|
Genesis Chapter
2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Sabbath Day In Genesis
chapter 2, we find the first mention of the sabbath day, which was to play
such a central role in the Mosaical Law. 1. Thus the heavens and the earth were
finished, and all the host of them. 2. And on the seventh day God ended his work
which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which
he had made. 3. And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God
created and made. (Gen. 2:1-3) Some people contend that today, during the Christian
era, we should still be observing the Sabbath, or seventh day, instead of
Sunday, the first day of the week. The passage which they probably rely on
the most is the one here in Genesis. They argue that God made the Sabbath a
holy day at the time of creation, some 2,500 years before the Law of Moses
was instituted, thus making its status as a holy day independent of the Law. We certainly cannot deny that God blessed and
sanctified the Sabbath day because the above passage clearly states that He
did. But what we need to understand is the context in which He sanctified
this day of the week. Sanctify is from the Hebrew “qadash,” for which Strong’s
definition includes to “pronounce or observe as clean ceremonially or
morally.” We should ask ourselves, can a certain day actually be
better or in any way different from all other days? The answer is of course
no. All days are alike, and no one day is set apart by nature as being
somehow superior to other days. It is as Strong’s definition suggests, the
sanctification of the Sabbath was purely ceremonial, and as such does not
necessarily have a special meaning for all time. The true nature of the Sabbath day can be easily found
elsewhere in the Old Testament. The first positive mention we have of the
Sabbath being observed was by the Children of Israel in the Book of Exodus. And it came to pass, that on the sixth day
they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers
of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, This is that
which the Lord hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the
Lord: bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe;
and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
(Exo. 16:22-23) If men had been observing the Sabbath since the beginning of
time, why wouldn’t these men already understand why God had provided twice as
much bread on Friday? Four chapters later, we find the observance of the
Sabbath included as one of the ten commandments. Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor,
and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God:
in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy
manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is
within thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and
all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed
the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Exo. 20:8-11) If the Sabbath was a holy day designated by God from
the beginning and intended to be observed by men of all time, then why do we
find it observed only during the Mosaical dispensation? There is absolutely
no biblical record of it having been observed during the first 2,500 years of
man’s history, nor during the period of the early church covered by the New
Testament. The Bible further clarifies the reason behind the
institution of the Sabbath day. And the
Lord spake unto Moses, saying, speak thou also unto the children of Israel,
saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and
you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the Lord that
doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy
unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for
whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his
people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest,
holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall
surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the
sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual
covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for
ever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day
he rested, and was refreshed. (Exo. 31:12-17) From this passage, it is very evident that God intended
the Sabbath as a special and holy day for the Children of Israel and not for
all men. It was part of the covenant which God made with those people in that
day and it does not apply to us today, nor did it apply to any who lived
prior to the Law. Why then does it state here in the second chapter of
Genesis that God sanctified the seventh day? We must remember that it is
Moses who wrote the book of Genesis. And what he is doing here is explaining
the reason why the seventh day was chosen by God to be set apart from the
other days as a part of the covenant He made with the Children of Israel. God
established the pattern in the creation which the Jewish week was to follow. God
did indeed sanctify the Sabbath day, but only for the Jews, not for mankind
in general. The question can be further clarified when we realize
the true purpose which the Sabbath served for the Jews and that God has
instituted something to take its place in the Christian era. The best explanation
of the Sabbath is in the book of Isaiah.
If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my
holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable;
and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own
pleasure, nor speaking thine own words. (Isa. 58:13) On the Sabbath day people were prohibited from doing
what they wanted or needed to do, and hopefully this would leave time for
them to think about God. We all know today how easy it is to get caught up in
the affairs of our fast paced world and put God on the back burner. The
Sabbath forced people to essentially take time off to meditate about God. Today we have the Lord’s Supper which serves the same
purpose. We do not have a whole day which is set aside for the purpose of
remembering God, but we do have a worship service which centers around a
memorial to Jesus’ death on the cross; the most important and pivotal aspect
of our Christian faith. The true meaning of the Lord’s Supper is shown in the
comments of Paul as he quotes the Lord Himself. When he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is
