At the rate human knowledge is expanding, it won't belong before the brain's electrical impulses can be captured and imaged the way a hard drive is today, in effect, storing "you" in a digital format.All of these advances in technology, whether real or merely the product of a very fertile imagination, point to the return of Christ "in this generation." For Lindsey, "this generation" has now extended well beyond the forty-year biblical timetable. Believing the rebirth of Israel to be a pivotal prophetic event, Lindsey was confidently predicting the return of Christ during the "generation" between 1948 and 1988. In the twenty years since his initial prediction has gone by the wayside, he has steadfastly refused to repent of his error and merely pressed on with one prediction after another, each surpassing the other in outlandishness.
And it won't be much longer after that before some whiz kid figures a way to transfer that image.
Add cloning to the mixture and the result would be a form of immortality. One could theoretically clone endless "blanks" of oneself and, barring violent death, live forever. It might be expensive, but how much is too much – if the alternative is death, anyway?
That may not be necessary, in any case. DNA research suggests that somewhere in the genetic code is the secret to eternal life – a kind of master switch that will turn off the normal aging process. That is the Holy Grail of genetic research, but even if such a master switch is never found, DNA research is leading to the eradication of all kinds of killer diseases.
At the very least, humanity will continue to enjoy ever-increasing life spans as medical research moves forward.
Either or both of these scenarios are more than possible; they are probable within the lifetime of some of those who are reading these words.
But both suggest dire consequences for the continuation of the human race. If life spans were extended, there would be less incentive to increase the current population. China's "one-child" policy could seem generous by comparison.
And then there is the possibility of endless cloning. Again, no reason to replenish the earth, and whatever the child of a clone might be, he would not be in the strictest sense of the word, "human." (If there really were no difference, there'd be no word for "clone.")
Within a few generations, the human race would be hopelessly contaminated, assuming there were any meaningful human reproduction at all.
At the root of the problem for Lindsey is his utter lack of understanding of the most basic principles of biblical exegesis. Rather than reading the ancient text and discerning how it might be appropriately applied to a contemporary situation, he takes a contemporary situation or, as is the case presently, his worst case scenario based on perceived implications of a contemporary situation, and reads it back into the ancient text. The result is an embarrassingly shallow form of proof-texting which trivializes the sacred Word.
According to Genesis 6:1-6, the "sons of God" intermarried with "the daughters of men" and produced offspring that Genesis calls "giants" and "mighty men of renown." Genesis 6:9 records that Noah was found to be a "just" man and "perfect in his generations," i.e., untainted by the hybrid genes introduced into the human bloodline. Genesis 6:12 says that by this time, "all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth."A careful reading of the two chapters preceding Genesis 6 sheds enough light on the terms "sons of God" and "daughters of men" to expose Lindsey's ignorance. First, there is the genealogy of Cain, the firstborn of Adam and Eve, who murdered his brother Abel and became the father of a line of wicked, self-centered descendants who made names for themselves with various worldly accomplishments. The line of Cain culminates with Lamech, the first bigamist, who not only followed the murderous example of his great ancestor, but also boasted of his deed to his two wives.
God saved Noah and his family alive and destroyed the hybrid population by sending the Flood.
When asked by His disciples to outline the signs of His return at the end of the age, Jesus told them, "And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man" (Luke 17:26).
Contrasted with the genealogy of Cain is the genealogy of Seth, the son born to Adam and Eve after Abel's death and Cain's exile. Unlike the line of Cain, the line of Seth is not noted for any accomplishments. But they are distinguished in that, beginning with Enosh, Seth's firstborn, they "called upon the name of the LORD."
Contrary to Lindsey's wild presuppositions, the intermarriage of "the sons of God" with "the daughters of men" is not a tainting of the human bloodline by some super-human or extra-terrestrial race. The increase of wickedness on the earth in "the days of Noah" was the result of the righteous descendants of Seth being seduced by the unrighteous descendants of Cain. Noah stood out as righteous in the sight of God not because he had avoided being tainted by some "hybrid gene," but because, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, he "called upon the name of the LORD."
Noah was, in his "days," a most unusual man. In fact, the only thing unusual in "the days of Noah" was Noah himself. When Jesus refers to "the days of Noah," he is hearkening back to a time when the people "were eating and drinking and marrying and giving in marriage" (Luke 17:27). In other words, it was a time when daily life was pretty much business as usual. When God acts in judgment, as he did in "the days of Noah" and as he did in the destruction of Jerusalem (the actual event Jesus said would take place within "this generation," that is, the generation of his first disciples), he acts swiftly, decisively, and (for those who have lived in defiance of him) unexpectedly. The Word of God need not be embellished or sensationalized for this truth to come through loud and clear.
No comments:
Post a Comment