Sentences with phrase «doctrinal statements either»

Even more emphatically than the «normal» unanimous judgment, «By the Court» depersonalizes and thereby institutionalizes the Court's most important doctrinal statements.

Though no one would describe it this way, the Bible is treated as a jumbled up collection of doctrines and ethics which must be organized and categorized into neat and tidy doctrinal statements and codes of conduct.

Churches hold doctrinal statements of so called «beliefs» as key components of having faith in God... these include things like the bible is innerrant, God is a Trinity, Jesus is 1/2 man and 1/2 God, the virgin birth, etc..

The new ideas of the Reformation which initially reinvigorated the church, soon killed the church when people tried to codify, define, and defend all the new ideas with ever - lengthening doctrinal statements.

It calls us to recognize the limited nature of all Christian theology, all church structures, all theological imagery, all doctrinal statements.

There are, of course, numerous Scriptural passages and theological arguments that are used to defend such a use of doctrinal statements.

Doctrinal statements place people and boards in the position of judge over others.

if I do, I run the risk of making this chapter go too long, just like I did with the last one on doctrinal statements....

By the way, I am not into doctrinal statements either.

First, I could continue on to the next chapter in Close Your Church for Good., in which I will challenge the use of Doctrinal Statements.

One concept that really helps grasp the concept of living and ministering without doctrinal statements is idea of bounded and centered sets.

Since the early church had no set «canon of Scripture» (we'll deal with this later), no universally accepted doctrinal statements or creeds, no seminaries to teach «correct doctrine», and no Pope or Denominational leaders to decide between disagreeing factions, there was a lot of disagreement in the early church about what was truth and what was «heresy.»

These are the areas of preaching, doctrinal statements, prayer meetings, and evangelism.

All of these are valuable within the life of believers, but there are a few things that the church can do to help make preaching, doctrinal statements, prayer meetings, and evangelism more effective for the mission of the church.

Early CHA and WTS doctrinal statements were modeled on NAE and ETS counterparts.

Throughout the centuries religious bodies devoted much of their energy to hammering out doctrinal statements.

But there are several problems with the development of doctrinal statements as a way of protecting the truth.

Of course, no doctrinal statements are mentioned there, no rituals, no structures, but only caring for orphans and widows.

The church began to develop doctrinal statements in order to know who is «in» and who is «out.»

But I think there is feature of those earlier doctrinal statements that are absent from most creeds and confessions from today.

Most conservative theologies are cognitive - propositional; they claim that doctrinal statements directly or «literally» refer to reality.

Ironically, while these Creeds were intended to promote unity, they really just caused the church to become ever - more fractured and disunified, for as the complexity of doctrinal statements increased, so also did the charge of «heretic.»

Tim, I am already softening some of my stance about doctrinal statements, and future posts will reflect this stance.

My posts from today and the next few days will be about your first point, that doctrinal statements lead to judging others.

In this series on doctrinal statements, I will argue that something similar happens in many other areas of theology as well.

I feel in my heart what I want to say about doctrinal statements, and these posts are a weak attempt to get it out into words.

(FWIW, my big problem with the way we do doctrinal statements is not that we have them, but that we insist on 100 % subscription to them.

While the vast majority of these doctrinal statements were created primarily for the purpose of defining one group's distinctive beliefs without condemning those who believe differently, nearly every statement contains points that are considered «non-negotiable» and which will cause churches to separate from others who believe differently, and even condemn these other groups as «unsaved.»

And if this is where doctrinal statements had stopped, I would not be writing this chapter.

Instead of bringing about unity and love, doctrinal statements created division and strife instead.

I definitely think that a lot of Creeds and Doctrinal statements begin with Biblical teaching.

On the contrary, the meaning of doctrinal statements such as the creeds and other historical professions of belief, the circumstances which evoked them, and the philosophical presuppositions which helped to determine the character of their assertions are all matters of the greatest interest and importance.

Hmm... one of the problems I see with doctrinal statements — and the underlying need for them — is that they often are the result of disagreements over interpretation.

I have written about some of this in an earlier post: The History of Doctrinal Statements.

Throughout history, people disagree on what Scripture actually teaches, and so doctrinal statements were written to serve as a guide for the proper interpretation and understanding of Scripture.

From the simplicity of the Apostles» Creed spawned an ever - increasing number of doctrinal statements, with ever - increasing length and complexity.

Once we get outside of Scripture, we see other doctrinal statements develop rather quickly as well.

Early creeds are found in Scripture and in The Apostles» Creed, and while the goal of these doctrinal statements was unity, the result was division instead.

Future posts will argue your second point, that we still need some doctrinal statements, but for purposes other than condemning and judging others.

There are uses for doctrinal statements, and while one of the uses is to provide guidance and boundaries in our biblical interpretation, there are pitfalls to this approach, especially when we include some of the later doctrinal statements of church history.

What are your doctrinal statements around what is going wrong in the world?

I am not sure how long you have been reading this blog, but this post here is actually part of a series that has been going on for about three weeks so far, in which I look at at the use and abuse of doctrinal statements.

Yes, in some future posts, I will praise the doctrinal statements, and suggest some positive uses for them.

The chapter on doctrinal statements will make more sense when it is all put together, rather than cut up into pieces for blog posts.

This is really the main point of your post showing the problems with doctrinal statements.

I hope that if / when the book comes out, my point will be more clear — Doctrinal Statements are good when used in their proper place, but just as with anything, they can be very dangerous if used improperly.

I really appreciate you clarifying in this post your position on doctrinal statements.

In such a way, doctrinal statements have gutted the gospel of any real importance or significance in our lives.]

[So in general, doctrinal statements lead people to think that if they just believe the right things, and sign on the dotted line, then they can live any way they want.

If one believes all the right things, and can sign on the dotted line of the best doctrinal statements that the church has ever written, but their life is full of hatred, greed, and selfishness, I would argue that while they may have eternal life, and while they may believe some good truths from the gospel, they really have not understood the most essential parts of the gospel.