Monday, February 13, 2006

The 2nd proposed Revision of the EFCA statement

Any thoughts?

1 comment:

Dan said...

I read it over lunch today, and I like it a lot. The changes that they are proposing make a lot of sense to me. For one, I appreciate the emphasis on placing the emphasis on the narrative structure of the Bible, as demonstrated by this quote, "We have chosen to begin with a statement about God and then a statement about Scripture, reversing the existing order. Both orders are represented in historic doctrinal statements, but this order seemed more appropriate in this statement because of its narrative framework. The Biblical gospel is a story revealed in history—the true story of creation, fall, redemption, and consummation, with its center found in Jesus Christ. And that Biblical story begins with God (Gen. 1:1) and then tells us that He speaks. The gospel originates in the being and character of God, and God's revelation of Himself within His creation is itself a part of that story. In effect, we have placed statements of systematic theology in a framework of biblical theology, providing a narrative for that theology." (Emphasis added)

And when speaking of Adam and Eve it says, "The mention of these two by name also supports the notion that the gospel is not a set of abstract philosophical propositions but a work of God in history. This creative act of God and the tragic events that follow set the stage for the unfolding story of God's saving work and points to the significance of Christ as the "last Adam"." AMEN!

They also manage to insert a clear statement in favor of helping the poor and the opressed and they relegate the millenial controversy to a second teir issue where it belongs. In my opinion (based on a cursory reading), there's not much to complain about. This is a statement of faith I can get on board with. (I'm not missing something, am I?)