my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After
the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is
the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in
remembrance of me. (I Cor. 11:24-25) Just as the Sabbath made the
people remember God, so too the Lord’s supper today makes us remember God. Paul further showed that Christ did away with the Law
of Moses and we no longer are held to observing any of the carnal ordinances
which were commanded as part of that covenant. Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which
was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; And
having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly,
triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in
drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the SABBATH DAYS: Which are a shadow of things to
come; but the body is of Christ. (Col 2:14-17) The ordinances of the
Law, including the Sabbath, were but a shadow or an image of the more perfect
covenant which was to come after. We now live under that covenant and are no
longer bound to observe the Sabbath as the Jews were. The seventh day was
sanctified for them only and not for all men. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Seven Day
Week In talking about the Sabbath, or seventh day, our
discussion would be incomplete without talking about the origins of the seven
day week. Historians, archaeologists and others have scratched their
collective heads for centuries trying to determine when, where, why, and by
whom the seven day week was started. The seven day week is found not only in the early
history of the Hebrews, but also in other important ancient civilizations
such as the Babylonians and Egyptians. What is so special about the number
seven that it should be chosen for such an important division of time? Seven
does not divide evenly into a month. The average month contains about 30.4
days. Five, six, or even ten would fit much better in a month than does
seven. Seven also does not divide evenly into 365, the number of days in an
average year. In fact, the only relatively small number which will divide
evenly into 365 is five. In many ancient cultures certain numbers were
considered to be very important. Numbers such as three, four, seven, twelve,
and forty even have special significance in the Bible. The number seven was
of great importance, not only to the Hebrews, but to most other ancient
civilizations. But the length of the week was not chosen because seven was a
special number, to the contrary, the seven day week came first. Seven was no doubt chosen as the length of the week and
was accorded such special significance because all of the ancient
civilizations had the same roots. At the time of the tower of Babel, when all
men on earth lived together, the seven day week was observed and everyone was
well aware of its origin in the creation of the world. After God confused
their languages and men scattered across the globe, the seven day week, and
the accompanying significance of the number seven, was carried with them
(Gen. 11:1-9). Cultures which do not reach back to near the time of
the tower of Babel usually do not have seven day weeks. This is exactly what
we would expect to see. As men were scattered from Babel groups went in all
directions. Some remained “civilized” and quickly established new cultures
and were responsible for building the most ancient of post-flood
civilizations. Other groups, for any number of reasons, lost many
aspects of civilization and reverted to rural living as farmers and/or
hunters. For this type of lifestyle the concept of a week was completely useless.
The day and the year were important, and perhaps the month as they looked
toward the time of planting and harvest, but an arbitrary division of time
only a few days long would have been completely meaningless to these people
engaged in a day to day struggle for survival. Later, as their descendants began to coalesce here and
there into small civilizations, the urban lifestyle generated a need for a
shorter division of time than the month and the concept of the week was
reinvented. But, having lost all prior knowledge of the week, they were
forced to develop the concept completely on their own. This is why we see
civilizations whose roots do not reach back to near the time of Babel with
weeks of many different lengths. For example Scandinavia observed a five day
week, in Africa weeks of three, four, five, six, seven, and eight days could
be found. Even the Romans observed an eight day week until about two
centuries after Christ. The prevalence of the seven day week among the most
ancient cultures demonstrates their common origin. The lack of a predominant
week length in later civilizations testifies to the arbitrary nature of the
seven day week. This leaves the Bible as the only plausible explanation of
the origin of the seven day week. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
When Will It
Rain? One of the many intriguing and mystifying statements
found in the early chapters of Genesis is that it did not rain during the
early history of the earth. 5. And every plant of the field before it
was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord
God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to
till the ground. (Gen. 2:5) In fact, we find no record of rain whatsoever, until
the windows of heaven were opened releasing the great flood in Genesis 7:11. This
is probably one reason why Noah’s warnings were met with such skepticism by
the unbelieving masses. The obvious question then, is how could the earth
have supported life, and life in abundance, including the lush Garden of
Eden, if there was no rain for the first 1,500 years? Since the earliest times of Egyptian history that
country has received very little rain fall. Today they receive a scant 8-12
inches per year along the Mediterranean coast and only about three inches per
year in the interior regions of the country. This amount of rainfall is
hardly sufficient to support any sizeable amount of agriculture. Yet in the
days of Moses this region supported several million people. The Egyptians rely on the annual flooding of the Nile
River caused by rain and melting snow in the mountainous regions to the south
where the great river is born. The flood waters bring life giving water and
