Is It Time to Replace "We Believe?"
I ask the question for two reasons.
First, it’s about time.
Winebrenner published his “avowed principles of the Church of God in the United Sates" in the 1840s. His statement of our beliefs sufficed until the “Doctrinal Statement” was approved eighty years later, in 1925. Thirty four years after that, in 1959, the denomination updated its statement of faith in “Teachings and Practices of the Churches of God…” In 1983, only twenty fours years later, the General Conference published the first edition of “We Believe.”
It’s now twenty two years after the appearance of “We Believe.” At best, the writing of an updated statement of our beliefs would be authorized by the General Conference in 2007. If the next statement of our beliefs could be approved by the following session of General Conference, the statement would be completed by 2010. That would be twenty seven years after the first appearance of “We Believe.”
Do the math yourself. Thirty four years from the “Doctrinal Statement” to “Teachings and Practices.” Twenty four years from “Teachings and Practices” to “We Believe.” So, yeah, it is about time to get started.
Second, there’s an increasing need.
Those of you who attended IMPACT 2005 heard Reggie McNeal say that the church today is facing a world more like the world of the first century than the world of 1980. Think about that! The world in which we proclaim Jesus has changed that much in the last twenty five years.
If you haven’t read “We Believe” lately, check it out. While I enthusiastically embrace the belief it describes, it is a document of its time. It presents the CGGC to a modern world. And, as we are becoming increasingly aware, a new world with a new mindset and a new way of judging the relevance of Jesus and His message is emerging very rapidly.
Believe me—no pun intended—I’m not attacking what we believe. However, I’m asking what I consider to be a very important question: Is it time for us to restate our faith according to the questions raised by the emerging, postmodern mind?
---------------------------------------------
A point for discussion: If we produced a new statement of our faith, how would you make it different than the current document? What item(s) would you add? What, if anything, would you delete from the old statement?
posted by bill Sloat at 10:01 AM
5 Comments:
Bill asked,
I'm asking what I consider to be a very important question: Is it time for us to restate our faith according to the questions raised by the emerging, postmodern mind?
Man, good question. And I say, if you know how to do... go for it? As for me, as important as I think it is, I am stumped as to how one would go about restating it. And... I'm wondering if the average person really even cares. Not that it's not important, but I am just wondering if anyone is at all interested in what we believe. Which is sad. Don't you think most people are content to believe what "they" believe, and whatever the church believes... well, you know, "whatever"? Is there a way to make it something that people will see as applying to their lives? I don't know. Maybe it just needs a new cover and an updated font. :)
Dan,
I'm very concerned that, as far as I can see, few of us seem to care about truth. And, that scares me.
Now, I'm sure that many do care—a lot. The problem is that there’s no evidence of it. There’s no forum for us to express it. In the good old days, the CHURCH ADVOCATE was a weekly publication which included sermons and theological discussions. Now, it’s just a publication where we promote the church and its programs.
At one time there were separate courses at WTS on CGGC history and doctrine. Now, the seminary provides one 2 credit intensive. And, that’s the seminary’s prerogative. What concerns me is that our leadership is content with that.
One aspect of the Emerging Church movement that thrills me is that there is a concern for actual Christian truth, at least as far as we deconstruct the modern pollution of the Gospel.
A few months ago, I did devotions for our Renewal Commission meeting on Paul’s words to the Galatians,
“Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including myself, who preaches any other message than the one we told you about. Even if an angel comes from heaven and preaches any other message, let him be forever cursed.” (Galatians 1:8, NLT)
Stong words!
My point was that, according to the New Testament, we need to be uncompromising in seeking purity of doctrine. And, I’ll tell you honestly that my defense of my dissertation was less stressful than handling the questions and comments of the other Commission members on that day. We still joke about it.
TRUTH matters!
Does the average CGGC person care? Of course not!
Does the average CGGC pastor care? I don’t think so.
Does the New Testament teach that we should care AND be assertive in maintaining purity in the content of our faith? You bet!.
The point of my post is that it’s time to state our historic faith in a manner that engages the emerging culture.
Do we need to "update" We Believe? I think so. There is another issue that concerns me regarding this book. While reading and studying some of these points of doctrine, I found a couple of references that were used a bit out of context.
I am sure that everyone of us has at one time or another fallen into that trap - using a single verse/passage to support a point we were teaching, only to know that the entire text was not about our point, exactly. But something as bedrock as our official doctrinal paper should be free of this kind of thing.
The other issue that I have with any denominational doctrine is the importance placed on the historical views and opinions of the founders in proper perspectice to the Bible.
When our church recently worked on putting our core values onto paper, we looked at the CGGC Core Values. Did you know we had a core value list? I didn't until I saw the "membership curriculum".
One thing missing off this list, in my opinion, was the belief in the innerency and incorruptability of the Word of God. I am sure we all feel the same way about the Bible.
But we placed that issue as our number one core value - the Bible is the unchanging voice of God.
We might be a people about many things, but one thing we are is a people of God's Word.
Maybe this is a bit off track, but Bill did ask for our thoughts...
Bill,
I agree with you 100%. I sat with a group of high school kids last night. You know what they wanted to talk about? Exactly what you are saying. And they were talking about it BEFORE I walked up to them (I pastor a few of them).
I am often ashamed of myself as a church leader because I feel like we are failing the people who are the most hungry. And, I have to confess, some of it is to keep our jobs, or to keep certain people happy anyway.
Man, I am so glad Wayne inspired Brian to start this blog site. This has done more for me than any kind of "mentoring" program.
So, when are you going to begin rewriting "We Believe"? :)
Dan,
I think that our view of Scripture is, indeed, very important to our identity. I've done a bit of a study of the way our belief was expressed in Winebrenner's statement, in the 1925 Doctrinal Statment and in 'We Believe.' Each statement reflects its time. (I've not carefully read the position in 'Teachings and Practices' and I can seem to find my copy right now.)
But, with the pressure Emerging Christianity is putting on the Evanglicalism of the modern era, I think our view of Scripture is something we absolutely need to think through carefully and teach passionately.
Post a Comment
<< Home