Gênesis 1
David Guzik · Citado em PreceptAustin
Gênesis 1
Guzik - The mathematician D.S. Ulam argues it was highly improbable for the eye to evolve by the accumulation of small mutations, because the number of mutations must be so large and the time available was not nearly long enough for them to appear. Evolutionist Ernst Mayr commented: “Somehow or other by adjusting these figures we will come out all right. We are comforted by the fact that evolution has occurred.”
Gênesis 1
Guzik - In our day, many say there is no real difference between men and women. This makes sense if we are the result of mindless evolution, but not it is true that male and female He created them. To God, the differences between men and women are not accidents. Since He created them, the differences are good and meaningful.. Men are not women, and women are not men. One of the saddest signs of our culture’s depravity is the amount and the degree of gender confusion today.i. It is vain to wonder if men or women are superior to the other. A man is absolutely superior at being a man. A woman is absolutely superior at being a woman. But when a man tries to be a woman or a woman tries to be a man, you have something inferior. (Genesis 1) NET NOTE on male and female - There is no possibility that the verse is teaching that humans were first androgynous (having both male and female physical characteristics) and afterward were separated. The mention of male and female prepares for the blessing to follow. Henry Morris on male and female - Both possess equally an eternal spirit capable of personal fellowship with their Creator. Shared equally by men and women are all those spiritual attributes not shared by animals--moral conscience, abstract thought, appreciation of beauty, emotional feelings, and, especially, the capacity for worshipping and loving God. (Borrow The Defender's Study Bible) Believer's Study Bible - This verse establishes the equality of the man and the woman as image-bearers of God, who together have a meaningful purpose in the planning of the Creator-God. However, the text is very specific in defining this equality, which resides in their spiritual being, for that is what it means to be "in the image of God." This image-bearing most emphatically does not mean that the function of God's creation is to officiate and act as God. The N.T. counterpart of this verse is Gal. 3:28, in which the apostle Paul is clearly addressing the family of believers and setting forth in this context the spiritual equality of all who are one "in" Christ Jesus. On the other hand, beginning here with the creative act itself, distinctive roles for man and woman are indicated. Therefore, the pattern is equality in essential being and distinctive difference in role or function (2:15-18; cf. Eph. 5:22, note). This equality in personhood and difference in function is beautifully illustrated by the Godhead. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all equal (John 10:30; 14:9), and yet in function the Son submits to the Father (John 5:19, 20; 6:38; 8:28, 29, 54; 1 Cor. 15:28; Phil. 2:5-11), and the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father to testify of and glorify the Son (John 14:26; 15:26; 16:13, 14). Thus, the divinely defined relationship between husband and wife is analogous to the relationship within the Godhead, and the relationship within the Godhead is a pattern of instruction for the family unit. (The Believer's Study Bible) William Lane Craig: “I think that the creation of Eve out of Adam’s rib is almost undeniably figurative language, rather than describing an actual surgery that took place with this rib floating in the air and then being formed into a woman.” COMMENT - Craig is undeniably in error! God's creation of Eve requires simple, childlike faith not erudite, elite reasoning! As a medical doctor I would suggest the Almighty God did not need to perform "surgery" to remove a rib! And who said the rib was floating in air? God could have grasped it or in His infinite omnipotence, He could have simply thought it or spoke it and Adam's rib was supernaturally transformed into Eve. When a man who calls himself an apologist questions the literalicity of the Bible, there is reason to question his authenticity (at least regarding some of his suppositions or conclusions). God said it, that settles it, whether our finite minds can grasp it or not! As an aside Craig is quoted as referring to Genesis as "mytho-history!" Really? He also states "we do share an evolutionary origin with human beings and that God used a preexisting hominin who was non-human and merely animal, not in the image of God (ED: ARE YOU SERIOUS? DIRECT REFUTATION OF THE WORD OF GOD! WOE!), as the stuff as it were out of which then he created the first human beings." (Source) Thus you have a number of reasons to be a Berean (Acts 17:11+) when listening to or reading Craig, who is more of a philosopher than a theologian! O Give Thanks to Him Who Made O give thanks to Him who made Morning light and evening shade; Source and Giver of all good, Nightly sleep and daily food; Quickener of our wearied powers, Guard of our unconscious hours. O give thanks to nature’s king, Who made every breathing thing; His, our warm and sentient frame, His, the mind’s immortal flame. O how close the ties that bind Spirits to the Eternal Mind! O give thanks with heart and lip, For we are His workmanship; And all creatures are His care: Not a bird that cleaves the air Falls unnoticed; but who can Speak the Father’s love to man? O give thanks to Him who came In a mortal, suffering frame— Temple of the Deity— Came for rebel man to die; In the path Himself hath