rich sediments to the fields along its course. So without relying on a single
drop of rain hitting their fields the Egyptians are able to sustain a
thriving agricultural society. Similarly, irrigation from rivers with distant sources
has allowed parts of desert areas across the globe, including the American
Southwest to become very productive agriculturally. Even the epitome of heat
and aridity, Arizona, has become a booming farm state. Abundant sunshine and
warm temperatures allow for the growing of numerous crops when water is
supplied. It must be admitted, however, that these and other
desert farming regions, which are irrigated with river water, ultimately owe
their existence to rain. Rain (or snow) fell at some distant locality, which
fed the river, which is then in turn tapped for irrigation. So then how can
we explain the existence, not just of any vegetation, but of lush tropical
vegetation, when there was absolutely no rain? If we did have some rain then
we could, at the very least, produce a suitable environment for vegetation to
grow along the banks of the rivers and streams which would carry the water
back to the oceans. When we consider the preflood world we must realize
that we cannot judge it by what we see around us in today’s world. All of the
evidence from fossils as well as the Bible points to a vastly different
earth. Many plants and animals which have long since become extinct in our
current environment thrived prior to the flood. And even those species which
continue today do not reach near the size they attained prior to the flood. Before the flood, the world was surrounded by a great
vapor canopy which was placed there by God on the second day of creation. And God said, Let there be a firmament in
the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And
God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament
from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God
called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second
day. (Genesis 1:6-8) This vapor canopy acted as a sort of insulator around
the earth. It was a great example of something which is often discussed by
many scientists and the media today─a greenhouse effect. The entire
earth had a mild, temperate and humid climate. The range over which
temperatures varied during any day and from day to day would have been very
small. We have all experienced the effect of clouds on
temperature. During the day clouds keep the temperature from rising very much
because a lot of the sun’s incoming radiation is reflected back into space by
the clouds. At night clouds keep the temperature from dropping very much. All
objects at normal temperatures radiate infrared radiation. If there are no
clouds, much of this radiation will escape into space and the temperature
will drop. However, if there are clouds, they will reflect most of this
radiation back to the surface and the temperature will only drop very slowly. The vapor canopy was not in the form of clouds but was
transparent vapor high in the atmosphere. But the word transparent is
somewhat misleading. It was fairly transparent to visible light, in that it
allowed a lot of it to reach the earth’s surface, although as thick as it was
it would have reflected or absorbed a sizeable portion of it. If you look at the difference in summertime
temperatures in the Southeast and the Southwest you can easily see the
effects of water vapor in the atmosphere. While most portions of the
Southeast may top out in the mid to high nineties during the main part of
summer, parts of the Southwest routinely reach 115° to 120°. Both regions are at essentially the same latitude,
and should therefore receive the same amount of sunshine every day. The dry
air of the Southwest warms quickly as the sun heats it, but the moisture laden
air of the Southeast warms much more slowly as the water vapor absorbs much
of the heat. A thick vapor canopy would have likewise absorbed a good deal of
the heat from the sun and stored it high in the atmosphere. At night the humid air in the Southeast retains much of
the heat gained during the day, and falls to only about 75°. In many desert areas, however, nighttime temperatures
can plummet to freezing or below as the bone dry air is unable to retain any
of its heat. The vapor canopy would have preented anypart of the earth from
cooling very much at night. Another big effect on the amount of radiation received
from the sun would have been outside the visible region of the
electromagnetic spectrum. Our present atmosphere is opaque to some frequencies
such as gamma rays, x-rays, and most ultraviolet rays. But a thick vapor
canopy would have blocked almost everything except visible light. This would
mean less severe heating of the land’s surface during the cloud free days
prior to the flood. The vapor canopy would also act as sort of a heat sink.
Anyone who has ever lived near the coast has certainly seen how the presence
of a large body of water moderates the extremes of temperature. Along the
coast the lows during the winter are several degrees higher than they are
just twenty or thirty miles inland. And during the summer the highs are not
as high as they are further inland. Water has a much higher heat capacity
than air, which means that for the same amounts of air and water, if they
absorb or release the same amount of heat, the temperature of the air will
change a great deal more than the temperature of the water. As the air temperatures in an area fluctuate rapidly
the water temperatures in the same area are fairly stable and any significant
change will be days or weeks in coming. When the air temperature drops below
the water temperature heat is released from the water into the air keeping
its temperature from plummeting too rapidly. And when the air temperature
rises above the water temperature the water begins to soak up some of the
heat which keeps the air temperature from soaring too high. The vapor canopy would have a similar effect on the
atmosphere. It would keep the air temperature from rising and falling very
quickly. But instead of this being a localized effect in coastal areas, it
would affect the atmosphere of the whole planet. At night as the atmosphere
began to cool the heat locked up in the vapor canopy would be slowly released
