25-0928sc Transcript

Teacher: Scott Reynolds for Steve Cain

(0:04) Okay, so since we’ve gone through the truth project and engagement project, (0:12) we’re familiar with the idea of competing truth claims, and the world philosophies are competing (0:20) truth claims, the genesis. They’re not the truth, they’re claims of the truth. (0:27) And when somebody tells you something about truth, their truth or your truth, (0:36) what they’re really saying, though they don’t realize it, is your truth claims or my truth (0:43) claims.

As we saw in the truth project, truth is reality, conforms to reality. What reality is, (0:53) that’s the truth. What you think about what reality is, that’s your truth claim.

(1:00) So there are competing truth claims, but there really is an objective truth, (1:08) an absolute objective truth. Okay, so my key thesis. As Christians, we are called to anchor (1:16) our faith in the historical reality of Genesis chapters 1 through 11, just as Jesus and the (1:24) apostles did when grounding their doctrinal and moral teachings for the church.

And that’s the (1:32) second half of chapter 1, which we’re going to spend some time on, part of it, because we won’t (1:38) have time to get through the second half of chapter 1, of Steve’s chapter 1. But the important (1:45) part there is, Jesus and the apostles believed Genesis to be literal and historical. So we must (1:56) uphold the Bible’s clear account without reshaping it to align with secular philosophies. A literal (2:03) understanding of Genesis 1 through 11 reveals the complete truth about creation and human origins, (2:12) standing firm against modern challenges such as evolutionary theory and extended (2:18) geological timescales.

But the point there is, naturalists by definition exclude what they call (2:29) supernatural. We call it spiritual. There’s a spiritual realm, there’s a natural realm.

(2:38) Naturalists, which evolution is based on and geological timescales are based on, exclude (2:46) spiritual. They exclude it. They don’t acknowledge.

If there’s evidence that points to that, (2:53) and Romans chapter 118 tells us there is plainly evidence that will show that God exists. (3:01) They ignore it because they reject anything except natural, empirical evidence. (3:11) As far as the supernatural goes, Peter makes a point.

And before we get to Peter, God makes a (3:24) point in how we should view nature. And God tells through the Hebrew writer that (3:39) Moses was a good supervisor of God’s house. But Jesus is the builder of God’s house.

(3:50) And then God says through Hebrews, because a house is built by someone. That is, (4:00) and 2,000 years ago, that’s the argument for intelligent design. We understand what (4:09) design looks like.

All right. So God gives us clues for our arguments. (4:16) Peter tells us about the skeptics, that they’ll reject God, and they’ll say everything goes on (4:23) as it has from the beginning.

That’s the concept of uniformitarianism. That became in vogue in the (4:32) 1950s. A little bit earlier, actually, in the 1800s, that comes into play.

But that’s what (4:41) we base the timescales on, is that. And so Peter tells us what they willfully forget, (4:55) what they reject. And then he says by God’s word, the world came into being, (5:04) and the world was destroyed by a flood.

So there’s two major events that are rejected. Why? (5:10) Because they’re not, they’re spiritual. Or they would say supernatural.

(5:17) They’re outside of the natural. So they reject it. And that’s exactly what Peter said.

(5:23) They willfully forget. So they’re rejecting the spiritual. That causes them to view nature, (5:33) it’s like faith only argument.

Faith only. And we know that if you go in and look at the (5:42) scriptures as faith only, you don’t get the repentance as necessary. It’s repentance for the (5:50) remission of sins, we’re told in John.

And then you have not only repentance, but next to it’s (5:59) repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. So baptism of repentance, which is what John was (6:05) preaching, by the way, John the baptizer. So it’s like faith only.

If you only go in with that idea, (6:14) you miss the other information, and you come out with the wrong conclusion. (6:20) So if you go in looking at origins from nature only, and they’ve convinced religious people to (6:29) do that, well, we only accept empirical evidence. Well, then you’re not accepting all the evidence.

(6:37) You’re rejecting. And that’s why you come up with the wrong conclusion. And your wrong conclusion (6:43) is long periods of time and evolution.

