<A HREF="javascript:history.go(0)">Click to refresh page</A>

Adding unto, taking away.

What does “in this book” mean? And how do we link Genesis 1:1 with Revelation 22:21?

Genesis 1:1.  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2.  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3.  And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4.  And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness 5.  And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Revelation 22:18.  For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19.  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

If “in this book” means the Book of Revelation, then we certainly do have to be careful how we interpret the meaning of this particular book. From a historical perspective we can see a lot of events in this book having already occurred or will occur before the “end”. And they could be repetitive. And if “in this book” could also mean “in the Bible” then we could also (carefully) see the historical as well as the repetitive on a much larger scale.

The “take away” certainly does represent a finality of destiny. The destiny, of course, representing our position on the Work of Christ.

But the “adding to”? Plagues? Sounds like Joshua’s final words to the Israelites as they were about to make a life for themselves in the Promised Land. Blessings and curses certainly represent their experience.

In either case these final words of Revelation to the Churches represent instructions as they journey into all the Promised Lands where God would lead them (for the last almost two thousand years). Blessings and curses certainly represent their (our) experience.

Could there be however a case where a “taking away” (not the Work of Christ) causes us to “add to”?

The Church has a whole has abandoned Genesis 1:1-5 as being a literal day (a taking away) and left the door open for all kinds of speculation (adding to), not only about the past, but possibly also about the future.

Long ages past only leads to an unclear understanding of our origins (or evolution somehow/maybe or some kind of preexistence theology/maybe space aliens, and whatever) but also about the timing and method of a “new heavens and a new earth” (Revelation 21) which appears then to be almost immediate, or how God could also demonstrate the original 6 days handiwork, less the creation of mankind, at least. Anyway, I firmly believe we can rule out any kind evolution here.

Genesis 1:1-5 could also be linked to Revelation 21 and the new heavens and earth.

Jesus in Matthew 24:29.  Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:  30.  And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

Genesis 1:1-5 does indicate that God, on the first day, did create the mass of the universe (as well as all the physical sciences) and caused it to ‘expand’ into what we see today. *

What happens when the force of gravity, also created on the first day, begins to influence the expansion? The ‘real big bang’?

Seems like the fabric of the universe (the Aether – not made of things which do appear) begins to ripple and push the stars, etc. back to their origins.

2 Peter 3:10. But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

The things of Revelation, that are about to happen, begins with a vengeance. What happens afterwards becomes much more apparent, finished off with a new heavens and a new earth.

Revelation 22:20.  He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21.  The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

* The fourth day of creation seems to indicate that God ‘created’ the sun, moon, and stars then. And yet we see that God created ‘two great lights’ (the moon is not a light) and ‘set them’ (the stars also). We could view this like we view the third day, not that the earth was created then, but was fashioned to ‘its purpose’. If we view the existence already of the spheres, then we can see that God merely rearranged their purpose and their position on the fourth day.

Note: Ussher text for day 4:

5. On the fourth day the sun, the moon, and the rest of the stars were created. {#Ge 1:14-19}

I think for one of the few times, I do have to disagree with Ussher. If one believes everything just appeared (or poof, poof) then Ussher is okay.

However, if one believes that God used ‘natural or scientific processes’ to create the sun, moon and stars, etc. on Day 1 then Day 4 is simply a rearrangement of the same to fit their purpose.

See Answers in Cosmology:

http://historyreally.org/hist14.html

Much like biological creation we can view life just appearing, but if we apply ‘natural or scientific processes’ then we might say that God ‘assembled’ biological life in a mature form with ongoing design for life duplicating itself. I guess we could say that God created the engineering or technology sciences also.

This does bring us to the question: does God break any physical laws, ever? Maybe in the case of where did all the material for the universe come from, we have to maybe say yes, and yet someday we will have an answer. Maybe we could say He did it before the universe was actually created.

