Comment on World Church moves to advance statements regarding creation by Larry Kirkpatrick.
Whatever the statement actually says, the church must be sufficiently clear about its principles to be willing to address those who bend it or try to hide under it with their own agendas. No one is going to walk in off the street and enforce adherence to belief for the church. The church must have clarity of mind and willingness to be misunderstood when it acts to be faithful. It must must have Phinehases in its midst and not Elis only.
Table of Contents
Larry Kirkpatrick Also Commented
World Church moves to advance statements regarding creation
Remember, there is a difference between voted statement documents and changes to the fundamental beliefs. This is, as far as I can see so far, only one of the documents of affirmation, and would not change the fundamental beliefs. I do believe that the fundamental belief #6 on creation should have substantially tightened wording (as I called for min my recent article). Now is the time to begin that process.
Recent Comments by Larry Kirkpatrick
Why the SDA Church needs to update its FB#6 statement on Creation
This question arises, apparently built on the implicit idea that the “let there be” (LTB) statements in the six creation days of Genesis one are never preceded by other text within the same day. Here, a look at days two through six is instructive.
Day 2 (vv. 6-8) LTB statements = 1, preceding text = no
Day 3 (vv. 9-13) LTB statements = 2, preceding text = yes (vv. 9, 10)
Day 4 (vv. 14-19) LTB statements = 1, preceding text = no
Day 5 (vv. 20-23) LTB statements = 1, preceding text = no
Day 6 (vv. 24-31) LTB statements = 2, preceding text = yes (vv. 24, 25)
Considering this, it is not so strange that day one comes out thus:
Day 1 (vv. 1-5) LTB statements = 1, preceding text = yes (vv. 1, 2)
Are there differences then in the text for the first day? Yes, but also for the sixth and final of the six days of creation. Is this a problem? No, for it is the nature of initiating and concluding elements in a series that the first and last items often contain unique elements. An example of this is the English sentence, in which the first letter is capitalized, and the whole sentence unit is concluded by a period or other stop mark. So there does not seem to be an issue based on including verses 1-5 in day one of the creation week. Furthermore, Exodus 20:11 includes “all that in them is” in the creation of earth in six literal days, and “all that in them is” includes water, which we saw discussed in Genesis 1:2. There is not a problem here.
As for the question of the scope of “heavens” in Genesis one and in Exodus 20, it was my point that we need not try to specify the scope intended by the inspired writer. The key issues in the creation/evolution debate are centered in earth and its creation and not the heavens.