Tom,

At the risk of being called naive or unscientific I wish to suggest something that may not have been considered by some here. I will also probably be accused of having the disease, ED or "exegesis deficiency".

It is my belief that the Scripture in its entirety may be only understood properly by applying the Gospel or the doctrine of "Justification by Faith Alone". There is no reason why this idea may not be applied to the creation account in Genesis also. (In fact this is what Scripture calls us to do) Why may we not consider the Genesis account not only to be historically factual, but to be extremely prophetic and Gospel centered?

Of course our God may create light before there were heavenly bodies to emit or reflect that light. To reflect upon God's new creation in the truth and LIGHT of Christ all one need do is consider that to our God a thousand years is a day.

In the 4000th year the Son (sun) of righteousness is created and brought to us in the flesh! This is obviously true because, of the fact of sin, there were no heavenly bodies (men) to reflect or emit that light in its fullness.

It is fact that the darkness of sin took up residence in our world BEFORE the Son of light and truth.

For "scientific" men to demand that our omniscient God create the physical world and time itself in the same way that "THEY" would do it is nothing but arrogant and prideful unbelief.

To answer your first question then: The first creation account should not be impossed upon Scripture, but the Second creation in Christ should be impossed upon the first. This is simply because the New Testament has interpretive authority over the Old.

Denny

Roms 3:22-24

Last edited by Adopted; Fri Feb 18, 2005 8:44 AM.

Denny

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life." [John 6:68]