kritter513's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

4.0

alanrussellfuller's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.0

The authors compare Genesis creation to ancient Egyptian, Canaanite, and Mesopotamian creation stories. Genesis presents God as transcendent and unique in all creation and as the sole claimant to deity. That's the main difference between Genesis and myths from other ancient cultures. The theology of other societies relied on viewing the gods as equal to various elements of the cosmos.  (Rom 1:23-25)

The authors point out that the number seven is unique in Genesis creation and stands for perfection. Indeed, they claim Israel's week is unique in the ancient world. I think they are wrong and miss making a point here.  The seven-day week originated in ancient Mesopotamia and became part of the Roman calendar in A.D. 321. The names of the days are based on the seven celestial bodies (the Sun, the Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, and Saturn), believed at that time to revolve around Earth and influence its events. The names of the days of the week in many languages are derived from the names of the classical planets in Hellenistic astrology, which were in turn named after contemporary deities, a system introduced by the Roman Empire during Late Antiquity. The seven-day week in Genesis shows that God is transcendent over all powers in creation. They note:

"It liberated the concept of time from dependency upon natural phenomena, specifically the waxing and waning of the moon, the rising of the sun, and the harvest season." p.157

They also give this meaningful quote from Galileo.

“We conclude that God is known first through Nature, and then again, more particularly, by doctrine, by Nature in His works, and by doctrine in His revealed word.” p.33

kaaleppii's review against another edition

Go to review page

5.0

Eye opening on the first chapters of Genesis

jacksezerhga's review against another edition

Go to review page

informative medium-paced

3.25

Light and simple but does a good job introducing counter ideas to young earth creationism. However, there isn’t a solid dedication against YEC which is a flaw in the book. 
More...