preventing the atmosphere from cooling very much. Then during the day as the
atmosphere began to warm up the vapor canopy would absorb most of the heat
keeping the atmosphere from warming very much. So we would expect a day/night variation in
temperatures of no more than 10-15°. This small variation in temperatures, it turns out is
essential to life existing without rain. Having grown up in one of the
wettest places in the United States I am accustomed to seeing a great deal of
rain─about seventy inches per year. Yet, despite all of this rain, I
have often seen crops wither and die in the fields. During the summer the sun
beats down intensely as the temperature soars into the high nineties. And if
three or four weeks pass without significant rainfall, plants with shallow
roots begin to die. What does them in is that the air is reasonably dry
during the hot afternoons and the soil is quickly robbed of its precious
moisture and the plants begin to wither. The air becomes somewhat dry due to the larger swings
in temperature. Often the temperature starts out in the morning in the low
seventies and then climbs 25° or more. The relative humidity usually starts the day
close to 100%. As the air warms up the amount of moisture it can contain
increases. So even though the amount of moisture in the air may actually increase
slightly during the day, due to evaporation from the land, the relative
humidity plummets to 50% or lower. As the relative humidity drops lower and
lower it has a greater tendency to draw up more moisture. Or in other words,
evaporation from lakes, rivers, the soil and even plants themselves
increases. When this is repeated day after day without any rainfall to
replenish it, the result is imminent death for shallow rooted plants. But where the temperature swing is only 10-15° the relative humidity would never drop below 75% or
80%. Yes this would certainly lead to some drying out of the land. And even
if it was much slower, eventually everything would die, if there was no new
moisture to replenish that which was evaporated away every day. To proceed any further we must understand where the
moisture goes which is evaporated from the land every day. As young children
we learn about the water cycle which operates on the earth to water its
surface. The sun evaporates moisture from the oceans and to a lesser degree
from the land every day. This moisture rises, forms clouds, and returns to
the land or oceans as rain. Often the water falls hundreds or thousands of
miles from where it was originally evaporated, having been blown by the
winds. The water which falls on land then returns to the oceans in streams
and rivers. But there is a profound difference in the preflood
world which would preclude this cycle from operating. An entire link in
missing from the chain, which means that none of the others can really
function at all. Presently water enters the atmosphere through evaporation
and leaves it through rain. But prior to the flood there was no rain. So if
the air was continuing to draw up moisture from the land every day where could
it go? Here is one possible scenario for the preflood world. The
actual values could vary a little without the overall idea suffering at all. At
dawn the temperature is 70° and the relative humidity is 100%. By afternoon the
temperature has climbed to 82°. If no additional moisture has been drawn up through
evaporation the relative humidity would be about 69%. But since some
evaporation would have occurred we can estimate the humidity at about 75%. Gentle breezes blow in air from the oceans which has been
subject to even less variation in temperature and which has been able to draw
up even more moisture. Its humidity might be as high as 85%. As night falls
the temperature begins its slow descent toward a low the next morning of 70° once again. This air has a dew point of about 76°. This means that once it cools to 76° it has a relative humidity of 100% and cannot cool any
further without releasing some of its water. This is the point at which a
mist called fog forms. In the South we arise almost every morning to see that
dew has “fallen” during the night. The dew doesn’t really fall, rather
moisture in the air condenses on objects which have cooled to or below the
dew point of the air. Many objects are able to do this even though the air
temperature does not go that low. This is because they are able to radiate
their heat away into space if the sky is clear. Occasionally we even
experience fog when the temperature does manage to fall to the dew point. In
our preflood world this would be a nightly occurrence. We would awaken every
morning to a very wet world filled with the sound of water dripping off
everything. 6. But there went up a mist from the earth,
and watered the whole face of the ground. (Gen.
2:6) Water was evaporated every day from the vast oceans on
the earth. This water had to go somewhere, and since there was no rain it had
to condense out every night over the land masses. Even if the temperature
over the oceans did reach the dew point there is nothing there on which the
moisture could collect. So all of the water would be deposited on land. This
would not be a small amount of water either. This would still be enough to
cause runoff and produce streams and rivers. It would also allow for lush
tropical areas teeming with both plant and animal life. Areas which receive fifty inches of rain a year are
capable of supporting a very rich variety of plant life. If an area receives
one hundred inches of rain a year we are within the realm of a rain forest. Yet
these numbers are deceptive. Of all this rain which falls much of it never
has the chance to benefit plants whatsoever. When rain falls rapidly most of
it runs off and soon makes its way into a stream or river. Some of the rain
is evaporated from small pools and puddles. I believe we can very
conservatively say that at most, one-half of the rainfall has any chance to
make it to a plants roots. This would be 25 inches per year in an average area and
50 inches per year in a rain forest. This would equate to about 0.07 inches
per day in an average area and about 0.14 inches per day in a rain forest. And
since evaporation would have been at least half of its present value prior to
the flood, we would have needed only half as much moisture then as we do now.
