). That is a man coming under the rule of Christ. These then are the things that come out on the first four days of creation: first light, then atmosphere, then food, and then rule; and the next two days are taken up with the introduction of animal and human life. God first made the conditions and then He brought in life. Now Christ is the tree of life because He brings in the conditions of spiritual life. He brings in the light of God, a new atmosphere of love, the food, and then the rule. It is all brought in, in Christ, and Christ is everythingâ&#x20AC;? 1. _____________________________________________________________

1: Charles A. Coates, Miscellaneous Ministry on the Old Testament, Vol.30, op.cit, pp. 9-13.

APPENDIX “C” Whether one admits it or not, theistic evolutionary thinking built upon atheistic evolutionary concepts is an affront to an Intelligent Designer and Creator God. It is totally contrary to the character of God, who on mere speaking can bring into existence something from nothing (Hebrews 11:3) and all that, at the same time, instantly as and when He wills it into existence. No where in the Bible it is stipulated that God created and subsequently chose to depend upon some magical evolutionary process which is, indeed, a figment of man’s fanciful evolving and constantly changing ‘scientific speculation’, if not wild imagination. “The Bible’s view is that God is the Almighty Creator of heaven and earth; this is no happenstance.”1 However, as is succinctly pointed out by Charles A. Coates, “It is evident that man cannot by searching find out God. God is too great for man the creature to reach up to Him; and, in addition to this, sin has come in and put an immense moral distance between God and man. If God remained quiescent it is certain that man must be for ever in ignorance of Him. But God has been pleased in infinite goodness to take certain ways of which we have the record in Scripture, and of which Christ is the crown, so that we might have the intelligent knowledge of Himself. “Indeed, it might be said that the whole of Scripture is the unfolding of two things -- the ways of God and His purposes. His purposes were in His mind before His ways began, and they will presently be displayed as the issue and result of His ways in scenes of accomplished bliss. The purposes of God show us the nature of His thoughts and delights -- they instruct us in all that God has before Him for the satisfaction of His love. The more we consider this great subject the more we shall discover in it the unfolding of

what God is in wisdom, power, grace, and love -- and all this while acting for the supreme good of man -- and we shall plainly discern that Christ is the Crown of all the ways of God, and this will make Him very great and glorious in the estimation of our hearts. “The first great movement of God, of all His ways, of which is presented to us in Scripture is creation. This must necessarily be so, or there would be no creatures to observe His further ways, or to be brought into infinite good as the result of those ways. The heavens and the earth were created, and the latter prepared and furnished in every way to be the habitation of man made in the image and after the likeness of God”.2 “But we miss the whole mind of God if we regard creation as anything other than the formation of a vast scene into which Christ should, in due time, be introduced”. Hence we read that "By him were created all things, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created by him, and for him. And he is before all, and all things subsist together by him" (Colossians l: 16, 17). “Christ is the beginning and end of all the ways of God (Proverbs 8:22 - 31). Read the whole passage. It was in view of Christ that everything was created, and creation will never be seen or understood in its proper beauty and completeness until it is seen in relation to Christ -- finding its Head and glory in Him in the day of completed reconciliation. “If I look around in creation now, I see the bondage of corruption on every side, the result of man's sin. (Unless, indeed, I survey the heavens, and see the glory of God there in perfection of beauty and order -- a striking contrast to all the discord and confusion found on earth.) But it was all made for Christ, and it will be seen in its true character and beauty when He becomes manifestly its Head. When we come to the creation of man we see a very distinct foreshadowing of Christ. It is expressly said that Adam was "the figure of him to come" (Romans 5:14). Who but Christ could really fill up all that was involved in being in the image and after the likeness of God? Who but Christ could have all things put under Him to order everything for the good pleasure of God? I do not enlarge on a truth so obvious” 3. At the cost of repeating, God used a creative process to mold and

bring forth a living Man out of the dust of the earth and not out of monkeys. And by using the man’s rib, He created a full-fledged woman towards the end of the sixth literal day of the creation week. And “In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made He him; Male and Female created He them; and blessed them, and called their name ADAM, in the day when they were created” (Genesis 5:1b -2). They did not evolve! _____________________________________________________________ 1: Jelinek, U. op. cit. p. 2 2: C. A. Coates, Miscelaneous Ministry in the Old Testament, op. cit. p.9 3: ibid.

