.jpg)
The text is a critical commentary on a theological dispute within the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) regarding the historicity of the Genesis Creation account. The author argues that the CRC, influenced by three individuals (the "Trio"), has adopted a position contrary to traditional doctrine by allowing the teaching that Genesis I is not literally true history, effectively challenging God's authority.
Key points:
- Core Conflict: The central question is whether the Bible's Creation account is historically true or false.
- The "Trio": The author blames a physics professor from Calvin College, H. Van Till, and other officials for introducing and promoting the view that challenges the literal truth of Genesis I.
- Synod Rulings: A 1988 Synod ruled that a specific book supporting Van Till's views could be used for teaching and appointed a study committee to address the controversy.
- Author's Stance: The author vehemently disagrees with the CRC's direction, calling the new position a "satanic question & answer" and accusing the church of reducing God to a liar.
AI TRANSCRIPT
for contrary to The Bible's own theology, the Reformed faith, and the CRC's traditional doctrines. In its word for word encounter with God, and standing firm as the victor, the VT-CRC thereby elevated the CRC itself to the mightiest authority on Creation in the history of Christian churches. This newly-minted "mightiest church" is not measured by membership numbers but by its mighty self-claimed victory over the once-almighty God of Creation. Credit or discredit for planning the strategy that won this victory may be given to the three mighty mortals shown above.
HOW THE TRIO CAPTURED THE CRC!
By what ecclesiastical maneuvers did the TRIO capture control of the CRC? It was thru a series of official acts that started in the classroom of Calvin College's physics Prof. H. Van Till early in the 1980's. He was given official permission by Pres. Diekema and his docile Board of Trustees to teach that Genesis I was not true history. From then on, the CRC in a series of official acts by Trustees and Synod, shepherded by the powerful Clerk Hofman, challenged the authority of God and His Word The Bible as its authoritative reference for full truth on Creation.
The challenge centered on this question:
Is the Bible's Creation account historically true or false? Is God a liar?
This question is simply about God's unqualified authority to do whatever He wishes in whatever way He wishes to do it. The challenge is as old as man. It surfaced immediately after Creation when Satan hurled it at God thru the acquiesence of Adam and Eve, humanity's original parents. In that encounter God won and humanity lost.
God's book, The Bible, with God and Christ as its inhouse divine witnesses proclaims the Genesis I Creation is true history. The VT-CRC Book, with its in-house officials as its human witnesses, claims Genesis I is false. In plain words the now mighty CRC has reduced the pastalmighty God to the level of a liar on the historicity of the Bible's Creation account.
How was it possible for the once-almighty God to be defeated by the now-mighty CRC? Part of the answer lies in the prolific use by the TRIO of the:
SATANIC QUESTION & ANSWER
It is called the "Satanic Question & Answer" because it was invented and first used by Satan at the beginning of human history when he beguiled Adam & Eve into challenging the authority of God by eating the forbidden fruit. In that challenge God won and mankind lost. Since then the use of the Satanic Q & A has become endemic in hu-
to even there could be "light before lights." The net result/position of this alleged "nonsense" is that the CRC now permits teaching that God's Creation account is historically false; that God is no longer the Almighty God who can Create just the way he did it.
An ironic side effect of this result is that the TRIO who planned it are now also the tragic victims of their own plans. Namely, they have obviously pachyed/mesmerized themselves into actually believing that human "reason" is a better judge of ultimate truth than faith in the revelations of God's Word. They've become so high and mighty above God that they can't admit they made a mistake. In 1988 the infamous and wimpy Synod enacted these measures:
HOW THE TRIO CAPTURED THE CRC!
By what ecclesiastical maneuvers did the TRIO capture control of the CRC? It was thru a series of official acts that started in the classroom of Calvin College's physics Prof. H. Van Till early in the 1980's. He was given official permission by Pres. Diekema and his docile Board of Trustees to teach that Genesis I was not true history. From then on, the CRC in a series of official acts by Trustees and Synod, shepherded by the powerful Clerk Hofman, challenged the authority of God and His Word The Bible as its authoritative reference for full truth on Creation.
The challenge centered on this question:
Is the Bible's Creation account historically true or false? Is God a liar?
This question is simply about God's unqualified authority to do whatever He wishes in whatever way He wishes to do it. The challenge is as old as man. It surfaced immediately after Creation when Satan hurled it at God thru the acquiesence of Adam and Eve, humanity's original parents. In that encounter God won and humanity lost.
God's book, The Bible, with God and Christ as its inhouse divine witnesses proclaims the Genesis I Creation is true history. The VT-CRC Book, with its in-house officials as its human witnesses, claims Genesis I is false. In plain words the now mighty CRC has reduced the pastalmighty God to the level of a liar on the historicity of the Bible's Creation account.
How was it possible for the once-almighty God to be defeated by the now-mighty CRC? Part of the answer lies in the prolific use by the TRIO of the:
SATANIC QUESTION & ANSWER
It is called the "Satanic Question & Answer" because it was invented and first used by Satan at the beginning of human history when he beguiled Adam & Eve into challenging the authority of God by eating the forbidden fruit. In that challenge God won and mankind lost. Since then the use of the Satanic Q & A has become endemic in hu-
to even there could be "light before lights." The net result/position of this alleged "nonsense" is that the CRC now permits teaching that God's Creation account is historically false; that God is no longer the Almighty God who can Create just the way he did it.
