- Joined
- May 27, 2023
- Messages
- 5,383
- Reaction score
- 3,715
- Points
- 113
- Faith
- Christian/Reformed
- Country
- US
- Politics
- conservative
Why does John introduce his gospel with these words?
Without going into all the nuances of the Greek logos translated "word" in what follows in that sentence, let's look the philosophical ponderings of the culture in which John lived. These philosophers were searching for the ultimate cause of all that is. The beginning.
It is no accident that John is making direct reference to the opening words of the OT. In the beginning, God--- so let's go there as this is the focus of the OP and its relationship to the question of old earth vs new earth.
Gen 1:1-3 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. And God said "Let there be light," and there was light.
I think most of us, me included, read "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" as meaning that is when all that follows in the six day creation account as being the beginning that is spoken of. I have come to see that the two things, our created world and the use of the word beginning, are distinct in this passage.
In which case the "beginning" both here and as used in John is expressing God as being the ultimate cause of all things in answer to the philosophical question, "Where did it all come from?" The heavens and the earth were the beginning of creation. Earth was a part of that creation.
The account of creation that follows is God creating on the earth, that existed without form and was void, as the habitation for all that He created in it as to all that has the breath of life, and especially for mankind, who He would create in His very image and likeness, as well as all that would sustain this life, and procreate life, plant and animal alike, and be pleasant to mankind none of it subject to death. Perfectly good.
If age dating in our science has any validity, this scenario would then answer the question of whether the earth is old or young. The creation account does not show God creating any land mass that theoretically shows aging. It only shows Him separating land and water. And the creation of all that is in it could absolutely occur in six literal days. And the question would not be whether or not earth is old or young, but whether or not the earth as we know it, as it is presented in Gen 1, is old or young.
Without going into all the nuances of the Greek logos translated "word" in what follows in that sentence, let's look the philosophical ponderings of the culture in which John lived. These philosophers were searching for the ultimate cause of all that is. The beginning.
It is no accident that John is making direct reference to the opening words of the OT. In the beginning, God--- so let's go there as this is the focus of the OP and its relationship to the question of old earth vs new earth.
Gen 1:1-3 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. And God said "Let there be light," and there was light.
I think most of us, me included, read "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" as meaning that is when all that follows in the six day creation account as being the beginning that is spoken of. I have come to see that the two things, our created world and the use of the word beginning, are distinct in this passage.
In which case the "beginning" both here and as used in John is expressing God as being the ultimate cause of all things in answer to the philosophical question, "Where did it all come from?" The heavens and the earth were the beginning of creation. Earth was a part of that creation.
The account of creation that follows is God creating on the earth, that existed without form and was void, as the habitation for all that He created in it as to all that has the breath of life, and especially for mankind, who He would create in His very image and likeness, as well as all that would sustain this life, and procreate life, plant and animal alike, and be pleasant to mankind none of it subject to death. Perfectly good.
If age dating in our science has any validity, this scenario would then answer the question of whether the earth is old or young. The creation account does not show God creating any land mass that theoretically shows aging. It only shows Him separating land and water. And the creation of all that is in it could absolutely occur in six literal days. And the question would not be whether or not earth is old or young, but whether or not the earth as we know it, as it is presented in Gen 1, is old or young.