SpenerQuest actually did some research and linked a bunch of Arand's articles.
Here is one about Creation from the Concordia St. Louis blog.
The article is written consistently in the tone and manner of mainline and academic theologians, all post-Kantian rationalists. As Paul Holmer stated so clearly in his lectures - "In the
about mode."
Someone can write about any religion in the
about mode, without believing a word of that creed. That religion is an object of study, not something to address as something to believe or disbelieve. The result is often a superior and patronizing attitude.
Therefore, what we get from these people - who gobble up the estates of widows and orphans, charging enormous sums for their paltry abilities - is the Bible
containing God's Word. Which part? Just wait, they will announce which parts can be trusted.
They cite the speculations of other academic experts, a truly nifty system for enhancing and spreading apostasy. Arand announces grandly that
we need to look at other ancient creation accounts. Why?
This is a good sampling of his style.
For a good article on genealogies, see Andrew E. Steinmann, “Gaps in the Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11?,” Bibliotheca Sacra 174, no. 694 (April 2017): 141–158. Steinmann responds to those who maintain that there are no gaps in the genealogies that such views are not correct. Steinmann also cautions that this does not imply that the earth is millions or billions of years old. “Instead, it simply argues that the earth is older than the 6,000 years that can be obtained by a simple arithmetic calculation based on the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies” (158).
This statement may have lit up the two districts of the LCMS, who "slandered" the entire faculty (good for them) for questioning an article LCMS published. Once again, this shows LCMS pastors having spine when WELS-ELS clergy are gutless.
Arand has chosen to hide behind this obscure fellow, above, to promote his rationalistic views.
Implied, but never stated, is Arand's denial of the efficacy of the Word. John 1 clearly explains Genesis 1 as the Creating Word, the Logos, the Son of God creating every single thing in the universe, from animal and plant life to the stars and planets to the gold, silver, and jewels of the depths.
That denial is not his alone, but a feature of mainline anti-Biblical theology. The denial of the efficacy of the Word is even more important than rejection of inerrancy. Babtists and Pentecostals endorse inerrancy - at least they think they do, but they deny the efficacy of the Word in preaching, teaching, and the Sacraments.
The LCMS has fallen prey to Barthian/Kirschbaumian apostasy
and Enthusiasm by treating their Missouri traditions as canonical, but Biblical doctrines as adiaphora.
Thus Arand speaks for modern Missouri, which reveals so much about his superficial education - as David Scaer (another LCMS ThD) does.
Does the Bible judge all books, as Luther taught? Arand thinks otherwise - that any writing can judge the Bible.
I asked Robert Preus and John Slick Brenner the same question - "Since almost all of the clergy of your synod were trained in your synod, why do they despise and abandon Lutheran doctrine?" In separate locations, at different times, they said individually, "We must not have trained them right."
Consider that, parents and spouses, when looking at the tuition bill for one year of apostasy training.
