Volume 3 Issue 1
Page 1

February 1998

CRUCIAL QUESTIONS ...

By Pastor Robert J. Cameron, Th.D.

As most of the readers of this article probably know, a judicial panel, selected from the membership of the Standing Judicial Commission of the General Assembly, recently ruled in favor of the Session of the Mt. Carmel Presbyterian Church in its complaint against the action of the New Jersey Presbytery in appointing a committee to look into the matter of the interpretation of Genesis one. The panel suggested that the New Jersey Presbytery reverse its action.

Although Mt. Carmel's complaint addressed the particular action of the New Jersey Presbytery, the main issue is one that has a history in the PCA. The matter of the creation account in the Bible has been before the SJC previously, and it is obvious that efforts are being made to skirt several crucial questions involved in this issue: Is there a right interpretation of Genesis one? Should the Westminster Confession's article on creation be accepted by all teaching elders in the PCA? Are varied interpretations of the first chapter of the Holy Bible acceptable in this denomination? Did the Westminster divines clearly articulate their view on creation when they said it happened "in the space of six days," the phrase found in the Confession and both the Larger and Shorter Catechisms?

In reading the Westminster Standards, it seems to this writer that the men who framed the Standards were quite capable of saying what they meant. But aside from the Confession and Catechisms, we ask, Can the Bible be trusted? No doubt, those who hold various views of Genesis one, such as the Day-Age view or the Hypothesis view, answer "Yes" to this question. And yet they would be quick to argue against the Solar Day or literal view of Genesis one, maintaining that the literal view is not the only possible correct view of the chapter. Some would even go so far as to say the issue really is not crucial. This writer, however, is of the opinion that the matter of the Bible's teaching on creation is the most crucial issue facing this denomination at the present time. If we cannot come to a right understanding and confession of how creation took place, the whole Bible is subject to interpretations that are at variance with itself and the standards adopted by the PCA. How many exceptions to the standards are we willing to allow? One of the arguments advanced against the literal interpretation of Genesis one is that there are other 'exegetically possible' interpretations of the passage. Even if this were true, could we not apply the same criteria to every passage of Scripture, including Genesis 3:1-5, and I Timothy 2:11-15?

I am writing this on the 17th of December 1997, just eight days before we will be celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior. This is normally a time of great rejoicing and gladness. But this year my heart is somewhat burdened because I am required to travel from Somerset, NJ, to Atlanta, on the 8th of January 1998, to present an argument before a panel of twenty-four men who, by their testimony, are committed to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and who joined a church that holds to the Westminster Confession. Hopefully, they believe that the Holy Bible is God's Word of Truth, inerrant, and containing all things needful for life and godliness. I will be presenting an argument based on that which they claimed to believe when they came into the PCA. In the Church of Christ, however, Satan has been successful, to a greater degree than one would suppose, with the use of the same tactic he employed with Eve in the Garden of Eden: 'Has God indeed said?' (Gen. 3:1 NKJV). It is amazing how effective this tactic has been down through the years. The question implies that God's Word is not true. Yet, Jesus, in His High Priestly Prayer, said that the sanctification of the saints depends on the truth of the Word. "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth" (Jn. 17:17).

The confusion on this issue would, perhaps, be somewhat less distressing if the qualifications for the gospel ministry (teaching elders) in the PCA were more relaxed than they are. It is very difficult, so I hear, for a person without seminary training to pass the examinations of most Presbyteries. When Mt. Carmel Church came into the PCA from the Reformed Episcopal Church in 1988, I was rigorously questioned in all areas delineated in the Book of Church Order. I do not recall being asked my view on the creation question, but I was asked whether or not I had any exceptions to the Westminster Confession. At the time, I thought the question was a bit odd, but for the sake of expediency I gave a simple answer without comment: "No, I do not." It is my opinion that the Westminster divines did a superb joy of clearly setting forth a system of Christian doctrine that can and should be adhered to by those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and are serious about their personal walk with Him.

