Misericordia, Soli Deo Gloria is a (poorly formed) Latin phrase I constructed from the translations for “mercy” and the common translation ‘to the Glory of God alone.’ Soli Deo Gloria was often used by composers, Bach and Handel, and I’m sure others, like I have, as it gained notice. Misericordia is a preface to the phrase with which I wanted to indicate a plea or request for mercy in response, generosity in understanding, or giving the benefit of the doubt. I used the composite form first in this post knowing that, in such a dense, lengthy post, I was liable to make errors in judgement which might impact the argument. It is essentially my plea that the reader not throw the baby out with the bathwater if there were some minor issues in form or substance. It is essentially my request to the reader to ‘be merciful to me, for it is intended to the Glory of God’.
We paid Ransom32, the virus malware that encrypts all your files and demands payment within a number of days to recover them, and we got our files back. Ish. From frantic googling, to panicked backup recovery attempts, to resignation and payment, here’s how it went down…
Anaverse for this February Twenty-ninth
Four years have passed
since the day that never was and
I find myself here again,
in this unwanted moment,
this day that never belonged,
this February Twenty-ninth
I was running that year
full strength, head strong
hurtling right off the edge
where I remain, still.
Sick now, pained now,
wearied soul, and forlorn
over empty space where I remain, still.
No sign from above has appeared
to save me though many below bludgeon and harass.
I am lost
but I still hold my ground.
Here is where I hold my ground
and here is where I make my stand
for her my beloved,
for the hand of my beloved.
Here has been, and is, my leap of faith,
caught in between, caught in the middle,
on this day so-called,
this February Twenty-ninth.
A Clear Sky
A clear sky above thee
A night sky beckons me
To recall again
Your name upon my lips
Bright points shining in space
In constellations across the black they race
Your name upon my lips
Crisp and clear cold nights air
Revives and refreshes all that is fair
Breath taken, life given
Your name upon my lips
Sigh and pain awaken
Sad and lonesome forsaken
Sorrow and anguish billow
Your name upon my lips
Oh the clear sky of night
When you rest within my sight
All sorrow gone, all grief forgotten
Your name upon my lips
A clear sky beckons
For you and for me
To watch and behold God’s vast glory
And in the stars writ our name and our story
Update 2016-04-06: A month or so ago, in the middle of a few comments on other things, I let Tyler know I wanted to see a reply to this post. He had just had a son, so I expressed understanding if he didn’t have the time. After all, it took me three months to write my own. He didn’t express anything to the effect that he would. He remarked something about it being too long-winded. At any rate, I often comment on his Facebook posts, acting the Devil’s Advocate to his Theistic-Evolutionist posts, and soon afterward I noticed my recent comments weren’t there. In fact, they were all gone. I couldn’t find a trace of them, not even in my own activity log. I also noticed I can longer comment on any of his posts. I suppose he got tired of someone raining on his parade and bringing up unfortunate points that he’s not willing or able to deal with (backup link). Touche. As I told Tyler many times, you can’t just keep making bold claims without backing it up. He has another post, “10 theological questions no young-earth creationist can answer” (backup link), which sparked my interest. I started to write a response to that while I waited for him but it turned out there are two other very involved write ups on it (here and here) that Tyler did not officially respond to. Surprise, he prefers to respond in the comments ensuring his readers never have to bother with the icky details of the back and forth all truth discovery requires. Tyler fails to see the need to backup his large claims in a studious, rigorous and repeated manner. This post, then, stands as a testament to Tyler’s unwillingness to argue for his position in a way that all could make up their minds in an objective manner which claims were right and which were not. I will, however, be happy to continue our back and forth should Tyler ever wish to respond to this post on his own blog.
Answering Genesis 1 and 2 Contradiction Claims
I’m continuing the back and forth I’ve been having with Tyler, of God of Evolution.com, and his article on supposed Genesis 1 and 2 contradictions to which I’ve responded over here. As we had discussed, Tyler responded to my piece with a follow up entitled Continuing the discussion about Genesis 1 and 2 contradictions. The following are a collection of his claims, attempting to prove Genesis 1 and 2 are mutually distinct and mutually contradictory creation accounts, with which I take issue and present responses to each.
“There are seven (not 10, as the CMI article claims) uses of this particular form of the Hebrew word in Genesis. In six of these cases (5:1, 6:9, 10:1, 11:10, 11:27 and 25:19), it introduces a genealogy. The only time the word doesn’t introduce a genealogy is — you guessed it! — Genesis 2:4.
The point being, there is nowhere else in Genesis that this word does what YEC proponents claim it does, that is, introduces a more “zoomed-in” retelling of a story that was told (and completed) immediately before it.” -Tyler of God of Evolution.com, Continuing the discussion about Genesis 1 and 2 contradictions
Tyler claims toledoth always introduce their section and that they do not conclude what came before. This is important because the Genesis 2:4 toledoth appears to introduce what follows as “the generations”, or ‘the account‘, with the apparent implication that it is a distinct and authoritative narration of the process of creation. This brings in contradictions between the Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 creation narratives that are not present when the Genesis 2 account is understood as a more detailed look at day 6 of Genesis 1.
Regarding the toledoth point, Tyler said the toledoth issue is “an unpersuasive point to begin with.” Initially, I was tempted to agree, but having put considerable time into researching what views are out there, I’m inclined to believe this is perhaps one of the most important points in support of interpreting the Genesis 2 account as a supplemental history to Genesis 1 and not a stand-alone account. I will attempt to show why this is a better take below.