So if we could get a fog to deliver the equivalent of 0.03 inches of rain
every day we could support a great abundance of plant life. And with an
equivalent of about 0.07 inches of rain per day we would have a very lush “rain”
forest. We might wonder how much the seasons would affect the
feasibility of the earth being watered by fog? Actually very little. With the
vapor canopy acting as both an insulator and a heat sink, temperatures during
what would technically be winter would probably be only five or ten degrees
cooler than summer. And besides, it is only the daily variation in
temperatures which would upset the balance. Seasonal temperature could vary
quite a few degrees as long as the temperature extreme within any given day
was only a few degrees. Even today there is more to summer and winter than just
the position of the sun in the sky and the hours or sunshine during the day. Cold
temperature are brought about during the winter only when fronts bring in air
from the frigid polar regions. After a few days this cold air will moderate
and temperatures will rise until another front renews the assault. During the
summer, heat waves are brought about as massive high pressure systems become
entrenched and hold very warm dry air in place for days or weeks. An absence
of fronts, high and low pressure systems, and all other weather phenomena
would preclude severe hot or cold periods. In addition, areas are often heated or cooled as air is
brought in by the wind from areas with extreme temperatures, such as the
equator and the poles. However, prior to the flood, the equator would not
have been significantly warmer than the higher and lower latitudes. Even the
poles would have been quite warm. They would certainly have been cooler than
the equator, but the difference would have been very small compared to today’s
difference. The world before the flood is very foreign to us, but
it was a world which operated much more perfectly that ours does today. Rains
are fickle and very unpredictable. We never know when the next drought or the
next flood will come. But prior to the flood these things did not exist. Every
night the fog came and watered the ground. Every plant could count on
essentially the same amount of water every day. No wonder the earth was so
lush and life abounded on a scale unimaginable to us today. I know of one relic from our preflood past which has
survived to this day essentially unaltered. The great redwoods in California
are found only in a narrow strip near the Pacific coast of Northern
California and nowhere else in the world. They are behemoths in today’s world
and serve as reminders of the world that once was. These trees don’t actually receive a great deal of
rainfall but rather rely on a nightly fog which rolls in off the Pacific
Ocean. And these trees are perfectly adapted to gather the small amount of
water which reaches the ground every morning. Almost all of their roots are
within 12 inches of the surface. This fact makes rain their worst enemy. If
the ground becomes saturated with rain then anything more than a gentle breeze
can send these poorly anchored giants crashing to their death. We now have but one last point to address, why didn’t
it rain prior to the flood? With an atmosphere nearly bursting at the seams
with moisture how could we even think there would be no rain? Even though the
atmosphere did contain much more water prior to the flood than it does now,
there was one vital link missing which precluded any possibility of rain. The
problem was, there were no clouds! All of that moisture and no clouds? Even on those
beautiful cloudless days we all enjoy so much, there is still usually plenty
of moisture in the air to form clouds, but the conditions just aren’t right. Take
for example a typical summer morning. The sun rises into a perfectly clear
sky as it usually does this time of year. As noon arrives a few clouds dot
the sky. By late afternoon the clouds are larger and much more numerous. Where
did they come from? Does the atmosphere contain more water in the afternoon
when the clouds abound, than it did in the morning with they were completely
absent? A little bit more due to evaporation perhaps, but not nearly enough
to account for all of the clouds which now populate the afternoon sky. Is the
relative humidity higher? No, it is now probably nearly half of the value it
had earlier in the day. Then, if there is essentially the same moisture there
in the morning and evening, what causes the clouds to form? As the day
progresses the sun warms the land which in turn warms the air near the
surface. This air begins to rise, and as it does so, it cools down. As the
air cools the relative humidity increases and clouds begin to form. But this
process could not occur prior to the flood. We have already seen that the surface temperature did
not rise very much during the day because of the vapor canopy. Certainly some
heating did occur and some air near the surface did rise a little as it was
heated. But the vapor canopy moderated the temperature of the whole
atmosphere. So as the air rose it did not cool very much at all and clouds
were never able to form. There is a song which speaks of “the unclouded day.” This
is exactly what people enjoyed prior to the flood. No clouds, no rain, no
thunder and lightning, no tornadoes, no hurricanes, no strong winds, no
floods, no drought. Indeed God had created a perfect world. There was no such
thing as natural disasters. No need for heaters or air conditioners. It is
hard to imagine the paradise that once existed here on this earth. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ashes to Ashes,
Dust to Dust The phrase “ashes to ashes, dust to dust” is often used
at funerals but is not to be found in the Bible. Perhaps the closest we can
come to finding such a statement is in Genesis chapter 2.
7. And the Lord God formed man of the dust
of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7) God did not scrape up a handful of dirt, form it into
the shape of a man, and say abracadabra. This statement means that God made
man out of the same minerals and elements which constitute the earth, and for
that matter, everything in the universe. The table at right lists the
elements which make up the human body. Man is not special in this regard
because the plants and animals were also formed in the very same way. 9. And out of the ground made the Lord God
to grow every tree... (Gen 2:9) 19. And out of the ground the Lord God
formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air... (Gen. 2:19) From these elements God made man, Adam to be more
precise, and then He “breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life.” Again man is not distinct from the animals
in having the breath of life, the animals also have it. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of
cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the
earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of
all that was in the dry land, died. (Gen. 7:21-22) Every member of the animal kingdom must breathe in some
way in order to survive. But what is under consideration here is more than
just breathing. God did not just pump oxygen into inanimate bodies and they
