I do believe that literal six day creation is the best, most sound way to affirm the special creation of Adam and Eve, but this, of course, does not mean that I believe that only a six day creationist can affirm the special, immediate creation of Adam from inanimate dust, and Eve from his rib. I do not.

I read the latest reply by my fellow minister, William Evans, with thankfulness. While we are certainly have differences remaining on areas relating to the issues of creation it seems we are perhaps more mutually minded in our concern than was apparent in debate to each other and others.

My concern, along with others who know me and some who don’t (paralleling, but opposite to Evans and his others), was that there was a full bore denigration of six day creation taking place, and along with that an argument that such hermeneutical and theological issues (in this case focused on Adam and Eve and their creation/origin) were not the purview of the courts of the church. As such from my side I sought to convey a robust defense of six day creation, and of the processes of church polity. I do believe that literal six day creation is the best, most sound way to affirm the special creation of Adam and Eve, but this, of course, does not mean that I believe that only a six day creationist can affirm the special, immediate creation of Adam from inanimate dust, and Eve from his rib. I do not.

Nor does it mean that I believe that a man who has served in a denomination which has either tacitly or formally had a history of allowing a fourfold view on days of creation ought to be defrocked for holding it. I do not. Wisdom and charity must be exercised in the life of the church, particularly in contentious areas. At the same time where a denomination, presbytery, or local congregation is committed to a six day creation view I believe it in error to seek to require or impose a fourfold view against conscience and commitment.

I am very thankful for those among my good friends who hold other views on the days, yet nonetheless are committed to the special creation of Adam and Eve apart from evolutionary origins. And I have good friends who are devoted, servant-hearted Christians who do not. I do not believe that such a stance is faithful to Scripture and a Reformed confessional theology, and believe it if were held and taught in the ministry of our ARP denomination it would be significantly problematic. I am glad that neither Bill nor I see this as a non-issue. Perhaps the Lord is already answering many prayers for another Psalm 133 ARP Synod as two brothers gain a better understanding of each other before meeting again face to face.

William VanDoodewaard is a minister in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and serves as associate professor of church history at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary.  He provided this article directly for The Aquila Report.