(My guess right now would be to say that ‘God can turn energy into matter’, just by thinking about it (or just let it happen – see Answers in Cosmology). We can turn matter into energy by lighting a match, and of course we made the match, but, the matter came from the ‘dust of the ground’. Am I saying that God created the universe out of energy? But, where did the energy come from? Did He create it (out of nothing of course) before the universe, and the establishment of physical laws the first day of Creation?)

(About this physical law thing. I am not saying God ‘cannot’ break physical laws, but I am saying ‘He does not have to’. He is that good. And this is an important factor in being The Judge of All. I was discussing God’s attributes with a skeptical scientific type and this subject came up, about the actual creation of the universe. At one point I had to stop, think, and say ‘you are right, that would be breaking a physical law’. It seemed important at the time to give this man a ‘rational’ understanding of God and how He does things. And maybe this is part of Biblical interpretation. So often we do not dig deep enough in investigation and hang with the somewhat absurd. Or worse, we dare not go there because of some prideful theological premises that may be jeopardized. And I am not saying perfect understanding will save anyone, but having ‘solid answers’ helps justify a faith or no faith decision of skeptics. We did our best…. And maybe this is an important factor in the ‘free will debate’, or are we responsible for our salvation? A theological premise dictates our understanding of God’s character, and what we present to the world as fact. No sheep are lost, but how did we do our job to glorify God.)

After this we can (must) say God never breaks any laws physical and definitely ‘never’ moral. We with our limited understanding may view miracles as God breaking physical laws, and yet God is bound by His perfect character and is just demonstrating His perfect ability to interact with His creation and still not break any laws, physical or moral.

Some may say so, but only to support an unrealistic view of how God operates, especially along the lines of salvation. Man was created with the ability to reason.

This was shown in the garden when Eve, then Adam was given a choice. Where they blindsided by ‘the craftiest of creation’? Yes, but no excuse: they showed remorse and God slew an animal to cover their disobedience and mankind began their journey away from Eden toward the promised ultimate sacrifice. Abel believed, and Cain scoffed….

Genesis 3:22 says “Behold, the man has become like one of us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”.

If we know good and evil then it follows that we know the difference and can choose life In Christ or death with those who refuse what Christ has done. Not more complicated than that. 

------------------------

Excerpt from Wikipedia:

Copernicus

Copernicus's vision of the universe in Dē revolutionibus orbium coelestium

Copernicus' major work on his heliocentric theory was Dē revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres), published in the year of his death, 1543. He had formulated his theory by 1510. "He wrote out a short overview of his new heavenly arrangement [known as the Commentariolus, or Brief Sketch], also probably in 1510 [but no later than May 1514], and sent it off to at least one correspondent beyond Varmia [the Latin for "Warmia"]. That person in turn copied the document for further circulation, and presumably the new recipients did, too..."^[94]

Copernicus' Commentariolus summarized his heliocentric theory. It listed the "assumptions" upon which the theory was based, as follows:^[95]

1. There is no one center of all the celestial circles or spheres.
2. The center of the earth is not the center of the universe, but only of gravity and of the lunar sphere.
3. All the spheres revolve about the sun as their midpoint, and therefore the sun is the center of the universe.
4. The ratio of the earth's distance from the sun to the height of the firmament (outermost celestial sphere containing the stars) is so much smaller than the ratio of the earth's radius to its distance from the sun that the distance from the earth to the sun is imperceptible in comparison with the height of the firmament.
5. Whatever motion appears in the firmament arises not from any motion of the firmament, but from the earth's motion. The earth together with its circumjacent elements performs a complete rotation on its fixed poles in a daily motion, while the firmament and highest heaven abide unchanged.
6. What appear to us as motions of the sun arise not from its motion but from the motion of the earth and our sphere, with which we revolve about the sun like any other planet. The earth has, then, more than one motion.

7. The apparent retrograde and direct motion of the planets arises not from their motion but from the earth's. The motion of the earth alone, therefore, suffices to explain so many apparent inequalities in the heavens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus