About:

November 2017
M T W T F S S
« Jul    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Recent Posts

Categories

Blogroll

Google Translator

    Translate to:

Get the Book That Took the Unknown Out of the Genesis Creation Account:

Buy Hey Mom, What About Dinosaurs?, the original work by Russell Husted that translates Genesis into modern English and modern Science.
2 - 3 Day Shipping

When I was a grad student (U.C. San Fran), a professor told me a lie. I believed it because I hadn’t enough knowledge. I didn’t know it wasn’t true. So it put up another wall between me and saving faith. A wall that waited years to come down.

That professor told us, maybe a dozen students, “The Bible says God put Adam and Eve into the Garden of Eden and forbade them to touch the Tree of Knowledge!” To me, a scientist and scholar who loved knowing things, whose life passion was a search for knowledge, that lie made me angry and despise a “God” that would actually forbid us having knowledge. It took me from mere atheism to a far angrier cast of atheism. Because I had not read the scripture myself and let someone else tell me what the “truth” was, I had no knowledge and believed the lie. Trusting the source, I believed the lie, and had faith in it (in what I only believed and did not know) and that cost me a lot through the years.

My faith, for decades, was placed in science. Being what I was, I believed in evolution. I had so much knowledge of evolution, so much belief in it and what other scientists thought, that I had great faith in it as “truth”, and the way to even deeper truths.

Eventually, I began to see problems in the research and methodology and things that my compatriots said about it. They claimed more than I felt the tenets and actual “knowledge” about evolution could justify, and my belief diminished and my faith weakened. Eventually I fell away from the faith. I no longer preached “evolution” as the explanation of everything and even became, for a while, something of an anti-evolutionist – partly because I came upon a competing theory that I felt explained much of what lies outside the legitimate reach of “evolution”.

The knowledge I acquired through the several sciences I worked with and used to explore my universe led me to believe there must be a Creator, a power and intelligence greater than the creation; the forms and substances and processes of the universe and life. This is, of course, exactly what Romans 1:20 says should happen:

“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.” (NIV)

That is, God has put so much of himself and wisdom and power into the creation that we have no excuse not to know He is there, and what He must be like. In fact, the preceding two verses, 18 and 19, say that anyone who tries to hide that evidence and knowledge from us, to keep us from discovering God, by giving us other theories – which they should know are not true – will pay a heavy price. They are what Bible calls “Antichrists”, and will have no part of salvation, or eternity:

“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them.”

Believing there is a creator is not all that difficult if you have much knowledge at all about the creation, and if there’s not someone (or host of someones) preaching some other force or power – or theory. Many scientists, especially in physics, astronomy, genetics, and medicine, have come to believe in a deity, if not God, because of what they’ve seen in the creation. Getting beyond simply accepting there is a creator, however, which could be any sort of deity or “intelligent designer”, is the next problem one must deal with.

In my cultural milieu, the predominantly Judeo-Christian US of A, going to the Bible, and God, is pretty easy. There may be other religions floating around, but only one, only the Bible, has made such a detailed and persistent claim to account for creation, without resorting to such wholly unbelievable mythologies as dream cycles or mud on a turtle’s back, etc.. So all that, and some very personal experiences, led me to knowing and believing in God, and thence to the Bible. Where else can we go to get such an encyclopedic knowledge and description of God?

But then I had another mountain to climb: I “know” God; I have quite a bit of information if I just listen to others – to preaching and “witnessing” by the many who claim to know him; but that’s about where I was with scientists and evolution. I need to build my knowledge, upon which to build my own belief. Well, as most Christians will say (if not always model), that’s the point and purpose of reading the Bible.

With most of the Bible, that was true. I found it a remarkable experience, and a knowledge base of huge proportions. Except for the first three chapters, Genesis 1 – 3.

I know a lot about the creation and about the history, the actual timed record, of creation. As a scientist. Yet I turned on evolution after decades of faith in it, because it wasn’t, in my opinion, sufficiently supported by the evidence. I felt most scientists went way beyond the limitations of the evidence, and their methodology, and logic and reason. In the same way I had serious trouble with the creation account, and the origins of Adam and Eve.

I expect you know that they are ridiculed by most scientists. Indeed, that’s the easiest way to criticize the “knowledge” base (the “paradigm”) of the Church, if not most Christians, and undermine belief in the Bible, and break down the faith which that belief allows both young and adult Christians. I made a career of doing that in my atheist days.