No, God, could you reject that? (6:53) However, if there is a spiritual realm and God really exists, (6:59) then they don’t have all the information. And while it makes sense in that, you know, (7:06) science works well today. We can observe things that exist when we exist.

(7:15) And it works really well. The laws of nature can be described with mathematical precision. (7:27) You can describe gravity with a mathematical formula.

You can make decisions based on that (7:35) and that’s accurate today. But what science cannot do is observe something that existed long (7:44) ago. It can’t observe something long ago because that something long ago doesn’t exist, which is (7:53) outside of empirical evidence.

So if you take a nature only view, and I believe that’s Peter’s (8:03) point, but they willfully forget is the spiritual, they come up with wrong conclusions. (8:10) And somehow that’s how we need to. And that’s why Genesis can be accurate.

And science, (8:18) even though they got all kinds of scientific evidence for the way things work today, (8:23) they don’t have that for back then. It’s outside their purview. (8:29) So that said, we’ve been studying the truth project in which we were exposed to the idea (8:38) that God’s metanarrative is overall encompassing recorded history from the beginning to Christ and (8:48) the prophecies that have reached even beyond that time contain a worldview, God’s worldview, (8:56) a worldview which Christians, those that belong to God should have.

(9:02) And since God cannot lie and his word is true, it is the true worldview, the worldview that is (9:11) really real and one that should frame our beliefs and be the basis of our decision making and our (9:19) actions, because after all, we act on what we believe is really real. So we’re currently (9:27) studying on Wednesday nights, the engagement project, where we’re learning how to engage our (9:32) neighbors around us with our Christian worldview. And then in Steve’s class, the scheme of redemption (9:38) by Edward C. Wharton, the first chapter, the chapter titled Genesis, historical or myth.

(9:45) And all of this information has made us aware that there is a war going on in our world today. (9:52) There’s a clash between worldviews, all making competing truth claims. And we learned in the (9:58) truth project, and I’ve already gone over this in my comments before, I am my truth, you have your (10:05) truth, and are really truth claims.

So we are bombarded today with these competing truth claims, (10:11) and we need to find the real source of truth to be able to discern what is true or not. Or in the (10:18) words of Hebrews 5, 14, solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses (10:26) trained to discern good and evil. As Dr. Del Tackett brought out in the engagement project, (10:35) when he was discussing the second epoch of God’s method narrative, the fall of man, (10:43) competing truth claims are not new.

It’s been going on since the beginning. (10:51) There’s a war between truth and lies, all the way back to Adam and Eve in the garden, (10:58) do not eat from the tree, or you will surely die, Genesis 2, 17, Satan’s challenge, (11:05) competing truth claim. What happened in the garden of Eden between, we even think of it as a story, (11:16) I think a lot of times, is the exact same attack that’s going on today in our society.

(11:30) Genesis says, God made the world in six days. Satan says, no, it took billions of years. (11:43) And if you look at all the different things that God said, that he made the male and female, (11:54) no, there’s multiples of genders.

There’s all kinds of genders. Jean was looking online, (12:01) and there’s a non-gender, and there’s a pan-gender, and there’s all kinds of (12:07) stuff that they’ve made up. So there are competing truth claims.

It’s the exact (12:12) same thing that happened to Eve. Did God really say? He said, we can eat anything except the tree, (12:20) or we’ll die. Satan says, you won’t die.

That’s a competing truth claim. (12:26) So there’s two truth claims. What’s at stake? God’s truth claim says there’s a penalty, (12:32) which is death.

And the serpent’s truth claim says there’s a benefit. You’ll be like God, (12:41) which is essentially what he’s saying, by the way, today, because what was the (12:48) top thing in psychology? Where does man need to strive? Self-fulfillment. (12:54) It’s when I can remove all the shackles, and I can fulfill myself.

(13:09) Del Tackett says we chose poorly in that instance, and in a lot of ways, we’re choosing poorly today. (13:20) So Satan’s the liar. We know these.

The father of lies, John 8, 44. It’s also a murder from the (13:27) beginning, same verse. And his offspring, he’s the father.

No, your father is the devil. So he has (13:35) offspring, those that do his will, all in John 8, 44. And then the prophecy.