An ironic side effect of this result is that the TRIO who planned it are now also the tragic victims of their own plans. Namely, they have obviously pachyed/mesmerized themselves into actually believing that human "reason" is a better judge of ultimate truth than faith in the revelations of God's Word. They've become so high and mighty above God that they can't admit they made a mistake. In 1988 the infamous and wimpy Synod enacted these measures:
- It ruled that the new VT-CRC Book The Fourth Day could be used to preach and teach its alleged truth that God's Creation was historically FALSE.
- It ruled that the Trustees of Calvin should appoint a Special Committee to resolve the question of whether the teachings of Prof. Van Till on Creation "adhere to the Word of God as interpreted by the Reformed Confessions." The Trustees recently reported that Van Till did indeed adhere to the Word of God and the Reformed Confessions.
I will not make a detailed comment on this report, it is too-sickening because: a) it was far more concerned with being "fair to Prof. Van Till" than to the truth of God's Word. b) The Trustees said they were confident Van Till "teaches only what is consistent with the Word of God and nothing that is contrary to the doctrinal positions of the CRC." This is absolutely and totally false as anyone can see from the foregoing record. Van Till in essence says the Bible's Creation is false history. Is that "consistent" with the "Word of God?" The Trustees betrayed their Trustee titles. Do they actually believe that the CRC membership is so "naive" (dumb) they cannot read what the VT-CRC Book says?
Now enters:
THE 3-YEAR STUDY COMMITTEE – CONFRONTATION WITH VAN TILL - 1988 Synod had some doubts about its first ruling, but it did not rescind the ruling. Instead it appointed a 3-year study Committee of nine CRC scholars composed of three representatives from each of the three areas of natural science, philosophy of science, and theology and assigned them a mandate under the title "Committee On Creation And Science." The Report of this Committee has been published, sent to all CRC Churches, and will be submitted next month (June) to the 1991 Synod. Everyone should read it because it:
USED DIVINE FAITH TO SHOOT THE CRC OUT OF THE SKY AND BACK TO EARTH
The lengthy discussion is not necessary for origin of man, would science be ff we accept as true that between species predestination is a distinct matter. For there has been, and is, within species, thorough breeding. I myself have done breeding on the mink farm for the purpose of innovations for better marketplace. But never this by changing a mink into a turkey, a dog into a cat.
For the above two reasons, man's evolution Science itself has not validated the Van Till viewpoint. Van Till is of course, not credible evidence. He is playing around with a throw-back to his youth. He will not take my challenge. Even Balaam had more sense, not Van Till.
In its "analysis" the Committee of 90 by saying
"It should be noted on the extent to which within the Reformed tradition symbolic terms are not meant to negate the acts of one kind of humanity from another promise suppositions of our theology. Rather, in the event of covenantal and mental.. - ===================================
jh.jpg)
The image displays a newspaper clipping containing an article that is critical of the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) leadership and its theological positions, specifically regarding the biblical account of creation.
- The article claims that three specific leaders, referred to as the "TRIO" (Calvin Professor H. Van Till, Calvin President Ole, and The CRC's Clerk Hofman), have effectively used the church to defeat God.
- It suggests that the CRC now permits the teaching that the biblical creation account is historically false.
- The author argues that these new positions are contrary to the Bible's theology, the Reformed faith, and the CRC's traditional doctrines.
- The author claims that the official CRC publication, The Banner, refused to print the article.
AI TRANSCRIPT
tian Reformed Church (CAC) have asked me to write another candid, educational honest summary or criticism of the medical of [unclear] herewith in the public press because the official publication of the CRC (The Banner) will not print it. Here it s
LLENGED GOD ON THE T
RESULT: THE CRC WON;
LLENGED GOD ON THE T
RESULT: THE CRC WON;
The owed the
CRC od's
Calvin Professor H. Van Till
Calvin President Ole [unclear]
The CRC's Clerk Holman
CRC od's
Calvin Professor H. Van Till
Calvin President Ole [unclear]
The CRC's Clerk Holman
These THREE MIGHTY MORTALS (I'll call them the TRIO) are the most visible CRC [unclear] to defeat the IMMORTAL GOD. Clerk [unclear]
But He is the closest thing you can can get to a pope; to him deferentially as "his Lordship."
But He is the closest thing you can can get to a pope; to him deferentially as "his Lordship."
All this, as all you CRC members know, is completely contrary to The Bible's own theology, the Reformed faith, and the CRC's traditional doctrines.
In its word for word encounter with God, and standing firm as the victor, the VT-CRC thereby elevated the CRC itself in the mightiest authority on Creation in the history of
because it is obviously "nonsense" to even imagine there could be "light before lights." The net result/position of this alleged "nonsense" is that the CRC now permits teaching that God's Creation account is historically false; that God is no longer the Almighty God who can Create just the way he did it. [unclear] of this result is that the TRIO win.