trod Leading back His saints to God. QUESTION - What does it mean that humanity is made in the image of God (imago dei)? (See the related video answering this question) ANSWER - On the last day of creation, God said, “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness” (Genesis 1:26). Thus, He finished His work with a “personal touch.” God formed Adam from the dust and gave him life by sharing His own breath (Genesis 2:7). Accordingly, humanity is unique among all God’s creations, having both a material body and an immaterial soul/spirit. Having the “image” or “likeness” of God means, in the simplest terms, that we were made to resemble God. Adam did not resemble God in the sense of God’s having flesh and blood. Scripture says that “God is spirit” (John 4:24) and therefore exists without a body. However, Adam’s body did mirror the life of God insofar as it was created in perfect health and was not subject to death. The image of God (Latin: imago dei) refers to the immaterial part of humanity. It sets human beings apart from the animal world, fits them for the dominion God intended them to have over the earth (Genesis 1:28), and enables them to commune with their Maker. It is a likeness mentally, morally, and socially. Mentally, humanity was created as a rational, volitional agent. In other words, human beings can reason and choose. This is a reflection of God’s intellect and freedom. Anytime someone invents a machine, writes a book, paints a landscape, enjoys a symphony, calculates a sum, or names a pet, he or she is proclaiming the fact that we are made in God’s image. Morally, humanity was created in righteousness and perfect innocence, a reflection of God’s holiness. God saw all He had made (humanity included) and called it “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Our conscience or “moral compass” is a vestige of that original state. Whenever someone writes a law, recoils from evil, praises good behavior, or feels guilty, he or she is confirming the fact that we are made in God’s own image. Socially, humanity was created for fellowship. This reflects God’s triune nature and His love. In Eden, humanity’s primary relationship was with God (Genesis 3:8 implies fellowship with God), and God made the first woman because “it is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18). Every time someone marries, makes a friend, hugs a child, or attends church, he or she is demonstrating the fact that we are made in the likeness of God. Part of being made in God’s image is that Adam had the capacity to make free choices. Although they were given a righteous nature, Adam and Eve made an evil choice to rebel against their Creator. In so doing, they marred the image of God within themselves, and passed that damaged likeness on to all of their descendants (Romans 5:12). Today, we still bear the image of God (James 3:9), but we also bear the scars of sin. Mentally, morally, socially, and physically, we show the effects of sin. The good news is that when God redeems an individual, He begins to restore the original image of God, creating a “new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (Ephesians 4:24). That redemption is only available by God’s grace through faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior from the sin that separates us from God (Ephesians 2:8-9). Through Christ, we are made new creations in the likeness of God (2 Corinthians 5:17).GotQuestions.org (Source: The Evidence Bible: Irrefutable Evidence for the Thinking Mind) Summary of several of these supposed "evidences" of evolution of man by John MacArthur (Creation Day 6, Part 2) - Now that does bring up the issue of fossils and I have to address this, I did a little bit last time, but I know many of you are students and even in elementary school in the later grades, certainly in junior high and high school and on into college you’re faced with the supposed fossil record that proves that man evolved from some kind of a four-legged apelike creature. How do we deal with the supposed fossil testimony that is used to prove evolution? Don’t scientists actually have missing links? It seems like every few years or every few months some scientist claims to have found some transitional ape-man form. Do they have missing links? The answer … absolutely not-absolutely not. A most interesting scientific book called In The Beginning, written by Walter Brown a Ph.D from MIT. For 21 years Walt Brown was the chief of science and technology studies at the Air War College and professor at the Air Force Academy, a very fine scientist. He has exposed, as have many others, the lies of evolutionists trying to make their case. He writes that stories claiming that fossils of primitive ape-like men have been found are grossly over stated. For example, it is now universally acknowledged that Piltdown man was a total hoax and yet it exists and has existed in text books for more than 40 years. Prior to 1978 the evidence for Ramapithicus consisted of a mere handful of teeth and jaw fragments. And as I told you last week, Ramapithicus was one of the largest categories of transitional ape-man. We now know that it came simply out of some teeth and jaw fragments. It is now known that ramapithicus was just an ape. The dethroning of ramapithicus supposedly the first human, the dethroning has been a serious blow. We now believe, scientists believe, that ramapithicus was probably the extinct relative of an orangutan, nothing more. You find some interesting information about that in a book by Roger Lewin called Bones of Contention. One of the other supposed transitional forms is called Nebraska man. The only evidence, by the way, for