Last year in many of the churches of Canada, a new Curriculum was introduced to be used in the Sunday Schools. The New Sunday School guide was the result of many years of careful preparation, and over $1,000,000 invested by the United Church of Canada and Baptists organizations. The adoption of the new Curriculum has been a source of genuine concern for many in both the United Church of Canada and Baptist faiths. The reason for the alarm can best be illustrated by the following quotation taken from an article that appeared in the London Free Press in July, 1964: “Among other things the new curriculum questions the virgin birth of Christ and the literal interpretation of the resurrection. It says the first 11 chapters of the Bible are mythical and the Old Testament book of Isaiah was written not by one man but by two. It also denies that David killed Goliath and that Noah built an ark to save the human race from extinction by flood.”
Concerning the first 11 chapters of Genesis, the curriculum in its Teachers’ Guide for the Junior Department declares. We have learnt to regard the narrative of Genesis 1-11 as stories inspired by the Holy Spirit to become parables or myths which can express the basic assumption of biblical religion ” In the Senior Department the instruction to the teachers is even more explicit, there are two separate accounts of the creation given in the opening chapters of Genesis They are not contradictory but supplement one another” (p 5).
The first story was written by an author who lived relatively late in the history of Israel He believed in monotheism, in only one supreme God for the whole of the universe In the story he spoke of him simply as ‘God ‘ The second story belongs to an earlier age when men still believed that many gods existed The earlier writer believed that the God of Israel was infinitely greater than the gods of all other nations but he still believed that there could be other gods, and he used the personal name of God, Jehovah” (p 19).
In Genesis 5 2, we are told that ‘Adam’ is the name of both man and woman Obviously we are not dealing with individual persons, but with a parable that contains representations of figures ” (p 20).
The familiar flood story was well known throughout the ancient world It was a Babylonian flood story that first attracted the attention of George Smith to the Assyrian discoveries Again He brew authors had taken an ancient legend and adapted to their own particular moral and religious purposes.
“The legend may have had a solid foundation in fact” (p 23).
The views expressed above are becoming increasingly popular among Christian groups, and are generally endorsed by the major religious organizations In respect to the term ‘myths” as they appear in the curriculum, the position was de fended by the British Columbia Diocesan paper as “proper” Dr White stated, The Catholic publication said this is the common position of Catholic and Protestant biblical scholars.”
More recently, heresy charges against Bishop James A Pike of California were dismissed by the Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church Bishop Pike had been accused earlier of heresy because of his rejection of the Church’s doctrine of the Trinity, Incarnation and the Virgin birth of Christ The Bishop has been the subject of religious controversy for several years because of his critical views on Biblical events This recent refusal of the Church to countenance heresy charges against Pike is a further indication of the moral and spiritual decay of Christendom today The so called Rt Rev John E Hines, presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church maintained that Pike’s position on these principles is expressive of the Church s endeavour to modernize itself, and stated that the criticism levelled at the controversial figure is part of the hazard of the ministry. The controversy over Bishop Pike has drawn this house closer together in recognizing individual freedom and responsibility Though the committee investigating the charges against Bishop Pike spent nearly three days in reviewing them, their negative report and the accused’s replies took only 71/2 minutes!
This latter day wide spread deterioration of acceptance of the Scriptures is not surprising to those in the household of Faith Christadelphians have always been regarded (even by their adversaries) as fundamentalists, i.e possessing an unwaivering belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures, Biblical miracles—particularly the virgin birth and the physical resurrection of Christ We have always welcomed into fellowship those who, believing the principles of the Truth, have expressed a whole hearted acceptance of the Bible as the Word of God This position has not been better stated than by the apostle Paul, when in his noble defense of the Faith declared before Felix, But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, Believing All Things Which Are Written In The Law And The Prophets” (Acts 24 14) Paul taught that the “mystery of iniquity” was already at work in his day, and that its evil influence over mankind was to increase in power and dominance until the day of Christ Peter, likewise, warned that false teachers would rise from the very ranks of the believers who would bring in damnable heresies—even denying the Lord, that bought them.
It is not altogether unexpected, that those astray from the true teachings of the Bible should now have come to that position where they find it necessary to greatly modify their views, and in some cases, reject parts of the Holy Scriptures, in order that they may keep abreast of the times and modernize the Church It is, however, of grave concern to many in the Truth to hear the suggestion that the early chapters of Genesis may now be regarded as merely a Divinely inspired story in which certain principles are set forth Of grave concern—because the suggestion comes not from without, but from within I What a sad commentary in deed on the labours of those of yesterday who worked so diligently to bring the Truth in all its purity to this generation, all the while toiling under the delusion that the account in Genesis is to be received literally To think that the true meaning of Moses’ account had to await the arrival of the twentieth century to be revealed astounds and amazes us What is even more astounding is the fact that the New Testament writers obviously were denied this superior knowledge For, it is clear that they accepted the accounts as recorded by Moses in the early chapters of Genesis as literal historical happenings Can it be that we have fallen into the same error as the Church? In our attempts to “modernize” the Truth and “update” it, have we followed the same broad road of tolerance and laxity, on which we have accused the Church of travelling? Perhaps it is necessary for us to pause and look again at the Genesis account under the searchlight of the Scriptures themselves, and see if our position is sound!
As we pursue this study, we shall do so strictly from the Bible’s point of view, ie we shall rely completely upon internal evidence For example, in respect to the flood, we shall not call upon the testimony of the archaeologist (though we could very profitably do so), but rather confine our evidence to that which is supplied by the Bible itself Our endeavours should amply prove to us that neither we nor the Christadelphians of a generation ago have followed cunningly devised fables or myths.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One