Daar word op die oomblik in die kerk meer gepraat oor self-ontplooiing as oor self-opoffering.-Anon.......As ‘n kerk haar woorde begin devalueer, dan word die kerk ‘n ramp vir die volk. - K Schilder

4/08/2010

Good books on Genesis

Prof. Dr . John Byl suggests some good (and warns against some not so good) books on Genesis, here:
http://bylogos.blogspot.com/2010/03/good-books-on-genesis.html

2 comments:

Liza said...

Dit is jammer dat hierdie besonderse boek van Dr. Schaeffer, Genesis in Space and Time nie Dr. John Byl se aanbevole boekelys gehaal het nie, en dit slegs op grond van ‘n paar paragrawe - soos hieronder aangehaal. Ek sou dink dat hierdie hoogs belese en gerespekteerde apologeet wat ‘n leeftyd spandeer het om die Bybel as die lewende woord van God te verdedig sou weet waarvan hy praat as hy sê dat daar tans geen duidelikheid bestaan rondom die betekenis van die woord ‘dag’ in die Hebreeuse taal nie. Dit blyk in elk geval nie vir hom van groot belang te wees nie en word sekondêr gestel tot die eintlike doel en sin van Genesis.

Day
Before we move on there is a point we need to consider. This is the concept of day as related to creation. What does day mean in the "days" of creation? The answer must be held with some openness. In Genesis 5:2 we read: "Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created." As it is clear that Adam and Eve were not created simultaneously, day in Genesis 5:2 does not mean a period of twenty-four hours. It is unfortunate that the New International Version does not use the word "day" in Genesis 5:2. The word they translate "time" is the same word in Hebrew as "day" in Genesis 1.

In other places in the Old Testament, the Hebrew word day refers to an era, just as it often does in English. See, for example, Isaiah 2: 11, 12, 17 for such a usage. The simple fact is that day in Hebrew (just as in English) is used in three separate senses, to mean: (1) twenty-four hours, (2) the period of light during the twenty-four hours, and (3) an indeterminate period of time. Therefore, we must leave open the exact length of time indicated by day in Genesis. From the study of the word in Hebrew, it is not clear which way it is to be taken; it could be either way. In the light of the word as used in the Bible and the lack of finality of science concerning the problem of dating, in a sense there is no debate, because there are no clearly defined terms upon which to debate.

The Date of the Flood
We have already pointed out that since the genealogies do not constitute a chronology, we cannot date the flood. There are reasons to think that if the dating systems used in present anthropological studies are correct, the flood should be dated considerably before 20,000 B.C. Let me say that I think these dating systems are still open to question, but if they are correct, then this date is to be considered. If all men but Noah and his family were destroyed (Scripture clearly states this), then the flood would haye had to occur before this date. Most anthropologists estimate that the American Indians entered America from the Orient in about 20,000 B.C. across either an ice bridge or a land bridge oyer the Bering Strait. Thus, because the Indians were descendants of Noah and his sons, the flood would have had to be prior to this time. It is interesting that both the North American Indians and the pre-Columbian Indians of South America had flood myths.

Genesis in Space and Time - A Christian View Of The Bible As Truth (p.p. 39,95)
-Francis A. Schaeffer

Henrietta said...

Ja Liza, ek vind Dr Byl besonder "streng" in sy oordeel van boeke. So het ek bv. Waltke se "Genesis" gelees, en veel seën daaruit gekry.