The Divine Viewpoint World View of Origins, No. 2

RV92-01

That's a very important statement. There are few things that John could hear in heaven. Obviously, the things that God permits him to hear are the things of utmost importance. So, it is no small thing that, as this scene closes of John's view of the heavenly throne room, that one of the final points made before him is that God is the Creator. That seems like a simple statement. Yet, as you well know, there is a philosophy that has captivated the minds of most of the human race – that the origin of the material universe and of life is not by a creative act of God, but by an evolutionary process. Sometimes it is even inviting God to be part of that evolutionary process. The consequences of that viewpoint are enormous. Whole philosophies, such as communism, are based upon the concepts of evolution. The grief to the human race of the various ramifications of evolution are untold. So, this is no small thing that we are looking at now.

The Bible does reveal to us that Satan has set himself up as the Supreme Being in opposition to the real Supreme Being, Jehovah Elohim. And Satan is seeking the devotion of mankind by appealing to the sin nature which is in man – that nature which we all inherit from our human fathers, because the nature of man was stained in the Garden of Eden by sin. All facets of the human soul, consequently, are depraved, and they are thus in sympathy with Satan's program of opposing the Creator.

The Corruption of Man

To this, we have the statement in Romans 3:11, concerning the total depravity of the human mind relative to spiritual things. Paul says, "There is none that understands. There is none that seek after God." Nobody, in his fallen unsaved state understands spiritual things.

Furthermore, the emotions are also corrupted in the human soul, with all the consequences that that has. In 2 Timothy 3:3, we have this indicated to us concerning emotions: "Without natural affection; truce breakers; false accusers; incontinent; fierce; despisers of those that are good."

Then in Titus 3:3, we also have: "For we ourselves also were once foolish; disobedient; deceived; serving strange lusts (or desires) and pleasures; living in malice and envy; hateful; and, hating one another." Titus 3:3 describes a variety of emotional expressions, and all of them are basically evil. That is the natural expression of the fallen sin nature.

Ephesians 4:19 adds: "Who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness." The word "lasciviousness" refers to immoral sensuality. The Bible says that the fallen nature of man, relative to his feelings, is so corrupt that the natural inclination of those feelings is to evil feelings (evil pleasures).

Then, of course, the will is corrupted as well, so that man is a slave of Satan, and he is unable to please God. This is indicated in Philippians 2:13, which says, "For it is God who works in you, both to will and to do of His good pleasure." If God doesn't work out His good pleasure through you, you will not do it on your own. It is God who must work out our desire to execute His will.

In addition, we may add Romans 3:12, which also tells us about the human will: "They are all gone out of the way. They are together become unprofitable. There is none that does good; no, not one." Nobody in his unsaved state chooses to do good. What he calls good is human good, which in God's category is an expression of evil.

So, this whole problem of the fallen nature of man, and how it affects all facets of the soul, is summed up in the statement in Ephesians 4:17-24. Here is how the apostle Paul pictures the state of man by nature: "This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you henceforth walk not as other gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind." That is how the unsaved people walk, and he is speaking to Christians – not to imitate that old lifestyle. They walk in the emptiness of their mind; that is, empty toward spiritual capacity and understanding:

"Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart" – callouses upon the soul; and, heart is referring to the mind. So, the mind is calloused against spiritual things. This is a very clear statement of the total depravity of the human mind:

"Who being past feeling, have given themselves over to lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But you have not so learned Christ. If so be that you have heard Him, and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus, that you put off concerning the former matter of life, the old man which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man, which after Christ, is created in righteousness and true holiness."

So, these Scriptures make it very clear that there's an old lifestyle that we have abandoned. The lifestyle of the total depravity of the soul, in all of its facets, is out of touch with God. And we have come to a new lifestyle where all those facets have been brought into enlightenment, and into touch with God. So, we can think God's thoughts; we can have God's feelings; and, we can, with our will, make God's choices.

The Human Viewpoint World View

The Autonomy of Man

Idolatry

So, the two characteristics of the human viewpoint world view, which comes from the evolutionary concept, are autonomy of man and idolatry. Those are always present. A human viewpoint world view produces a lifestyle, then, which is evil, in the form of human good instincts.