Nebraska man turns out to be a pig’s tooth … quite a leap. The skulls of the famous Peking man are considered by many experts to be the remains of apes that were systematically decapitated and exploited for food by man. The classification Homo-erectus is considered by most experts to be a category that should never have been created … with regard to them. The first confirmed limb bones of Homo hibilis have recently been discovered. They show that this animal clearly had ape-like proportions and should never have been classified as homo or manlike. And then australopithecines, as I mentioned last time, which were made famous by Lewis and Mary Leaky, found most in South Africa, are quite distinct from humans. Several detailed computer studies of the australopithecines have shown that their bodily proportions were not intermediate between man and living apes at all. Further study of their inner ear bones that were used to maintain balance show a striking similarity with those of chimpanzees and gorillas but a complete difference with those of humans. One of the fossils, a three and a half-foot tall long-armed 60-pound adult called Lucy … you remember the discovery of Lucy … was initially presented as evidence that the australopithecines walked upright in a human manner, however studies of Lucy’s entire anatomy, not just a knee joint, now show this is not true. Lucy, I hate to tell you, swung from trees. For about a hundred years the world was led to believe that Neanderthal man was stooped and apelike. Recent studies show that this erroneous belief was based upon some Neanderthals who were crippled with bone disease such as arthritis and rickets. Neanderthal man, Heidelberg man and Cro-Magnon man were completely human, artists depiction of them, especially of their fleshy portions, are quite imaginative and not at all supported by the evidence. And so it goes. And furthermore as we have been saying all along, the dating methods of evolutionists are grossly in error as well. So bottom line, they don’t have any transitional forms. They don’t have any proof for the evolution of anything, certainly no proof for the evolution of man. And the reason they’re having a hard time proving it is because it didn’t happen and therefore it can’t be proven. Related Resources: The missing link—has it been found? | GotQuestions.org Ape-Men: the Grand Illusion Piltdown Man - A Century of Fraud -- The Piltdown Man - Documentary ' Nebraska Man' Revisited | Answers in Genesis Neanderthal Man—the Changing Picture Neanderthal Neanderthals Are Still Human! Making Monkeys out of Men Making Man out of Monkeys Homo Erectus (Java Man, Peking Man) From Mars? Microbes from Mars fell on the very early Earth . . . , and the offspring of those microbes are still here-and they are us.” That’s how one astronomer speculated about how life originated on Mars and then came to Earth. Some men and women of science are looking to outer space for the origins of life on earth, not believing the Bible’s explanation that God placed mankind, animals, and plant life on earth through special creation. But how did that supposed microbial life start on a hostile planet? The bigger question is this: Why is it so difficult to accept that the earth, uniquely and singularly fitted for life to exist, is where God created and placed living creatures? As humans struggle to accept a miraculous beginning of life from the breath of God (Gen. 2:7), they choose to trust a miracle of a far different sort-the miracle of life originating from no first cause at all. Perhaps they could follow the advice Job received: “Listen to this, O Job; stand still and consider the wondrous works of God” (Job 37:14). And maybe they should try to answer God’s question: “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4). Dear Heavenly Father, what an awesome and powerful God You are! You created life by Your very breath. We praise You and stand in awe of You. Thank You for Your creation. Only God could create the cosmos out of nothing Questions for Evolutionists by Dr. Kent Hovind The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe. Evolution is not a good theory—it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science. 1. Where did the space for the universe come from? 2. Where did matter come from? 3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)? 4. How did matter get so perfectly organized? 5. Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing? 6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter? 7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself? 8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce? 9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?) 10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.) 11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor? 12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true? 13.When, where, why, and how did: a) Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two- and three-celled intermediates?) b) Single-celled animals evolve? c) Fish change to amphibians? d) Amphibians change to reptiles? e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live? 14. When, where, why, how, and from what did: a) Whales evolve? b) Sea horses evolve? c) Bats evolve? d) Eyes evolve? e) Ears evolve? f) Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve? 15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others)? a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)? b) The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce? c) The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs? d) DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts? e) The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose? f) The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants? g) The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones? h) The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system? i) The