So I wasn’t able to believe Genesis 1 and 2, nor the “Adam and Eve story”. And if I couldn’t believe those, the first pages – and essentially the foundation of its claim to who and what God is – how much could I believe any of it? I’d heard Genesis mocked ever since High School, at least. And everywhere in the media and the public arena. Look at the “Culture War” between Evolutionists and Creationists. I think half (at least) of Christians have given up defending Genesis. Science and scientific evidence simply overwhelm them, so they just do their best to live with “a mystery beyond our limited minds”. I can’t do that. And I’ve found, over the years, nearly everyone with higher degrees, scientists and doctors and engineers, etc, live their Christianity in some sort of compromised, compartmentalization where Genesis 1 – 3 is just set aside as …What? As I did.

In 1998 I began a project – not of own will, I assure you, but with a powerful push and influence by the Spirit himself – to see why Genesis was so much out of sync with all the rest of Scripture, why that vitally important testimony of God seems so – to use the word popular today – so “lame” at the very time we need it most!

The result, I hope you know, is this website, the new translation of Genesis 1 & 2 & “Adam and Eve”, and the book “Hey Mom, What About Dinosaurs?” (see the option to purchase it in the right column), which documents and follows the forensic linguistics and translation process, and explains some of the reasoning and scientific theory and knowledge behind it. Yes, the book was done ten years ago. It is a little bit behind the most recent interpretation of Genesis (maybe 5%), but its still a good read and vital if you want to assure and reassure yourself the work, the linguistics, and the reinterpretation is valid and as reliable as any other modern translation. Its more reliable, of course, since it advances the message 400 years from 1611 to 2010, and tells us what God intended we should know about creation’s creating! [And you have to read it to know why the Spirit led me to that title!]

So here’s the point of this article:
There can be no faith without knowledge. We have to know something in order to believe in it, and the more we know the more we are able to believe. And we have to believe something, or in something, before we can have faith in it. And how it goes is obvious: the more knowledge, the more belief, the more faith is possible.

One can believe in something but have no faith in, or dependent on it. Demons, the Bible tells us, know about God, and Jesus, and even the Scriptures, but probably have little belief or faith in them. The Israelites knew much about the Scriptures, and probably believed a lot, but – as Biblical history shows – were all too ready to go elsewhere with their faith. So, it seems, are we. Especially so our children, after they absorb enough of our science-oriented media and culture, and as they get more education from schools that are taught by atheists or others who don’t believe Genesis 1 – 3. Their (and our) knowledge inevitably gets challenged, and is oft replaced by other ideas and theories. Their belief is inevitably shrunken. And their faith in God inevitably diminished. Or ended.

This translation, and the book that documents it, changes that for very many who read it. It was intended to do that for me, for my friends and comrades in science and academia, and Christians, and potential Christians. There is no other work like it, and without it, no faith is possible for all too many souls. Of that I am certain.

Another Genesis 1 & 2 … Why?

Posted in: Bible & Science,What We're About by admin on August 24, 2009

For Christians, the Bible is a text book. Essentially a history text book that teaches them why they are Christians. Who God is. Why God has anything to do with us. What He’s had to do with us. Why it matters. What He wants of us. And looking to the future, what He promises us. And the history and purpose o Jesus. And then, the foundations of Christianity. And what that means, why it matters, and what is now required to live that revolution in our relationship with God. And a whole lot more. More than just history, that is.

Text books are often revised. Brought up to date. Revised to fit with new information, new perspectives, new language. A physics textbook written before Einstein would have to be rewritten to be of value to modern students. A textbook on paleontology must be continually revised to include fossils discovered in the last decade and newer scientific techniques for analyzing and dating them. A textbook on biology must be revised every few years to incorporate the newest knowledge of genetics and genomes and understanding of cellular processes and mechanics and the latest species discovered. A textbook on astronomy, written a mere decade ago, would have nothing about the discovery of planets, and star formation, and the latest theories of black holes or cosmology. Students wouldn’t even go to a university that still used only old textbooks from the 1950s.

We face much the same problem with the Bible. There are dozens of new versions that modernizing the language, incorporating new discoveries in archeology, even taking new theological or denominational slants. It is a textbook that has had many revisions and updates, especially since the King James translation of some 400 years ago. Though that version is still a favorite among many, it has been replaced by others to meet the needs and interests of many teachers and students.

Genesis 1 & 2 is a textbook in itself, a history of creation. And what we know today dwarfs what we knew but a decade a go. Think how our knowledge of the creation was revolutionized by Galileo, and Newton, and Einstein, and Feynman, and Wilson and Crick, and Hawking , and… there’s no end to it. How can we not need a new version of Genesis 1 & 2?