God created Man for a purpose. Accordingly, “In Genesis 2 we come to the unfolding of God's ways. God has been pleased to take certain ways in order to reach His end, and in the ways of God it was necessary that man, God's creature, should be the subject of testing. I think that is very plain. When God made man He put him in the Garden of Eden to test him. “People get strange ideas of what a beautiful place the Garden of Eden was but, though that garden was a beautiful place, it was a place of testing and was intended to be so. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was there and it was forbidden them. It was the test of man's obedience and confidence in God and the penalty of death was attached to disobedience. “So that the Garden of Eden, beautiful as it was, was a place of testing for man, and I suppose everybody can see that when man was thus tested he turned out a complete failure through disobedience, and thus fell under the power of sin and came under death as the judgment of God. “And then when God was pleased to set up government and put the sword of government in the hand of Noah after the flood, man despised His government, and when God gave him His law he broke it, and when He sent prophets man evilly treated them, and when He last of all sent His Son, Him they rejected and crucified. And now that He causes His gospel to be preached in this world, what do men do with it? They resist the Holy Spirit and will not receive the glad tidings of the grace of God. God is testing man from the beginning to the end and the result of the test is that at every point man turns out a complete failure. “At every part of man's history he is an utter failure. The test began in the Garden of Eden and is still going on, and that test is not the law but

Christ. The question for everyone is, "What think ye of Christ?" They who believe on Him are the children of God, and the rest are accursed. You know there is a solemn scripture connected with the gospel, "If any one love not the Lord Jesus Christ let him be Anathema Maranatha" (1 Corinthians 16:22). “There is only one of two things for the sinner; if he will not have the blessing he must have the curse. And why not be blessed? Because they love the world and love to have their own way and will not submit themselves to God. But the end of this is death. Death comes in as the result of man’s testing. “The tree of the knowledge of good and evil was forbidden, and forbidden because man was not fit to touch it. It was too great a matter for man to touch, and God knew very well if man attempted to touch the question of good and evil he would involve himself in utter ruin, so God forbad it. Well, they disobeyed God and the result has been a world of sin and sorrow and death; and the world is established thus, as it were, under God's eye today. That is the result of the testing of man. He has plunged himself, and we have all plunged ourselves into sin and death and Satan's power. “Now let me say there were two things in the garden not connected with the testing of man; they had a place on another line altogether. The first was the tree of life and the second was the river. These had nothing to do with the testing of man. They were symbolical of what was in the mind of God; and I do not think it can be difficult in the mind of any Christian to see that the tree of life was a figure of Christ. I think it is equally clear that the river was typical of the Holy Spirit. So that on the first page of Scripture we see in emblem Christ and the Spirit as God's provision for man. “I do not see there could have been much meaning in the tree of life for Adam in innocence. I do not think it could have meant anything to him. What would be the good of the tree of life to a man not under death? It seems to me the tree of life could only have its place when sin and death had come in, and not before. But it is very interesting to see that before man had come under sin and before he is tested, God had a provision in His own mind that was in store for man against the time when sin and death should come in.

