With holidays fading in the memory, and thoughts turning again to the world of work, it is an appropriate time to re-engage with, and re-energize, our discourse on the topic of science and faith. A summary of the discussion so far (posted in June) alluded briefly to the challenges of interpreting Scripture, particularly the opening chapters of Genesis, in the light of emerging scientific findings. This is an area worthy of more detailed, potentially fruitful, exploration.

The Christian view of the Bible as God-inspired requires us to seek the truths and guidance presented throughout the whole of the canon. To this end it is useful, having focused initially on ‘D for Darwin’ to set the scene and explore the topic of evolution to move to ‘D for Divinity’ (please forgive the abject addiction to alliteration) and interrogate the biblical narrative of human origins.

As before, it is very helpful to have an brief informed commentary to set us on our path with key insights and background. It is therefore a pleasure as Forum chair to welcome an introductory paper from Rev Dr Fergus Macdonald that provides both a perceptive view on the literary construct of the Genesis origins account and a starting point for discussion as to the meaning and truths contained therein.

"WHAT KIND OF LITERATURE IS GENESIS 1-3?"

Please see attached paper, in the link below.

"What kind of literature"– Rev Dr Fergus Macdonald

Initial thoughts from the chair:-

The paper by Fergus Macdonald sets out the literary genres of the Genesis creation account(s). It prompts the question as to intent of the (human) author in using these devices rather than plainer prose. Is there a theological or cultural view as to the purpose behind the structure of the texts?

How helpful is it from the Christian perspective to view Adam (or ‘the adam’ as we might now understand him) as the representative of humanity - chosen from among others belonging to the homo sapiens species - charged by God (Yahweh Elohim – the more personal name used by Hebrews) with obedience to divinely-derived, moral law?

What are the theological consequences of separating physical and spiritual death and identifying the breaking of the moral law (disobedience to God’s directive) with the latter in the Genesis account?

How far does the distinction between Adam and Eve as spiritual but not biological parents of humankind help in bringing together the scientific and biblical origins accounts? As the paper states ‘there are many variations in how Christians affirm both divine creation and Holy Scripture, there is an underlying consensus affirming that there is no ultimate distinction between the natural world rightly interpreted and Scripture rightly understood.’
What might these variations include and how far can we go within Christian orthodoxy in generating an integrating view of Scripture and science?

Please feel free to seek clarification, or amplification from Fergus on any matters presented in the paper. Also, please be at liberty to ask your own questions, and propose alternative interpretations, while always adhering to the maxim of respectful dialogue.

My question is for Rev Dr Fergus Macdonald
Is there a "killing sentients" concept in the OT covenant sacrifice that would translate to "Levitical surrendering consciousness to GOD" as a metaphor for "New Testament surrendering consciousness to GOD" which in turn indicates a surrendering of our will to HIS will (cf. LORD's prayer). The Lamb belongs to me, I willfully surrender it to death and GOD as a parable for my surrender. This synchronises the Old and New Testament metaphors. Any comments? - by the way I am not a trained Theologian just someone who reads his bible.

Thank you, John, for your question. I would find it easier to respond if you would kindly expand on your understanding of the relationship between 'killing sentients' and 'surrendering consciousness to God'

Animal sacrifice practiced in OT temple worship was rendering a conscious being ritualistically to GOD. In the NT surrender of the disciples will to Father is the subject of prayer and teaching. I believe both are metaphorically parallel. Perhaps will rather than consciousness would have been a better description of my view. However "sacrifice" seems to be the backbone holding both OT and NT together.

John makes an interesting point about the idea of sacrifice being a unifying link between old and new testaments. We cannot separate the idea of sacrifice from death. We rightly tend to think of death as an 'enemy' to be eschewed but the sanctioning, by God, of death for the purpose of sacrifice seems to give it a form of noble purpose, especially in the old testament. The death of Christ was of course the ultimate and last sacrifice through death required.
However this more positive use of death for the purpose of sacrificial offering cues in my thinking the idea of death being able to be considered as part of the natural cycle of life. Without death and the recycling of nutrients life would cease to be; without the death of animals and humans the planet would be over burdened quickly to a point where it could not cope - perhaps not even survive.
So the point I am distilling from John's post is that death may be a more ' natural' and 'intentional' aspect of creation than we are accustomed to think. This is of relevance to discussions about 'death before the Fall.'
It links too to the opening paper of the GTN conference ( given by Bethany Sollereder) in March 2017. This can be made available by requesting it via office@graspingthenettle.org

The concept of sacrifice in the Hebrew Bible is intriguing and somewhat mysterious. According to he 20th century German theologian Gerhard von Rad 'There is a realm of silence and secrecy in respect to what God works in sacrifice.' Nevertheless, sacrifice is not entirely enigmatic. John rightly sees sacrifice as a parable of the surrender of the offerers to God. The metaphorical use of the term in the New Testament (e.g. Romans 12:1) continues to reflect this idea of surrender. It is also important to bear in mind that sacrifices also point to new life. In the Genesis narrative sacrifice is first mentioned immediately after Adam and Eve's expulsion from the garden, and in the case of Abel it accompanies restoration to God's favour. So, although animal sacrifices involved death it was a death that symbolised new life. Ultimately the Old Testament sacrificial system was a liturgical marker that the Hebrew community and its institutions had been redeemed from the realm of spiritual death.