When Genesis was recorded, the things of which it talked were 99% (at least!) unknown and beyond even the language’s capacity, let alone the scribe’s ken. Maybe by 1611, when the King James rendition was published, maybe that was down to 98%. But it hardly mattered, because no one knew any better, no one questioned the account as the were reading it, and there were no culture wars going on questioning our beliefs in the veracity of the Bible or the reality of God, and no one’s beliefs or faith depended on what Genesis said – or was thought to say. Today, it is hugely different, on both (or all) sides of the belief divisions.

Another Genesis – THIS other Genesis – may well make the difference, whether a person, scientist or layman or atheist or Christian, believes the Bible is true, God is real, or Jesus is whom Christians say he is. So Another Genesis is potentially a game changer, and soul saver. The only question is, is it still Genesis as God intends it. Is it truth, not just more believable in our modern day? Is this other Genesis, which I have translated from the Hebrew texts, a better representation of the original message than the King James? I obviously believe it is.

You can read the Other Genesis here. You can see exactly how I arrived at this Other Translation, see how each word was interpreted, how every choice, and the reasoning and decision making led to it, in my book: Hey Mom, What About the Dinosaurs?

What Do You Expect?

Posted in: Bible & Science,What We're About by admin on March 01, 2009

What we think about the Bible, and what we get out of reading it, is largely dependent on expectations other people have instilled in us.

For instance, it’s commonly said the Bible is not a science text. That’s true. It’s also commonly said the Bible is not about science, or scientific things, but only things “spiritual” or “religious”, so we should not compare or evaluate one in terms of the other because they are about two different realities, one “natural” and one “supernatural”. That’s not true.

Much of what the Bible talks about, and tells us about, is that very same reality science is about. Social sciences and physical sciences! And while you might think that that stuff about God in the Bible is not at all what science is about, you need to look a bit closer at some of what physics and cosmology and astronomy are getting into nowadays. Small wonder so many scientists, especially in those sciences, believe in God, and are practicing Christians or Jews.

The Bible itself tells us that it is but one testimony about the truth and nature of God, and what He requires of us. The other, it says, is the creation itself. The Bible tells us that mankind’s study of the creation, the natural physical reality of the universe, is but another way to discover and understand God. And science, for most of it’s history, was almost universally thought of, by both scientists and churchmen, as just that. The schism, the development of the “culture war” between science and Christianity, began primarily over both sides’ misunderstanding of evolution and what it meant.

Even today many (myself included) do not think that the theory and established tenets of evolution need at all be a contradiction of the Bible, of Genesis, or belief in God or a Divine Creator. That said, from a Biblical point of view, science is just another way of  “reading” about God, of discovering the truth and nature of God, and what He requires of us (i.e. what it takes to survive and prosper inside His creation). Some scientists, like some theologians, may try to use their endeavors to refute God and the Bible, and think that what they know about nature and natural processes, do refute the Bible. They are so wrong, but even then they are giving tacit acknowledgment that science and the Bible are both dealing with the same subject matter.

The first chapter of Romans makes exactly that point:

Romans 1:18-20. For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. From the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen, being understood through what he has made. As a result, people are without excuse.

That is, even if one never heard of God, or the Bible, or anything of any Judeo-Christian religion, one should still know there is a God, and what He is like, and even that He requires righteous behavior of us. That we have no excuse, not anyone, for disrespecting our earth, or life, or our neighbors. That probably works for most people.

So scientists, searching farther and deeper into the “text and testimony” that nature offers about the truth and nature of God, and how we must behave if we are to survive and prosper in via the laws and principles of the natural creation, are doing much the same thing that biblical scholars and theologians are doing. They are looking for the same truths, the same principles and laws, in that same objective “reality” in which we exist!

In a sense, scientists are like forensic and engineering experts trying to understand how, say, a car is made and built in order to understand what it is and how it works in order get the best out of it. Theologians are more into reading the manual provided by the manufacturer in order to do the same.

Sometimes just reading the manual is the best way to meet our needs, even in scientific things. That’s especially true if we have not yet developed a scientific understanding of the subject. Like, if you have no engineers or factory technicians around, you better use the owner’s manual to work on your car. The Bible, many a Christian likes to say, is like an owner’s manual, written by the original manufacturer of the earth and life, for the folks who owned the 1500 BC model. It was very practical. Like Chilton’s manuals for cars, written to help you keep your car working, The Bible  was a relatively untheoretical set of recipes and directions for keeping your life running … then. For instance, consider the “manual’s” instructions on how to deal with a corpse:

Num 19:14-21
14 ‘This is the law when a man dies in a tent: All who come into the tent and all who are in the tent shall be unclean seven days;
15 ‘and every open vessel, which has no cover fastened on it, is unclean.
16 ‘Whoever in the open field touches one who is slain by a sword or who has died, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days.
17 ‘And for an unclean person they shall take some of the ashes of the heifer burnt for purification from sin, and running water shall be put on them in a vessel.
18 ‘A clean person shall take hyssop and dip it in the water, sprinkle it on the tent, on all the vessels, on the persons who were there, or on the one who touched a bone, the slain, the dead, or a grave.
19 ‘The clean person shall sprinkle the unclean on the third day and on the seventh day; and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, wash his clothes, and bathe in water; and at evening he shall be clean.
20 ‘But the man who is unclean and does not purify himself, that person shall be cut off from among the assembly, because he has defiled the sanctuary of the LORD. The water of purification has not been sprinkled on him; he is unclean.
21 ‘It shall be a perpetual statute for them. He who sprinkles the water of purification shall wash his clothes; and he who touches the water of purification shall be unclean until evening.
(NKJ)

(Note: “running water” is essentially fresh water; “sprinkle” would be better rendered “douse”; “washing” of clothing refers to major laundering, by thrashing or stomping on it in water)

Now, some people are offended by a passage like this, objecting to God “commanding” a bunch of onerous rules. Well, do you think a Chilton’s book on fixing your Ford is any less imperious? Are you offended because it doesn’t say, “If you’d like, tighten the bolts that hold the A-frame of the front wheel to the vehicle frame”? Hey, it’s your life at stake here! And if you’ll look closely, the rules in this “manufacturer’s manual” regarding corpses are pretty much equivalent to our modern scientific hazmat procedures.

The Hebrew scribe (Moses?) was surely completely unaware of germs and viruses and the hazards of exposure to dead bodies. No such scientific knowledge existed then. So the benefits of that reality were given him by another process, several thousand years before science could lead my government to prescribe hazmat rules for me to follow to protect myself and my community.

I read Numbers 19 years ago. Probably at least two times. But I didn’t really get it at all until a few months ago when a man committed suicide in an apartment building I run. He shot himself in the head while lying in his bed. The city medical examiner removed the corpse, but left the bloody bed and furniture and carpet there.

The man’s brother came up from Mexico to take care of the body and estate. He simply covered the messy bed with a blanket and slept on it! While I might have been a bit off-put by the gore, to him it was pretty practical. And I assume he was ignorant of Numbers 19. So was I. But our law required I call a hazmat company to clean and sterilize the apartment before I could begin to restore it for renting again. Talking to the workers in their spacesuit-like garb, I was advised how risky it had been for me to even go in earlier to clean out some of the junk.

When I recently reread Numbers 19, I immediately recognized the scientific sense and wisdom captured there. In this case the same truth of nature, of God’s creation, was involved. Two approaches, same result, though one of the approaches to knowledge got there at least 3000 plus years sooner. Lucky them!

As this blog goes on, this is going to be a theme repeated many times. The creation account of Genesis 1 and 2 is about all the same stuff modern science is about now. When science started some centuries ago the scientists, the fathers of science we revere today, knew that. Believing that the creation was the handiwork and design and esthetics of the Creator, they were excited that they would both get to know and understand the way the stuff was designed and created and made to work, as well as the mind and heart of the Creator. Many scientists still do. And, I’m happy to say, so do many Christians, especially the scientists among them.

The idea that the record, or description, of creation in Genesis 1 & 2 is any less likely to be a reasonable record or explanation, appropriate to someone living 3500 years ago is naive at best. It’s somewhat justifiable, I suppose, to think that because it was written so long ago, so long before any knowledge of, let alone science or language referring to, or descriptive of, such things as the planet, or galaxies, or space-time, or atoms and genes, etc., it would not really have any real meat or substance in it. Most people, I think, think of it, with its curious, more or less picturesque and poetic language, as most likely a fluff piece with no objective scientific reality or underpinnings. No relevence. No comparability with what we know today. But that’s not true!

Just like the hazmat instructions of Numbers 19, the Creation Account of Genesis 1 & 2 is serious, and talking about the very same reality that science is about. The problem is the language. It needs a better rendition, in terms and language of today, with relevence and comparability to the jargon and theory that we all have acquired from modern science. It needs translating. And modern science, having dug so deeply and discovered so much about the history and processes of creation, is actually a big help in the art and forensics of translating that 3500 year-old, “for the general public” text!

So what do you expect? Stick around and follow what goes on here. We will translate and analyse and interpret Genesis 1 and 2, even some of 3. And more. Other verses that help us understand Genesis, and the creation by God, as the Bible tells it, and even as science tells it! We will look at, and translate and interpret things that science discovers, or theorizes about, or has to say, from both the Biblical and scientific perspectives. I think I can promise you that what you’ll learn, no matter what you expect, will pretty much blow you away!