by Charlie Wolcott
As interesting as the analysis on Creation, Noah’s Flood, and the Tower of Babel is that one historical event plays a major role on both historical and theological studies: the origin of sin. One of the major problems with using the scientific method to try to figure out how our origins came about is that we have to assume that what we see going on today is what has been going on for all of history. Yet, every culture I know of has had some kind of longing for a golden age that has passed. Today, we see all sorts of advertisements for anti-aging products. There was a drive to search for the “fountain of youth.” There is a desire for immortality and a desire for things to be better than they are now. Where does this idea come from?
If Evolution were to be true, there would be no understanding of immortality or even of an ideal, utopian world. Why? Because how messed up the world is today is no different than how messed up the world would have been for all history. This includes decay, death, and mortality. This is a crucial assumption every dating method that suggests an old earth must make. If this assumption was not made, there could be no reliability of the methods to suggest any age. All the old earth models have this same problem. Their models depend on there being no immortality or any ideal, utopian world.
The only origins model that gives a reason for the concept of immortality and an ideal, utopian world is Young Earth Creation (YEC), and this comes straight from the Bible. In
Genesis 1:31, God had just finished making the earth, the universe, all the creatures, and mankind. He called his creation “
very good”, which means complete, finished, and to ideal specs. This is not the same as perfect, because the creation is not perfect as God is perfect. “Very good” does, however, paint a picture of being without blemish, pure, innocent, and untainted.
But this utopian world was lost. And the record of how that came to be is found throughout
Genesis 3. The cause was sin. In
Genesis 2, God told Adam that he could eat from any tree from the Garden of Eden
except the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The result of doing so was death. God gave Adam and Eve the ability to choose his way or their way. Both chose to eat from the tree and then they realized they were naked. Their innocence was lost. Utopia and immortality were gone.
Many would question why many in the YEC camps talk about how the creation is cursed by sin when it was man who did it. One of the curses God brought in Genesis 3 was
to the ground due to Adam’s sin. Adam was given
dominion over the earth. So it wasn’t just Adam who was cursed but everything under Adam’s authority that was affected. Plants began to grow thistles and thorns. As a personal aside, I often wonder if mosquitoes turned from sucking fruit juices to blood due to sin.
Eve was cursed with significant childbirth pains as well as marital issues. It is very interesting to note that when Eve was tempted
Adam was with her. Adam stood there and did not play the role that God gave him as the authority of his family. He let Eve take the lead and when God called him out,
he blamed Eve for his failure.
Eve then blamed the serpent. And man has been playing the blame game ever since.
Something else happened as a result of Adam and Eve’s sin: it cost
an animal its life. This is the first death mentioned in Scripture. It is a direct result of what Adam and Eve did. And this action set the pace through the entire Old Testament about the Jewish animal sacrificial system. This is also where we get the idea that we need to wear clothes. I wrote about this in
my first Worldview Warriors post. YEC is the only origins model that can give a solid reason why we wear clothes. Evolution doesn’t explain it. They try with reasons like, “It’s to protect us from cold.” If that was the case, why didn’t we “evolve” fur like the other winter-friendly creatures? The Bible is clear that clothing is put in place to cover our sin. Adam and Eve’s clothes of fig leaves didn’t do it. It took God’s clothes, clothes that cost an innocent animal its life.
Hebrews 9:22 tells us that without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin.
Leviticus 17:14 tells us the life of the flesh is in the blood.
Romans 6:23 is very clear that the wages or earnings of sin is death.
1 Corinthians 15:26 then says that death is the last enemy that shall be destroyed. You can search the entire Bible and you will find the same recurring theme: sin and death are linked at the hip. If you have sin, death will follow. If you have death, it is a result of sin.
And one thing all Old Earth models get wrong is placing death prior to sin. YEC is the only model that gets this part right. A frequent argument is: “What if Adam and Eve, didn’t sin? Animals still would have died to maintain population control.” Or, “What if a dog accidentally jumped off a cliff?” These arguments are ultimately rooted in what is called an “argument from silence.” The Bible does not say if any animals died before sin. It doesn’t even tell us how much time took place between Creation and when Adam and Eve fell. And it is very dangerous to build one’s theology based on something that is not stated. What is stated is that the first death mentions was a direct result of sin. What is clear is that sin and death cannot be separated. And what is most important is that it took the death of a perfect, innocent person, Jesus Christ, to pay the penalty for sin. An animal could only temporarily cover for sin as a picture of what Christ had to do. It was a man who sinned and it took a man to pay the price. When Jesus died, God’s wrath and God’s justice was satisfied. But it was Jesus’ resurrection that enabled us to partake in his life.
From a doctrinal basis, YEC is the only origins model that gets it right because YEC is the only one that accurately puts death where it belongs: the punishment for sin. All the Old Earth models have death preceding sin. If Adam knew he was mortal by observing constant death around him (via the animals) then God’s warning to him in the garden meant absolutely nothing. And ultimately, if death preceded sin, then death could not be the penalty for sin. And that would mean Christ died for nothing and delivered us from nothing. If original sin is just a “moral lesson,” then we are living a lie because how can we call ourselves “saved” from a myth? In all of literature, no hero ever died for what he knew was a myth (within the realm of the story). If Jesus died for a legend, a myth, then he died for a lie and we are living a lie. But if original sin was a real historical event, then so is our salvation - a practical, tangible salvation. Do not be swayed by the false teachers out there that want to rob you of a living a true freedom with Christ by pretending the problem of sin is not really a problem.
8 comments:
Well put. I believe that this is why long-agers and atheists hate the YEC position. Not only does it make sense of the gospel message, but we uphold the authority of Scripture. They hate that. Atheists will hang out with compromising "Christians" who spend time bashing those of us who actually believe the Bible, since those guys are halfway toward atheism anyway. Jesus, Peter, Paul and the others accepted Genesis as literal history and Adam as a real person, not as imagery and allegory. It happened, and is essential to the gospel message.
