The second of seven articles of the statement opposes the claim that a consensus has been obtained in
fundamental points of the doctrine.
Not exact matches
While it is impossible in a scientific age to consider any literal acceptance
of the
doctrine of resurrection, it does
point even better than the
doctrine of immortality to some
of the
fundamentals of religious experience mentioned above.
Quite the contrary, its purpose is to argue that the
fundamental Thomist vision
of finite existence as
pointing to its self - sufficient cause is fully compatible with a
doctrine of God that can embody the real strengths
of the Thomist position without entailing its religiously and logically unsatisfactory conclusions.
In a poll taken by Christianity Today in 1957, for example, among members
of the Protestant clergy who chose to call themselves conservative or
fundamental, 48 % affirmed that belief in Scripture's inspiration also demanded a commitment to its inerrancy, while 52 % said they were either unsure
of the
doctrine of inerrancy or rejected it outright.1 Discussion within evangelicalism concerning the inspiration
of Scripture has usually focused on this
point: whether or not Scripture is inerrant.
The Christian
Doctrine of Deification Edward T. Jones From early Church Fathers... «this (deification) they (all early Church Fathers) regard as a
point beyond dispute, as one
of those
fundamentals which no one who calls himself a Christian dreams
of denying.»»
The
doctrine of sufficient depravity is one
of a thousand truths from Dallas that seem novel and yet, the more we reflect on them,
point to the most
fundamental tenets
of our faith.
Debating only finer
points of doctrine with colleagues who do not question
fundamental beliefs is not much
of a debate.
It is my impression that he was being very conscientious about doing his job, to the
point that he actually submitted the sacred tenets
of feminist law to
fundamental legal
doctrine.