So (13:44) we, as Christians, we must believe what the Bible says without compromising the Word, by inventing (13:51) ways to fit it into world philosophies. We risk diluting God’s Word to the point of irrelevance (14:00) if we compromise. Chapter 1 of Steve’s class concerned the relation of Genesis as history (14:11) to redemptive Christianity.

How are we redeemed? And you can’t make a case for redemption (14:20) without Adam and Eve and the introduction of sin. (14:26) What do you need to be redeemed for if that’s just a mythological story? (14:34) So Ed Wharton asks, how are Christians to understand these chapters, (14:39) particularly chapters 1 through 11 of Genesis? Are they to be read as history or as Hebrew (14:45) mythology? A related question he says is, does it really make any difference how they understand as (14:52) long as we believe Jesus is Lord? And I want you to think about that because that’s an argument (14:58) I’ve heard. Is it a salvation issue? Have you heard that? Is it a salvation issue on parts of (15:07) the Bible that are difficult and critics have pounced on them? Some Christians come back and (15:15) say, well, it’s not a salvation issue.

So it doesn’t, you know, it’s not how do you become a (15:20) Christian and stay faithful. So does it really matter? And that’s what Ed Wharton’s asking here. (15:27) Does it really make a difference how Genesis 1 through 11 is understood as long as we believe (15:33) Jesus is Lord? And in that chapter, he says that he seeks to answer these questions by pointing (15:45) out the effect that our view of Genesis will have upon our view of the Bible’s redemptive message (15:54) and man’s need for Christ as Savior.

And Steve presented this class and (16:03) his notes are on the website, so I’m not really going to go over that. (16:09) I’d like to pick up where Steve left off, which is page six of his chapter one notes. (16:18) And in this one, there’s like one little bullet point, and that is on the second page of my (16:30) handout.

There’s a little bullet point there that says NT affirmation of Genesis, New Testament (16:36) affirmation of Genesis. It says Jesus and apostles treated it as history. For example, Jesus on Adam (16:44) and Eve and Matthew, Noah and Paul on Adam and Romans.

And that’s as far as I was able to get (16:51) in my notes. And if we get further than that, we can go to Ed’s notes. Okay, so the teachings of (17:01) Jesus Christ and the apostles are firmly rooted in the historical accounts of Genesis.

This (17:09) perspective rests on the trustworthiness of Jesus and the divine inspiration of the New Testament (17:15) writers. A key question arises, can we really, or I’m sorry, can we rely on Christ and the apostles (17:25) to have drawn accurate conclusions from Genesis, especially given their foundational role for the (17:34) entire Christian era? That’s Jesus and the apostles, their role. The resurrection provides (17:41) a definitive answer, serving as the ultimate validation of Christ’s claims and the authority (17:49) of his apostles.

For Christians, there is an inseparable unity between their trust in Christ (17:57) and the apostles and their understanding of Genesis. To accept Christ as Lord is to embrace (18:05) his perspective on scripture, including the foundational truths of Genesis. So number one, (18:14) Jesus and Genesis.

Jesus affirmed the authority of Genesis within his broader endorsement of the Old (18:23) Testament as seen in passages like Luke 24, 44 through 47. This is where he said now in Luke 24, (18:39) now he said to them, these are my words which I spoke to you while I was with you, (18:44) that all things which are written about me in the law of Moses, that’s in Genesis partly, (18:51) that’s part of Moses' writings, and the prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled. (18:58) Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures and he said to them, (19:03) thus it is written that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, (19:12) and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in his name to all the nations (19:20) beginning for Jerusalem.

By the way, there’s the repentance for remission of sins. For repentance, (19:26) besides faith, is necessary for the remission of sins. And then we have John 539 and John 1035.

(19:41) He taught that these scriptures, Jesus, including Genesis, prophetically pointed to the salvation (19:48) he accomplished through his death and resurrection. His specific references to Genesis includes the (19:56) account of Noah and the flood, Matthew 24, 37 through 39, if you want to follow along. (20:05) For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah, for as in those days before (20:13) the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah (20:20) entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away, (20:29) so will the coming of the Son of Man be.

