This article was originally published as a chapter in the book " The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament"

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book "The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament"

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book "The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament."

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book "The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament."

This article describes evidence for what appears to be physical design on Earth, in the universe, and in the basic laws of nature. Some have used the examples of design as arguments for the God of religion as the intelligent designer; others have explained the design naturalistically. Some pros and cons of the arguments will be outlined along with cautions in using the arguments.

What does humans suffering have to do with the doctrine of creation?

It matters greatly what model of earth history we adopt. This explains why Jesus carefully worded the first angel’s message to endorse a special creation worldview and a global flood, both so important to the worship of the Creator. How beautifully, then, the name Seventh-day Adventist testifies to the goodness and worship worthiness of our God, the benevolent Creator, who banishes forever the “former things.”

The Adventist faith will not be itself if it accepts theistic evolution. The active God who created by the word of His mouth, who communicated through the prophets, who lived among us, died in our place, was resurrected and ascended to minister for us, who will return the second time to gather us to Himself, who will resurrect the dead and re-create the new earth, and who will finally destroy sin, cannot be worshiped if He does not exist. This article was originally published on Perspective Digest, v. 18/4.

In the contemporary scientific academy, as is well-known, the word “creationism” derisively refers to a worldview irrevocably rejected by the secular scientific community in general. What may be less well-known is that there are contrastive worldviews generally subsumed under the term “creationism.”

Martin Luther approached the issue of origins from the basic premise that the Bible is the only safe and reliable source of information on that topic, being superior to the writings of philosophers, theologians, astronomers, and scientists.

As Christians, we believe that God created the Earth and us, and has entrusted us to care for the planet and each other. What are some practical things that we can do at home to care for the Earth’s environment?

Creation and Sabbath provide key rationale for the continued necessity of earth care. In the biblical theology of conservation, we cannot dismiss care for animals and care for the environment by reasoning that the earth will eventually be “burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). All living creatures are co-inhabitants on the earth, and as they also depend on its ecosystems for survival, the Bible holds humankind responsible for the preservation of the earth and the care of all living creatures.

An unbiased reading of Genesis 6-8 unquestionably demonstrates that Noah’s flood was universal. Reasons for its denial are located in sources from outside the Scriptures, such as scientific arguments and the mythology of the ancient Near East.

Finally, if intelligent life exists on the Earth, does it exist elsewhere? The last few years have seen an extensive search for earth-like planets orbiting other suns besides our own, where the conditions would be right for other intelligent beings to exist. Hundreds of such planets have been discovered and possibly some have the right conditions to be inhabited. The Seventh-day Adventist community does in fact believe that other intelligent beings exist besides humans, and perhaps they could live on such planets.

In this article I examine the biblical record, selected evidences of science, and the resources of the Spirit of Prophecy in an attempt to answer some of the basic questions regarding the nature of selected curses proclaimed by God on the earth after the Fall.

We are warned in Romans 1:20 that those who observe God’s handiwork yet do not believe “are without excuse.” Before the artist-Creator we must stand in awe.

To interpret Genesis 2:17 as announcing natural consequences instead of a juridical penalty ignores the overwhelming biblical evidence of how authors used the phrase in question throughout the Old Testament. As such, the natural consequences interpretation seems to establish human arbiters as higher authorities than the text to determine its truthfulness and relevance.

The first reason that what we believe about Creation matters is that the Bible sets forth a clear position on it; and the Adventist Church accepts Scripture as authoritative. A second reason why it matters what we believe about Creation follows the first naturally: Jesus had a position on Creation, and the church’s position should be in harmony.

One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts. Do they stand in opposition to each other?

Many of us struggle to correlate catastrophe and the Creator – and perhaps never more frequently than now.