Sunday School - Common Creation Questions - Lesson 5 Genesis 1
Previous discussion weeks have been focused mainly on Young Earth, but the pastor tried to be slightly open minded, though the go to against the opponents is always on the definition of death as well as evolution, which is to my view, shallow.
Tong: Death in Genesis 1-3 is not about bodily death (the day you eat shall die). It's the separation from God. Tong on 3 definitions of Death (not about stop breathing, etc.):
1. Cease of function of our body
2. Departure from the source of life
3. ？Spiritual?
On His "image". There's talk about how image is not just the attributes of God. I recall some from Pak Tong and Van Til:
Many theologians treat Likeness & image the same thing, using these interchangeably. But Tong disagrees slightly:
形象是原本的状态，样式是终久学习应当达到的果效。
Jesus said, 你们要学我的样式 Matthew 11:29 - no mention of image. 所以，原先被造的潜在能是神的形象 (image)；被造之后生活的果效是样式(likeness)。
因为我们有神的形象，所以我们应当像神；因为基督到世界上成为我们的样式，所以我们应当效法他的样式。
Therefore IMAGE (human ALPHA) => more about potentiality. LIKENESS (human OMEGA) => more about the teleological effect.
Van Til:
For Rome: Image of God brings reason and free will to Likeness of God.
Van Til: Image of God consists most basically of Natural Religious Fellowship (created already) with God at the moment of endowment of of the image. Rome wouldn't affirm.
On dominion/subdue over creation of God by man, what's lacking in the discussion was the Prophet, KING and prophet (which was briefly mentioned by Phil). Mostly just talking about the "ability to use not abuse, stewardship over" the creations.
Pastor's view on Eve's "don't touch it", God did not say. Tong like some also agreed:
那么夏娃如何回答蛇的呢？ 《创世记解经》唐崇荣牧师 著
【创3:3】 惟有园当中那棵树上的果子，神曾说，你们不可吃，也不可摸，免得你们死。
这里夏娃犯了两个错误：
1、修改了神的话语：神没说“也不可摸” (Calvin disagrees: Eve's showing piety)
2、修改了神说话的语气：神说“你吃的日子必定死”，不是“免得你们死”。(Calvin agrees)
所以我们看到，当我们添加或减少神的话语原文，或者修改神说话的语气时，我们就容易被撒旦骗。
Pastor: Desire is not sinful.
[Gen 4:7...but you must master it]
Bill brought good point, though the reaction was slower than I expected: Did Satan fell first or man?
[At this point, I'm reminded to questions like Why Satan's allowed to tempt? Did man actually no need to work, etc., the quote of Socrates - An unexamined life is not worth living!]
Decreed of God on the Fall was mentioned, as some has problem with it or to count in the cause and effect of why the Fall must happen which is to glorify God as the reason for the Plan, mentioned by Mary in the group. In my head I was yelling [Geerhardus Vos' "Eschatology precedes Soteriology"]. Now the question is how should I dumb it down.
This also reminded me of a FB comment I posted:
We cannot call God "author" of evil without assigning culpability to Him, hence the term: Decree. God decreed the Fall. God ordained evil. We do similar thing to many authors of fictional novels of good vs. evil.
As to the idea that WHAT IF Adam didn't eat of it. I am not sure if Tong dealt with this, I couldn't find it online. However, I would venture to fantasize this:
If Adam was truly (as this is debated: the particle with עמה could just mean a conjugal bond) there at the moment of Eve's demise (Gen 3:6), then it behooves him to respond to the serpent instead of Eve, and thus making Adam culpable. However, if Adam had been late, he would thus be given the chance to redeem Eve, even with his own life, in a way, he may not be culpable. In either case, Adam is the federal head, not Eve, and would be treated so in certain matter.
Settings 
.
Cookies and other site data.
.