My denomination is going through the process of revising the Statement of Faith. As with anything in the church, it's been a long and complicated process, with everyone putting their two cents in about the first and second drafts changes they've made thus far. Click here if you'd like to see more of this discussion happening online.
#1 Statement in the current SOF:
The Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, to be the inspired Word of God, without error in the original writings, the complete revelation of His will for the salvation of men and the Divine and final authority for Christian faith and life.
Here is the proposed revision:
1. God's gospel originate in and demonstrates the holy love of the eternal, triune God -
We believe in one God, Creator of all things, holy, infinitely perfect, and eternally existing in a loving unity of three uqually divine Persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This one God, all-knowing and all-powerful, has, in love and grace, purposed from eternity to redeem a people for Himself and to restore His fallen creation for His own glory.
Aside from the ridicules amount of appositives in that statement, I am very happy to see the first point of our SOF is now about God, not just the scriptures.
The term "Evangelical" means "based on the scriptures". We are a denomination that belive the Bible is the perfect Word of God and we teach as such. Obviously it's a very important part of who we are.
I attended a District meeting a while back after the second revision was released. It was a open forum for discussion for the changes... so I knew what I was potentially get myself into. It just so happens I sat next to a very angry, passionate and high-spirited pastor who had no problems communicating how much he hated the switch. "With God's Word we are nothing." to which I replied, "Without God, we are nothing."
For me, placing our statement about the triune God first was a logical and smart move on behalf of the committee. But for some reason, there were men in the room who felt moving it made our belief in the Word less than should be. Huh? If we took it out, sure. If the wording was altered to mean as such, absolutely. But just changing it from #1 to #2? I don't get this man's arguement.
But this whole SOF discussion doesn't even get really interesting until we discuss the changes to #11.
We believe - In the personal and premillennial and imminent coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and that this "Blessed Hope" has a vital bearing on the personal life and service of the believer. Yeah, I know.
But that's a post for another time.
What I'm listening to: Jake Coco. Mmmm...