On Creationism

JP Holding is a particularly obnoxious Christian apologist, so it is always good to knockdown some of his more fanciful claims. Thus one comes from here : As we have shown here, the resurrection of Jesus, within the context of Judaism, was thought by Gentiles to be what can be described as "grossly" physical. This in itself raises a certain problem for Christianity beyond a basic Jewish mission. We have regularly quoted the dictum of Pheme Perkins: "Christianity's pagan critics generally viewed resurrection as misunderstood metempsychosis at best. At worst, it seemed ridiculous." It may further be noted that the pagan world was awash with points of view associated with those who thought matter was evil and at the root of all of man's problems. Platonic thought, as Murray Harris puts it, supposed that "man's highest good consisted of emancipation from corporeal defilement. The nakedness of disembodiment was the ideal state." Physical resurr...

Last post I looked at Genesis 1:1 to 2:3. This post I will look at the second creation account Genesis 2:3 onwards. This shows clear stylistic differences; in the King James version, the creator is Lord God, not God, and in the Hebrew this is God in the singular, Yahweh. What we have is two creation myths merged together, and the match-up is not great... 4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Setting the scene; there were no plants yet - though is could be understood to mean that the seeds were in the ground at this point. Mankind was not around to cultivate plants, nor was there rain t...