Statement of faith

No different from most "Statements of Faith" around.

Their Statement of Faith #1 is too wordy, I think.

Their Statement of Faith # 2, is wrong. Death was not a threatened penalty for sin. It was a very definitely sure result of sin that since it was spoken by He who cannot lie, then you can take it to the bank.

God said to Adam "thou shalt surely die".

Surely is not a threat.

 

Theological disagreements aside, the statement of faith is too short and not thoruough enough. In my view, the WCF and LBCF represent statements of faith/creeds that are sufficient in their depth and breadth for a statement of faith.

 

I think it was intentionally short to allow for interdenominatioal fellowship.

 

Well, there you go. Compromise at its finest. lol

 

Tis something that a lot of today's fundamentalists are not aware of - the fundamentalist movement originally sought to fence out modernists, but left a wide gate for everyone else. Anyone was welcome as long as they attested to the "five fundamentals". They found out later that the gate was too wide for comfort. Now we have people like Tony Compolo calling themselves [edit: maybe he didn't call himself a fundy, but I know that Dan Rather did back in the 90's] "fundamental" because they attest to the five acid tests. But beyond those five, watch out.

But apparently Niagara was more concerned with dispensationalism than it was fundamentalism anyway.

 

And true interdenominational fellowship doesn't require compromise of beliefs.
I fellowship with Presbyterians and neither of us have to compromise what we believe for fellowship.

 

Then you would be a calvinst and Presbyterian and not a Baptist.

Infiltraitor alert!

 

Groaner alert !

 

Silly Sal . There have always been Calvinistic Baptists . Baptists of your theology would have been in the distinct minority in the USA from 1740-1850 for example .