Jesus explicitly referred to Noah as a historical (20:40) figure. He’s not a made-up story. He’s not a myth.

The flood is one of the attacks of critics, (20:52) that it didn’t exist. The ark, Jesus referred to as a literal seaworthy vessel, (21:02) Noah entered the ark, and the flood as a global event of such magnitude that it swept them all (21:12) away, Matthew 24, 39. Some propose a subtle form of liberalism, suggesting that Jesus accommodated (21:22) himself to mythological elements and Genesis to convey spiritual truths.

This view, however, (21:31) is untenable for two reasons. First, it assumes Jesus regarded Genesis as mythical, (21:39) yet neither his words nor those of Moses support this notion, and Jesus' language consistently (21:47) treats the events of Genesis as historical realities, rendering the idea of appealing (21:54) to myth an unfounded assumption. And second, Moses grounds the flood narrative firmly in (22:04) historical context, linking it to God’s judgment on humanity’s pervasive sin, Genesis 6, 1-17.

(22:15) Furthermore, Moses presents the flood as a well-known event, using it as a chronological (22:22) reference for subsequent events, Genesis 10-32 and 11-10, and the Genesis account ties the flood (22:31) to a historical framework, connecting it to events both preceding and following it. (22:39) So Moses and Jesus both view the flood as a real event, one that you could use as a signpost (22:53) for determining when other events in history occurred. Not a mythological signpoint, (23:02) an actual signpost.

The primary concern for Christians is that dismissing Genesis as mythology (23:11) undermines the historical foundation of Jesus' teaching. And by the way, dismissing Genesis (23:18) as mythology would be the six days of creation, would be the flood, would be the long lifespans, (23:29) would be the genealogies, would be the Tower of Babel. Everything that occurs (23:34) within the first 11 chapters, the critics have labeled mythology.

If we do that and say, (23:45) well, that’s just there for teaching. So if we dismiss Genesis as mythology, it undermines the (23:56) historical foundation of Jesus' teaching, particularly his moral conclusions about (24:02) marriage. When questioned by the Pharisees about divorce, Jesus responded by grounding his answer (24:10) in the Genesis account, Matthew 19, 4 and 5. Have you not read that he who created them (24:21) from the beginning made them male and female and said, for this reason a man shall leave his father (24:30) and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.

Here Jesus first cites (24:37) Genesis 1.27, affirming the creation of Adam and Eve as male and female. And then he quotes (24:46) Genesis 2.24, attributing Moses' words directly to God, thus endorsing the one flesh principle (24:56) of marriage. And 2.24 is also known as the law of marriage.

It’s when marriage started. For this (25:04) reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and they shall become (25:09) one flesh. So Jesus clearly regards these passages as historically reliable, as evidenced by his (25:23) conclusions, the next two verses.

So they are no longer two, but one flesh. That’s a conclusion (25:30) based on that account. And number two, what therefore God has joined together let no man (25:37) separate.

And he says that in Matthew 19, 6. These statements introduced by so and therefore (25:46) reflect Jesus' reasoning from the historical reality of Genesis. God’s design for marriage (25:54) unites a man and woman as one and this divine union is not to be broken. The authority of (26:03) Jesus' teaching on the nature and permanence of marriage rests on the historical integrity (26:12) of the Genesis account.

If he based that on a mythological story, what good would be that moral? (26:23) How could he use it then in his argument on marriage and divorce? When the Pharisees countered (26:35) Jesus by noting that Moses permitted divorce through a certificate of divorcement, Matthew 19, (26:42) 7, Jesus responded, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because of the hardness of your heart. (26:51) But from the beginning it was not so, Matthew 19, 8. This statement underscores Jesus' reliance (27:02) on the historical reality of Genesis, emphasizing that God’s original design for marriage (27:09) and established in Genesis 1, 27 and 2, 24 did not include divorce. Jesus highlights a deviation (27:19) introduced by human sinfulness, contrasting it with the divine intent from the beginning.