“And I believe, beloved friends, the whole of Scripture is the history of how God has brought in Christ and the Spirit that there might be infinite blessing for man and at the same time real satisfaction and rest for God. And I think we get the climax in Revelation 22. There you get the tree in the midst of the street of the city and of the river, and the river of the water of life flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb. That is the climax. It is a picture of the Garden of Eden; when worked out in its entire blessed fulfillment you get the tree and the river again. Now, if we see really the consequences of Adam having eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, we shall find the thought of the tree of life very precious. And I do not think anyone would think much of the tree of life until he had realized what was meant by the other tree. “You see, sin came in, in connection with the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and death by sin, and not only that, but Satan's power. “People do not think of it, but it is a reality that Satan is the god and prince of this world. They think as they look at members of parliament and cabinet ministers that they are ordering everything as they like; but there is a secret invisible power behind the scenes moving everything in this world, and that power is the power of Satan. The Lord spoke of him as the prince of this world; and Paul calls him the god of this world, and he speaks of him as the ruler of the authority of the air, and the spirit that works in the sons of disobedience. A man thinks he is doing his own will, but he is not; he is doing Satan's will and using the power of Satan. “Now these facts have to be recognized. Sin has come in and death by sin, but people regards death as a natural event; it is the most unnatural event possible to happen. To call it the course of nature is an abominable lie and a libel upon God. Not a bit of it! It is the judgment of God upon sin. People do not die in the course of nature but under the judgment of God. ‘The wages of sin is death’. God never created man to be a dying man; death came in by sin. Sin has come in and death has come in and Satan's power has come in. Now we are all involved in this matter; every one of us is deeply affected because sin has come into the world. “A young man once said to an old Christian, 'I have found original sin in the Bible'. The old man replied, 'Have you found it in your own heart?' Now we have found sin in our own heart and not only in the Bible, and we have come under death and as children of Adam we have fallen

under Satan's power. Why I dwell on this is to show that before Christ could be the tree of life for us and before we could receive the Spirit which answers to the river, this terrible question must be settled, the question of sin and death and Satan's power. These things must be settled…., I do not know whether they are settled for you or not, but I know they are settled for God; and the way they have been settled is such that the full blessing of it is available for us. “Christ is the tree of life and He is that after settling every question that came in by the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. How was it done? Take the question of sin; that is the first point. I found myself as a natural man in company with Simon Peter in Luke 5 crying, "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, Lord" (Luke 5:8). “Mark that word "sinful". How ready people are to say, 'Oh yes, we are all sinners', but how few have the sense of being a "sinful" man -- full of sin. Now how is that to be met? Why, only by Christ: it can only be met by a holy sacrifice; and Christ, God's beloved Son, came into this world, born of the virgin, born in holy flesh, that He might go to the cross and be made sin, and in His sacrifice put it away. Has it been accomplished? Yes, blessed be God, it has. There has been a sacrifice offered, atonement made, and the benefit of it is open for every sinner in this world. And then take death; you see, death has come in through sin. Well, we could not meet it. It is no use talking of meeting death. Suppose you had all the medical men with all the medical science in the world: ask them if they can meet the question of death and set it aside? “Why, they would laugh at you. But Christ has come into the world and gone into death and has tasted death for every thing. The Son of the blessed God, upon whom death had no claim, for He was without sin, and hence over Him death could have no power, for He was the Prince of life, He has come into this world and tasted death for every thing. “What a wonderful thing! The very judgment that rested upon you and upon me has been taken in love by the Lord Jesus Christ. “And what about Satan's power? There is the universal power of Satan. Has Christ been able to deal with that? Yes, He has. In Genesis 3 God says, 'The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent's head'. No one can meet Satan but Christ.

