and
Professors Daniel Harlow and John Schneider of Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Mich., published scholarly articles asserting that strong evidence from both biblical studies and science creates conflicts with parts of the historic Reformed confessions and requires theological explanation.
In particular, they question whether Adam and Eve actually existed, whether there was a literal Fall, and whether we need to reinterpret the doctrine of original sin as presented in the Reformed confessions.
While I greatly admire the work that the gentlemen at The Aquila Report do, I had to ask myself, how is this news?
The Christian Reformed Church has never taken a stance on the length of the days of creation, though they have in the past declared theories of evolution as unacceptable. There is a natural progression from ambiguity on the days of creation to denial of a historical Adam and Eve to "reinterpreting the doctrine of original sin." Should we at all be surprised then, that those who deny the doctrine of creation continue into greater error?
Six day creation is a fundamental tenet of reformed theology. There is a reason the Westminster divines added the clause "in the space of six days" to the Confession. We must do all we can to preserve this system of doctrine and do away with compromising theories. Defense of six day creation is, after all, a defense of God's revealed word.
I agree with you. But the PCA has opened up to many views of Creation other than six literal 24 hour days. I believe we will eventually find ourselves at the top of a slippery slope because of this.
ReplyDeletePastor St. John: the history of Charles Briggs on the issue of six-day creation is relived by every Presbyterian denomination that refuses to enforce our Confession.
ReplyDelete