PR ResourcesReformed Encyclopaedia
SearchResourcesScriptureExploreAskLiveChurchesAboutContact
  1. Home
  2. Search

Type

Scripture

Publisher

Source

Year Range

–
PR Resources

A not-for-profit initiative making the theological riches of the Reformed faith freely available to the church worldwide.

Newsletter

Weekly digest of newly added resources

Navigate

SearchResourcesExploreAsk a QuestionAuthorsScripture Index

Community

Find a ChurchAboutContactCopyright NoticePrivacy PolicyTerms of ServiceFeature Requests(coming soon)RSS FeedSupport This Project

Related Sites

RFPAPRCACPRCSermonAudio

© 2026 PR Resources. A not-for-profit project. All content belongs to its respective authors and publishers.

Support us

Showing 10 results for “debunking the framework hypothesis”

RFPA BlogBlog PostBest

Debunking the Framework Hypothesis (5)

Debunking The Framework Hypothesis·2015-09-11

In light of these statements by Kline and Waltke, we should ask ourselves this question: If we did not live in our current age, would this type of statement have been made and, furthermore, would the Framework or any other reinterpretations of Genesis 1:1–2:3 even be valid options for evangelicals?

RFPA BlogBlog PostBest

Debunking the Framework Hypothesis (2)

Debunking The Framework Hypothesis·2015-08-20

Today we return to this article by Dr. Robert V. McCabe and Tim Chaffey. In this excerpt they explain one aspect of the Framework Hypothesis’ interpretation of Genesis 1 and refute it. The Two Triads of "Days" argument is a premise that all Framework advocates agree with. Framework supporters claim

RFPA BlogBlog PostBest

Debunking the Framework Hypothesis (4)

Debunking The Framework Hypothesis·2015-09-10

Today I share another excerpt from this article by Dr. Robert McCabe and Tim Chaffey which criticizes the Framework Hypothesis. In this excerpt the authors defend the traditional interpretation of Genesis 1 as actual history against an attack made by advocates of the Framework Hypothesis. One advoca

RFPA BlogBlog PostBest

Debunking the Framework Hypothesis (3)

Debunking The Framework Hypothesis·2015-08-21

Today is the 3rd installment of an excerpt from this article.  Today we consider the Framework Hypothesis’s argument that the 7th day of creation is a long period of time.  Please feel free to respond in the comment section below. The second argument supporting the Framework position is that the se

RFPA BlogBlog PostBest

The Framework Hypothesis Introduced (1)

Debunking The Framework Hypothesis·2015-08-18

This chapter focuses on evaluating three major arguments that Kline and other Framework advocates use to support their nonliteral interpretation of Genesis 1:1–2:3: Two Triads of "Days," The Unending Nature of the Seventh Day, and Ordinary Providence. These three arguments will be followed by an eva

CPRC PamphletsPamphletRelated

The Framework Hypothesis and Genesis 1

Herman Hanko

Prof. Herman C. Hanko Introduction The need to speak on the Framework Hypothesis bodes ill for the church. It is not an error that is placed on church’s agenda by the world. It originated and has its greatest influence in conservative Reformed and Presbyterian denominations and seminaries. Though

CPRC PamphletsPamphletRelated

Genesis 1-11: Myth or History?

David Engelsma

The framework hypothesis denies that Genesis 1:1-2:3 makes known what actually took place in the beginning. Rather, the very human, but inspired author told a story whose point is that God created the world in some unknown way and over the span of unknown time. (In fact, the defenders of the framewo

Protestant Reformed Theological JournalJournal ArticleRelated

PRTJ Vol. 34, No. 1 (November 2000)

2000-11-01

admitted that the framework-hypothesis opens up the church to Jan Lever's teachings of man's biological descent from the beasts. 1 :- Fundamental to the histori.city of Genesis I-II is the reality of the days of Genesis I: 1-2 :3, eac~ consisting of one evening and one morn- ing: the factuality of t

Standard BearerJournal ArticleRelated

The Creation Record Literal (3)

H C Hoeksema·1988-09-01

At the conclusion of my previous editorial on this subject, I referred to the fact that there are those who have rejected the period theory because of its obvious exegetical flaws and because it does not really help them in getting rid of Scripture's very definite and specific timeframe in connectio

Standard BearerJournal ArticleRelated

How Many Interpretations of Genesis Should a Denomination Allow?

Clayton Spronk·2010-04-15

However, when responding to more questions about creation in the January 13, 2010 issue of Christian Renewal, Rev. Barnes indicates that it is not so easy for him to respect the views of those who interpretGenesis 1 and Genesis 2 figuratively (especially the views of those who hold to the Framework