Enter Nim’s world this Christmas season and let his wintry world carry you to a land of northern lights, falling snow, playful gremlins, sleeping giants, chilly horses, and one innocent maiden who believes in good, still. Rest, and refresh, as Ola Schubert draws you into Nim’s magical land in his extravagantly hand-crafted and richly orchestrated tale, Nim’s Vintersaga.
It Is Well With My Soul
When peace like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou hast taught me to say,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.
Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blest assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.
My sin, oh, the bliss of this glorious thought!
My sin, not in part but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more,
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!
For me, be it Christ, be it Christ hence to live:
If Jordan above me shall roll,
No pang shall be mine, for in death as in life,
Thou wilt whisper Thy peace to my soul.
But Lord, ’tis for Thee, for Thy coming we wait,
The sky, not the grave, is our goal;
Oh, trump of the angel! Oh, voice of the Lord!
Blessed hope, blessed rest of my soul.
And Lord, haste the day when my faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll;
The trump shall resound, and the Lord shall descend,
A song in the night, oh my soul!
After forgetting about some domains I was selling on Sedo.com, apparently somebody made an offer on one of my domains. I needed to reevaluate my domains after so long so I did not accept the offer. Sedo cancelled the transaction but has proceeded to demand a USD $75.00 fee even though no services were provided. So, be aware and I recommend you stay away from Sedo. I have posted posted a negative review on BBB.com along with the other completely negative feedback there.
Lindsey Gallant has released her devotional Abraham’s Advent in ebook format for a token donation amount.
I’m so excited to be announcing this devotional ebook and fundraiser for Preemptive Love Coalition!
Get your beautifully designed copy of the devotional Abraham’s Advent: A Stranger’s Journey to Bethlehem and Beyond. It is now available to download as a PDF or EPUB file for $2.99 (CDN).
This devotional is meant to be a humble companion as you journey through the Advent season. It follows the story of one man who learned to live within the promises of God. But it can be your story too, if you are willing to sit awhile by a Bethlehem fire.
Proceeds from this ebook are going to Preemptive Love Coalition and the amazing, life-changing work they are doing in Iraq and the Middle East. In places of darkness and desperation, they are healing hearts, waging peace, and loving anyway. Find out more here.
Find out more on Lindsey’s Red Letters Blog.
Update 2015-12-03: Tyler has responded in his post Continuing the discussion about Genesis 1 and 2 contradictions. I am currently drafting a new response in our friendly back-and-forth in the hopes of answering his further points.
I’ve been discussing with GodOfEvolution.com’s Tyler on Facebook. In response to his article entitled As different as morning and evening: Genesis 1 and 2 contradictions:
If I may respond to your article’s claims:
(1) ‘This is the account’. The CMI article covers this is much more convincing detail than you provide. JEDP also has issues with this verse that lend to summarizing the previous text and introducing new text (all in that one verse) implying the author knows the creation account is done and a new, different account begins (logically and from the text we gather it is not an account of the same things but more details on the previous). Your claim that it asserts a distinct creation account does not have the support it needs.
(2) Shrubs vs plants and trees: You assert 2:5’s ‘shrub’ equates to 1:11’s ‘plants and trees’ but don’t say why – and you should given the extra qualifications ‘of the field’ (many translations) and the implications these plants required cultivation (‘there was no one to work the ground’). The land may have ‘produced’ all vegetation in 1:11 but not all had ‘appeared’ or ‘sprung up’. It’s amusing you disparage Batten but you fail to mention Gen 2:6 (part of the same thought) ‘but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.’ So your claim to a “more important reason” why plants are supposedly not around doesn’t hold water (couldn’t resist the pun).
(3) Creation of animals: It is perfectly congruent for (a) God to have created all animals in Gen 1:24 and for God to have created more of those animals to have Adam name them (to see God actually creating things and to discover none are like Adam), and (b) to take the text to mean that they had already been made and that God “brought” them to him which is the wording of many translations. Your claim about ‘formed’ vs ‘had formed’ lacks support. 2:7 could easily have said ‘had formed’ with the prefix “Now” rather than “Then”. Additionally, when you take the Gen 2 as more details about day 6, there’s no problem reading it either way. God did ‘form’ Adam on day 6 and/or he ‘had formed’ Adam ‘earlier’ on day 6.
(4) I will make a helper suitable for him: Correct. God still had some making to do on day 6. He still had to make Eve. As the points above show, when you view Gen 2 as a more detailed accounted of day 6, the tense of the words makes sense.
(5) “risk distorting these lessons such that the real, eternal value intended by the original authors”: I think CMI sums it up about right:
“The final word on this matter, however, should really be given to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In Matthew chapter 19, verses 4 and 5, the Lord is addressing the subject of marriage, and says: “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?”
Notice how in the very same statement, Jesus refers to both Genesis 1 (verse 27b: ‘male and female he created them’) and Genesis 2 (verse 24: ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.’). Obviously, by combining both in this way, He in no way regarded them as separate, contradictory accounts.”
Jesus had no problem viewing both accounts as compatible and complementary. He even drew out ‘lessons of eternal value’ from both at once. There is also no need to abandon any actual ‘lessons of eternal value’ by viewing them as plain accounts that make sense of and build on each other.
(6) “In my view, these two snippets of ancient literature contain the essence of God’s reason for making mankind, and the relationship he desires with every man and woman who now lives.” The beauty of a plain reading of the Genesis creation, not only that it makes logical sense from the text, is that you take both historical truth *and* the theological and existential truths. Creationists don’t claim there’s only one level of understanding or one set of lessons that creation provides. You get the best of all worlds when you take God’s Word at His written word. That’s the beauty of God’s written word.
The CMI article referenced is creation.com/genesis-contradictions.