Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine
Save Your Time And Money
| AnyBook4Less.com | Order from a Major Online Bookstore |
|
| Home | Store List | FAQ | Contact Us | | ||
| Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money |
||
 |
Title: Creation in Six Days: A Defense of the Traditional Reading of Genesis One by James B. Jordan ISBN: 1-885767-62-5 Publisher: Canon Press Pub. Date: 06 December, 1999 Format: Paperback Volumes: 1 List Price(USD): $15.00 |
Average Customer Rating: 3 (6 reviews)
Rating: 5
Summary: Essential book for much-needed reformation of Evangelicalism
Comment: I am now translating this book into Japanese. It is aimed primarily at Evangelicals who affirm biblical inerrancy, yet also feel compelled to try to reconcile the Genesis creation account with the views of modern science. Older, discredited theories of this type -- the "Gap Interpretation" (or "Ruin-Reconstruction Interpretation": there is a gap of indeterminate time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, during which the world of a presumed pre-Adamite race was destroyed and then rebuilt) and the "Day-Age Interpretation" (each "day" is actually a vast amount of time) -- are glossed over; instead Jordan focuses on some of the newer theories now in vogue or coming into vogue among Evangelicals, such as John Sailhamer's "Limited Geography Interpretation," which says that the Genesis creation account actually describes the creation of the land of Canaan, not the whole world. Other Evangelicals interacted with include Bruce K. Waltke, Meredith G., Kline, C. John Collins, Paul H. Seely, Mark Futato, and C. Lee Irons.
As the book's title makes clear, Jordan doesn't think such approaches -- that pit the literary features of Genesis 1 against the plain historical and narrative sense of the text -- are viable. Rather, he thinks the people of God have been correct all along (i.e., for the past 3,000 years) in interpreting Genesis 1 as referring to the creation of the entire universe in six consecutive 24-hour days. He covers all the theories contrary to the traditional reading that are currently popular among Evangelicals and shows how none of them stand up to close scrutiny. He also shows how the presuppositions of unbelieving science make it a weak reed to lean upon, and drives home the point that modern Christians have been too credulous toward, and subtly influenced by, the constructs of unbelieving science, with the result that their worldview is partly orthodox and partly gnostic. ("Gnosticism" meaning a religious perspective that emphasizes Christianity as a religion of ideas rather than as a religion rooted in actual time-based historical events in the physical world.) If the historical factuality of Genesis 1 is suspect, then, ultimately, so is just about everything else that is said to take place in the Bible -- even, for example, the resurrection. Of course, no Bible-believing Christian wants to say *that*, but if the non-historical approach to Genesis 1 is legitimate, then there is no logical barrier to extending that approach to everything else. If all that the Genesis creation account tells us about the first Adam cannot be taken at face value, then what are we to make of statements like 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 ("For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.") or Romans 5:12-21 ("Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned . . . where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.")? Here we have core doctrines of the Christian faith that are based squarely on the historic factuality of the origin of mankind exactly as described in the Genesis creation account. Take away the historic factuality and the doctrines no longer have any basis, which is precisely why liberal and secular scholars don't believe in those doctrines. Too many Evangelicals are unwittingly trading away their birthright for a mess of respectability in the eyes of an unbelieving world, respectability which will never be granted in any case. Better that we take an uncompromising "hard line" like J. Gresham Machen, whose integrity in a previous generation won the admiration of an unbeliever like H. L. Mencken (If you haven't read Mencken's obituary of Machen in the January 18, 1937 Baltimore Evening Sun, you owe it to yourself to do a search on "Dr. Fundamentalis" and read it.)
There is happy irony, as Jordan shows, in the fact that the traditional "literal" reading of Genesis 1, which takes the whole account at face value as actual history, is also the approach best equipped to mine the full richness of the abundant symbolism and literary structures of Genesis 1. Yes, it is rife with symbols, and yes, it all actually happened just as it is written. Because God is the One at work, the Bible is fully capable of simultaneously being both symbolic and also historically accurate; there is no contradiction in maintaining both. Any reading that attempts to evade the historic factuality of the six-day creation account ends up obscuring much of the symbolism and literary structure of the text.
I decided to translate this book because gnosticism is a rampant problem in the Japanese churches, just as it is in the English-speaking world, and it is sapping the church of vitality. When something is stuck to one's face, one can be totally unaware of it until it is pointed out. The church is in such a predicament today. Gnostic tendencies unconsciously carried over from the non-Christian society around us are so thoroughly embedded in the fabric of modern Christian culture that we are largely unaware of the problem. If the Japanese translation of this book helps a few pastors and seminary students become more thoroughly biblical in their thinking, it will have been worth it.
