A leading creationist author slams Game Start.
Well the Bible does require us to test revelation. The test doesn’t get harder than this. This introduction really just talks about the reviewer, who I have called DJ. You can skip forward to the next section to get into the issues. But what I have discovered over time is that people and relationships are at the heart of the issues.
I submitted my site for review by CMI. They passed it on to one of their experts. I didn’t ask permission nor tell them I would publish the review, so for now I’ll just refer the expert as DJ. His appraisal was not favourable, but I have hopes that he might change his mind with time and that’s another reason for suppressing his name. Further, I still have very high regard for his work and if you happen to agree with me I don’t want to offer any reason to denigrate his work.
This review was about a year ago (Oct 2008) as I write and I have improved the presentation of information and seen more insights that further confirm suggestions made in this site. In fact, several of DJ’s comments triggered these improvements and while searching out a response to some challenges I found further confirmations.
DJ is a champion of God’s word in the area of Creation and Genesis. He boldly and knowledgably proclaims and defends God as Creator, revealing this truth both in Science and in the Word. He is part of the CMI team and worthy of your attention. I have read some of his writings and other CMI authors and in the earliest stages of my Game Start articles I was aware that I was challenging some aspect of these understandings, and frankly of long held Christian theology. I would generally refer to them as “passionate Literal Model believers”. I meant this with no disrespect nor to undermine nor suggest that their understanding was “narrow”.
None the less I have seen some things differently or at least offered different options. I am honoured to have someone with DJ’s expertise give an initial review. And let’s be fair boys and girls, I have openly challenged some classic views in the Game Start articles. Watch out - did you see how I just slipped in the “classic” adjective. It is a reasonable adjective to use but it has connotations of “old”, “traditional”, and this leads you towards “out-of-date”. Not so! If you want to hold true to the classic biblical understanding then be sure that I am not against you or want to deny you that. It is my belief that the understandings I offer clarify and extend revelation of God without undermining the fundamental precepts and revelations the classic understanding, championed by DJ and CMI.
However DJ pretty much sees the Game Start articles as a perversion that does not stand up to biblical scrutiny. Those are strong words. They are not the exact words DJ uses in the comments he sent back. I chose them to make sure that you understand the serious nature of the following arguments. As I said, even in my Foreword, composed before I received this feedback, go with the classic/CMI view of Genesis if you like it better and trust and their and many other classic creation authors.
My first response to this review detailed his exact comments and my responses to each comment but it was really hard to get into. You had to read my articles and then figure out what exactly he is saying as different to what I was saying. And I have changed most of those articles since then, partly in response to his comments.
This is what happened directly and indirectly as a result of his comments...
Well that was pretty much a total make over for the front end of Game Start. But I also introduce the “Images from Genesis” section of Game Start. It contains many topics that relate to issues mentioned by DJ and frankly issues that are common to most people’s understanding, or misunderstanding of God.
I was sad that DJ made no comment about “God’s Timetable” which is a feature of GeckoFocus. I have restructured the presentation and created Page-1-God since then.
But what I have come to understand is that our view of scripture can be coloured or blinkered by the way we apply scriptures. DJ has long opposed false teaching and attacks on scripture in Genesis. The most savage attacks come from believers who twist scripture to imply various things that really are not that well supported by scripture. The primary defence adopted here is to look at the plain reading and to deny the possibility of insights that go beyond the plain reading. Of course, I do exactly that in many places. ...My response is Rules and Assumptions.
So, for the moment DJ can’t entertain any of these insights. The trick is, I claim that my insights do not pervert the image of God but actually reveal a more consistent image of God and are backed up by many other scriptures. The false teachings were always undermining the Bible. My insights strengthen the Bible. That is a challenge for any reader of this site to verify.
DJ’s review has been very valuable. As I prepared responses I even found more supporting evidence. I was able to remove some places where misunderstandings occurred. I have been able to see more clearly the position held by strict young earth creationists and the background behind that position more clearly. But as iron sharpens iron, it’s not comfortable. If DJ re-read my Game Start articles he would find a much clearer presentation of my arguments with a little more grace given to people who want to stay with the classic Genesis understanding. But I have not repented of day-8 man, or the probability that the creation days were a thousand years long.