Has the Apologetic Demand Recently Increased?
October 2009 has started with a bang! On the 2nd, Rick Phillips wrote a very thoughtful critique of Tim Keller’s latest statements that seem to affirm both Willow Creek and the emerging churches. Phillips asks, What about gospel clarity? On the 7th, professor R. Scott Clark followed up on Phillips’ critique questioning the validity of Triperspectivalism (appealed to by Tim Keller but popularized, if not invented, by John Frame). Commenting on Triperspectivalism (or TPism as Clark has dubbed it) , Clark writes,
It’s something that puts humans in control of theology, piety, and practice in a way that tends to corrupt the Reformed theology, piety, and practice and it puts humans in control at the same time it seems to allow them to claim simply to be following the Word. This is a powerful elixir. This is how Keller is able to create an apparently plausible triad using the traditional Calvinist rubric of the three office of Christ: prophet, priest, and king.
On the 3rd, Darryl G. Hart posted the question, Do Tim Keller and Norman Shepherd Live in the Same Neighborhood? Hart raises concern of Keller’s apparent similarities with Norman Shepherd’s attempt to bring faith and works together. Hart is responding to an article by Keller on the gospel and the poor. Hart concludes,
Keller supplies unintended support because the effort to join faith and obedience in the individual seems inevitably to slide into linking word and deed in the church.
On the 9th, Derek Thomas commented on a recent press release that claimed Dutch professor, Ellen van Wolde, has proven the notion that God is the Creator is wrong. See: God is not the creator, claims academic.
Van Wolde claims that Genesis 1:1 should read “In the beginning God spatially separated the Heaven and the Earth,” meaning that He didn’t create everything out of nothing because water already existed!
Also on the 9th, launching from Thomas’ short post about van Wolde’s claim, Rick Phillips asks, “is this really much different from the tactics currently en vogue in our own ‘conservative’ Reformed circles for getting around the plain meaning and historical understanding of the creation account? ” Perhaps Phillips has Keller in mind since it is old news that Tim Keller sides with the Roman Catholics and denies the literal biblical creation account, opts for evolution and maintains that Genesis 1 is not literal but poetry (or a song, I think he said). Phillips asks, “Is declaring a new meaning for a basic Hebrew word like bara much different from declaring that Genesis 1 is poetry (despite the fact that it bears all the marks of historical narrative and virtually none of poetry)…?” Rick Phillips continues,
When I was in seminary, I learned from my professors that even though Moses believed the days of creation were normal week days (as evidenced by his application of Genesis 1’s chronology in the fourth commandment, Ex. 20:11), God was just using Moses’ primitive cosmology to teach us something different from what the text said. I was not surprised, therefore, when one of these professors recently appeared on the internet insisting that we need not maintain a historical Adam and Eve. The slippery slope is broad enough for us all, my friends, not just for known “liberals”.
Phillips is referring to Tremper Longman’s giddy (and unacceptable) admission which can be seen here.
Overall, I am glad to see some critical theological activity and questioning of the trajectory of contemporary theology and scholarship in general. If this continues it may cause another apologetics-ripple in the mainstream. What I hope comes out of this is that it goes beyond just questions and light commentary. I would like to see these guys (and the many others that are silent) start to give some real answers and not just ask the questions.
5 Comments, Comment or Ping
Frank!
Question, has anyone responded to Longman? I’m going to respond to a friend from Fuller who agree’s with him. It’s a thing we started talking about on Facebook. I’m looking to what Waltke has to say.
Oct 12th, 2009
Stephen Macasil
Frank!,
As in an “official” response? Not that I know of. Depending on the context of your discussion with your friend, you can make some arguments from these passages that affirm Adam as a literal person:
Gen 5:3 – When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
1 Chron. 1:1 – Adam, Seth, Enosh;
Luke 3:38 – the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
Rom. 5:12-21 (esp. 14) – Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
1 Cor. 15:22 – For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.
1 Tim. 2:13 – For Adam was formed first, then Eve;
Jude 14 – It was also about these that Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones,
Deut 32:8 literally says, “Sons of Adam” (although most translations – mankind) – When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
when he divided *mankind* (ESV) [when he divided the sons of Adam]
I hope this helps…
Oct 12th, 2009
Daniel Chew
Stephen:
I agree. It is way past time for some of these topics to be tackled and a stand to be taken, instead of merely leaving it in the air for discussion. Worse still, that pastors and other office bearers in denominations such as the PCA can believe in views that contradict their own confession of faith (WCF) on important issues such as the Creation account.
Oct 12th, 2009
Frank!
Thanks. I think that does help. He’s a student at Fuller and he’s bringing in some ANE stuff into the discussion. I might add, you can see it on my Facebook page. It happened yesterday morning.
Oct 13th, 2009
Stephen Macasil
I took a look at it. Looks like you have a good handle on it so far. I can’t help much on the ANE stuff other than what I find in my commentaries and lexicons. I’ll be keeping watch to see if the thread develops. I may even pop in and join!
Oct 13th, 2009
Reply to “Has the Apologetic Demand Recently Increased?”