# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1965_S296
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

A RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS RAISED BY MEMORIAL 331,
PROPOSITIONS 1 AND 2

Introduction

The following statement is presented as a Supple-
ment to the Progress Report on Memorials 338, 339, 340,
and 331, issued in 1964 by the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations. While this Supplement makes
reference to Memorial 331, particularly propositions 1
and 2, it does not offer specific answers to specific ques-
tions. The Commission believes that it is not possible
to give simple yes or no answers to the questions of
Memorial 331 as they are worded. The Commission calls
attention to the fact that comprehensive studies in the
area of Biblical interpretation, with special reference
to Genesis, are at present being carried on by the Col-
lege of Presidents, the two theological faculties, and
other committees and groups in addition to the Commis-
sion on Theology. It would seem to be the course of
wisdom to await the outcome of these studies.

However, while this Supplement does not provide
specific answers to specific questions, it does point to
certain fundamental presuppositions which must con-
trol the treatment and ultimate disposal of such prob-
lems in Biblical interpretation as may arise in the
church. The Commission recommends that the ques-
tions raised in Memorial 331, and all other questions as
well, be studied by the members of our church in the
Light of the approach to the Scriptures that is enunci-
ated in the Lutheran Confessions which we all sub-

scribe.

A. Statement of the Questions
(See Reports and Memorials, 1962, p. 161)

The pertinent portion of Memorial 331 reads as fol-

lows:

“Resolved that we earnestly petition Synod’s Cleve-
land Convention to declare, before the close of its ses-
sion, whether its pastors, teachers, and professors will
be permitted to teach the following ‘propositions’:

1. The six days of creation described in Genesis and
Exodus are not such normal periods of light and
darkness as we call ordinary or calendar days.

2. It is dangerous to insist that the Genesis account of
creation and the fall is literal, factual history, for
this is a stratagem which the Evil One sometimes
employs to lead us away from the real truth.”

B. Synodical Action (See Proceedings, 1962, p. 105)

Resolution 3-16, Section B reads as follows:

“Memorial 331 presents for doctrinal judgment a num-
ber of propositions related to the nature of the Word of
God and to the inspiration, inerrancy, interpretation, and
clarity of Scripture. As they stand without context, these
propositions do not express the consensus of our church
and should not be taught as truths. However, the effec-
tive teaching of theology, especially in training of min-
isters of the Word, may well require the frank examina-
tion, the critical evaluation, and the firm refutation of
some of the views reflected in these propositions.

Resolved, That the questions raised in Memorial No.
331 be referred to the Commission on Theology and

Church Relations, to pastoral conferences, and to con-
gregations for study; and be it further

Resolved, That the Commission be directed to prepare
a progress report within two years, and if necessary to
develop a statement on the doctrine of Scripture, with
consideration of its relation to the issues raised in Me-
morial No. 331; and be it finally

Resolved, That this progress report be distributed to
the church for study, and be presented to the next syn-
odical convention for approval.”

C. Action of the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations

Your Commission has issued a Progress Report on
Memorials 338, 339, 340, and 331. In that Report refer-
ences to Memorial 331 include the following:

“Propositions 1—5 . . . deal with the interpretation of
historical and ‘zoological or biological’ data in the Old
Testament. In addition to the basic principles given in
the report on Revelation, Inspiration, Inerrancy as guide-
lines for seeking answers to these questions, the Com-
mission has appointed a special committee which is
making a thorough study of the subject of inerrancy.
The Commission looks to this study to deal with the
above-noted propositions.

“In regard to Propositions 1 and 2 the Commission has
studied and discussed several essays and documents on
this subject by Old Testament scholars of our church.
A special committee of the Commission is preparing a
statement on creation for presentation to the Commission
at one of its next meetings.

“In addition, studies of the above subject are in
progress by the faculties of the two theological semi-
naries and also by the College of Presidents .. .

“The results of these studies will be transmitted to
the Synod as soon as possible.”

The Commission now offers the following supple-
mentary observations for the church’s reference and
guidance.

1. Proposition 1 together with its introductory clauses
asks in effect for a yes or no answer to the following
question: May the Synod’s pastors, teachers, and pro-
fessors be permitted to teach that the six days of crea-
tion described in Genesis and Exodus were not such
normal periods of light and darkness as we call ordinary
or calendar days?

2. Similarly, Proposition 2 asks in effect for a yes
or no answer to the following question: May the Synod’s
pastors, teachers, and professors be permitted to teach
that it is dangerous to insist that the Genesis account
of creation and the fall is literal, factual history, for this
is a stratagem that the Evil One sometimes employs to
lead us away from the real truth?

3. A simple yes or no answer, in the judgment of the
Commission, will not meet these concerns. However,
in dealing with these questions we remind ourselves that
our answer should be a Lutheran answer, that is, an
answer that rests on Holy Scripture and the Lutheran
Confessions. For the Holy Scriptures are “the only rule
and norm according to which all doctrines and teachers
alike must be appraised and judged” (Formula of Con-

296

A RR RR NE ae Nem ere ee