immune system or the need for it? (Ray Comfort - The Evidence Bible: Irrefutable Evidence for the Thinking Mind) Imago Dei Matthew Gawronski (Playing this haunting song as you ponder your origin) Tell me, tell me what I am Chemicals interlaced Just particles lost in space Oh, tell me Tell me, tell me who I am A product of consequence A meaningless consciousness Oh, tell me Tell me, tell me what Truth is An absolute fact as long as we choose it Tell me, tell me who I am A product of consequence A meaningless consciousness Imago Dei, Imago Dei Emblems of grace beyond the surface Imago Dei, Imago Dei More than stardust from the darkness Tell me, tell me what Truth is An absolute fact as long as we choose it More than stardust from the darkness Tell me, tell me what Truth is Imago Dei, Imago Dei There must be more than There must be more than There must be more than the visible Imago Dei, Imago Dei Emblems of grace beyond the surface Imago Dei, Imago Dei More than stardust from the darkest depths Tell me, tell me what Love is Just chemical reactions of nothing? Tell me, tell me Who Love is Just a good word, good man Oh, what's in His scarlet hands? Oh, tell me, Imago Dei, Imago Dei Emblems of grace beyond the surface Imago Dei, Imago Dei More than stardust from the darkness Genesis 1:28 God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." God blessed them Ge 1:22 8:17 9:1,7 17:16,20 22:17,18 24:60 26:3,4,24 33:5 49:25 Lev 26:9 1Ch 4:10 26:5 Job 42:12 Ps 107:38 127:1-5 128:3,4 Isa 45:18 1Ti 4:3 moves, Ps 69:34 Genesis 1 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Related Passages: Hebrews 2:5-8+ For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking. 6 But one has testified somewhere, saying, “WHAT IS MAN, THAT YOU REMEMBER HIM? OR THE SON OF MAN, THAT YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HIM? 7 “YOU HAVE MADE HIM FOR A LITTLE WHILE LOWER THAN THE ANGELS; YOU HAVE CROWNED HIM WITH GLORY AND HONOR, AND HAVE APPOINTED HIM OVER THE WORKS OF YOUR HANDS; 8 YOU HAVE PUT ALL THINGS IN SUBJECTION UNDER HIS FEET.” For in subjecting all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him (REFERS TO MAN, NOT JESUS AS SOME ERRONEOUSLY TEACH). But now (BECAUSE OF SIN ENTERING WORLD IN GENESIS 3) we do not yet see all things subjected to him. Hebrews 2:9+ But (THIS SECOND CONTRAST INTRODUCES THE Kinsman-Redeemer, THE SECOND ADAM 1Co 15:47+, WHO WILL RECOVER THE LAND [planet earth] ADAM LOST RULE OVER WHEN HE SINNED!) we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone. DIVINE BLESSING AND FIVE COMMANDS God blessed them - In the Septuagint the verb is eulogeo which means literally to speak well (good) and which when used of God means He confers favor (grace) or benefit. One is reminded of believers today who are now the "new creation" in Christ (2Cor 5:17+), for God the Creator "has blessed us with every (HOW MANY? cf the blessings in and 2Pe 1:4+) spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ." (Ephesians 1:3+) Guzik on God blessed them -- the first thing God did for man was to bless him. Without the goodness of God’s blessing, human life would be not only unbearable, but also impossible (Genesis 1) In truth His divine power granted (TO ADAM AND EVE) "everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence." (2Pe 1:3+) NET NOTE on blessed them - As in Ge 1:22 the verb “bless” here means “to endow with the capacity to reproduce and be fruitful,” as the following context indicates. As in v. 22, the statement directly precedes the command “be fruitful and multiply.” The verb carries this same nuance in Gen 17:16 (where God’s blessing of Sarai imparts to her the capacity to bear a child); Gen 48:16 (where God’s blessing of Joseph’s sons is closely associated with their having numerous descendants); and Deut 7:13 (where God’s blessing is associated with fertility in general, including numerous descendants). See also Gen 49:25 (where Jacob uses the noun derivative in referring to “blessings of the breast and womb,” an obvious reference to fertility) and Gen 27:27 (where the verb is used of a field to which God has given the capacity to produce vegetation). And God said (see note on this phrase 10x/10v) to them - This has been called the "dominion mandate" and has never been revoked, but renewed and after the Flood when "God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth." (Ge 9:1, cf Genesis 9:1-7). "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth - God gave man 5 commands. Before the Fall, Adam gave perfect obedience. God created humans to take an unfinished and untamed creation and direct and subdue it as God would. Note the divine logic. If they were to fill the earth they would have to be fruitful, to procreate prodigiously. When they were of sufficient numbers of human beings, then they could proceed to subdue and rule.The earth implies not just the Garden of Eden but the entire earth. Because of sin they never even got out of the Garden and fell woefully short of fulfilling the commands in this passage. THOUGHT - Sin (even little ones, because they do not remain little, by become dominating and destructive) will blunt your effectiveness beloved and keep you from carrying out their purpose explained by Paul "we are His workmanship (MASTERPIECE poiema), created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand (EVEN BEFORE GENESIS 1:1!) so that we would walk in them." (Eph 2:10+) Henry