Modern readers often assume that Genesis 1 depicts the creation of the earth and sky as we know it. Yet in an appeal for textual honesty, Steven DiMattei shows that such beliefs are more representative of modern views about this ancient text than the actual claims and beliefs of its author. Through a culturally contextualized and objective reading of the texts of Genesis 1 and 2, this study not only introduces readers to the textual data that convincingly demonstrate that Genesis' two creation accounts were penned by different authors who held contradictory views and beliefs about the origin of the world and of man and woman, but also establishes on textual grounds that what the author of Genesis 1 portrayed God creating was the world as its author and culture perceived and experienced it--not the objective world, but a subjective world, subject to the culturally conditioned views and beliefs of its author. In the end, this book clearly illustrates that the Bible's ancient texts do in fact represent the beliefs and worldviews of ancient peoples and cultures--not those of God, not those of later readers, and especially not those of modern-day Creationists.

Modern readers often assume that Genesis 1 depicts the creation of the earth and sky as we know it. Yet in an appeal for textual honesty, Steven DiMattei shows that such beliefs are more representative of modern views about this ancient text than the actual claims and beliefs of its author. Through a culturally contextualized and objective reading of the texts of Genesis 1 and 2, this study not only introduces readers to the textual data that convincingly demonstrate that Genesis' two creation accounts were penned by different authors who held contradictory views and beliefs about the origin of the world and of man and woman, but also establishes on textual grounds that what the author of Genesis 1 portrayed God creating was the world as its author and culture perceived and experienced it--not the objective world, but a subjective world, subject to the culturally conditioned views and beliefs of its author. In the end, this book clearly illustrates that the Bible's ancient texts do in fact represent the beliefs and worldviews of ancient peoples and cultures--not those of God, not those of later readers, and especially not those of modern-day Creationists.

Why isn't the evolution of flight shown in the fossil record? Bugs, birds, bats and dinosaurs flew and are shown fully formed in the fossil record, but there are no animals with halfway wings in the fossil record leading from ground based animals to flying animals. What is desperately wrong with the Grand Canyon if evolution is true? Where are the massive signs of erosion between the sedimentary layers of the Grand Canyon if they were laid down a "million years" at a time? Why does massive erosion only show up at the top? Animals with well-developed eyes show up suddenly in the fossil record as do flying animals. It's the norm for plants and animals to show up in the fossil record with the same separations as we see in different types of living animals and plants today. The "second law of thermodynamics" is a law of science that says everything left to its own will wear out, run down. It is a fundamental law of science. So how did evolution accidentally go up? How could a DNA molecule fumble together? The cell needs DNA; DNA needs the cell ñ which came first? 'Beneficial' mutations also weaken in other areas, and don't write evolutionary advancing DNA code. Spiral galaxies (which have the shape of a star fish that is spinning quickly) throughout our universe, like our Milky Way galaxy, are supposed to be over 10 billion years old. If they were over a billion years old they would lose their spiral arm shape. The arms of our galaxy, the Milky Way, only show a maximum age of 0.3 billion years. People want to know why they're here now and where they're going to go. They want surety of truth also. Read this book and see how well evolution holds up in all the sciences. Read this book and see if life can have meaning, direction and hope ñ with surety. For those who claim to be open minded, put on your seatbelts and keep your arms inside as you ride the roller coaster of your own value systems!

Mainstream Christianity tends to define salvation exclusively in terms of substitutionary atonement (Jesus died for me so that I can go to heaven when I die). While this is not incorrect, nor unbiblical, this definition of salvation is incomplete. Where does Israel fit into salvation? And what about the covenant? Most importantly, what about the kingdom of God that Jesus preached fervently? How do all of these dimensions that are central to the biblical text and its message fit into the bigger picture of salvation? Salvation in Fresh Perspective: Covenant, Cross, and Kingdom reminds readers that salvation is not centrally about the believer, but about God and his World Renewal Plan. Salvation, when properly framed by the entire text that runs from Genesis to Revelation, is not all about me and Jesus, but about God and his plan to renew the creation through the Jewish Messiah and his covenant people. Salvation in Fresh Perspective seeks to bring back into focus the often forgotten dimensions of the great story of salvation.

It is generally assumed that science and religion are at war. Many now claim that science has made religious belief redundant; others have turned to a literalist interpretation of biblical creation to reject or revise science; others try to resolve Darwin with Genesis. "The Nature of Creation" addresses this complex debate by engaging with both modern science and biblical scholarship together. Creation is central to Christian theology and the Bible, and has become the chosen battleground for scientists, atheists and creationists alike. "The Nature of Creation" presents a sustained historical investigation of what the creation texts of the Bible have to say and how this relates to modern scientific ideas of beginnings. The book aims to demonstrate what science and religion can share, and how they differ and ought to differ.

