A Critique of the Framework Interpretation of the Creation Account (Part 2 Of 2) -- By: Robert V. McCabe

Journal: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal
Volume: DBSJ 11:1 (Fall 2006)
Article: A Critique of the Framework Interpretation of the Creation Account (Part 2 Of 2)
Author: Robert V. McCabe


A Critique of the Framework Interpretation
of the Creation Account (Part 2 Of 2)

Robert V. McCabe1

This article is the second of a two-part critique of the framework interpretation of the creation account.2 In essence, the framework interpretation argues that the creation “week” itself is a figure, a literary framework, designed to present God’s creative work in a topical, nonsequential manner, as opposed to a literal week comprised of sequential, literal days. As noted in the previous article, the framework interpretation is supported by four theses: the figurative nature of the creation account, the creation account controlled by ordinary providence, the unending nature of the seventh day, and the two-register cosmology. In the first article, I specifically demonstrated that the first thesis of the framework view, which argues for a topical arrangement of the “days” of the creation “week,” cannot be consistently supported with the overall exegetical details of Genesis 1:1–2:3. And it ultimately undermines the literary nature of the creation account as a genuine historical narrative serving as a prologue for the remainder of the historical narrative in Genesis. My purpose with this concluding article is to evaluate the remaining three theses of the framework interpretation.

The Creation Account Controlled By Ordinary Providence

According to some advocates of the framework position, Genesis 2:5 assumes that God used ordinary providence (God’s non-miraculous operations in sustaining and directing all of creation)3 to

govern the creation events recorded in Genesis 1. The chief advocate of this position is Meredith G. Kline.4 Not only is his interpretation based on this assumption about Genesis 2:5, but also an appeal to the analogy of Scripture.5

In addressing how these framework advocates interpret Genesis 2:5–7, two items need to be summarized: the “because it had not rained” interpretation of Genesis 2:5, 6 and how it relates to Genesis 2:5–7 in the context of Genesis 1...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()