In its word for word encounter with God, and standing firm as the victor, the VT-CRC thereby elevated the CRC itself in the mightiest authority on Creation in the history of
because it is obviously "nonsense" to even imagine there could be "light before lights." The net result/position of this alleged "nonsense" is that the CRC now permits teaching that God's Creation account is historically false; that God is no longer the Almighty God who can Create just the way he did it. [unclear] of this result is that the TRIO win.
======================
.jpg)
The text is an opinion piece by a Calvin alumnus, Leo Peters, who criticizes Calvin College officials for allegedly omitting comparative data in a 1991 report and for teaching evolution over the biblical account of Creation.
- The author argues that "true scientists" acknowledge God's Creation as a working parameter for origins.
- He compares Calvin's 5.6% enrollment loss to other similar Christian colleges that saw increases, suggesting the college's stance on the Bible is the reason for the decline.
- The author urges the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) to make "fast, hard decisions" to restore Calvin's reputation as a "Bible-believing college".
- The piece concludes that teaching the "new bible as Creation truth" (referring to evolutionary science) should be eliminated.
AI Transcript
"...Many citing top scientists who have made substantial contributions in the modern science of organic and inorganic origins would dare say that the Bible's Creation is "nonsense." Instead, they only acknowledge that they can use a few working parameters to explain, for example, the extremely important origin of true, separate, and distinct species in biological nature, and DNA, the nucleic acid that is now a key compound in the science of genetics.
When speaking of track records, compare Darwin's "scientists" inconsistent, no-proof output with the following glossary of truly illustrious scientists who have solid, historically verifiable track-records in the science of origins:
Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Boyle, Dalton, Rutherford, Chadwick, Maxwell, Yukawa, Fermi, Einstein, Pauli, Durac, Gell-Mann, Salam, Weinberg, Glashow, Vanderm-eer-Rubia, Hawking, and Hubble. Even B.C. Plato & Aristotle discuss "the atom" as being the basic created substance of matter. And thus to know the atom is to know the universe; and to know the universe is to know the atom.
THE TRUE SCIENTISTS
Top scientists searching for origin humbly can't yet account for the first atoms in the Table, (hydrogen & helium - the first building blocks of matter) present at the "big bang" except that they must have been "created." This agrees with the Bible's Creation account "In the beginning God created..." but pseudo scientists call The Bible's Creation "nonsense." So, dear reader, make your choice. Seeking truth: God or Calvin's "scientists"?
In the 17th Century a great man made the choice and proclaimed it with this prayer:
"O, Our Lord. Great is His Power. And there is no end to his wisdom. Praise Him you heavens, praise Him sun and moon and you planets. For out of you, through Him and In Him are all all things, all perception, and every knowledge."
Who wrote this? No! It was Johannes Kepler, a great astronomer who discovered the laws that govern the motions of the planets.
I could go on and on about the genuine men of science who credit the Bible's acceptable account of organic, inorganic, & metaphysical origins. Now they simply discover the detailed forces and particles of the Bible's Creation - behind the words "In the beginning". These men were basically humble.
...are grossly derelict to God, the CRC, and their duty both as scientists and alleged Christians.
The "officials" were duty-bound to give a complete analysis in the 1991 "State Of The College" report to the Trustees and faculty on the causes for the decline in enrollment. The report compared Calvin with 88 other dis-similar colleges. A complete comparison should have compared Calvin with other:
Similar Church-Owned Colleges'
1990-1991 Changes in Enrollment
1990-1991 Changes in Enrollment
| Calvin lost 5.6% | Trinity - Increase 3.5% |
|---|---|
| Dordt - 0 | King's College - increase 10% |
| Hope - lost 2.4% | Redeemer - increase 40% |
This comparison makes Calvin's performance look sick. It's even worse than the above 5.6% because since its recent peak of about 4,500 to the present enrollment Calvin's loss has been 12%. Is that the reason they didn't include the above comparison in the State Of The College Report?
They fully realize the importance of a comparison sheet because they included the names of 88 dis-similar colleges that made Calvin's loss of enrollment look good. The above-mentioned Similar Church-owned Colleges should also have been included in the comparison. Why were they omitted? In the competitive business world such omissions would have subjected the guilty employees to instant dismissal.
Should Calvin's officials be given the same treatment for this dereliction of duty? No great sums of money have been lost due to this dereliction. But what about teachings that could send students to hell? Such teachings are of far greater importance than any amount of money. So, what should the CRC do about Calvin's new bible and the officials who teach it?
Except for Calvin, all the above-mentioned colleges teach that The Bible's Creation is true history. They are all Bible-believers; not Bible-busters. That may tell the CRC something about why Calvin's enrollment is rapidly going down, and what must be done to change the direction.
The CRC membership will have to make some fast, hard decisions if Calvin is to be restored to its former pristine, honest, credible, excellent reputation as a Bible-believing college. The most important decision will be to eliminate completely the teachings of the new bible as Creation truth. The "scientists" may speculate all they want, but there is no warrant for teaching their speculations as truth.
Leo Peters, Calvin Alumnus
Member of LaGrave Ave. CR.
Member of LaGrave Ave. CR.
========================================
