Something a bit deep
I've been studying some embryology recently. Most people seem not to like it much because it's quite complicated and you have to think in at least 3D. But I love it. It's just so fascinating. Now, this has sparked some interesting thoughts in me which I would love your comments on.
"The key to understanding embryology is in our deep evolutionary past." So says our professor of anatomy. The me of 15 years ago would have scoffed at this, but it has really got me thinking. So, this requires me to teach you a bit of embryology (ha ha). Well, basically after all the mummy-meets-daddy stuff, part of the developing mass of cells forms a blob of specialising layers which folds into a sort of cylinder and forms the embryo. The layers in this cylinder go to make different parts of the forming body as each bit becomes more and more specialised. The very early human embryo isn't much different from the embryo of a fly. But it keeps on growing until it has primitive gills - similar to fish embryos. The point I'm making in a waffley kind of way is that embryo development is initially the same for all animals, the stages where species differentiate from each other occurring later and later in the embryo's development the 'higher up the evolutionary ladder' you get.
The reason given is that whilst our fully grown bodies are the final point in our evolutionary process, in order to get there our embryos have to pass through every point in the evolutionary past of our embryology; each mutation in the species having to be exhibited in the embryo first and each embryonic variation developing further than the one before.
Anyway, my point...
I certainly believe that God created man and that we are different from the animals. Genesis 1 and 2 says God formed the man from the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life and the man became a living being in the image of God. But though we have spirits we also have bodies - animals, with animal functions and instincts. Spiritually the difference is we are made in the image of God. Does that mean our bodies couldn't have evolved with the animals? God's way is so often to take what is lowly and make it great - the supernatural from the natural. What if God took a human creature (in a similar way to taking Abram - "Leave your land and go here") and breathed into him, making him a (spiritually) living being - and hence in the image of God - in the same way Jesus breathed on His disciples before Pentecost and as a result we are a living people in the image of Christ? And hence we are part of the New Creation as Adam was part of the first. Perhaps another analogy would be Isaac and Ishmael - the miraculous (Adam) chosen over the natural (Homo sapiens).
This is all a bit weird and I don't know if I believe it. But anyway, if you haven't read Genesis, it really is the most fascinating book.
"The key to understanding embryology is in our deep evolutionary past." So says our professor of anatomy. The me of 15 years ago would have scoffed at this, but it has really got me thinking. So, this requires me to teach you a bit of embryology (ha ha). Well, basically after all the mummy-meets-daddy stuff, part of the developing mass of cells forms a blob of specialising layers which folds into a sort of cylinder and forms the embryo. The layers in this cylinder go to make different parts of the forming body as each bit becomes more and more specialised. The very early human embryo isn't much different from the embryo of a fly. But it keeps on growing until it has primitive gills - similar to fish embryos. The point I'm making in a waffley kind of way is that embryo development is initially the same for all animals, the stages where species differentiate from each other occurring later and later in the embryo's development the 'higher up the evolutionary ladder' you get.
The reason given is that whilst our fully grown bodies are the final point in our evolutionary process, in order to get there our embryos have to pass through every point in the evolutionary past of our embryology; each mutation in the species having to be exhibited in the embryo first and each embryonic variation developing further than the one before.
Anyway, my point...
I certainly believe that God created man and that we are different from the animals. Genesis 1 and 2 says God formed the man from the dust of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life and the man became a living being in the image of God. But though we have spirits we also have bodies - animals, with animal functions and instincts. Spiritually the difference is we are made in the image of God. Does that mean our bodies couldn't have evolved with the animals? God's way is so often to take what is lowly and make it great - the supernatural from the natural. What if God took a human creature (in a similar way to taking Abram - "Leave your land and go here") and breathed into him, making him a (spiritually) living being - and hence in the image of God - in the same way Jesus breathed on His disciples before Pentecost and as a result we are a living people in the image of Christ? And hence we are part of the New Creation as Adam was part of the first. Perhaps another analogy would be Isaac and Ishmael - the miraculous (Adam) chosen over the natural (Homo sapiens).
