Volume IV, Issue 3

Dismantling the Framework Hypothesis – Part Four

      This is the fourth and final installment on the Framework Hypothesis.  This view attempts to identify non-literal elements in the Genesis creation account so that its adherents can claim that it need not be understood literally.  In the past three newsletters, we have defined this view and critiqued the first two major arguments used to support it.  These are known as the Textual Parallelism and Ordinary Providence arguments.

      The third major argument is easily the most confusing of the three – a difficult task to be sure since all of the arguments are confusing.  It is known as the Cosmogony Argument.  Consider the following mouthful from the late Meredith Kline (the view’s leading promoter) and see if you can figure out what he is saying:

It is found that a metaphorical relationship exists between the two levels; the heavenly level (upper register) is described in figures drawn from the earthly level (lower register).  As for the seven-day scheme, it belongs to the upper register and is, therefore, to be understood figuratively, not literally.

      In case you were not able to follow what Kline was stating, allow me to interpret.  He claimed that the perspective of Genesis 1 alternated between the heavenly (upper) realm and the earthly (lower) realm.  He believes that the term day was a description of a heavenly time, which he believes is different than earthly time.  As such, we should view these days as being figurative.  He went on to say that the “the ‘days’ are merely symbolic of heavenly time.”

      This is truly an imaginative argument but has no basis in Scripture and, like the other arguments discussed in previous newsletters, it has fatal flaws. 

      First, for the sake of argument, we will assume that there is even such a thing as “heavenly time.”  If that is true, then we must ask whether or not there is any indication in Scripture that it is different than earthly time.  In Daniel 10:13, an angel reveals to Daniel that while he was on his way to deliver his message, he was delayed by the “prince of the kingdom of Persia” for 21 days until Michael the archangel came to his aid.  Most Bible scholars believe the prince of Persia refers to a demon.  If so, the angel’s words suggest that “heavenly time” is the same as ours.  (See also Luke 1:36 for an angel’s use of time)

      Second, there is simply no reason or indication in Scripture that the two times are different.  This point must be demonstrated rather than assumed.  As it stands, this is an example of circular reasoning.  The argument goes like this, “Heavenly time and earthly time are different; therefore, the days in Genesis one should be viewed as long periods of time.”  If we ask how they know this, the response will be something like this, “The days in Genesis obviously are not literal days; therefore, we must conclude that earthly and heavenly time is different.”  This proves nothing!

      Third, and this is the biggest problem, the focus of Genesis one is on earth (the lower register) and not heaven (the upper register).  As such, there is no reason to think that the days should be viewed as heavenly time. 

      Finally when days are described as being a period of “evening and morning” and are listed in a numbered sequence, it is quite natural to see these as referring to earthly days.  There is no problem with the sun’s creation being on the fourth day.  God created light on day one and there was still an evening and morning for the first three days.  From this we can conclude that the earth was rotating from the start. 

      The Framework advocate cannot account for the “evening and morning” phrase so Kline resorts to calling the phrase “imagery”, a “picture”, and a “formularized framework” in Genesis one.  Again, he utilizes circular reasoning.  He assumes all of language in Genesis one is a framework so any wording that contradicts his view must simply be part of that framework.

      We have looked at each of the major arguments for the Framework Hypothesis.  All three of these arguments have fatal flaws.  The view rejects a grammatical-historical approach to interpreting Genesis 1 – 2.  It forces numerous contradictions into the text and creates numerous theological impossibilities.  The view is couched in confusing and technical language, requires an incredible imagination, and was not even developed until the last century.  Finally, the Bible simply does not support this view.  As such, this view should be rejected by all Christians.    

Old-Earth Creationism on Trial

      We have been hinting that Tim’s first book is on its way.  Well, it is almost here.  Master Books has informed us that the book is due to be released early next month (June).  It is called Old-Earth Creationism on Trial and is co-authored by Dr. Jason Lisle. 

      The book promises to be the most thorough critique of arguments used by old-earth creationists that allegedly show that the Bible supports their view.  It also contains a couple of chapters on the philosophy of science so that the reader can learn a proper understanding of science and its role in relation to the Word of God.  It was intentionally written in easy-to-read language and we took great care to treat our opponents with respect. 

      Look for more details on the website as the publication date nears.

New Position

      Tim has been hired as the Associate Pastor at Martintown Community Church, Martintown, WI.  He will be responsible for various discipleship duties regarding the youth and their families.  This will reduce the number of Sunday morning speaking engagements that he will be able to do.  Nevertheless, he is still available to speak during other times in the week and some Sunday mornings. 

Master of Divinity

      On Saturday, May 10^th, Tim graduated from Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary (Liberty University) with a Master of Divinity degree specializing in Apologetics and Theology.  The ceremony included a testimony by Chuck Norris – yes, the real Chuck Norris.

      Tim hopes to enroll in the newly-formed Ph.D. program at Liberty this fall so that he can earn a doctorate in Apologetics and Theology.   

Miscellaneous

     As always, if you have any questions, comment, concerns, corrections, ideas, prayer requests, etc., please email us and let us know.  Also, thank you for your prayers.  Please continue to keep us in your prayers throughout this month.

     Do you know of anyone who would enjoy receiving our newsletter?  If so, would you consider forwarding it to them and ask them to visit the website and sign up for the monthly mailing?

     If you would like to be removed from this mailing, please click here and send a blank email.