I posted this in the SDA section but wanted to get a wider range of opinions. I was reading a piece by Robert M. Johnston in which he stated the following:
"The natural tendency officially to define doctrines more and more closely ought probably to be resisted. When the circles become too large, fission occurs--schism. When the rope is drawn too tightly, people cut the rope. Every time a doctrinal point is added to the required list, it is like adding a new station to a railroad--it is one more place for people to get off the train. Minimalism is cowardly, but maximalism is tyrannical. If anything, however, Adventism suffers from doctrinal inflation. "
What does he mean, is he saying we should move away from having so many doctrines and reduce our orthodoxy (right doctrine) and move more towards orthpraxy (right practice). But then you bump into the problem of salvation by works if you apply this thinking to its natural conclusion.
Peronsally my tendency is to have good guidelines of 'doctrine' and give a wide latitude to how they are implemented, but others would like to reduce 'doctrine' saying it is better to have less "statements of creed" and follow more strictly a regiman of "good works".
I think people would have a issue either way so the application of "less is better" to doctrine doesnt hold much appeal in my mind, but could there be more to this....
"The natural tendency officially to define doctrines more and more closely ought probably to be resisted. When the circles become too large, fission occurs--schism. When the rope is drawn too tightly, people cut the rope. Every time a doctrinal point is added to the required list, it is like adding a new station to a railroad--it is one more place for people to get off the train. Minimalism is cowardly, but maximalism is tyrannical. If anything, however, Adventism suffers from doctrinal inflation. "
What does he mean, is he saying we should move away from having so many doctrines and reduce our orthodoxy (right doctrine) and move more towards orthpraxy (right practice). But then you bump into the problem of salvation by works if you apply this thinking to its natural conclusion.
Peronsally my tendency is to have good guidelines of 'doctrine' and give a wide latitude to how they are implemented, but others would like to reduce 'doctrine' saying it is better to have less "statements of creed" and follow more strictly a regiman of "good works".
I think people would have a issue either way so the application of "less is better" to doctrine doesnt hold much appeal in my mind, but could there be more to this....