This is all a bit weird and I don't know if I believe it. But anyway, if you haven't read Genesis, it really is the most fascinating book.
posted by Michael at 12:28 pm
6 Comments:
Woah, thats pretty cool. The embryo development thing is really fascinating.
I think you're onto someting with the:
God's way is so often to take what is lowly and make it great - the supernatural from the natural.
bit. What a thorny, tough issue it is, but this maybe spreads a little light.
But where does it leave the whole made in seven days bit? Does this obsertvation of the stages of embryo development give a lot more tenability to evolution? Is it now fact and not theory?
As far as practical science goes, evolution is an excellent theory, without which you won't understand much biology at all. But nothing in science is fact - you can't prove, you can only disprove and refine.
7 days of Creation - fundamental! I believe it is massively spiritually significant, though not a cosmological record. I could talk for hours about it!
"Let there be Light!" Apparently, literally that is "Let Light be, and Light is." Awesome. Light is. I AM. And God only creates in the Day, that is, in the Light, because darkness was over the surface of the deep (Gen 1:2) and creation was subject to frustration from the very beginning (Rom 8:20). So God brought forth the Light (John 1:5, Gen 1:3, Prov 8:22) even before he had created the sun or the stars and in the Light did His work of creation (John 1:3, Prov 8:30). And so the Light is the Firstborn (born not created) over all creation (Col 1:15). That’s why God sent Jesus (as opposed to anyone else) as the Messiah, because it was through Him everything was created in the first place. Because when God works He always does so through Jesus. Because Jesus holds everything together (Heb 1:3). Because Jesus is the Cornerstone, the Foundation, the Author, the whole point (Rev 22:13). And now after His resurrection, He is not only the Firstborn over all creation, even more than that, He is the firstborn from among the dead and so the Firstborn over the New Creation (Rev 21) so that in all things He might have the supremacy (Col 1:18). Which, I think, is the whole point of creation, new and old, in the first place.
Sorry, what was the question?
That is some deep stuff!
So the Light (let there be) is talkin about Jesus? This makes him the firstborn over all creation?
I was thinking about the Firstborn thing recently (bloomin JW's got me arguin). I figured it was just a title cause he is the Firstborn Son inthat he is the one who (cause he was before all of us) has the rights of Heirship and stuff. I really must check the context on that.
What else you got on this 7 days thing?
That's a dangerous question you know... you could be here for days! Pretty cool stuff though.
Michael, I think what you said is roughly how I've put creation and evolution together in my head over the years. It's never been a major issue for me though (except when I read a creationist book which contained the world's most holey arguments (as in lace curtains, not as in presence of God!) and promptly decided there had to be something in evolution) so I've been content to leave that area kind of fuzzy.
Never put together Jesus and the Light in Creation before. But how do you get from "let light be, and it is" to "born not created"? In Genesis the light seems firmly part of the created order, whereas Jesus isn't. Just a thought...
It never says the Light is created. Every other day in Genesis 1 has a verse "So God made..." (v7) or "So God created..." (v21) but not for light. He just brought it forth and saw that it was good. Afterall "God is Light" (1 John 1:5 - it's pretty explicit). I just love to believe that in the very first 3 verses of the Bible you get Father ("God created"), Spirit ("hovering over the waters") and Son (the light in which everything was made).
The rest of the days, Hairy, I don't know. But I don't think the beginning of Genesis is just an introduction to lead into the scriptures. Major themes seem to be established. Light is separated from darkness. Water separated from water and the land from the sea (incidently, there is no sea in the new creation, Rev 21, so what's the significance there? Ps 104:7, God rebuked the waters at creation. And again after the flood and again at the Red Sea, Ps 106:9. This is all redemption stuff - salvation for some is judgement for others. "I will make a distinction" Ex 11:7).
And the seventh day is where the whole of the Old Testament Law is heading (check Hebrews - entering God's rest).
Wow there's alot of revelation there.
I heard the "and there will be no sea" bit of Revelations was about the ocean being a symbol for chaos (ha, like in Genesis, the earth was void and chaotic).
In alot of ancient culture the ocean/sea is seen as the source of chaos and bad things. There will be no more of these.
Hopefully there will still be an actual sea. I like it and I could swim in the new one without drowning.
Post a Comment
<< Home