“You know there is a great deal of wickedness in the way people speak of Satan -- even among Christians. People speak of him in a frivolous way and in a very light way that they would be afraid to do if they knew what a great dignitary he is. You know the archangel Michael would not bring against him a railing accusation (Jude 9). “There is only one Person who could bruise the serpent's head, and that is Christ. He came into this world and into the place of sin, and was there to bruise the serpent's head. True, the serpent bruised His heel; but at that very moment his head was crushed beneath that victorious heel. Thus Christ has annulled him that had the might of death, that is the devil, and broken the power of Satan for ever. “Beloved friends, that is why Satan is not god and prince in my heart and has no possession there, because the One who has broken his power has a place there; and that is the only way Satan is displaced. It is by Christ coming in. Now you see when these things came in by the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, sin, death and Satan's power were all met by Christ going into death, and now Christ in resurrection is the tree of life. “Mark that, it is Christ in resurrection. It is in resurrection that Christ is really precious to a sinner. When Christ was on earth the question of sin was not settled, nor the question of death and Satan's power. But after He had been to the cross, He came back in triumph, and it is really in resurrection that He becomes the tree of life. As the scripture says, life and incorruptibility were brought to light through the gospel (2 Timothy 1:10), through a risen Christ. “Beloved friends, what a joy it is to think that Christ is the tree of life! I am not now burdened by the thought of Sin. I see Christ having come into death and been raised again by the glory of the Father; all the power of Sin and Satan was broken at the cross, and the One who broke that power is now known by faith in my heart as the tree of life. What a wonderful thing to see that risen Person! Christ is the wisdom and the power of God. “You may remember in Proverbs 3:18 we read, "She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her; and happy is he that retained her". Christ is the wisdom of God to meet sin and death and Satan's power, and as I lay hold on Christ, I lay hold really upon the tree of life. It is such a wonderful thing to have a Person outside yourself! Many a true Christian is looking inside

half his time, but if you begin to look inside you are sure to get dull and down in your soul and into darkness. It is a great thing to keep the eye on Christ. Christ is the tree of life, Christ in resurrection”.1 “The second thing which strikes me in connection with the unfolding of God's ways in Scripture is promise. This element was introduced as soon as man had departed from his first estate. There was no occasion for promises so long as innocence continued. Man was surrounded by every good possible to him in the circumstances of his existence as an innocent creature, and promises of a higher order of blessing neither would have been appropriate nor could have been understood by one who as yet had not the knowledge of good and evil. “But when the accomplished act of disobedience had proved the success of the serpent in alienating man from God, and man had thus fallen under the power of evil and the sentence of death, immediately the element of promise appears in God's ways. It may be said that the statement that the woman's Seed should bruise the serpent's head was not exactly a promise to man, but rather part of the divine sentence on the serpent. But inasmuch as it was a declaration of what God would bring to pass with a view to His own glory in man's blessing, it certainly was of the nature of promise. And, henceforward, promises form by far the most important and blessed part of the Old Testament Scriptures. “It is impossible to go into detail on such a great subject without extending the present remarks far beyond their intended limits. But it may be said in general that the Old Testament promises fall into three classes: those which stand in relation to sin and death and Satan's power in the widest and fullest way; those which stand in relation to all the confusion which sin has introduced here; and those which come in, in connection with the utter weakness of man. I will give an example of each class. “In Genesis 3 we see the introduction of sin and death and Satan's power. These three things go together. No sooner were they introduced than God appeared on the scene with a blessed declaration of His own purpose (Genesis 3:15). It is so all through Scripture. As different manifestations of the power of evil and its fruits appeared, God met them with promises. “In the case before us, the serpent had no sooner shown his head than God said, 'I will have a Man to bruise that head'. And as the history of evil