Over and above the position of the Confession, however, the greater question is how serious Bible students can justify non-literal views of a portion of Genesis one in light of the Bible's own testimony concerning the matter. "Has God indeed said?" Yes, He has! The word "yom" or "day" in Genesis one is modified in the creation account: day one, day two, day three, etc. It is further modified by "evening and morning" each time it appears in the creation history. Thus, God Himself defines "day" for us. The words "evening" and "morning" appear in this same combination, and separately, too many times in the Old Testament, with the evident meaning of a period of darkness and a period of light which we know today as night and day, for them to be reasonably understood in the creation account as meaning anything other than a normal day—twenty-four hours. In the description of the first day of creation (Genesis 1:5) we read, "And the evening and the morning were the first day." And we see in Genesis 1:14 that God created particular lights in the firmament to delineate time: "and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years." All of the time references in the Scriptures, and in the world, are based on the solar day. If the days of creation were something other than twenty-four hours, where in the Scriptures may we find evidence that there was a change. Genesis 2:4 tells us that what preceded is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created. Can we rely on the time references in the Holy Bible? Is the Bible accurate when it says that "all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years?" (Gen. 5:5). Can we rely on this information and teach it as fact if the days of creation were something other than twenty-four hour days?

These arguments, along with the charge by Paul to Timothy to, "rightly divide the word of truth," are quite compelling. But there is another one that is more convincing, i.e., the fourth commandment in the Decalogue.

In Exodus 19, we read that God commanded Moses to have the people sanctify themselves for the hearing of the Law. Bounds were set for the people and cattle; no hand was to touch the mountain on the pain of death; all clothes worn on the third day were to be washed clean; and no man was to come near his wife during the three days of preparation. In Exodus 20:1-17, Moses recorded the words that were spoken by God. This is not a matter of plenary inspiration. Rather, it is the record of that which was actually spoken by God Himself. "And God spake all these words, saying," (Ex. 20:1). Therefore that which Moses records, Exodus 20:2-17, are the words spoken by Almighty God.

During the earthly ministry of Jesus, He confirmed that the words Moses recorded were true. "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (Jn. 4:45-47).

Moses wrote that God Himself said that creation took place in six literal days. The work-rest period for Israel is based on this truth. "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it" (Ex. 20:11). Not only did God speak the words of the Ten Commandments, including the reference to creation, He wrote them. "And the Lord said unto Moses, Come up to me into the mount, and be there: and I will give thee tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that thou mayest teach them" (Exodus 24:12). And again, after Moses had received detailed instructions for the sacrifices, the construction of the tabernacle, and ordinances for the priests, God reiterated the importance of Sabbath observance and the penalty for violating it: ". . .whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. . . . It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God" (Gen. 31:14,17,18).

Thus, the writings of Moses, which Christ confirmed to be true, tell us that God both spoke the words of the Ten Commandments and wrote them twice. The Westminster divines were careful in articulating that which is contained in Holy Scripture. Creation took place "in the space of six days." That is precisely what we are told in the Pentateuch. And Jesus confirmed the truth of that which Moses wrote several times during His earthly ministry.

This brings us to the question: why does one committed to Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior deny, in the face of Biblical evidence, the literal interpretation of Genesis one? If creation was done in a space of time other than six solar days how did the house of Israel know how long to work and how long to rest?

We do not know what the SJC will do about Mt. Carmel's complaint. Although the panel they appointed ruled in our favor, it seems as if several members of the Commission are not pleased with that decision. We are somewhat less than hopeful that they will uphold the decision of their own appointed committee, require adherence to our Standards, or confirm the truth of the Scriptures. A way to skirt the essence of the problem will probably be found. Presbyteries will continue to accept candidates for ordination who take exception(s) to the standards in this and other crucial areas, such as the ordination of women, continuing revelation, speaking in tongues, a non-universal flood, etc., until modernist-minded men are a majority in the General Assembly. Other denominations have gone down this same road. Is the PCA, in just twenty-five years, headed down the road to modernism?

Genesis one is foundation in the studies of Biblical and systematic theology. If creation took place in some time period other than delineated in Genesis 1:1-2:4, then all of the time references in Scripture must be taken figuratively and disregarded. And if this becomes the general rule in the PCA, we will be saying to the Church of Christ, and to the world, that, contrary to I Corinthians 14:33, God is the author of confusion.

About the Author:

The Reverend Dr. Robert J. Cameron is Pastor of the Mt. Carmel Church in Somerset, New Jersey.