Should the new CEO believe in the Bible as our "only infallible rule of faith and practice?" (See the 2013 Statement of Faith)
-----------------
If so, should the new CEO be accountable to actually LIVE the Bible as absolute authority or be permitted merely to affirm it as a to talk is to walk principle?
FYI, you may think that, for me, these are both rhetorical questions but, actually, they are not.
ReplyDeleteThe second question is. If we are going to require an extreme view of the authority of the Word, then, yes, the new CEO should be required to walk the Bible walk.
However, let me perhaps surprise you. I am not sure that we should hold on to the "only rule of faith and practice" notion.
That conviction was Winebrenner's. It was standard among Primitivists of the early nineteenth century but, beginning with the next generation, the theological tradition from which we come has placed less laser focus on the authority of the Word than the Winebrennerians did. They did this by elevating the role of the Holy Spirit and, even, a New Testament modeled community of believers.
Think about the Holiness and Pentecostal movements. Think about the Charismatic movement. Think Organic/Simple Church.
Perhaps, the greatest theological error of the Rosenberry era in the CGGC has been the insistence on paying even lip service to the absolute authority of the Word.
It may be that the best way to move forward after Ed is to examine with honesty just what we really do believe about authority among the people of God.