Would You Adam and Eve It!

Today, the SAB make two objections under the
interpretation and contradictions categories respectively.

Objection 1
When was Adam created?
"God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." -- Genesis 1:27

Jehovah's Witnesses: 4026 BCE
"According to reliable Bible chronology Adam was created in the year 4026 B.C.E., likely in the autumn of the year, at the end of the sixth day of creation." (April 1, 1968, Watchtower) This was the basis of the failed 1975 prophecy: that Armageddon would occur in 1975, 6000 years after Adam's creation. The failure of the "reliable Bible chronology" was never explained, and the whole 6000 years thing was promptly dropped and forgotten after 1975 passed uneventfully.

Response
As already mentioned in a previous post, the Watchtower organisation (Jehovahs Witnesses) are notorious for making false predictions about various events, and this is no exception. See here for a catalogue of Watchtower false prophecies and erroneous dating information.

Objection 2

When was Eve created?

At the same time as Adam.

After Adam and all the animals were created.

Gen.1:27 God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Gen.2:20-22 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Response
Again, as already mentioned in a previous post, Genesis 1:27 does not even imply that the man and woman were created simultaneously.

As mentioned many times (in fact, I'm getting slightly sick of saying this now) the SAB have shown their true colours, i.e. biased militant atheists whose material has no foundation in fact.

Bye for now.

Users or Abusers?

In my last post I said that we would look at SAB's objection to the number of Gods that the Bible teaches. Because of the substantial content of the necessary reply to this objection and time constraints, I have decided to leave this topic until I have more time available (perhaps on the weekend).

Instead, this post will deal with the following objection from the SAB under the interpretation category:

Gen.1:26
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 creepeth upon the earth.

God gave humans dominion over every other living thing on earth. This couldn't be true, of course, since millions of other species existed for millions of years before humans existed. But this verse is used by fundamentalist Christians to justify their mistreatment of other species and disregard for the environment. After all, they believe that God created the other species just for them, so they can do whatever they please with them.

Dealing with each statement in turn:

1. God gave humans dominion over every other living thing on earth. Correct.
2. This couldn't be true, of course, since millions of other species existed for millions of years before humans existed. Really? The SAB are sure about that are they? It looks like the SAB are just swallowing the evolutionary dating methods without question, ignoring their unreliability -- see here.
3. But this verse is used by fundamentalist Christians to justify their mistreatment of other species and disregard for the environment. What a sweeping generalisation. I know of no genuine Christians who use this verse, or the environment in that way. The SAB need to provide some evidence of this.
4. After all, they believe that God created the other species just for them, so they can do whatever they please with them. Another unsubstantiated statement. It is more likely that Christians will care for the environment (see passages like Proverbs 12:10 and 1 Timothy 5:18), unlike evolutionists who believe that we all evolved by the survival of the fittest.

Again, the SAB have revealed their atheistic bias, since none of their objections have an ounce of substance.

See you soon.

Man Or Beast?
The SAB outdo themselves with this objection. Here it is under the interpretation category:

The beast of the earth, beast of the field

And God made the beast of the earth. -- Genesis 1:25

The Christian Identity and Aryan Nations folks say that "beast of the earth" and "beast of the field" refer to all non-human animals and non-white humans. They consider all people of color to be without a soul and on the same level as animals, such as cattle, fish, and birds.

The Christian Identity and Aryan Nation movements are non Christian racist sects who twist and use the message of the Bible to further their own racist agendas, in a similar way that David Koresh did at Waco, and not unlike the way the SAB use it to further their atheist agenda.

The beast of the earth and beast of the field refer to what they say, non human animals. The Bible is not and never has been racist, as is testified by the redeemed people worshipping in heaven -- "And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;" (Revelation 5:9).

It's amazing the lengths the unbelieving mind will go to in order to try and oppose the will and purpose of God; it reminds us of Joseph's brothers.

The next instalment will deal with the question of how many Gods the Bible teaches about.

Bye for now.

Fowl Play!
Today we deal with the following objections from the SAB under the contradictions category:

From what were the fowls created?

From the waters.	From the ground.
Gen.1:20-21 "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 moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good."	Gen.2:19 "And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof."