and of man's weakness developed, God met it all by promises. He pledged Himself to remove the evil, and to put a corresponding good in its place. “So every manifestation of what was evil became the occasion for a promise in which God engaged Himself to remove that evil, and to put in its place what was good, and holy, and blessed. “It is a terribly solemn fact that sin, and death, and Satan's power have come into the world. Men struggle in vain to get rid of these things. All civilized nations are doing their best to improve the condition of things here. They succeed, perhaps, in whitewashing the exterior a little, but under the surface there are "dead men's bones, and all uncleanness" (Matthew 23:27). “These men try to grapple with death. People are deeply interested in medical science and hail with delight every new discovery. They are glad to think that death can be pushed back a year or two. But how impotent is man in all this! Sin is here and men cannot remove it; death is here and men cannot set it aside; Satan's power is here and men are glad to have it so. An overwhelming majority is in favor of Satan’s rule, and prefers it to God's. Satan says to man, 'You can go your own way', but if God were to rule He would necessarily say, 'You must go my way'. Men say, 'We prefer to go our own way, and not God's way'. They thus choose to be ruled by Satan. “How blessed to see that God has brought in Christ to meet the question of sin, and to annul death and Satan's power! Christ has put away sin, annulled death, and bruised the serpent's head. In contrast to sin and death and Satan's power, He has brought in righteousness and life and the kingdom of God. He is the Antitype of the coats of skin and the tree of life. The promise of Genesis 3:15 finds it’s Yea and Amen in Him. Then in Genesis 12:2 we have an example of a class of promises which have relation to all the confusion which sin has introduced here. Sin and death and Satan's power having come in, there is confusion here instead of blessing. Everything is out of order. ‘Let us make ourselves a name’ (Genesis 11:4) is man's supreme ideal of happiness. “Many a man would be willing to sacrifice wealth, rest, pleasure, health, natural affection, and even life itself if he could thereby make himself a name. But it results in confusion, because it excludes God, and there is no true happiness in it. ‘Blessing’ is happiness conferred by God. God's answer to ‘Confusion’ was the calling out and blessing of Abram. ‘I will ... bless

thee, and make thy name great’ (Genesis 12:2). God called him out of the confusion to have true happiness, and to be made great in a divine way. “The world has but a poor idea of happiness and greatness; it is all confusion if looked at morally. But God delights to make men happy and great by giving them the knowledge of Christ. God made Abram's name great by bringing Christ into his family. All blessing from God is centered in Christ. Men are looking for happiness either in the Babel of sin's confusion or in Christ. The world system often looks very attractive to the young; they do not see the emptiness of it all; but it is all tinsel and unreality. There is very little real happiness in the hearts of worldly people, with all their pleasures. They get a certain amount of gratification for their natural tastes but very little real enjoyment. “Viewed morally all is in confusion here because God has not His true place in men's consciences and hearts, and there can be no real happiness in confusion. Christ was here entirely apart from all the confusion of this world. He loved righteousness and hated lawlessness, and therefore was anointed with the oil of gladness above His companions. If men are led by Christ it will certainly be in the paths of righteousness, and only in those paths can true happiness be found or enjoyed. Christ is Lord of all and Head of every man, and in confessing and obeying Him we get outside the confusion of the world, and into the sphere of true blessing. “In a coming day He will have universal sway, and all confusion will be at an end. He will order everything in righteousness, lawlessness will cease, and therefore every hindrance to the full blessing of man will be removed. Inconceivable happiness will pervade the universe when everything is subjugated by the gracious power of Christ to the will of God. Every kind of misery and suffering will be set aside, and the supreme goodness of God will be the satisfaction and happiness of men. Then shall be brought to pass what is written in Genesis 12:3, ‘In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed’. Every element of confusion and evil will be displaced by order and goodness, and everything will minister to the unalloyed happiness of men. “With regard to the present time, Christ is presented to men in the gospel that they may be attracted to Him, and thus morally separated from this world of confusion. It is certain that God has more resource and power

to confer happiness than the world or its prince, and in believing on Christ and obeying Him we come into blessing -- God-given happiness. “God gives what is worthy of Himself, and therefore the happiness of those who receive from Him is immeasurable. The promises express God's unnumbered thoughts of blessing towards man. They are all brought to pass in Christ, and established through redemption in such a way that they can never be overturned. “Then a third class of promises comes in by reason of the utter weakness of man. For an example of this class I turn to 2 Samuel 23:1 - 5. These were the last words of David. God's gentleness had made David very great; many divine promises were connected with him; but he came to his last words -- he was not suffered to continue by reason of death. Death is the utter weakness of man. “The promises could not be established in a man who was going down into death. David was not strong enough to hold the promises. He had to recognize the necessity for another Person to come in who should be ‘as the light of the morning, like the rising of the sun, a morning without clouds’. There was One who could pass through the night of man's death and condemnation, and rise to be the Sun of an eternal day -- One able to hold everything for the glory of God and the blessing of man in the power of resurrection. David had to turn from himself and his own house to Christ. He was dying, and his house was ‘not so before God’, but he could turn to a greater Person in whom everything should be established in the light and power of resurrection. ‘An everlasting covenant, ordered in every way and sure’ is established in a risen Christ. Man in the flesh could not hold the promises of God by reason of death, but David, by the Spirit, was in view of One who could establish them and hold them for ever. Whatever promises of God there are, in Christ is the Yea, and in Him the Amen. “In the world to come, death will no longer be a dark cloud resting