The Divine Viewpoint World View

The evidence for answering the questions of origins, we have shown you, is made up of past historical records, both written and geological, and of the natural processes of scientific laws, and of the chemical and mechanical systems which result from these laws. Christians and non-Christians, I repeat, both must work from this same limited data in determining where everything came from. The scientist doesn't have anything more. The unbelieving scientist has nothing more to work from than you as a Christian have to work from, in terms of the data for determining where everything came from. The non-Christian simply rejects the Bible, so he's left with a mere corrupted human reason to interpret the evidence. This is the same evidence that you, with a Christian mind, must interpret. The Christian applies the information of the Bible to the evidence, so as to guide his fallen human reason to a true interpretation, and then to guide him to a real explanation of origins.

The First Law of Thermodynamics

The Second Law of Thermodynamics

Having said that, you must be prepared that you will find that the evolutionary scientist will confront you, and dismiss these laws as not pertinent. They have no answer. There is no scientific refutation of the implication of these two laws against evolution. There are many non-Christian scientists who admit that the first and second laws of thermodynamics totally undermine the whole concept of evolution. While they don't want to take creationism, they have no explanation, but they do conclude that evolution is not the answer. These laws forbid that. They would not permit that.

However, there are other unbelieving scientists who come up with another assumption. They cover one assumption. The assumption of evolution is covered by two other assumptions. This way, they get around these laws. I want to mention that again so that you won't be surprised. The evolutionist makes an enormous assumption that out there in space someplace, back in time, there was something that neutralized these laws; or, that far out in space now, these laws don't function. So, those are the two basic explanations that regular qualified scientists will give you. They argue that there has to be some natural law far back in time which canceled out these laws; or, that far out in space, there is another natural law that we don't know about that counters these laws, and thus would have made evolution possible.

So, the divine viewpoint world view, which is based on creation by a personal, omnipotent God, is really far more scientific than the human viewpoint world view based on evolution. The evolutionist has to work far beyond the limits of his observation in order to establish his case. So, the evolutionist has to make enormous assumptions, which cannot be verified, on which to build his evolutionary explanation.

Let's look at just a little example of how great those assumptions are which he has to me. Suppose that we talk about a timeline here, and we say that one inch equals 1,000 years. At this point in time, we actually have about 3,000 years of recorded history. We have 3,000 years where records are kept, scientific and otherwise, that we can go back to, and actually deal from known data. That is the period of eyewitness. 3,000 years is about as far back as we can go, and say, "We've got solid eyewitness information." So, it makes a line that's actually three inches long.

What does the evolutionists claim in terms of time? Well, he claims, basically, a period of 5 billion years. So, he's got to take this line back in time 5 billion years. On the basis of one inch for every 1,000 years, this line would have to go back for 75 miles. You would have to draw a line 75 miles long to represent what he has to fill in from his fallen human reason. That's the picture. We have 3,000 years of eyewitness information (scientific, historical, and otherwise) that we can deal with, so we have a three-inch long line. However, for what the evolutionist says is the basis upon which he bases his conclusions, he needs a 75-mile long line.

How accurately can you draw a 75-mile line into the past if all you know is the first three inches of it? How accurately can you draw where that line is supposed to go; analyze where it's going to end up; and, analyze what's on that line, when all you have is three inches of the 75-mile line to work from?

The divine viewpoint of origins (of eyewitness – direct observations) goes back to the beginning of the universe. Wherever the beginning of the universe was, we have a direct eyewitness to that point, by the simple fact that we have the written record of Genesis. The biblical data makes it unnecessary for us to make any assumptions. We have an eyewitness (God) who was there to report exactly what happened.

So, the real issue is this: whether there is a personal almighty God out there or not. That's the question. And if He is there, then the issue is whether He is capable of giving us an inerrant and understandable report about the origins of the universe. That's the question. Is there a God out there? Does He have the capacity to create a world (a universe)? And is He capable of giving us a record without mistakes, so that he can describe to us what happened because He was on the scene to see it? The Bible answers, "Yes," and, really, each of us are bound up to answer that question. You, as a Christian, may say, "Yes, I find no reason to question the Bible. The Bible has, to my satisfaction, confirmed its authority and its veracity." Then whatever the human scientist comes up with, like evolution, is simply dismissed as the assumptions of a fallen human mind (a totally corrupt mind) trying to analyze, on the basis of expansive time, what they could not possibly know anything about. Whereas, the Bible comes up with an accurate eyewitness report.