suddenly came to life. God took a pile of elements, arranged them into a
precise order, and then something miraculous occurred. God created life. He
animated the inanimate. God did what evolutionists say occurred by random
chance. In this account of man’s creation he does not differ at
all from the animals around him. Man and the animals both have bodies of some
sort, and God has placed the spark of life within these bodies. So then how
does man differ from the animals? While man does have a physical body and the
spirit of life like the animals, he also possesses something which the
animals do not. In the Bible we find the words soul and spirit used
interchangeably and usually referring to the spirit or breath of life. All the souls that came with Jacob
into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob’s sons’ wives, all the
souls were threescore and six. (Gen 46:26) Or if a soul touch any unclean thing, whether it be a carcass
of an unclean beast, or a carcass of unclean cattle, or the carcass of
unclean creeping things, and if it be hidden from him; he also shall be
unclean, and guilty. (Lev 5:2) For
as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead
also. (Jam 2:26) These same two words are also used, however, to refer
to the eternal soul or spirit which man possesses. The part of man which will
live eternally in either Heaven or Hell. And
fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul:
but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell. (Mat. 10:28) The Apostle Paul alludes to all three parts of man in
his second letter to Thessalonica. And
the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit
and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord
Jesus Christ. (I Th. 5:23) Man has a physical body, the spirit of life,
both of which the animals possess, and also an eternal soul. The eternal soul
makes man immortal, while the animals are not. When an animal dies the body
decomposes and the elements from which it was made return to the earth to
perhaps be used again by other animals and plants. The spirit of life is
extinguished never to be rekindled for that animal. And since the animal had
no eternal soul it ceases to exist in every sense of the word. When a man dies, his body also succumbs to the forces
of decay and his body breaks down into its constituent elements and returns
to the earth. For man too, the spirit or breath of life also ceases forever. Solomon
described death this way. Then shall
the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God
who gave it. (Ecc. 12:7) By spirit, he means the breath of life which God gave
to man and all animals in the beginning. This spirit of life can be passed on
from one animal or man to another through procreation, but once an individual
has died that spirit of life which he possessed returns to God. But this is
not the end for man. Man possesses an eternal soul, the exact nature of which
we can only guess at, which leaves the body and resides in Hades awaiting the
Judgement (Luk. 16:19-31). People often speak about someone “losing” their soul. This
just isn’t possible. We can lose our wallet, purse, car keys, or any other
physical object. To say that we have lost an object in this sense means that
we have been separated from this object and that we don’t know its location. This
can never be the case for our soul. The soul is not something we possess. The
soul is not some “part” of what we are. The soul is what we are. Instead of
saying we “have” a soul, as though it were an accessory to the body, we
should say we have a body, because it IS an accessory to the soul. Here on this earth the soul is constrained to dwell
within and be limited by a body of flesh. This body is not what we are, it is
only a temporary house in which we dwell. Someday we will all be freed from
this prison of flesh. The body and spirit of life which we once possessed
will be but a distant memory, but the soul will live forever. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Garden of
Eden 8. And the Lord God planted a garden
eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. Few things stir the imagination of man like the story
of the garden of Eden. That great paradise which God created for Adam and Eve
to inhabit. A paradise which they were soon forced to leave because of their
disobedience to God. We have already seen that the preflood world as a whole
was vastly superior to the present one. No storms of any sort to worry about,
ideal temperatures all the time, and not even any wild beasts to worry about.
In the beginning man and the animals alike ate vegetation (Gen. 1:30). Adam
and Eve didn’t even have to work very hard for food. They didn’t have to till
and plant the soil as men would later be forced to do. 14. And the Lord God took the man, and put
him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. (Gen 2:14) All Adam and Eve had to do was be caretakers of the
garden. Everything they wanted and needed was within the reach of their
fingers. They had heaven on earth in every sense of the word. The one thing that has most puzzled people over the
millennia is where the garden of Eden was located. The Bible certainly does
not give us the exact location, but it does give us some clues. A river is
mentioned as passing through Eden, where it watered the garden, and then
split into four separate rivers. 10. And a river went out of Eden to water
the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. (Gen.
2:10) It is important for us to notice in which direction the
river divided into four parts. The wording of this verse might suggest that
the river split after passing through the garden, however, a closer
examination will reveal that this is not the case. The river was divided into
four HEADS. The head of a river is
upstream! What we have here is four rivers merging into one and then flowing
through the garden of Eden. The Bible then proceeds to tell us the name of these four
rivers and something about the regions which they flowed through. 11. The name of the first is Pison: that
is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12. And the gold of that land is good: there
is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13. And the name of the second river is
Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. 14. And the name of the third river is
Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth
river is Euphrates. (Gen. 2:11-14) In the six thousand years of earth’s history there have
been many dramatic changes in the appearance of our planet’s surface. The
flood caused tremendous changes as it carved enormous canyons, flattened the
tops of mountains, filled in valleys, and had numerous other effects. At the time of creation there was only one continent,
called Pangea. Shortly after the flood this continent broke up into several
pieces which drifted away from each other as they floated on the earth’s
molten mantle. The continents have continued to travel to where they are at
present. This process has raised most of the mountains that now inhabit the
earth. It has created other features such as the great Rift Valley in Africa.