The doctrine of original sin puts man as being responsible for why the world is messed up because of sin. Yet it is interesting how Evolutionary thinking such as global warming folks think man is responsible for climate change. The difference is that they think man can solve it. The Bible is clear that man CANNOT solve it. And we have seen countless attempts by man to solve the issues. They fail...EVERY time. Only God can redeem this universe and he is going to do so with fire. The issue of Sin and Death also brings up the issue of a need for a Savior. If there death before man, then man is not responsible for it and there is no need for a Savior. That is why Evolution is appetizing. Because it removes the accountability man has towards God. But God is on the throne whether we want to believe it or not and we WILL face him on Judgment Day.
YEC will not and cannot stand without God in the center of it all. And it cannot stand without Christ at the Cross. I've said this several times and I will say it again, if I had to pick just one piece of evidence to prove YEC, the one I would pick is the historical evidence of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That event validates everything from Genesis to Revelation. As Paul clearly says, our faith is rooted in the Resurrection and if the Resurrection did not happen, we are to be pitied among all men. If the Resurrection did not happen, we YEC truly are fools. If the Resurrection did happen (and it did) YEC deniers are the fools because they deny the work of Almighty God from the foundations of the earth.
// Yet it is interesting how Evolutionary thinking such as global warming folks think man is responsible for climate change. The difference is that they think man can solve it. The Bible is clear that man CANNOT solve it. And we have seen countless attempts by man to solve the issues. They fail...EVERY time. //
Interesting. Are you an anti-vaxxer? (What hubris that man has that he thinks he can eliminate diseases)
While man's ability to completely solve problems that are rooted in sin is limited, mankind still exercises tremendous authority through the dominion over the earth given in Genesis, "Be fruitful and multiply, fill the earth and subdue it." Since this command was repeated after the flood, it is evident that the authority and dominion conveyed by the command did not end with the fall.
Anti-vaxxer? How in blazes did you get that? Sheesh, these evotards will find any excuse to say something irrelevant. Waiter, another serving of red herring over here too!
Anonymous, yes, man is told to have dominion over the earth. The scientific method (not the philosophy of scientism that has been defended with such passion recently) is an example of that. We've done a lot of great stuff with science. We've done a lot of great stuff with being able to build buildings, telescopes, space shuttles, etc. But so much of this global warming and evolutionary stuff is reflected so well in the sci-fi channel style movies. I honestly see no difference between the movies and the mindset the politically driven "science" on it. The universe is groaning because of sin and man cannot stop that.
Absolutely Charlie! Sin = death, that was the one rule since the beginning. If you can't even grasp the first rule, then what? I can see this struggle in my ten year old *step-son (for lack of a better term), My daughters half brother, his struggle right now is that he doesn't understand consequences. In his worldview you punch in a code and you have unlimited life, health and chances; nothing you can do causes lasting effects. He can simply push reset and start again where he was last strong and on top. He cannot handle being corrected or disciplined, and if you 'punish' him by grounding him from things, He punishes you with his silence and uncooperation. His dad doesn't know how to get it across to him, because his dad is agnostic and doesn't understand why either...
he cannot give him a satisfactory answer as to why he can't do as he pleases.
It is a law of the universe, the consequences of sin are as solid as the consequences of gravity.
Do people really want to live in a world with NO moral lines... Where sin is just an abstract idea, and relative to each persons personal code of conduct. It does not take a great imagination to follow that line of thinking a couple generations. First there is a rise in theft and assault, then a leniency of law, which leads to more theft and assault, which leads less law, more lawlessness... pretty soon assault and thievery is a brutal part of everyday life. If there is no sin or consequences then who is to say one cannot take this, or kick that, or rape and murder the child next door? Degradation, destruction, pandemonium, and eventually a craven barbaric world, maybe not so unlike 'Mad Max' and other post apocalyptic movies talk about your sci-fi world! People adopt the worldview of thier 'idealic' fiction worlds, without paying attention to the bottom line - the moral to the story.. Caught up in what they want, ignoring what it costs, like ignoring an old medical bill that might eventually be written off.
The funny thing is that every man KNOWS he is an eternal being, they live like they are never gonna die. Yet they know they are housed in mortal bodies of delicate flesh. Your flesh will die.
Death is inevitable. The funnel at the end of this road we all must pass through. You cannot enter God's Eternal presence with sin corrupted blood. You must be clothed in innocence. If you are not innocent (which any born of the seed of man is not) Then you must be covered with the innocence of another.(the unblemished lamb, or the Son of God, not born of the seed of man)....
You are going to spend eternity somewhere, and there are only two places prepared to do so, the presence of God, or the place exempt from his presence... Athiests love to spout "Your, God sends people to hell" What they don't comprehend is that it is not Hell because God made it evil, Hell is evil because God is not there, it is simple physics... God is Light,God is Love, God is Good. So anyplace that he isn't, will be dark,empty,and evil. God does not want you to choose it, He has even died trying to save you.
He gave up all his immortality to become an man and live like a vagabond, thru human temptation and suffering because he knew you could not endure. He was torturted and killed by his own to save them even from this very sin they were commiting, and future sins.. your sins, my sins, our sins... but if you hate God he will not "make you" spend eternity with Him. You can spend your eternity without him... in the "outer darkness"
Good stuff there. Paul makes clear that because of one man's sin death entered the world. But because of that, it only took one man to redeem it. If there were multiple "original sins" it would require multiple Christs. YEC is the only one that gets this right. There is ONE Savior. One Savior for ONE man's original sin that carried through to all mankind.
Post a Comment