The reformation for which David calls is thus not one which requires a mere shift
in doctrinal belief, something with which Evangelical leaders seem too often too easily satisfied; it also involves the transformation of a whole form of church life, one which he sees as starting in what happens in gathered worship on a Sunday and leads to a reorientation of thinking and living throughout the week.
So this garbage that somehow G - d is more interested
in your doctrinal beliefs than how you actually treat your fellow creation (animals included) is bunk.
Maybe there are some who believe that but it is not based
in their doctrinal beliefs.
Not exact matches
Unfortunately
in my case, I've probably gone to excess the other way... after 43 years of being (
in my view) threatened with hellfire for every cotton - picking thing (including the «sinfulness» of being born
in the first place because it's a well - known scriptural fact that every human is born sinful and separated from G - d, with a heart that does nothing but desire evil and no way to please G - d even when righteous), threatened with being «left behind»
in the rapture (should I fail on some
doctrinal (
belief) point at the crucial moment)... I refuse to consider ANY possibility of hell at all.
Add to that the variety of doctrines / Theologies within orthodox Christianity... with Consensus on a very small Core of Truths: God Is, We are not God, Jesus Christ is the Messiah and Salvation is Through Faith /
Belief in Him... there is much that lacks Consensus and there are mountains of arguments and counter-arguments for each
doctrinal / Theological position.
It wasn't the summer that brought an end to my doubt, but it was the summer I encountered a different Jesus, a Jesus who requires more from me than intellectual assent and emotional allegiance; a Jesus who associated with sinners and infuriated the religious; a Jesus who broke the rules and refused to cast the first stone; a Jesus who gravitated toward sick people and crazy people, homeless people and hopeless people; a Jesus who preferred story to exposition and metaphor to syllogism; a Jesus who answered questions with more questions, and demands for proof with demands for faith... a Jesus who healed each person differently and saved each person differently; a Jesus who had no list of
beliefs to check off, no
doctrinal statements to sign, no surefire way to tell who was «
in» and who was «out»; a Jesus who loved after being betrayed, healed after being hurt, and forgave while being nailed to a tree; a Jesus who asked his disciples to do the same...
[10] «ln our view there is an important difference between this factual information being imparted
in a descriptive way as part of a wide - ranging syllabus about different religions, and a curriculum which teaches a particular religion's
doctrinal beliefs as if they were objectively true.»
However, the error of
doctrinal uniformity continues to plague the church as some groups are more concerned about articulating the errors of one group or another than
in rejoicing with others that they share a
belief in the same Lord and Savior.
They since have found me on Facebook and still continue
in conversational pots
in the same assumed understanding of
doctrinal positional
belief.
But anathemas and condemnations are more than personal insults; they are assertions of a
doctrinal identity that marks one group off from another
in a division between right
belief and heresy.
Therefore, the gospel can not be summarized
in a
doctrinal statement because statements of
belief usually do not also contain statements of behavior, and even if they did, such «lists» soon become legalistic rules, which undermines the gospel even further.
Co., 1978); Thomas C. Campbell and Yoshio Fukuyama, The Fragmented Layman: An Empirical Study of Lay Attitudes (Philadelphia: Pilgrim Press, 1970); James D. Davidson, «Religious
Belief as an Independent Variable,» Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 11 (1972): 65 - 75; James D. Davidson, «Religious
Belief as a Dependent Variable,» Sociological Analysis 33 (1972): 81 - 94; James D. Davidson, «Patterns of
Belief at the Denominational and Congregational Levels,» Review of Religious Research 13 (1972): 197 - 205; David R. Gibbs, Samuel A. Miller, and James R. Wood, «
Doctrinal Orthodoxy, Salience and the Consequential Dimension,» Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 12 (1973): 33 - 52; William McKinney, and others, Census Data for Community Mission (New York: Board for Homeland Ministries, United Church of Christ, 1983), part of a denomination - wide study of census data relevant to each congregation
in the United Church of Christ; David O. Moberg, `' Theological Position and Institutional Characteristics of Protestant Congregations: An Explanatory Study,» Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 9 (1970): 53 - 58; Wade Clark Roof, Community and Commitment; Thomas Sweetser, The Catholic Parish: Shifting Membership
in a Changing Church (Chicago: Center for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1974).
Whitehead (1947 p. 96) surmised that if the leaders of any ecclesiastical organization at present existing were transported back to the sixteenth century, and stated their full
beliefs, historical and
doctrinal, either
in Geneva or
in Spain, then Calvin or the Inquisitors would have been profoundly shocked and would have acted according to their habits
in such cases.
The call is to affirm and reaffirm the
doctrinal and functional centrality of the biblical gospel —
doctrinal centrality
in belief and proclamation, and functional centrality
in life and ministry, implications of the gospel.
, Immediate experience rather than
doctrinal belief continues to be central among all the religious movements, including the Jesus movement, and
in the human potential movement as well.
Today I will address the
doctrinal and functional centrality of the biblical gospel —
doctrinal centrality
in belief and proclamation, and functional centrality
in life and ministry.
Revelation is not fundamentally a codified set of
beliefs written down
in Scripture or
doctrinal formulations.
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..
In our view there is an important difference between this factual information being imparted in a descriptive way as part of a wideranging syllabus about different religions, and a curriculum which teaches a particular religion's doctrinal beliefs as if they were objectively tru
In our view there is an important difference between this factual information being imparted
in a descriptive way as part of a wideranging syllabus about different religions, and a curriculum which teaches a particular religion's doctrinal beliefs as if they were objectively tru
in a descriptive way as part of a wideranging syllabus about different religions, and a curriculum which teaches a particular religion's
doctrinal beliefs as if they were objectively true.
Back cover:
In this examination of mainstream Christian parenting practices and the
doctrinal beliefs behind them, best - selling author, L.R.Knost, debunks common cultural and theological
beliefs about spanking, original sin, sin nature, submission, authority, obedience, breaking a child's will, and more, along with providing grace - filled, gentle solutions to behavior issues.
See also Chamberlain v Surrey School District No 36, [2002] 4 SCR 710 at para 130 [foretelling the
doctrinal challenge of adjudicating competing values: «
In an instance where
belief claims seem to conflict, there will be a need to strike a balance, either by defining the rights so as to avoid a conflict or within a s. 1 justification.»]