Genesis 1:1-3

We've already begun to look at this, and I'll briefly remind you of what we have seen. Genesis 1:1 says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." We have indicated that Genesis 1:1 is a broad, general statement of the fact that God is the cause of the universe. That's all it is. Genesis 1:1 is a broad, general statement that God is the Creator of the universe. We have also indicated that in the Hebrew language, the expression "in the beginning" is in a state that's called the absolute state in the Hebrew. It's in a grammatical construction that indicates that this is an independent statement. This is an independent clause. It stands by itself. You must get that firmly in mind – that verse 1 is an independent statement that stands by itself.

We have to deal with the language, and that's the problem. I don't want to get too technical, but that's the only way we can interpret and say for sure what God has said, and what He has not said. It is language that gives us the information. And it is the way God put together the words of language that gives us the information. What I'm telling you is that the Hebrew language makes it very clear that Genesis 1:1 is an independent general statement of the fact that God is the cause of the universe. Then the rest of chapter one explains in detail this independent state. That's what you have to anchor to. You have a statement that's a general statement. Then the rest of the chapter explains that independent general statement.

We are told that Elohim created the universe out of nothing by the power of His spoken word. We find that in Psalm 33:6-9 and in Hebrews 11:3. Both of those passages declare that God spoke the creation into existence. We've also pointed out to you that the phrase "the heavens and the earth" form a compound unit, which in the Hebrew language means "everything." "Heavens and earth" is a way of saying "everything." This combination of words in the Hebrew, furthermore, designates "an organized everything," and that is very important. The universe was not made up of chaotic material in a chaotic state.

Those are all significant points. Verse one is an independent statement that God is the originator of the material universe and of life. It is an independent statement because of the construction of the very words "in the beginning." Furthermore, the expression "heaven and earth" in Hebrew terminology means "everything," and it means "everything in an organized fashion." So, verse 1 tells us that a perfect God created a perfect universe. He didn't just throw out a pile of stuff out there that was all in a disorganized state. When He finished, He made a perfect, orderly, organized, structured universe. The language, in the original, tells us that.

So, Genesis 1:1 tells us exactly what God spoke into existence. He did not speak into existence a disorganized, unformed, dark, water-covered mass. When we get to Genesis 1:2, there is a dramatic change, because in Genesis 1:2, we have got a dark, disorganized, water-covered mass oozing all over the place. Verse 2 begins with the word "and." ... This "and" is the type in the Hebrew language which does not denote sequence. You have two types of the word "and" in the Hebrew. One denotes sequence. In the English, we would say, "and then." For example, we might say, "I met Sue as she was going to the grocery store, and then I asked her what she was buying, and then she said to me, 'I'm going to buy this soup, and then I'm going to go home.'" All of those occurrences of the words "and then" are sequenced. It tells you what came next connected to what was before, and it connects. It tells you what consecutively comes next. But there is another kind of "and" which does not connect. It is a conjunctive, and it is a different kind of "and." It makes a statement, but it does not connect it to what came before. That's the difference.

Now, in Genesis 1:2, you must remember that the first word "and" is not one that tells you a connected sequence. It is not one that connects to the verse before. The "and" in verse 2 is the type which cannot be used to introduce an independent statement describing what was next in sequence. It does not indicate what was next in sequence. Verse 2 does not tell you something that happened connected to verse 1. What verse 2 does, because it is this second kind of "and," is that it connects to verse 3 and all that follows. That's the point. Verse 2 connects to verse 3 and all that follows.

If Moses wanted to make a statement in verse 2 of sequence (if he wanted to connect verse 2 to what happened in verse 1), he would not have used this number two "and." He would have used the number one "and." That's all there is to it. It's very clear. He could have used (and he would have used) the number one "and" if that's what the Holy Spirit was telling him to do. Nowhere in the Old Testament Hebrew is this number two kind of "and" (this conjunctive "and") used to indicate a sequence (a statement that is connected to a previous statement). It is not used to describe the subsequent event.

So, the "and" which begins Genesis 1:2 introduces what we call a circumstance. It is described as a circumstantial course because it is introducing a circumstance. It is grammatically connected to verse 3. What verse 2 is doing is telling you the circumstances that existed when God began His creative work. Verse 2 is connected to verse 3 – not to verse 1. We say that verse 2 is subordinated to verse 3. It gives you the circumstances, and then the main action is picked up in verse 3. Verse 2 just gives you a little background of the situation that existed. But the main action is picked up in verse 3. Verse 2 describes the circumstances which existed when God began the main action of creation in verse 3. Verse 2 is not sequential to verse one, as if it's describing what creation had become. That's the point of this. You must not look at verse 2 and say, "This is what creation had become" as the result of something that God did in verse 1. Verse 2 is just declaring how things were when verse 3 begins.