It is also responsible for the thousands of volcanoes located all around the
globe. The question must then be asked, can we really expect the rivers which
were present at the time of creation to still exist? Is there any possible
way to relate the description in Genesis with today’s geography? Even though the flood and plate tectonics have vastly
reshaped the earth’s surface, some things will still be the same. Even if
mountains were worn down some and valleys were partially filled in, the
mountains would have still been higher than the valleys. After the flood,
rivers would have reestablished themselves in the same places in most cases. Let us also consider what the author, Moses, is telling
us. He is using the names of four rivers which were well known in his time. Although
Moses had certainly never been to the Garden of Eden, since it was destroyed
in the flood like everything else, he knew, through the inspiration of God,
exactly where it had been. He then used the fact that the rivers which had
merged near the Garden of Eden, prior to the flood, were still there. So then, where was the Garden of Eden? Our first clue
is what Moses said in verse 8 about the garden being “eastward in Eden.” The obvious question is eastward from where? There
is but one logical answer to this question. The Garden of Eden lay eastward
from where Moses was when he wrote about it. And where was Moses? We cannot
know his exact location when he wrote these words, but there is little doubt
that it was somewhere in the wilderness as the Children of Israel wandered
about as punishment for their disbelief. And what is to be found to the east
of there? It is the lower part of a region known as the Fertile Crescent,
which lies in the southern portion of present day Iraq. We can further narrow our search by identifying the
rivers listed in Genesis. Only one of the four rivers mentioned still exists
by the same name it was called in Genesis─the Euphrates. Another of the
rivers is also easy to locate, the Hiddekel, is today called the Tigris. The
confluence of these two rivers lies almost exactly due eastward from where
Moses was when he wrote about the garden. The waters of the Tigris and
Euphrates merge forming the Shatt al Arab River about 90 miles northwest of
where it empties into the Persian Gulf. The other two rivers in question are not as easy to
identify, and for good reason. Prior to the flood most of the world, and this
area in particular, was very amply watered. There was certainly a great
abundance of streams and rivers. These rivers would have been quite large,
carrying a great deal of water back to the oceans. In the days of Moses,
however, things were vastly different. This area was dramatically more arid,
although it probably received more rainfall than it does today. The Tigris and Euphrates may still carry nearly as much
water today as they once did into the garden. This is because they have their
origins, not in the dry Arabian Desert, but in the much wetter mountains of
distant Turkey. The Gihon and Pison, however, by the time of Moses,
carried much less water than they did prior to the flood. This is because the
areas which give rise to these rivers has become dramatically more arid,
receiving little or no rainfall. The Gihon is said to compass the whole land of
Ethiopia. This might seem to be a problem since Ethiopia is located in
Africa, south of Egypt, and separated by the Red Sea from the area we are
investigating. There is, however, a very easy solution to this dilemma. The
word translated Ethiopia here is from the word Cush. The Ethiopians are the
descendants of Cush, a grandson of Noah, and son of Ham. Any place where the
Cushites dwelled or had ever dwelled could possibly bear their name. This is
similar to the fact that numerous American rivers, cities, counties,
mountains, etc. bear the names of Indians who once dwelled there, even though
in some cases they may have been gone for two or three hundred years. The
following passage illustrates the widespread usage of the name Ethiopia. “The biblical Cush, the name originally given to the
southern parts of the known world. It is divided in the poems of Homer into
eastern and western Ethiopia, and this distinction is repeated by Herodotus,
and by the later Greek and Roman geographers. Homer gives the southern limit
of Ethiopia as the northern boundary of the Southern Sea. Some ancient
writers give the boundaries of the three Ethiopian kingdoms, Meroë, Aksum,
and Napata. Eastern Ethiopia appears to have included Southern India, whose
inhabitants were called Ethiopians from their color.”[1] Obviously, the name Ethiopia had a much wider usage in
the past, than it does today. In Moses’ day this term no doubt described a
sizeable area to the east of the fertile crescent. In the days prior to the
flood a major river drained this area and joined the Tigris, probably near
its confluence with the Euphrates. Today, however, two factors preclude a
major river from emerging from this region. First and foremost, this area
does not receive enough rainfall to produce a major river. Secondly, the
drainage area under consideration has been greatly reduced. Since the time of
the flood, mountains have been pushed up in this area causing a large part of
it to drain toward the Caspian Sea instead of the Persian Gulf. There is
still a fairly large river emerging from this area called the Sirvan. This
river flows into the Tigris on the southern edge of present-day Baghdad. This
is most likely the river Moses was referring to as the Gihon. The fourth river is the Pison, which is said to emanate
from the region of Havilah. Havilah is located in the very dry deserts of the
Arabian Peninsula. There is no true river which emerges from this region any
longer because there is practically no rainfall there anymore. In Moses’ day
there might still have been enough for some water to flow. Maps still show
the Wadi al Ubayyid River flowing from this area into Bahr al Milh lake only
a few miles from the Euphrates. This river is like most rivers in the American
Southwest, 95% of the time there is nothing there but a dry river bed, but
after a rain they can become a raging torrent and continue to flow for a few
days. In the past when there was more rain this would have been a major river
and, on its present course, would have joined the Euphrates about twenty
miles southwest of where the Sirvan joins the Tigris. This eastern portion of the fertile crescent is known
as Mesopotamia, which means “between the rivers,” speaking of the Tigris and
Euphrates. For nearly 250 miles a vast fertile delta region lies between
these two rivers, extending from their confluence, northwest to where they
almost merged the first time, flowing no more than 20 miles from each other. It
is also at this point where they nearly meet the first time, that the Sirvan
and Wadi Al Ubayyid enter the picture. So we almost have all four merging
near a central location. In the distant past, especially prior to the flood,
when they all would have carried a great deal of water, these four rivers may
well have merged at or near a single point. But all rivers flowing over flat
land, as these are doing here, are constantly changing their course. In every
curve of a river the flowing water is constantly eroding the soil on the
outside where the water is flowing fastest. This continuous process is easily
seen in the short term in the form of trees which are undermined and toppled
as the river erodes the bank away. It is also seen in the long term by the
numerous lakes which dot the flanks of most rivers. These lakes are formed
when the river alters course and the abandoned part of the old river bed
remains as a lake. There is little doubt that the Tigris and Euphrates
have altered course many time throughout their history. The flood could also
have had a significant impact on their courses. Although there is little
doubt that they continue to flow in the same general area that have always
been in, they may have moved many miles one way or another. This means that the garden of Eden was located
somewhere in what is now the delta region of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.