upon everything here. The blessing will be commanded, even life for evermore (Psalm 133:3). The righteous will enter into life eternal. Men will enjoy without a cloud the favor of God; death will be swallowed up in victory. All this has been made known in the way of promise, and there is not a single promise of which Christ is not the crown. It is He and He alone, in whom and by whom all will be fulfilled.” 1 “Before the work of the six days began there was a primary movement of the Spirit of God, hovering

over the face of the waters, in the earth that was desolate and empty and covered with darkness; in which scene God could find no pleasure or rest, but move and work, to bring Man into existence after His likeness.” 2 As a matter of fact, through the physical works of creation of the first four days, God brought into existence the physical conditions to sustain physical life on earth, including that of man. At the same time, through these physical works, God also symbolically portrays the spiritual conditions necessary for the new spiritual creation in man through the indwelling of the New Man, the second Adam, even our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The next two fruitful days symbolizes Christians’ spiritual fruit-bearing. __________________________________________________________ 1: C.A.Coates, Miscellaneous Ministry on the Old Testament, Vol.30, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, 1991. pp.18-24. 2: C.A.Coates., op.cit. p. 4.

REFERENCES 1: Alfred Edersheim, Biblical History: Old Testament, Text: Public Domain, Database @2004, WORDsearch Corp., Volume 1 2: A. E. Knoch, “The Divine Calendar”, Concordant Publishing Concern, 15570 Knochaven Road, Santa Clarita, CA 91387, U.S.A 3: Charles A. Coates, An Outline of Genesis, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, 1991 4: Charles A. Coates, Miscellaneous Ministry on the Old Testament, Vol.30, Kingston Bible Trust, UK, 1991 reprint. 5: Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology: A Popular Systematic Guide to Understanding Biblical Truth; 1999; Moody Press, Chicago, USA. . 6: Creation and Evolution? Christian Odyssey, Grace Communion International, March 2009, Volume 6, No.1, Ca., US, p. 5 Also available on the Internet at: www.christianodyssey.org 7: Dennis Gordon, Christian Odyssey, op. cit. p. 7.

8: Donald DeYoung, Astronomy and the Bible, www.answersingenesis.org 9: Finis J. Dake, Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible, Dake Publishing, Inc; USA, 10: Frank E. Gaebelein, General Editor, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Regency Reference Library, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, 1981; p. 323. 11: Gaines R. Johnson, The Bible, Genesis and Geology, www.kjvbible.org 12: George Campbell Morgan, Handbook for Bible Teachers and Preachers: Applications to Life from Every Book of the Bible, Baker Book House, USA, 1982 13: Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of BIBLE DIFFICULTIES, Zondervan Publishing House, US, 1982 14: Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, “How to Read the Bible for All its Worth”; OM Books, Indian Reprint 2000, A. P., India 15: Hans Wijngaards in ‘Historicity in the Old Testament’, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore, 1971 16: Henry M. Morris, Evolution and the Pope, www.scienceofcreation.org 17: Jack W. Langford, www.separationtruth.org 18: J. Pellatt, Departure and Recovery in ‘The Closing Ministry of J. Pellatt, (1843 –1913), Vol.1, Kingston Bible Trust, UK 19: Jelinek, Urlic, Science and the Bible, Kingston Bible Trust, England 20: Jeffrey B. Russell, The Myth of the Flat Earth, American Scientific Affiliation Conference, 1997 21: J. D. Bernal, The Origin of Life, New York, 1967. 22: John MacArthur, Jr., The Battle for the Beginning: Creation, Evolution, and the Bible, Indian Reprint by Grace to India, Pune; 2002.