Without Form and Void ("Tohu wa-bohu")

If you'll turn to Jeremiah 4:23-26, we find the same expression used, and it gives us a little clue of what "without form and void" means. In this passage, Jeremiah sees the Creator taking apart (dismantling) His work of creation. He is reversing something which had been structured into its unformed state. Notice: "I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form and void ('Tohu wa-bohu'), and the heavens, and they had no light. I beheld the mountains, and lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld, and lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all its cities were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by His fierce anger."

Here is a description of God taking apart His creation. This passage refers to some form of divine judgment. It may be, in this context, a judgment upon the nation of Judah, and God returning her to a position of nothingness. Or it may be the judgment of God of taking the universe and destroying it (taking it back down). The thing that is described by Jeremiah, however, in either case, is a return to a state of the material prior to its structured state – taking it back down prior to its structured state.

Many years ago (almost 30 years ago), when I first came to Berean Memorial church, we came into the present property on which this gymnasium building stands. And one of the things we dreamed about was putting up a structure which was big enough for all the activities we had: the Berean Youth Clubs; the academy events; and, all these other things. We talked about putting up a gymnasium. Eventually, we even thought that we could use it for a church auditorium. One day somebody gave me $250, and said, "I'd like you to invest it in the Berean ministry."

So, I went out to west Dallas, to the cinder block company, and they had a pile of seconds (not exactly right blocks, but still structurally sound and usable). I bought $250 worth of those things, and they delivered them, and we put it right out here on this lot. Then I announced to the congregation that we had begun building the gymnasium. We had $250 worth of blocks. Well, it was several months before anything further happened with those blocks, but we had made a beginning, and it was the beginning of the beginning.

That is the structure at that point that is described here as "Tohu wa-bohu." Now, these blocks are all around you here in this building. What Jeremiah is describing is that if somebody were to come and start pulling these blocks back out of the gymnasium walls, and stacking them back out on the building sight here, the way they were originally. If we were to take that pile of $250 worth of blocks, and put them all back there, we would have created the condition of "Tohu wa-bohu." We would have returned it to its unstructured state. That's what it means. If you catch that, you'll be ahead of most people on understanding what God is saying here. That's what Jeremiah is describing – the taking back down to its original state.

However, the original state to which God is returning things in Jeremiah 4 is not a condition upon which we can make a judgment that we can say that this is the result of divine judgment. Those building blocks did not sit on this building site because of somebody's judgment. There wasn't a divine judgment. There wasn't anybody's action of judgment. When God describes "Tohu wa-bohu," that condition in Genesis 1:2, we can't say that it was the result of God's judgment. I can't say that it wasn't. But you cannot, from the language of Scripture, say that, "Aha, Satan pulled off a deal, and he used the planet earth as his base, and God let it go to pieces." Maybe that happened, and maybe it didn't. You can't prove that. All we can say is that the words "without form and void" is a return to an unstructured state. It's just a pile of lumber there. Jeremiah 4:23 cannot be used to prove that the status of Genesis 1:2 is the result of some act of divine judgment.

If you turn to Isaiah 34:11, this phrase is used again, and it gives us another little indication: "But the cormorant and the porcupine shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness." "The line of confusion," or formlessness, is the Hebrew word "Tohu." "And the stones of emptiness is the Hebrew word "wa-bohu." It's the same exact expression as we have in Jeremiah, and the one that we have in Genesis 1:1: "Tohu wa-bohu." It would be better translated as "the measuring line of chaos and the plumb line of desolation." Isaiah is now talking in terms of carpentry, and what he is talking about here is God taking apart the nation of Edom, which was descended from Esau. He is taking it apart like a person would take apart a house. He is talking about dismantling Edom like a house, and reducing it to its pre-constructed state. The previous un-constructed state, again, is not a state of judgment. It's just a state that exists.

It's like somebody who has an erector set, and the youngster sits down and he builds a bridge out of his erector set, with all the little beams and the screws. Then he finishes playing with it, and his mother says, "Now put it all away," and he takes all the screws out, and takes it all apart, and puts it all back in the box. He didn't take it apart in judgment, but he did return it to "Tohu wa-bohu" to an unstructured state from where it had been.