(27:26) His reasoning clearly affirms the historical integrity of Genesis as he grounds his teachings (27:33) on marriage’s permanence in the creation account. So building on his literal interpretation of (27:40) Genesis that God’s design for marriage unites a man and woman as one, not be separated, (27:47) Jesus established a clear prohibition against divorce except in cases of sexual immorality, (27:56) Matthew 19, 9. He further declared that remarriage after divorce for any other reason (28:22) constitutes adultery. This morally stringent ruling or teaching relies on the historical (28:30) reality of Genesis 1, 27 and 2, 24, which we just read, where God instituted marriage.

(28:39) If the Genesis account were dismissed as fiction, the foundation for Jesus' authoritative stance (28:46) on the permanence of marriage would be undermined, rendering his teaching incompatible (28:52) with modern skepticism that denies the historical integrity of scripture. (29:00) Jesus' view of Genesis as historical, in John 8, in a confrontation with the Jews in Jerusalem, (29:09) Jesus revealed his literal interpretation of Genesis by addressing them, (29:16) by addressing their intent to kill him. He declared in John 8, 44, (29:21) 44.

You are of your father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. (29:30) He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in (29:37) him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature or his native language, for he is a (29:47) liar and the father of lies.

So Jesus affirmed that the devil initiated lying and murder from (29:58) the beginning, referencing the events of Genesis 2, 17 through 18, where God commanded Adam and (30:07) Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, warning that disobedience would (30:14) bring death. The devil’s deception, you shall not surely die, in Genesis 3, 4, led to their (30:25) spiritual and eventual physical death, making him a murderer. Jesus' use of from the beginning in (30:34) John 8, 44, parallels his usage in Matthew 19, 4 and 8 regarding the origin of marriage, (30:43) consistently grounding his teachings in the historical reality of Genesis.

Jesus believed (30:52) in historical, literal Genesis. To view Genesis as mythological undermines the truthworthiness (31:02) of Jesus' claims. If Jesus was mistaken about the historical accuracy of Genesis, its events, (31:10) their timing, and the conclusions he drew from them, his reliability concerning his divine nature (31:19) and redemptive mission is called into question. Thus, whether Genesis is regarded as history (31:26) or myth carries profound implications for the Christian faith.

(31:34) The Apostles and Genesis. (31:38) I’m going to get to Paul’s first argument, and then we’ve got like five minutes, (31:48) and if we, we’ll see where we are by then.

Okay, so the Apostles and Genesis, point number two in (31:58) that chapter one handout of Steve’s. The apostolic writings of Paul, Peter, and John (32:07) consistently treat Moses' account in Genesis concerning the origin and nature of man and woman (32:15) and the institution of marriage as historically, as historical truth. To dismiss Genesis as mere (32:24) myth not only undermines its authority, but also casts doubts on the truthfulness and divine (32:31) inspiration of the Apostles' teachings.

Their letters, as will be demonstrated, reflect a (32:38) clear conviction that Genesis records actual historical events, grounding the theological (32:47) and moral conclusions in its reliability. Paul and Genesis. In the opening chapters of Romans, (32:58) Paul vividly describes humanity’s moral decay stemming from their rejection of God’s revealed (33:06) truth.

Three times he states that for this reason God gave them over to their sinful desires as a (33:15) consequence of their rebellion, Romans 1, 24, 26, and 28. Paul condemns homosexuality as a (33:26) perversion of God’s created order. As established in Genesis 1, 27, where God created humanity, (33:36) male and female, this natural order reflects the historical reality of human origins described (33:45) by Moses.

To dismiss Genesis as mere myth undermines the foundation of Paul’s preaching, (33:54) which relies on the truth of God’s design and creation, accepting Paul as a spirit-inspired (34:02) apostle and his writings as the Word of God requires affirming the historical authority of (34:09) Genesis. As Paul himself did, consider the two illustrations, and I only got one illustration. (34:18) Number one, in Romans 5, Paul grounds his doctrine of universal condemnation and the need for (34:27) universal salvation in the historical reality of Genesis.

He writes, therefore, just as through (34:37) one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, (34:44) because all sinned, nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had (34:54) not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who was a type of him who was to come, Romans 5, (35:04) 12, and verse 14. Paul asserts that Adam’s transgression, as recorded in Genesis 3, (35:11) introduced sin and death into the world, affecting all humanity. This historical event (35:20) establishes the universal need for salvation through Christ, whom Paul presents as the (35:26) counterpoint to Adam, or we would call antitype to Adam.