23: John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, USA, 1997 24: John MacArthur, Jr. The Ultimate Priority, Moody Press, USA, 1983 25: J. Taylor, Snr, Volume 2, “Readings in Genesis”, New York, 1908, (reprinted from Vols. I and II "Mutual Comfort", 1908/9) 26: Joseph S. Exell, The Biblical Illustrator, Genesis, Vol.I Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA

27: Ken Ham, http://www.answersingenesis.org /articles/nab/could-godhave-created-in-six-days 28: Ken Ham, Creation: Where’s the proof? www.answersingenesis.org/ go/proof. 29: Ken Ham, A young Earth—it’s not the issue! January 1998, www.answersingenesis.org. 30: Lecomte Du Nouy, Human Destiny, The New American Library of World Literature, Inc., New York, USA , 1956 reprint 31: Luigi Accattoli, WHEN A POPE ASKS FORGIVENESS, The Mea Culpas of John Paul II, (Translated by Jordan Aumaann), Alba House, New York, 1998, (2005 reprint). 32: Mariette DiChristina, Life Quest, Editorial, Scientific American India, Jan. 2010. 33: Mark P. Cosgrove, The Essence of Human Nature, Zondervan Publishing House, USA, 1977 34: M. W. J. Phelan, The Genesis ‘Gap Theory’, Its Credibility and Consequences, Twoedged Sword Publications, UK, 2005 35: Michael Schmaus, DOGMA Volume 2: God and Creation, Sheed and

Ward, Inc, NY, USA, 1969 36: Merrill C. Tenney, General Editor, and J.D. Douglas, Revising Editor, New International Bible Dictionary, Zondervan Publishing House, Michigan, US, 1987, 37: Online News Hour: A Papal Apology, March 13, (www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/ religion /jan-june00/apology_3_13).

2000

38: Prof. Jerome Lejeune, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org. 39: Patterson, R. Natural www.answersingenesis.org

Selection

v/s

Evolution,

2007;

40: R. E. O. White: Biblical Ethics: John Knox Press, Atlanta, USA, 1979 41: R. Patterson; What www.answersingenesis.org.

Science?

Evolution

Exposed,

2007;

42: Roger Patterson: Natural Selection vs. Evolution March 8, 2007, www.answersingene sis.org. 43: Roger Patterson, Evolution Exposed: What is Science? 44: Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The (Elusive) Theory of Everything, Scientific American, India, October 2010 45: Steven W. Boyd, The Biblical Hebrew Creation Account- New Numbers Tell the Story, Institute for Creation Research; www.icr.org. 46: Timothy G. Strandish, Why Darwinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Triumph? Signs of the Times, May-June 2010, Seventh Day Adventist Publication, Australia. 47: Vivo Soggaard, Media in Church and Mission: Communicating the Gospel, Theological Book Trust, Bangalore, India; 1993 48: World Book Encyclopedia, 1992, Vol.8

49: Weston W. Fields, Unformed and Unfilled, Master Books, USA, 2005. 50: “www.pbs.org/world/2000/mar/13/catholicism.religion 51:www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/k/author-terry-ortenson/v/recent. 52: The World Book Dictionary, Vol. 1 A-K, World Book, Inc; US; p.737 53: The World Book Encyclopedia (International), World Book Inc., USA, Vol. E. 54: Yockey, H.P., A calculation of the probability of spontaneous biogenesis by information theory, Journal of Theoretical Biology 67:377–398, 1977; quoted by Roger Patterson in “The Origin of Life”, Evolution Exposed, www.answersingenesis.org.