There is no problem in reconciling these two accounts. The waters bringing forth the fowl in Gen.1:20-21 says nothing about what the fowl (or the sea creatures for that matter) were actually made out of, but that they came forth from the waters. Similarly, Gen.2:19 says nothing about which part of the ground was used to form the beasts of the field and fowls of the air. The most obvious conclusion to draw from this is that God made the fowl using ground (i.e. earth or soil) from the ocean bed. Why He did this we do not know.

This explanation agrees perfectly with both accounts - they were brought forth by the water, and were formed out of the ground, and dissolves the apparent contradiction.

Let the SAB jump through hoops and do what they can to argue otherwise.

Next we will be dealing with some strange interpretations of what the Beasts of the Earth are.

Bye for now.

Stars in your skies!
In this episode, the SAB raise two objections concerning the creation of the stars - one under the science and history category, and the other under the contradictions category.

The first objection is reproduced below:

Gen.1:16
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
God makes two lights: "The greater light [the sun] to rule the day, and the lesser light [the moon] to rule the night." But the moon is not a light; it only reflects light from the sun. And why, if God made the moon to "rule the night", does it spend half of its time moving through the daytime sky?
"He made the stars also." God spends a day making light (before making the sun and stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes the trillions of stars.

The SAB says "...But the moon is not a light; it only reflects light from the sun...".

The Hebrew term used for light in Genesis 1:16 is maw-ore, which more literally translates as luminary. The Oxford English Dictionary definition for luminary is
"A natural light-giving body, esp. a celestial body; pre-eminently applied to the sun or the moon. the luminaries often = the sun and moon."
The moon is indeed a light giving body. The mechanism by which the light is given from the moon (reflection from the sun) doesn't change this fact. The SAB are, not untypically imposing a biased interpretation on to the passage that is unwarranted.

The SAB says "...why, if God made the moon to "rule the night", does it spend half of its time moving through the daytime sky?...".

Why not? It would only be a problem if that adversely affected its night-ruling duties. SAB must have fallen asleep at his day job after moonlighting. Of course he wouldn't call it "moonlighting" with his pedantry elsewhere about the moon not shining by its own light.

The SAB says "...God spends a day making light (before making the sun and stars) and separating light from darkness; then, at the end of a hard day's work, and almost as an afterthought, he makes the trillions of stars."

Exactly, demonstrating God's immense power, so that making trillions of gigantic balls of gas is just a doddle. But scholars of the literature see this as an afterthought, though in part against pagan claims of the importance of the stars in astrology.

The second objection is reproduced below:

When were the stars made?

On the fourth day of creation, after the earth was made.	Before the earth was made.
Gen.1:16-19 He made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven.... And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.	Job 38:4-7 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? ... When the morning stars sang together.

This is another apparent 'order of creation' objection from the SAB.

But Job 38:7 speaks of some kind of celebration occurring in response to the spectacle of God's amazing creative activity at the beginning of time, which can be seen clearly if the whole of verse 7 is considered: "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" (Job 38:7).

It would take some very imaginative exegesis of the passage to equate the morning stars singing together with God's creation of the stars at the beginning of time. But this is clearly what the SAB are suggesting that this passage is talking about. And why call the physical stars morning stars instead of just stars? This verse clearly uses figurative language, and most biblical scholars are in agreement that the morning stars and sons of God referred to in this verse are angels (the context of the verse also favours this interpretation). So the verse actually speaks of the celebration and praise to God made by the angels in response to God's creative activities, and has nothing to do with the creation of the stars on the fourth day of the creation week.

Again, the SAB's ignorance has been exposed, and the word of God stands unmoved and defiant in the face of this and other foolish attacks.

Join me next time where we explain to the SAB "From what were the fowls created?".

Bye for now.

Return of the Backslidden blogger!!

Just a quick post to signal my return to the blogsphere after some gentle encouragement from my friend over on Fatbaptist. I've let things slip over the past couple of months and as a result have been relegated to the 'Good blogs gone silent...' category on the Fatbaptist blog. I hope to make my way back into the 'Other blogs i like' category soon.

The first post of my comeback will deal with the SAB's objections to God's creation of the stars. Here goes nothing!!!

Bye for now.