By treating Adam’s sin as a literal event, (35:37) Paul’s theology of sin and redemption rests firmly on the historical truth (35:46) of Genesis, underscoring its foundational role in Christian doctrine. Paul consistently anchors (35:55) his theology of universal sin and salvation in the historical reality of Genesis. (36:04) In 1 Corinthians 15, 22, he writes, for as in Adam all died, so also in Christ all will be made alive, (36:16) linking the universal consequence of Adam’s sin in Genesis 3 to the universal hope of redemption (36:24) through Christ.

And if the first one is mythological, what’s that say about our hope? (36:32) Is that mythological too? You see the problem of making Genesis mythological? (36:43) So similarly, in 2 Corinthians 5, 14, Paul states, one died for all, therefore all died, (36:52) reinforcing that humanity’s spiritual death traces back to the historical fall recorded (37:00) in Genesis. In 2 Corinthians 11, 3, Paul expresses concern for the church, warning, (37:10) but I’m afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, (37:20) their minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ. (37:27) This echoes Jesus' declaration in John 8, 44, that the devil was a liar and murderer (37:34) from the beginning.

Paul’s reference to the serpent’s deception of Eve in Genesis 3, 4, (37:49) where the devil lied, saying, you will not surely die in defiance of God’s warning, (37:55) Genesis 2, 17, underscores the historical reality of this event. The devil’s lie led to Eve’s (38:05) spiritual death, establishing him as the father of lies who seeks to corrupt believers by distorting (38:14) God’s word, including truths about Christ’s divine nature, the inspiration of the scriptures, (38:22) and the necessity of salvation. To deny the historicity of Genesis is to undermine the (38:31) foundation of human sinfulness and the universal need for redemption through Christ.

Okay, (38:39) and then I’ll leave you to the rest of the chapter, the rest of the story in Chapter 1 of (38:50) Eve’s handout, but there is a conclusion statement, concluding statement at the end of the (39:00) chapter there that I’d like to read. It’s the historical foundation, based on the historical (39:06) foundation of Genesis and Jesus and the apostles' teaching. Jesus and the apostles, Peter, (39:14) Paul, and John, grounded their doctrinal and moral teachings for the church in the historical (39:21) reality of Genesis 1 through 11.

From Jesus' affirmations of creation and marriage to the (39:29) apostles' teachings on sin and redemption, their arguments consistently rely on the historical (39:37) accuracy of these chapters. Denying the historicity of Genesis 1 through 11 (39:47) undermines the foundation of their reasoning, rendering their conclusions theologically void, (39:53) empty. Such a denial carries profound implications, calling into question the divine authority of (40:02) Jesus and the inspiration of the New Testament writings.

And, you know, when we go into apologetics, (40:14) there’s a tendency to try to want to prove Genesis Chapter 1 scientifically, (40:20) but the reason why we ought to believe it is if we believe Jesus, he believed it, and he made his (40:30) arguments from it. And so if we believe Jesus, we should believe the Genesis account and not try to (40:40) make it fit into the world’s philosophies. So to read that thesis, and as uncomfortable as it is, (40:55) Genesis, in Genesis Chapter 1, God made the earth and the universe, (41:03) both spiritual and physical realms, actually, in six days.

(41:09) His creating was done in six literal days. And as we mentioned earlier, (41:18) Peter gives us an idea of why the world’s philosophy is so wrong, because they willfully (41:26) reject the spiritual realm. And if there is a spiritual realm, (41:34) and natural man says, I’m only going to use what I can see, empirical evidence, scientific, (41:43) empirical, science can only address what it sees, what it can observe.

That’s the physical. (41:52) We cannot see the spiritual realm. So it’s outside the purview of science.

Science can only look at (42:01) nature. And so the natural man says, I reject the supernatural, spiritual. I reject the spiritual, (42:10) supernatural.

I only accept the natural, and they only have half the story. (42:18) And that’s why they’ll come up with the wrong conclusions. That’s what I got.

(42:25) So next week, Steve will be here. Amen.