5) Does Adam get created (Genesis 2:7) on Day 6 (24 hour period), name all the animals of all
the earth (Genesis 2:19), and still have time to make his wedding ceremony with
Eve (Genesis 1:26) in a literal 24 hour period??? That's a lot of moving
parts. And the scientific/historical creationists still need to answer why the
order of creation is flipped (#4 above).
In this post, I move to the 5th
problem of the traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-2. There is one problem
with which to deal in this paragraph in addition to the back-handed remark
concerning the supposed discrepancy in the order. Since I dealt with the order
in a previous post, I will address the issue of Adam naming the animals. This
supposed problem has one of the simplest solutions of the 12 mentioned by
Nathan over at Faithlife.
Before I get to the solution, I think
it is appropriate to talk about the underlying presupposition with which Nathan
appears to operate. Nathan seems to assume that Adam is naming every living
animal under the sun. This is his first mistake. Second, Nathan seems to
believe that Adam’s ability to name the animals must be on the same level as
our ability would have been. That is Nathan’s second mistake. Finally, Nathan
seems to think that he knows exactly what Adam’s naming of the animals would
have been like. That is Nathan’s third mistake. Presuppositions are emerging
all along Nathan’s “12 problems in the traditional interpretation of Genesis
1-2.
Everyone operates with
presuppositions. The question for the Christian is whether or not those
presuppositions are the product of divine revelation or something else. Think
about it like this, the best way to know that a piece of currency is a counterfeit
is to compare it to the genuine. Well, to what can the genuine be compared in
order to know that it is the genuine? Nothing. It is the standard. A genuine
dollar is genuine because it is the concrete expression of the abstract idea
itself. There is nothing beyond the perfect form by which all its types are to
be measured. How does this line of reasoning apply in this case? We have two
different presuppositions regarding the standard against which biblical
claims should be measured. My claim is that Scripture is self-attesting.
Scripture is measured against itself. The competing claim is that Scripture can
be measured against human reason, modern science, rationalistic philosophies
with roots in the enlightenment. Nathan has to find reasons in the text to
support his claim of deep time. He needs to do this because he agrees with
modern science. Since he agrees with modern science’s view of the age of the
earth, man, and the universe, he either has to reject the Bible’s claims out of
hand or he has to adopt a method of interpreting the Bible that will
accommodate modern philosophies.
What does the Scripture actually
say in this case? The Scripture says that Adam named three categories of
animals: the beasts of the field, the birds of the heavens, and livestock. To begin with, God brought the animals to Adam. This surely would have expedited the
process. Second, Adam was only naming the kinds, not every animal. He would
have named everything in the cat family, cat, in the canine family, canines,
etc. There would not have been nearly as many animals to name as Nathan
presupposes. Even if Adam had to name as many as 2500 kinds of animals, and
even if it took him 5 seconds per kind, and even if he took a break every hour,
he could have completed the task in under four hours.[1]
At the end of the day, one has to
ask why modern interpreters are seemingly so desperate to turn many traditional
historic Christian beliefs upside down. The answer to that question is not
difficult to discern if only one will take the time to read the most recent
literature and listen to the most recent proponents of this movement. It is
simply offensive to the modern intellect to reject scientific theories
regarding evolution, the age of the universe, and the origin of man. The Bible,
if Christianity is to survive, must be recast in light of the new norms. And
those new norms revolve around scientific theory and new social morals. Any
belief that contradicts modern science or social morality must be purged from
the culture at large. Such beliefs are classified as ignorant, backwards, and
in many instances, immoral, hateful, and bigoted.
In summary then, as it turns out,
there is no problem for the traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-2 when it
comes to Adam having enough time to name all the animals. The real problem is
in the presuppositions people make, many of them uncritical, about how the text
should be approached from the start. In fact, what you will find when you begin
to dig deeper into objections to Christian belief, and supposed problems for
the historic understanding and teachings of Christianity, is there is hardly an
objection raised that is not grounded in uncritical, and unwarranted
presuppositions, beliefs, and assumptions about the Bible. As it turns out, the
same is true in this situation.
[1]
Jonathan D. Sarfati, The
Genesis Account: A Theological, Historical, and Scientific Commentary On
Genesis 1-11 (Powder Springs, Georgia, USA: Creation Book Publishers,
2015), 327.
No comments:
Post a Comment