An interesting case in point is the statement of faith of the Wisconsin
Evangelical Lutheran Synod. It rejects evolution "and all attempts to interpret the
scriptural account of Creation so as to harmonize it with such theories." WELS is
very conservative - one might fairly say rigid - but also generally careful & scholarly
in a 16th century way. They here make it very clear not only that Scripture must be
understood as true but that certain ways of interpreting it must be ruled out. It's
sort of an interesting variation on the old rabbinic idea of "building a fence around
the torah." Many other anti-evolutionists aren't as careful about this.
.......................................
> The Bible actually says, 'let the Land
> [subject] bring forth animals [object] after their kind' If anything this
> statement proclaims the reproductive capacities of land rather than that of
> animals.
>
> And interestingly, the Bible never actually says that God created
> 'instantly' either. That is our theology running amok. When the Bible says,
> God said,'Let there be light' and it was so. It doesn't say 'and it was so
> INSTANTLY'. Our theology adds the 'INSTANTLY' which then leads us to
> misread the 'after their kind' statements. There could have been lots of
> time between God's statement and the fulfillment. Or does our theology
> require that God be in a hurry?
OTOH I think it would be a mistake to say that Genesis 1 "teaches biological
evolution." The idea of matter "bringing forth" life which Glenn notes is one feature
which makes the account open to an evolutionary interpretation but it doesn't _demand_
such a reading.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/