Creation

I heard a comment the other day that the creation account in Genesis is ‘ridiculous’ because the herbs and grasses and trees were created the day before the sun was. This is true, plants were created on day three, and the sun and moon on day four. That’s an interesting point, and, to be honest, that slipped by me before. On the face of it, that does seem some kind of odd, to say the least. My first instinct was to reply that plants don’t need light every day, just because they were created 24 hours before the sun, doesn’t really mean that there was a problem. That didn’t seem right to me; there had to be a better answer, and not just because I don’t believe that the days in Genesis were necessarily the 24-hour days that we have now. Of course, any of us that have read about people growing illicit marijuana plants indoors under artificial light, realize that you don’t need sunlight for plants to grow, you just need light. God created light on day one…
Another comment about Creation was made that in Genesis chapter 1 it says that on the sixth day God created man, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. This would have been two days after God created plants, as mentioned above. But, in chapter two, it says that God created Adam first, and then created ‘the garden’, and created Eve later. Why does Genesis 1 say that God created man and woman at the same time, two days after creating plants, and then Genesis 2 says that God created man first, then plants, and then the woman? Let me point out first that Genesis 1 doesn’t say that God created man and woman at the same time, only on the same day. Granted, it’s declared in one verse in the first chapter, but spread out over several verses in chapter two, which can create the impression that little or no time has passed between the creation of man and woman in the first chapter, while also creating the impression that a great deal of time has passed between the two in the second chapter. Notice that there is no mention of nightfall between the creation of Adam and the creation of Eve (although Adam did sleep—prophecy of general anesthesia?). As far as the creation of plants, chapter 1 says He created the plants, chapter 2 says He planted a garden; that’s not the same thing (ask anyone who’s ever planted a garden). So, chapter 1 gives us a general overview of Creation, but then chapter 2 gives us details about the creation of man.
Side note: I mentioned general anesthesia earlier; of course, God didn’t have to use general anesthesia to remove Adam’s rib, He could have used local anesthesia and kept it extremely local. When I heard about this as a kid, it made sense to me, because I didn’t know about local anesthesia. As an adult, I realize that part of the reason that the surgeons who prefer general is that it keeps the patient from moving around. That wouldn’t be a problem for God, either. So why did God put Adam to sleep? I don’t know, but I’m sure it seemed like the best idea at the time. If I had to guess, my best guess that God knew Adam well enough to know that Adam would have serious issues at watching his side open up, and a part of himself come out, and then watching the wound miraculously heal. It might have given him nightmares for life.
Another criticism: After Adam and Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit, and then heard God’s voice, they hid themselves. God called out, “Where art thou?” What kind of omnipotent God loses track of His creation? How could He not know where Adam and Eve were? Generally, I don’t hear that criticism from parents, because we, as parents, understand that. When we know our children are doing something they shouldn’t, we will frequently ask questions that we know the answers to, to try to encourage them to confess. Just because He asked the question, it doesn’t necessarily follow that He didn’t know the answer. I’ve heard that in law school, they teach prospective lawyers that they should never ask a question unless they already know the answer. God never does, either.

God Will Not Share His Glory

I was listening to a song this morning that has a line in it, "You will not share your glory with another." From what I understand, the story behind the song is a little complicated. It was written by a worship leader at a church, after a brief mandated suspension. The pastor felt that the worship team was getting kind of a collective big head, as in, they had a general attitude of 'look what we can do' rather than an attitude of glorifying God. That sort of defeats the purpose of the worship team. Anyway, the pastor talked to them about it, and asked them to take a break from leading worship. During this time, they reflected on their collective attitude, and realized that the pastor was right, and made a commitment to use worship for worship and not for self-promotion. The first several times that I heard the song, I thought that line had to do with the fact that there is no other God but God, but then I heard how the song came about and realized that what they are really saying is that God won't even share His glory with someone making a show of serving Him. You either are serving Him legitimately of a pure heart, giving all honor and glory to Him, or you are serving yourself.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus did a good job of explaining this: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Your light, meaning your example, so shine, that men may see your good works, and glorify your Father. Seems kind of backwards, doesn't it? But it isn't. Remember that we can do nothing of ourselves, so if what we are doing is really good works, then God is the one actually doing the work, anyway (I have blogged about this before). In John 12, Jesus says that if we lift Him up, we will draw others to Him--that's what we, as Christians are supposed to be about, anyway.