That, again, is the picture here. The object here of what Isaiah is saying is that God is returning to the original lumber pile. The object of God's wrath here, Edom, is being returned to an unformed state. So, the compound phrase, "Tohu wa-bohu" (formless and empty), is shown to mean a state of material prior to its structured state. It is prior to somebody who does something with it. That's all it's saying.

Interestingly enough, there's a Greek translation of the Old Testament. It's called the Septuagint version. It uses the symbol LXX. That is the number 70 in Roman numerals, purportedly for 70 translators. The Septuagint translates "Tohu wa-bohu" with this Greek word "outhen." "Outhen" means "nothing." So, it is describing very accurately the status of the material: nothing. Another word you could add to that is "formless." "Outhen" means "nothing" or "formless." That is, it does exist, but it does not exist in an orderly fashion.

So, the compound phrase denotes the contrary of creation. "Tohu wa-bohu" indicates the contrary of creation, but it does not merely indicate an inferior stage of creation. It denotes the state of the material devoid of order, or not having been shaped or formed into something. It is a condition of pre-creation. The meaning of "formlessness" or "unstructured" is confirmed when you look at this word "Tohu" when it is used alone in the Bible, apart from "wa-bohu." "Tohu" is used in physical terms several times.

For example, in Deuteronomy 32:10 and in Job 6:18, it means a trackless waste. It is something that is not structured or not ordered. In Job 26:7, it is translated by the word "emptiness." Again, it means nothing is put together. The word "Tohu" is used by itself in Isaiah 24:10, Isaiah 34:11, and Isaiah 45:18. It means "chaos." Again, the ides is "disorganized." Symbolically, for what is baseless or futile, it is also described as "Tohu" in 1 Samuel 12:21 and Isaiah 29:21.

So, "Tohu wa-bohu" means the state of material without order, and without being shaped or formed into something, but it doesn't indicate how it came to be in that state. You can't push it beyond that. Isaiah 45:18 now tells us something of additional significance about creation: "For thus says the Lord who created the heavens." God Himself formed the earth and made it. He established it. He created it: "Not in vain." There you have this Hebrew word "Tohu." He created it not "Tohu." He formed it to be inhabited: "I am the Lord. There is one else." That's an interesting statement because that tells us something about Genesis 1:1. It confirms what the language of Genesis 1:1 already says – that God did not create a pile of junk. God created an organized, perfect universe. Isaiah tells us very specifically that God did not create it formless.

This again confirms what we have been saying: You cannot connect verse 2 with verse 1 in the first chapter of Genesis. God created and He ordered; and, then in Genesis 1:2, something different is found. You cannot connect Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2, because what you would be saying would be that in Genesis 1:1 God created an orderly universe, and then in Genesis 1:2, that God had an uncreated disordered universe. You can't connect the two of them. Genesis 1:2 goes with Genesis 1:3, and those verses that follow.

Isaiah 45:18 is giving us a fact about creation. There is no Scripture that declares to us that God called into existence, by His Word, the unformed, dark, watery state of Genesis 1:2. We do not view Genesis 1:2 as describing anything relative to Genesis 1:1. Genesis 1:2 is not saying that the world was not perfect at its beginning as it is now seen. It was not created in empty chaos. We cannot make God the Creator of disorder; of darkness; and, the deep. That would not be the product of a perfect God. The word pattern in Genesis 1:2 is a pattern that indicates (and I don't want to get into that too deeply here) the fact that what God created was perfect, but what we have in Genesis 1:2 was an uncreated state.

We'll get into that a little later next time in more detail, because this is another little tough section. I think we've given you enough to think about so far. But this is an amazing pattern. I'll just give you this much: In Genesis chapter 2, you have another story of creation, and then there is expansion in other places. Every time, you have this pattern: You have the word "and," then you have a noun, and then you have a verb – making a statement. And it is in such a combination that every time, it's telling you the same thing about the order of creation. The second account, in Genesis 2, makes the same pattern. And every one of these indicates that God created a perfect creation, and then follows an unformed state. The thing was taken all apart, and then God proceeded with an act of creation. I'll show you that a little more in detail, because this little combination is, again, one that is of great significance.

That does raise the question: how did this condition come about in Genesis 1:2? God didn't make that. How in the world did that condition come about so that that's what existed when creation began? That's the question you have in mind. And I'm glad you asked it. If you'll come back next time, we'll give you the answer to that interesting bit of scriptural mystery.

Dr. John E. Danish, 1982

Back to the Revelation index