There is really no way to pinpoint an exact location, although the southern
portion of this area does lie more directly eastward from where Moses would
have been when he described its location. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Tree of Life 9. And out of the ground made the Lord God
to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree
of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. The tree of life is first mentioned here, but can also
be found elsewhere in the Bible. This was one of the many trees which Adam
and Eve were permitted to eat of freely in the Garden. The tree of life is so
named because that is precisely what it is. It was indeed the very fountain
of youth that so many men have search the world over trying to find. As long
as Adam and Eve continued to eat of this tree they were immortal. Prior to the flood many men lived to be over 900 years
old, today few even reach 90. The main reason that our lives are so much
shorter today is because of the sun. The sun’s untraviolet rays cause a very
minute amount of damage to our bodies at the cellular level every time we are
exposed. Even though the body can repair most of this damage, there is always
a little which it cannot fix. Over time this damage accumulates and is
noticable as what we call aging. Prior to the flood, when the vapor canopy blocked all
of the higher frequencies of light, this type of damage was nonexistent. In
addition, genetic mutations caused by sunlight, which have significantly
weakened our gene pool as a species, did not occur prior to the flood for the
same reason. As a species we were much healthier and stronger, and our immune
systems would also have been much more efficient. All of the diseases and
maladies which are so common among us today would have had no tangible effect
on us back then. The diseases which are so often linked to our diet
today, cancer, heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, and many others,
also would have been nonexistent because man did not eat meat prior to the
flood. Our diet was essentially fat and cholestorol free. In short, all of
the things which we see as detrimental to our health today, did not exist
prior to the flood. This definitely explains the longevity of men prior to
the flood. If you examine the life spans immediately after the
flood you will see that they begin to drop off very rapidly. As the sun began
to take its toll on us we began to get weaker and weaker as a species genetically.
We have become more and more succeptible to birth defects, diseases, and the
aging process. The only reason that the life expectency has increased
dramatically during this century is technology. In developed countries most
people do not have to work as hard physically, and they have ready access to
advanced medical facilities. Were it not for this, I believe we would still
see the downward spiral of human life expectencies. What does all of this have to do with the tree of life?
The tree of life was the difference between living 900+ years and living
forever. Its fruit apparently contained some compound(s) which could still
the aging process indefinitely. The literal effect of this tree on life
expectencies is clearly evident in the comments of God after Adam and Eve
sinned. “And the Lord God said, Behold,
the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he
put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and LIVE FOR
EVER. Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to
till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he
placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubim, and a flaming sword which
turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Gen. 3:22-24) Man lost his access to the tree of life when he was
expelled from the Garden. This also means that man lost his opportunity for
eternal life because of his sin in the Garden. But through Jesus, who took
away man’s sins, we have regained our relationship with God and our access to
the tree of life. We are not allowed to partake of the tree in this life, for
the same reason that Adam and Eve were barred from doing so, but we do have a
promise of receiving unlimited acces in the next life. “He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the
churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life,
which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” (Rev. 2:7) “In the midst of the street of it, and on
either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve
manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the
tree were for the healing of the nations.” (Rev. 22:2) “Blessed are they that do his commandments,
that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the
gates into the city.” (Rev. 22:14) Of course there will not be a literal tree of life in
heaven, this is meant figuratively, as is the entire description of heaven in
the last two chapters of Revelation. But the meaning is unmistakable. Just as
Adam and Eve had eternal life as long as they had access to the tree of life,
so too will all the redeemed enjoy eternal life in heaven. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||