This thesis investigates the presence and significance of creation imagery in the Gospel of John. This is an issue that Johannine scholars have been discussing for nearly a century, since Edwin Hoskyns’ 1920 article “Genesis I–III and St John’s Gospel,” but it is still by no means a settled question. Many scholars continue to insist that John employs creation imagery in this Gospel by making numerous subtle allusions to Genesis 1–3. Others find this imagery in what they consider to be the creation-like structure of the text or parts of it. By contrast, this thesis argues that John has intentionally included only a limited number of instances of creation imagery and that he has positioned them carefully to highlight their significance. The thesis establishes the actual instances of creation imagery in the Gospel, demonstrating that a number of allusions that scholars have suggested to Genesis 1–3 are actually questionable. It contends that John has included direct references to the creation of the world specifically in 1:10; 17:5; and 17:24; and that only in 1:1–5; 5:17, 20, 36; 6:19; 9:3–4, 6; 17:4; and 20:22 has he also drawn on and creatively deployed terms and images stemming from Genesis 1–2 and other creation discourses found in the Old Testament. Although John uses these limited instances of creation imagery in varying contexts, this thesis argues that they function collectively in a threefold way that is consonant with John’s overall argument. First, John uses them to portray Jesus in close relationship with his Father, existing apart from and prior to the created order. This relationship authorizes his participation in divine activities. Second, John uses creation imagery to assert the primal and universal significance of Jesus and the message about him, and to privilege him over other important figures in the story of Israel. Third, John uses creation imagery to link past reality with present and future reality, portraying Jesus as the agent of creation whom the reader should regard as the primal agent of revelation and salvation. The thesis concludes by underscoring how these findings may inform our understanding of John’s Christology and Johannine dualism.

This study is an attempt to construct a new biblical creationism as solution to the problem of the relationship between religion and science. It examines the challenge of modern evolutionism and the churches' responses against it. The modern evolutionism as the acting hypothesis of many modern scientific disciplines helps the Church to re-examine its traditional doctrine of creation. There are two Christian responses against the challenge: individually, various positions are active, such as the theistic evolutionism, the recent special creationism, and the old earth creationism; collectively, the Christian churches have not given careful consideration to the challenge. This study examines the creation account in Genesis 1 according to the Kantian epistemology of the writer's Th. M dissertation, an examination of modern eschatology. It proposes a presentist understanding of creation as the tentative alternative to the traditional creationism. It suggests that: 1) In evolution debate both creationists and evolutionists seem to assume there is an examined scientific creationism. 2) Because the traditional divine report model is unverifiable, we need to construct a scientific model. 3) The account seems to follow the ancient clay tablet format. 4) This study proposes a 'new habitat orientation week' model: the assumed observer's report of daily recognition of the wonderful world. 5) It informs us both of the responsibility for the world and of the significance of communal life. 6) It may provide a balanced foundation both for the sound relationship between science and religion and for the positive Christian worldview. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Dogmatics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

This study is an attempt to construct a new biblical creationism as solution to the problem of the relationship between religion and science. It examines the challenge of modern evolutionism and the churches' responses against it. The modern evolutionism as the acting hypothesis of many modern scientific disciplines helps the Church to re-examine its traditional doctrine of creation. There are two Christian responses against the challenge: individually, various positions are active, such as the theistic evolutionism, the recent special creationism, and the old earth creationism; collectively, the Christian churches have not given careful consideration to the challenge. This study examines the creation account in Genesis 1 according to the Kantian epistemology of the writer's Th. M dissertation, an examination of modern eschatology. It proposes a presentist understanding of creation as the tentative alternative to the traditional creationism. It suggests that: 1) In evolution debate both creationists and evolutionists seem to assume there is an examined scientific creationism. 2) Because the traditional divine report model is unverifiable, we need to construct a scientific model. 3) The account seems to follow the ancient clay tablet format. 4) This study proposes a 'new habitat orientation week' model: the assumed observer's report of daily recognition of the wonderful world. 5) It informs us both of the responsibility for the world and of the significance of communal life. 6) It may provide a balanced foundation both for the sound relationship between science and religion and for the positive Christian worldview. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Dogmatics))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.