I DON'T GET IT?

The original question was,

Did God create Adam EXACTLY as Genesis 2:7 tells us He did?
7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

There are pastors, preaching and teaching Gods word from the pulpit, who DO NOT believe this passage happened as stated in Genesis.

And for those of them who do not believe, how can they claim to believe what you have been reading about this particular verse in this blog?

I myself was told by a pastor that God created man through a process of evolution.

I was astounded.

The other pastors and elders didn't think that this was a problem.

Continuing, this pastor explains that “In the Beginning” (Genesis 1:1) does not mean a specific “point in time”, but rather a “period of time” that could have taken place over thousands or millions of years. As a result, he says that “man” eventually evolved to the place when God breathed into them and they became “man.”

This raises some questions.

This “man like being”,

did God breathe into just one single male?

Did God breathe into one specific male and one specific female?

Did God breathe into a bunch of “man like beings” including males and females and then say that you guys are now man and have my spirit within you?

Who or what were these men like beings?

How do they explain John 1:1-3?

1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 He was in the beginning with God.

3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

Do postmodernist interpret John 1:1-3 the same way as Genesis 1:1?

Wouldn't they have to?

Doesn't their hermeneutics have to say that God evolved?

What these people are doing is twisting the scriptures to answers questions that science will back up.

These people can't operate on a simple faith, they need science to tell them that it is ok to believe a verse in the bible because the information is already accredited to science and not to God.

And if science doesn't back it up, then they can not say that a verse is true or reliable.

Now, some of you may be thinking that God can do whatever He wants, whenever He wants, however He wants, with whoever He wants.

I used to agree with that.

The real answer is NO, God cannot do whatever He wants.

For instance, God cannot lie.

Titus 1:2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago,

The opposite of the word “lie” used here is TRUTH.

In other words, God is incapable of lying.

As a matter of fact, God can only tell the truth.

God cannot die.

God cannot ever, ever, ever be wrong.

God cannot accept you into Heaven upon any merit other than you being washed clean by the blood of the sacrificial lamb, whom the bible tells us is Jesus the Christ.

Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved.

Ok, so now you are thinking that maybe God is telling the truth, but for 2,000 years we have misunderstood the meaning and interpretation of the creation story?

Wow, um, well, ah, ya…

But back to Genesis 2.

In my ignorance and uneducatedness (new word) I actually believe that God did exactly what He inspired the writers of Genesis to put down on paper. Or maybe in the evolutionist case, God inspired a “type of human man” to chisel into a rock. HEY! Isn’t that what Moses did?

Gosh, there’s the evolutionist proof! Ha ha ha.

Anyway, I really believe Genesis 2:7 is true. Literally.

I also believe that Genesis 2:21-24 is also literally true.

I believe that John 1:1-3 is true. Literally.

Is the Bible totally literal?

No, it is not.

The bible is literal and figurative.

When Jesus said that I am the bread of life, He did not mean that He is bread.

Jesus also did not say that Roman Catholics should eat His body and drink His LITERAL blood.

A wafer is still a wafer no matter what you pray over it.

However, verses like Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1-3 are literal.

Also not true as stated?

Genesis 2:21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.

22 The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

23 The man said, This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.

24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

Now, imagine with me if the aforementioned scriptures are NOT true…

This would mean that there are no special qualities or differences between males and females, well, except for the obvious.

Then again, how would you “Christian” evolutionist explain this away?

Maybe you were raised by godless, militant feminist?

If verses 22 through 24 are not literally true, then the whole Christian marriage ceremony becomes a lie and a sham.

Now there is an upside to the passages NOT being true...

Excluding verses like 22, 23 and 24, may explain why some men will have sex with practically anything that breathes.

It most certainly can explain mans attraction to pornography and it can be used as an excuse for infidelity, multiple sex partners and even homosexuality.

Genesis is literal and true.

The creation story of the world is literal and true.

6 literal 24 hour days.

The creation of Adam and Eve is literal and true.

Dirt and rib.

The first marriage ceremony is literal and true.

Male and female.

If you do not agree with the God inspired scriptures as stated in the Book of Genesis, then what else in the bible don’t you believe and what else in the scriptures is open to your own flawed, based on science interpretation?