REPORT: TOL Statement of faith

[godrulz]

We share the same statement of faith with Denver Bible Church.

Zakath seems to think there is some unusual ideas beyond the creeds. I did not find the statement unorthodox.

 

[Frank Ernest]

Simile: a comparison using like or as. A thousand years in God's everlasting duration is the same amount of time as 1000 years earth time. This verse is not a literal proof text to say that creation occurred over 6000 years. In light of eternity, a thousand years is a blink for God. For a man, it is many lifetimes. God's perception is different since He has existed forever. It seems forever for us that He has not returned. For Him, it is a moment.

Ages of creation is problematic from a literal view of Genesis 1 (you need light, food, water, etc. quickly or things would die off; the Genesis chronology also contradicts evolutionary theory).

Peter says be not ignorant of a simile? :darwinsm:

Good one! :down:

 

[Frank Ernest]

In some ways yes and in other ways no.

Not even many of the characters in the Bible itself were aligned with God's will, what makes you think the early church fathers would be any different?

BINGO!

 

[Zakath]

We share the same statement of faith with Denver Bible Church.

No surprises there... :nono:

 

[Zakath]

... I did not find the statement unorthodox.

No surprises there either...

 

[Zakath]

The TOL statement does mention the procession of the Spirit.

Yes, but not in the sense and wording commonly understood in Western Christianity.

Which pet doctrines are you referring to?

Implied Biblical literalism, for one, placing them in the ranks of fundamentalism.

Particularly interesting is that they are so focused on confrontation, rebuking, and judgement that they feel the need to make such conduct an article of faith. :box:

I did not see Open Theism or Enyart ideas in the list.

Based on debates I've seen at denominational general conferences, such beliefs seem alienate many Christians. Open Theism has actually been called a heresy in some circles. Since DBC is a small group trying to make a name for itself, it's better for them that they don't mention such beliefs publicly.

 

[godrulz]

Peter says be not ignorant of a simile? :darwinsm:

Good one! :down:

No. He is reminding the readers that in light of eternity, a delay in the Second Coming is not a denial of its eventual fulfillment. A simile, allegory, parable, etc. can convey truth as much as a didactic passage. God is patient, and so must we be. Are you prepared to excise all figures of speech from the Bible to follow a wooden literalism into heresy? Are you prepared to put 1000 years into every mention of the word 'day' or 'day' into the verses about the millennium? Just as Proverbs 8 is a personification of wisdom (not Christological, didactic passage), so the words 'like and as' can trigger a simile for comparison. If you want to be literal, the Second Coming should take place exactly on a 1000 year reference. The Daniel Tribulation is 7000 years long instead of 7 years, etc. No good exegete makes a doctrine on time and eternity from this Petrine 'proof text'. What is your problem? Is sozo messing with you to be contrary over little things?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

No surprises there... :nono:

And therefore what?

Is it wrong for my website to share the statement of faith of the church I attend?

 

[Zakath]

And therefore what?

Is it wrong for my website to share the statement of faith of the church I attend?

I think linking your website's "theological views" so closely to that of any particular church suggests a level of control that you may or may not intend.

But "it's your party, you can cry if you want to..."

 

[Zakath]

Hey, I just received three negative reps in 10 minutes. All from this thread. I must have hit a nerve. :chuckle:

 

[Granite]

Hey, I just received three negative reps in 10 minutes. All from this thread. I must have hit a nerve. :chuckle:

:chuckle:

Doesn't take long, does it.

Nothing too surprising in the statement of faith, pretty much biz as usual.

P.S. Just repped ya. We do what we can!

 

[Zakath]

Make that 4 negatives and one positive. :thumb:

Nice to know I'm making a difference.

 

[Poly]

I think linking your website's "theological views" so closely to that of any particular church suggests a level of control that you may or may not intend.

But "it's your party, you can cry if you want to..."

Let me get this straight. He chooses to go to a church where he theologically agrees and then he's being controlled when he decides to tie in those views on his website? So what's he supposed to do, promote theological view that he doesn't agree with in order to show that he's not being controlled? :kookoo:

You're really graspin' there, Zakath.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Hey, I just received three negative reps in 10 minutes. All from this thread. I must have hit a nerve. :chuckle:

Maybe because you are an idiot?

Just a thought.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I think linking your website's "theological views" so closely to that of any particular church suggests a level of control that you may or may not intend.

Those ARE my theological views you knob!

Are you intentionally trying to be a brainless fool?

 

[Zakath]

Let me get this straight. He chooses to go to a church where he theologically agrees and then he's being controlled when he decides to tie in those views on his website? So what's he supposed to do, promote theological view that he doesn't agree with in order to show that he's not being controlled?

Perhaps just not make such a big thing out of the correspondence between the two sets of views...

 

[Zakath]

Those ARE my theological views you knob!

Knob?

:chuckle:

Are you intentionally trying to be a brainless fool?

Merely trying to keep you all company...

 

[Zakath]

Maybe because you are an idiot?

Just a thought.

Maybe because I ticked some people off by poking at their guru, St. Bob the Broadcaster.

That's alright, I can handle the truth. The issue is, can you folks do so? :think:

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Perhaps just not make such a big thing out of the correspondence between the two sets of views...

"Big thing"?????

I think that's the first time I have ever stated that the two statements are the same. And even then I don't think I made a "Big thing" out of it. But you really don't care about that do you?

You are more interested in being a flaming retard.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Maybe because I ticked some people off by poking at their guru, St. Bob the Broadcaster.

Or possibly because you are saying some incredibly stupid things on this thread.