Jim Lee asked his readers when during the day we read the Bible? I could say I was following a yearly Bible reading plan with a small group and read the verses of the day when the notice arrived.
However, I thought why not start my own plan in addition to this focusing on each book in succession with a commentary as a guide?
I started this two weeks ago using David Pawson’s one hundred lecture series Unlocking the Bible. This commentary covers the whole Bible at an introductory level. I divided those one hundred lectures into two videos per week to make the plan last about a year.
This week I am continuing with Genesis. On each of these Sunday Walks I will link to an audio of the book I’m reading along with links to two of Pawson’s lectures.
Weekly Bible Reading:Genesis (Audio: King James Version read by Alexander Scourby) Commentary: David Pawson, Genesis Part 5 of 7 and Part 6 of 7, Unlocking the Bible
I used to find Plotinus, a 3rd century Platonist, interesting. His idea of the One suggested a kind of naturalistic or pantheistic spirituality. To the extent I understood any of this, the One was like a force field having the attributes philosophers might assign to a deity.
Little of this is attractive to me today, but that earlier exposure has kept me wary of Platonic or even Aristotelian influences. When I hear discussions of God that do not lead to repentance, salvation or a personal relationship with Jesus grounded in the special revelation of the Bible I wonder if there aren’t hidden presuppositions underlying the arguments that might be coming from ancient Greek, rather than Jewish or Christian, sources.
I’ve noticed these hidden ideas within various Christian traditions going back to Augustine or earlier. Some of them are fine, but it’s easy to forget that even the acceptable ones are cultural additions. So, I try to distinguish what is in the Bible from what is outside trying to get in. Then I put scripture over tradition should a conflict arise between the Word of God and that other stuff.
For those who wish more information on this especially as it pertains to questionable Greek cultural influence, see David Pawson’s lecture on “de-Greecing” the church:
Weekly Bible Readings:Genesis (Audio: King James Version read by Alexander Scourby) Commentary: David Pawson, Genesis Part 1 of 7 and Part 2 of 7, Unlocking the Bible
Although Rebekah told Isaac of the prophecy she received that Jacob, the second-born of her twins and her favorite, was to receive the blessing, as the boys matured Esau, the first-born and Isaac’s favorite, seemed to Isaac better able to carry any burdens his blessing might require.
In his old age with failing eyesight, Isaac decided to give the blessing to Esau rather than Jacob without telling Rebekah, but she overheard his plan and improvised one of her own. She prepared the meal Isaac requested from Esau, covered Jacob’s arms with fur to imitate Esau’s hairy skin and dressed him in Esau’s clothing to deceive her husband. Not even Jacob, willing though he was to go along with it, thought her plan would work, but it did.
After realizing he had been fooled, Isaac reluctantly remembered the prophecy and remained faithful to it reaffirming the blessing he unwittingly gave to Jacob. Esau, however, wanted revenge and so Rebekah convinced Isaac to send Jacob off on the pretext of finding a suitable wife, not one like Esau found among the locals, knowing that she would likely never see Jacob again.
Jason Lisle is an astronomer who argues for biblical creationism and a young earth. I think he’s right. However, I suspect many Christians would not agree. They accept the deep time of evolution perhaps because they’ve been taught that’s just the way things are. To keep religion relevant, they add onto this a God who guides the mythical process of evolution. I know some Christians believe this kind of theistic evolution, because I’ve been there, done that and wish now I hadn’t.
The problem with theistic evolution is that no connection exists between that guiding God and Elohim (Yahweh) after theistic evolution trashes Genesis 1-11. If one doesn’t accept Genesis as an historical document, how can one make sense out of Easter except as one more myth? Don’t forget what’s at stake: 1 Corinthians 15:14.
There is plenty of scientific justification for a biblical young earth. Indeed, what is lacking is scientific evidence for the belief that deep time could ever be deep enough to make evolution work or that a big bang could randomly pop any ordered reality, let alone an orderly universe, out of a disordered quantum vacuum no matter how often it tries.
Here are a few sites I have found useful should you wish to explore this.
John Hartnett describes the Anisotropic Synchrony Convention that Jason Lisle uses to solve the starlight travel time problem which answers the question how light from stars billions of light years away could reach the earth instantly on the fourth day of creation.
Easter is upon us. Many proclaim the resurrection of Jesusas historical fact. That’s the core of what matters.
Asserting the resurrection of Jesus as historical fact takes me back to creation as presented in Genesisalso as historical fact. If it is weren’t for Adam and Eve there would be no need for the death and resurrection of Jesus. From that beginning I go to the end times that prophecies assert will also be, some day, historical fact.
Here is a song I found on The Marshall Report appropriate for those last days which may be coming soon.