Herbert Carl Leupold on the Historicity of the Creation account in Genesis:
We are utterly out of sympathy with such an attitude; for it does not conform to the facts of the case. Nothing in the book warrants such an approach. It is rather a straightforward, strictly historical account, rising, indeed, to heights of poetic beauty of expression in the Creation account, in the Flood story, in the record of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac, in Judah’s plea before Joseph, and the like. But the writer uses no more of figurative language than any gifted historian might, who merely adorns a strictly literal account with the ordinary run of current figures of speech, grammatical and rhetorical.
Leupold. Exposition of Genesis. 1942. Introduction
***
 |
| John 1:3 is also a burden for the delicate nerves of the Barth/Kirschbaum fans at Fuller and other Lutheran seminaries. |
GJ - I wonder if the 1650 views are connected to the LCMS abandoning the doctrine and calling its critics "slanderers" of the esteemed, apostate St. Louis Seminary?
I would rather they focused on Creation by the Word, because the same power which fashioned the universe in six 24-hour days also justifies those who believe in the Savior.
Crab-walking away from the Creation is simply another symptom of the dominant Universal Justification snake oil salesmen abandoning the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace.