In opening up the topic “Darwin DNA and Divinity” opportunities have arisen to consider a wide range of related issues.
I would like to offer the following core understanding of what the Biblical chapters on origins essentially communicate to us about God, the purpose of his creative work and his relationship with his creation.
To many atheists the first three chapters of Genesis are clear proof of the Bible’s ancient ignorance of the physical world and how it came into being. For some Christians it is an embarrassment, because of a similar belief that these early chapters focus on the mechanics of creation, on the “how” rather than the “why” questions. For countless others over thousands of years these chapters have been seen as foundational for the understanding of the rest of God’s revelation to man, a remarkable revelation of truths far more important than how old is the Earth or the relationship between the species. It has been of great value to people of faith, whether ancient nomads or modern scientists, whether living in the West or the East, the North or the South, whatever their native language or culture. Far from being an embarrassment to such believers these chapters are strong evidence for the divine origin of the Scriptures, providing answers to truly basic questions, who we are, what it means to be human etc. Just imagine a committee of “wise men” today, setting out to write an account of origins in a few sheets of A4. I shudder to think what they would come up with.
Most problems arise from a failure to understand the purpose of Scripture. The Westminster Shorter Catechism made a profound statement when it said, “The Scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God requires of man.” In seeking to understand any piece of writing we need to know why it was written. Failing to take this seriously leads to finding answers in Genesis to questions we should never have asked in the first place. It leads to fighting over the length of the days of creation, to straining out gnats and swallowing camels.
Looking at Genesis1 in this light the following are a sample of what I see as it’s true teaching.
What do Genesis 1 to 3 say about God?
• God is. “In the beginning God …” The Bible simply starts with God, the eternal God. It doesn’t try to prove the existence of God. God is the starting point from which we begin our journey of exploration. His existence makes sense of everything else. Without him there is no sense in the universe. God alone is. He alone is eternal. In the light of that basic truth we may search, in hope, for truth on all other fronts.
• The God we meet in Genesis 1 has the power to bring things into existence including ourselves and everything around us. He commands and things happen.
• The God we meet in Gen 1 is separate from the world he created. He brought into existence all we see, not by converting some part of himself into physical energy and matter but by calling into existence the physical world out of nothing. Yet, though distinct from the physical creation, he remains constantly interacting with it.
• The God we meet in Genesis 1 is the ultimate authority. The creation belongs to him. Nor is He an absentee landlord. The Earth does not belong to the Devil. The Earth is not ours to do with as we please.
• The God we meet in Genesis 1 speaks. “And God said …” His word is powerfully creative. It does something. He is not a dumb spiritual force nor dumb like the idols of the nations around Israel. He is certainly not some set of eternally existent “physical laws” capable of bringing the physical world into existence.
• The God we meet in Gen 1 is personal. “Let us make man in our image …” The next two chapters further explore this vital concept and his personal relationship with man.
What do Genesis 1 to 3 say about man?
• The word “create” occurs in only three places in the chapter, verses 1, 21 and 27. These are clearly significant aspects of the whole creative process.
• On the sixth day God made land creatures. On that same day he created man. Is this not very suggestive? In ch2:7 we are told God made man from the dust of the earth. We share something with the inanimate world of matter and even more with the other animals, surely good reason for a humble respect for God’s creation.
• However, while man shares a physical nature with the animals he is no mere animal. He is special. Adam searched among the animals for a soul-mate and could not find one – another pointer to the clear difference that existed between man and the other animals. God then made Eve to be with him. With these two God entered into a special personal relationship and bound them to himself for ever.
• Man was created in the image of God. In what does this image consist? It must be something that characterises man and separates him from all other animal life. It is not merely intelligence, although that is involved. Man is a personal being with moral and spiritual dimensions. We can relate to other personal beings, particularly to God himself. Love becomes possible. God said, “Let us create …”. It is a personal thing with God. In creating man God was bringing into being someone like himself. The creature and the Creator can never be identical but there is an affinity that does not exist between God and any other part of his creation. Much later in the unfolding revelation of God we come to the amazing concept of God becoming man in Jesus of Nazareth.
• Man is spiritual as well as physical (not necessarily in two separate essences), capable of being destined for eternal life in the presence of God, able to pray and to hear the voice of God. Man was created a “nephesh” or “living being”, sometimes translated “soul”. Note how God participates very closely in the creation of Adam as he “breathed into his nostrils the breath of life”. 2:7
• Man has a moral constitution. He knows the difference between right and wrong. That knowledge has taken a big knock when man fell into sin but it remains that all men know there is a difference and feel guilt when doing something wrong. We sometimes talk of people as acting in a ‘beastly’ manner, yet it is man and not the beasts that can devise instruments of torture and take pleasure from hurting others.
Surely our response to these chapters should be that of the 24 elders before the throne of God in heaven as revealed to us in the last book of Scripture. Revelation 4:11
“Worthy are you our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

Alan J F Fraser