In this book you will learn about the origins of life, which has been a popular topic of debate for decades, stirring division among groups of people regarding what to believe, whether a higher entity created life (Creation) or a series of cosmic accidents (evolution) led to life developing on earth. I have spent nearly eighteen months researching in order to find the seemingly elusive answers to the questions involving our very origins: Where do we come from? Who or what made usa supreme being, some cosmic event, or both? What should we believe inCreation or evolution? Does it matter what we choose to believe? I have selected thirty most often asked questions on this subject matter and have attempted to answer them by looking at both sides of the argument on creation and evolution fairly and scientifically and without taking sides.

According to Bruce Ashford and Craig Bartholomew, one of the best sources for regaining a robust, biblical doctrine of creation is the recovery of Dutch neo-Calvinism. Tracing historical treatments and exploring theological themes, Ashford and Bartholomew develop the Kuyperian tradition's rich resources on creation for systematic theology and the life of the church today.

There is a broad consensus among biblical scholars that creation ex nihilo (from nothing) is a late Hellenistic concept with little inherent connection to Genesis 1 and other biblical creation texts. In this book, Nathan J. Chambers forces us to reconsider the question, arguing in favor of reading this chapter of the Bible in terms of ex nihilo creation and demonstrating that there is a sound basis for the early Christian development of the doctrine. Drawing on the theology of Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas, Chambers considers what the ex nihilo doctrine means and does in classical Christian dogma. He examines ancient Near Eastern cosmological texts that provide a potential context for reading Genesis 1. Recognizing the distance between the possible historical and theological frameworks for interpreting the text, he illuminates how this doctrine developed within early Christian thought as a consequence of the church’s commitment to reading Genesis 1 as part of Christian Scripture. Through original close readings of the chapter that engage critically with the work of Jon Levenson, Hermann Gunkel, and Brevard Childs, Chambers demonstrates that, far from precluding interpretive possibilities, reading Genesis 1 in terms of creation from nothing opens up a variety of interpretive avenues that have largely been overlooked in contemporary biblical scholarship. Timely and innovative, this book makes the case for a new (or recovered) framework for reading Genesis 1 that will appeal to biblical studies scholars and seminarians.

The debate over literal, six-day creation within the “conservative” camp is surely not a tempest in a teapot. While it is fair to acknowledge that sincere Christians appear on both sides of the debate, it is not correct to deduce from that literal, six-day creation is an issue on which there can be a reasonable, brotherly disagreement. Latitudinarians who point out that these has been no consensus on this issue in the orthodox Christian church should realize that there has been no consensus in the orthodox church on the doctrine of justification either, but that fact does not suggest we may hold a latitudinarian view of it. We unswerving advocates of literal, six-day creation are not contending that those who disagree with us are not Christians. We are, however, contending that they do not believe in a Christian manner on this issue. Subtitled A Presuppositional Defense of Literal Six-Day Creation, this symposium by thirteen authors is a direct frontal assault on all latitudinarian and otherwise waffling views of Biblical Creation. It explodes the "Framework Hypothesis," so dear to the hearts of many respectability-hungry Calvinists, and it throws down the gauntlet to all who believe they can maintain a consistent view of Biblical infallibility while abandoning literal, six-day creation. It is a must reading for all who are observing closely the gradual defection of many allegedly conservative churches and denominations, or who simply want a greater grasp of an orthodox, God-honoring view of the Bible.

A careful and unbiased analysis of how thinkers from church history interpreted the creation narrative in Genesis How literally are we meant to take the creation week of Genesis 1? In this polarizing debate, contemporary interpreters invoke great theologians from history to support their own side, whether that be a young Earth or theistic evolution. The problem lies in trying to force ancient authors into contemporary boxes, as Andrew J. Brown shows in this thought-provoking volume. Covering Philo, Basil, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, and more, Brown carefully interprets great thinkers’ readings of Genesis 1 in their intellectual contexts. He then assesses how these authors have been subject to cherry-picking and misappropriation in the trenches of the modern creation debate. By studying the intellectual history of the church in this way—to revisit rather than recruit the ancients—we can enrich our own biblical interpretation. Irenic and magisterial, Brown’s guide will interest both scholars of historical theology and anyone invested in the creation debate.