Skip to main content

Five Kinds of Life in Genesis

Mockers as well as compromisers on biblical authority point to Genesis 2:17 and say that it is untrue, that Adam did not drop dead when he ate the forbidden fruit. Therefore, Genesis cannot be taken more than a fictional story or allegory. A more in-depth approach shows that they are wrong.

Knowledge of the Bible is necessary, and it is very helpful to get the perspective of people who have spent time studying and writing about it. One of these is Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

Genesis 2:17 has been mocked because Adam did not drop dead when he ate that fruit. C.H. Spurgeon has insightful material to help our understanding.
Although this child has taken heat from both Calvinists and Arminians for refusing to identify with either group, Spurgeon is popular with Calvinists. That doesn't matter here, because the man referred to as the Prince of Preachers has some important material for us. He preached a huge number of sermons, and was known for keeping his listener enthralled. Spurgeon also was faithful to Scripture and spoke so that people could understand his messages. The sermons on Five Kinds of Life help give us a fuller understanding of this part of Genesis.
Some liberal theologians have used this verse to undermine and discredit the authority of the Genesis account of creation. They say that, obviously, Adam did not die when he ate the forbidden fruit, so they use that as an excuse to allegorize the entire creation account and so make God out to be a liar. A superficial reading of the passage seems to confirm that their understanding is correct, but like many things in the Bible, this requires a little study. God did not lie, nor can he lie (Hebrews 6:18), so their interpretation must be false. Before we can understand this passage in its entirety, we must first get an understanding of what the Bible means by life. I have found some sermons preached by Spurgeon that help explain.

To read the rest, see "Spurgeon on Genesis 2:17." Also of interest, "Calvin said: Genesis means what it says."

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Gopher Wood and Noah's Ark

Something that has puzzled readers of the sixth chapter of Genesis is the use of the term gopher wood. Footnotes often say that the "Hebrew term is uncertain", and Bible translations differ — "I know what that means, Cowboy Bob! Noah commanded his sons, "Shem, you gopher water, Ham can gopher more pitch, and Japheth can gopher wood". No. Anyway, Bible translations differ. Many use the term gopher wood, and using the translations in my copy of theWord Bible Software , Coverdale (1535,) Geneva (1587), and Tyndale (1526) translated it as pine. The NIV translates it as cypress and adds the "uncertain" reference. The KJV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB, ESV, WEB all render the term as gopher wood. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Cimerondagert  ( CC by-SA 4.0 ) An excellent possibility is that God was not specifying a particular tree that has disappeared since then, but that Noah was to use hardwood. Getting into the Hebrew language, we see the root word tha