Rev. David Rives — Three Reasons

It was a slow news day, but suddenly the Drool-o-tron™, with its sirens and flashing lights, alerted us to the latest video from the brilliant and articulate leader of David Rives Ministries, posted at the website of WorldNetDaily (WND).

Our computer was locked onto this headline: Why is it so important to take Genesis literally?, but the rev’s video is actually titled: “Is Genesis History?”

The rev tells us that Genesis is actual history, not myth. But why is that important? He gives us three reasons. (1) It’s a question of authority. Genesis says creation took six days! Man’s word is flawed and God’s word isn’t, so who ya gonna believe?

Here are the next two reasons: (2) If we start re-interpreting Genesis, where do we stop? (3) The truth of Genesis is vital, because if there were millions of years of death before sin, then death isn’t the penalty for sin, and the Gospel is meaningless. We can’t have that — it’s absurd!

The rev is dressed in a blue blazer with no necktie, but he has a hanky in his breast pocket. Very classy! There’s no doubt about it — he’s the cutest rev you’ve ever seen! The video is only 3 minutes long before the commercial at the end. Go ahead, click over to WND and watch it.

As we always do with the rev’s videos, we dedicate the comments section for your use as an Intellectual Free Fire Zone. You know the rules. Okay, the comments are open. Go for it!

Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

10 responses to “Rev. David Rives — Three Reasons

  1. Derek Freyberg

    Hardly surprising for David Rives to say it, since he’s a YEC. The Hamster says this all the time – even though he adds his own extra-Biblical interpretations all the time too.

  2. Genesis is actual history

    Yeah but it’s bad history.

  3. Well, David is a cute little guy AND he has his presentations down pat. What is of course the sad crux is that he is preaching that in order to be a member of his flock, one must oppose science wherever it disagrees with a young earth creationism interpretation of the Old Testament. Not a problem as long as you’re not a biologist,geologist,physicist,astrophysicist,astronomer, microbiologist, neurologist,oncologist, science teacher, stratigrapher, geneticist, etc,etc,etc,etc. Seems a rather unnecessary exclusion of the intelligentsia. Societies that have done that in the past to a great degree
    haven’t flourished. But then, 50% of Alabama’s registered voters backed up ole Roy Moore, so, it would appear that big parts of america are indeed creationist oriented. I wonder what the actual percentages are of science oriented vs creationism oriented citizens there are?

  4. Michael Fugate

    That Genesis is not actual history has been understood by Christian theologians since the start. It is the YEC literalists who are re-interpreting the Bible. Given the Christian belief in an afterlife, why are they so hung up on death? They don’t believe people actually die, do they?

  5. James L. Kugel
    The Bible As It Was
    Belknap Press, Harvard U. Press, 1997

    Gives many examples of the non-literal readings of the Bible – in the society in which the Bible was produced – Ancient Middle East, a couple of centuries BCE and CE. Including the letters of Paul of Tarsus.

  6. Skeptical Servant

    More retarded nonsense. The world is overwhelmingly old. You have to be ignorant to believe this BS.

  7. The comments at WND are, as always, priceless:

    “Let me refer you to a good book on the subject: The King James Bible by King James.”

  8. As Michael Fugate and TomS point out, it is Rives and his tribe who are the ones reinterpreting Genesis.

    Death before sin? Rives is referring to Paul, not Genesis – that’s if he’s actually aware of where the idea comes from. Romans 5:12. Sin only entered the world through the disobedience of one man, and IF death was the punishment for that sin, then death could not have existed before it. But this is false reasoning.

    We know from scripture that death existed before original sin, and the notion that it was the punishment for that sin is, to say the least, dubious.

    God said to Adam when forbidding the fruit, “The day you eat from that, you are surely doomed to die”. We know from Genesis 1:1, all things came to be because God spoke the word. Therefore, by God’s own word ordaining it, death existed before the sin. And Eve said to the serpent, if we (eat of the fruit) we shall surely die”, demonstrating that she was already familiar with the fact of death. And she said “we shall surely die”, not “all living things shall die”, not “death will enter the world”.

    At Genesis 2:9, we are told of another tree, the tree of life. It was created at the same time as the tree of knowledge. If they eat of that, says God at Genesis 3:22, they will live forever – implying necessarily that if they didn’t, they wouldn’t. That is, death was otherwise entailed on them from the start.

    Further, when God pronounces the punishment for their sin, (Gen 3:16-19) He doesn’t actually condemn them to die. He treats death as a given – They must labor “until you return to the Earth, for dust you are, to dust you shall return”. The stated punishments are the curse of labour (which is actually worded as a curse on the Earth itself) and, on Eve, pain in childbirth. And chattel status: “Your husband… will be your master”, says God. (Irrelevant aside: we have pretty much abjured that particular curse. I wonder if that constitutes disobedience to God, too? And whether Rives thinks it does?)

    All of this was standard exegesis long before the Dark Ages were out. If the medieval schoolmen and Augustine of Hippo could manage it, where does that leave David Rives? Is his insistence on the literal nature of Genesis a regression, or is it really a novelty? Me, I think that compared to the worldview of David Rives, the Dark Ages weren’t so very dark after all.

  9. The rev tells us that Genesis is actual history, not myth. But why is that important? He gives us three reasons. (1) It’s a question of authority. Genesis says creation took six days! Man’s word is flawed and God’s word isn’t, so who ya gonna believe?

    But who ya gonna believe about the Bible being God’s Word, when every word in it was written by human beings? Even the purported quotes from God.

  10. Who are you gonna believe. What the Bible says. or what somebody tells you what the Bible says?
    The Bible says nothing against (or for, for that matter) changes in the world of life on Earth. It doesn’t say that domestic cats and saber-tooth cats are descended from the feline “kind” on Noah’s Ark.
    The Bible doesn’t say that the Grand Canyon (or any other landscape) was carved by Noah’s Flood.