Finally, to set the record straight: there is nothing less than respect for all of Jordan's adversaries in this book. Anyone reading pp.118-119 carefully will not conclude that Jordan denies general revelation. Jordan never denies "heavens and earth" refers to the entire physical universe; rather, he denies it is improper to treat "heavens" and "earth" separately. The other complaints against Jordan are spurious; e.g., even if Jordan had been able to locate the obscure medieval rabbis cited by Sailhamer, it wouldn't have significantly altered any of the book's conclusions. Also, argument from authority is a no-no.
Rating: 1
Summary: Wrong on all counts
Comment: Young Earth Creationists seem so inexplicably ignorant about the damage their ideas cause to evangelism and the divisions their raw, conceited dogmatism cause within the Church that one wonders which deity these "creationist ministries" really serve. I have a degree in literature, a lifelong interest in theology, and an advanced degree in Communications - which makes me well-qualified to assess Jordan's argument. Jordan argues that believing in a literal 6-day creation within the last 10,000 years is the only possible reading of Genesis 1, and that anyone who interprets the text differently is trying to bend the Bible to fit science. I strongly disagree. Genesis 1 contains many obvious symbolic elements (e.g., the Snake represents Satan), and I am not aware of any genre of literature, produced in any culture, that mixes even the smallest element of allegory with an otherwise factual account of events. If Genesis 1 contains an allegorical element, it is purely allegorical - period. Many creationists are aware of this difficulty, and try to evade it by saying that there really was a talking snake in Eden. Like Jordan, they argue that the snake was possessed by Satan, and this supposedly resolves the discrepency between Genesis 1 and later Scriptures that say man fell at the suggestion of Satan. But this reading is pure nonsense. The Bible tells us that Genesis 1 is symbolic (and the Bible frequently uses a motif where a story or detail introduced in the books of Moses are re-interpreted in the prophets and/or the New Testament as being symbolic of Christ), and if God wants to begin the Bible with an allegory, who are we to say that he can't?
Jordan's supposedly "academic" interpretations of other portions of Scripture are bizarre and over-reaching. For example, rather than admit that the Bible uses human language that may not always be scientifically accurate, Jordan argues that the "firmament" of the sky described in Genesis 1 refers to the sea of glass in Revelation. A plain, straightforward assessment of the Bible is simply that the Bible uses common, human language when describing natural phenomena - for example, we often say "the sun rises" when if fact the sun revolves around the Earth. The Bible does likewise - for example, the ancient Hebrews called the sky a "firmament" or a "dome," and the Bible uses their language. There is no serious suggestion that the sky is made of glass or metal.
Jordan's arguments are so bizarre that I'm perplexed such a book was ever published. Let's stick with Intelligent Design and let Young Earth Creationism slip into the obscurity it merits.
Rating: 5
Summary: Starting with the bible...
Comment: This defense of the biblical view of Creation focuses on the most basic thing: what the Bible says. If you are looking for a book dealing with strictly scientific issues, then don't buy this. However, Jordan goes after the real problem...those Christians who just won't accept what the Bible says. He critiques many of the views thought up to reconcile the Bible with the shifting sands of modern science (i.e. The Framework Hypothesis, The Day-Age Theory, etc.), and offers a vigorous defense of the traditional reading of the text (six, literal, 24-hour days). Jordan understands the most basic issue (Genesis 3)that warps our understanding of the most basic things.
While the book did contain some non-traditional views of other matters (i.e. Genesis incrementally revealed as the covenant book from Adam through Joseph), I would recommend this to anyone who seeks to understand what the issue really is: Indeed, did God say six days? YES!
 |
Title: Primeval Saints: Studies in the Patriarchs of Genesis by James B. Jordan ISBN: 1885767862 Publisher: Canon Press Pub. Date: 21 December, 2001 List Price(USD): $11.00 |
 |
Title: The Genesis Debate : Three Views on the Days of Creation by David G. Hagopian, J. Ligon Iii Duncann, Daivd W. Hall, Hugh Ross, Gleason L. Archer, Lee Irons, Meredith G. Kline, J. Ligon, III Duncan, David W. Hall ISBN: 0970224508 Publisher: Crux Press Pub. Date: 24 November, 2000 List Price(USD): $16.95 |
 |
Title: A House For My Name : A Survey of the Old Testament by Peter J. Leithart ISBN: 1885767692 Publisher: Canon Press Pub. Date: 20 June, 2000 List Price(USD): $15.00 |
 |
Title: On the Reliability of the Old Testament by K. A. Kitchen ISBN: 0802849601 Publisher: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Pub. Date: December, 2003 List Price(USD): $45.00 |
 |
Title: What Darwin Didn't Know by Geoffrey, Md. Simmons, Geoffrey S. Simmons, William Dembski ISBN: 0736913130 Publisher: Harvest House Publishers, Inc. Pub. Date: January, 2004 List Price(USD): $12.99 |
Thank you for visiting www.AnyBook4Less.com and enjoy your savings!
Copyright� 2001-2021 Send your comments
