Basic HTML Version
8
the capacity to THJNK for themselves -
like a boy with an exciting new toy,
they wanted to use it - they became
intoxicated with intellectual vanity.
They could exercise this God function
of producing the knowledge of what is
right and wcong.
Vanity resents authority over it. They
began to resent God's authority and His
command . They began to think of thcm–
selves as having Godlike intellcct. This
lifted them to the God level -
reduced God to
thei,-
level. God
became a competitor - a rival in
deciding what is right and what is
wrong. God had forbidden them to eat
the fruit of that one tree - that is, to
decide for themselves what is right and
what is wrong. God had said it was SIN
to cat that fruit. Now they determined
to decide
for Jhemselves.
They decided
the way to
knou•
was to put it to the
test - by experimeot.
So, first Eve, then Adam, are here
represented as setting out on the very
first "scientific experiment."
The narrative contioues, verse 6:
"And when the woman saw that the
tree was good for food, and that it was
pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to
be
desired to make one wise, she took of
the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave
also unto her husband with her; and he
did eat. And the eyes of them both were
opened, and they knew that they were
naked; and they sewed fig !caves
together, and made themselves aprons."
So, one of the first bits of knowl–
edge that carne was self-consciousness.
Imrnediately they became SELF-centered
- selfish - competitive in attitude -
jealous, envious, reseotful toward
others. The narrative at this point
implies a drastic change occurred in
their minds when they allowed vanity,
self-centeredness, the competitivc spirit,
to enter thcir minds.
This passage purports to show thc
very first "scientific experiment." God
said that if they took of that forbidden
fruit thcy would die. The narrative shows
them rejccting revelation, just as scicnce
docs today. They made an experiment.
They had to
Jest
the matter. They refused
to believe their Maker. They made the
"scienti fic experiment." Ti1ey ate the
forbidden fru it. REsuLT: they ou.m!
The Scriptural revelation maintains
The
PLAIN TRUTH
that only Goo can determine what is
right and what is wrong - that God's
Law, summarized in the Ten Command–
ments, is the WAY that is RIGHT aod
produces GOOD, and that the trans–
gression of that Law
(1
John 3:4) is
the WAY that is WRONG and produces
EV1L.
And the Biblical revelation teaches
tbat roan for 6,000 years has rejected
God's revelation as the Sourcc of basic
KNOWLEDGE - and has set out on a
WAY OF
LIFE
contrary to that Law. Man
does what is right in his own sight -
NOT what God says is right. He has
piled up a tremendous mountain of
books of MAN-produced KNOWLEDGE.
He has continued to make "scientific
experiments."
RESULT: humanity has produced,
also, a vast mountain of EVILS. His
fund of KNOWLEDGE is a mixture of
good and evil - true and false - he
has produced a civilization full of
empty lives, discontent, unhappiness,
pain and suffering, crime, immorality,
broken homes and family life, corrup–
tion, injustice, unfairness, violence, pol–
lution, war and DEATH.
Yet man refuses to believe the results
of his own experiment. He has written
the cruel lesson in 6,000 years of
human experience, but he has never
learned the lessoo.
Dr. Clark Kerr was president of one
of the world's greatest universities - a
veritable MULTTVERS ITY, where he was
able to put into action his ideas as an
academic theoretician. Result of the
experiment? The confusion, division,
and violence at the home Berkeley
campus finally forced Dr. Kerr to
res•gn.
The entire chain reaction of campus
protest, confusion, riots and violence
really started on the Berkeley campus of
the University of California. It started
about the time the "God is Dead"
movement was getting under way.
The 1970 Summer Session Bulletin
of Claremont University, under classifi–
cation of "Graduate School Summer
Courses" lists the following:
"200s. The Theology of tbe Deatb of
God"
and
"300s. Process and Death of God
Theology"
Augusc-September 1970
And, although the Uoiversity of Cali–
fornia is a different institution, it seems
poignantly significant that, as I write,
these words appeared in a
Los Angeles
Times
headline:
"Berkeley Reported
<Dead'."
The entire headline was:
" 'Sorne Colleges May Be Unable to
Reopen in Fall,' Nixon Told. Two
Advisers Cite Severe Student Discon–
tent; Berkeley Reported 'Dead' as
Institution of Freedom and Learning."
I happen to
be
President of a college
with three campuses. On these campuses
there are no campus protests, no oppo–
sition marches, no student rioting,
and violence, and no hippies. There is
PEACE, happy co-operation between stu–
dents and faculty and administration.
Student faces are wreathed in SMILES
which are real and genuine - the out–
ward exprcssion of an inoer joy. Vis–
itors are amazed.
This is the RESULT!
The
CA
USE? We are not a factory
of KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION, but of
human CHARACTER PRODUCTION. Here,
we DISSEMINATE knowledge. We dis–
seminate BOTH sides of the two-sided
question of evolution vs. special cre–
ation, and give our studeots and facul–
ties the
academic freedom
to believe as
they see it.
But even as you'll find Darwin and
all the evolutionists in our college
libraries, you'll also fiad various trans–
lations of that Volume viewed as "Rev–
elation." Its knowledge is not ignored,
rejectcd, and thrown out the window.
It
is not regarded as tbe sum-total of
knowledge. lt was never intended to
be
that. But it is a revelation of BASlC aod
FOUNOATIONAL knowledge.
And OUR scientific experiment very
definitely is producing exceedingly
HAPPY and JOYFUL results.
And in the interest of academic free–
doro, the Graduate School of Theology
edits a very thought-provoking, stimu–
lating, interesting quality magazine,
ToMORROW's WORLD - a magazine
of Biblical
understa11ding.
You may
have a subscription if you like -
already paid - like
The
PLA!N TRUTH,
you can't pay for your own. It might
give you a few surprises. The Bible is
often quite surprising!
o