review study day

Originally posted on February 25, 2009 – by Andre Piet

last Sunday

The interest was even greater than the number of registrations had suggested. More than a hundred people showed up Sunday for the theme ‘new light on Genesis 1’. The subject is currently very much in the spotlight (200th birth year of Darwin) and the turmoil (Knevel, EO, flyer) of the last weeks has strengthened that even more.

Genesis 1: day-notes

The study day was a follow-up to the study I had given a few weeks earlier about the toledot (=documents) and the origin of the book of Genesis. Genesis is a compilation of documents (under the editorship of Moses) that stem from the very earliest times. It has unfortunately been translated away in our Bibles, but Adam himself wrote the first book. Gen.5:1 speaks (literally rendered) of “the book of documents of Adam,” thereby referring to the preceding chapters. This study day dealt with the first documents (Genesis 1) in Adam’s book, the subject: “the documents of heaven and earth” (Gen.2:4). Adam directly noted in the garden of Eden what God spoke about creation… with mention of the days on which he noted this. “Day one,” “second day,” “third day,” etc. The days of Genesis 1 are the days on which Adam was reported to! That was eye-opener no. 1 of the study day.

not created in six days

All the classic questions about the days of Genesis 1, such as:

• how can there be days, evenings and mornings without a sun?;
• why did God keep a night’s rest?;
• how can Gen.1 include the creation of man and woman in one day while from Gen.2 we know that a considerable time lay between the creation of Adam and Eve?
• etc.

disappear once we recognize that Adam recorded the day numbers on which he wrote down the ten monumental words of God. The days of Genesis 1 speak of the very first week of man. Not: the first week of creation. The world was not created in six days. And thus Knevel is after all a little bit right…

restitution doctrine?

The second eye-opener of the day follows from the conclusions of the first session. If the days of Genesis 1 are days of notation, then the basis for the restitution doctrine also falls away. Especially this point will be hard to digest for a number of listeners. I recognize that, for I too for years have believed and taught that the days of Genesis 1 were days of restoration. Though I had for some time already had my doubts about the narrow basis for this view.

designed as perishable

In any case, Sunday I took the bull by the horns and argued that the earth was created waste and empty. And these considerations led me to yet another discovery: this creation is perishable by design (Rom.8:20). “Not voluntarily,” Paul writes, that is, it is not the choice of the creature. All this demonstrates that with GOD nothing ever went wrong. From the beginning GOD intended that this creation would be of a transient nature. He created a dark world (the old creation) in order to make His light (the new creation) visible. The first Adam was necessary in order to arrive at “the last Adam.”

full plate

All in all it was quite a full plate that was served to the audience on Sunday. In two hours of study a great deal passed by. From many I have received enthusiastic responses about the day, though I am aware that the content may sit heavily on the stomach for a category of listeners (including those who follow it via the internet)…
My advice: consider everything open-mindedly and determine for yourself (in the light of Scripture) whether “these things are so.”
———————————————–

first study
second study

Delen: