Let's see where we disagree with AIG

[Redneck Crow]

Something that I thought might be interesting--

I read the following on the AIG website--it's their stated theology:

THEOLOGY

1. The Godhead is triune: one God, three Persons—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
2. All mankind are sinners, inherently from Adam and individually (by choice) and are therefore subject to God’s wrath and condemnation.
3. Freedom from the penalty and power of sin is available to man only through the sacrificial death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, and His complete and bodily Resurrection from the dead.
4. The Holy Spirit enables the sinner to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.
5. The Holy Spirit lives and works in each believer to produce the fruits of righteousness.
6. Salvation is a gift received by faith alone in Christ alone and expressed in the individual’s repentance, recognition of the death of Christ as full payment for sin, and acceptance of the risen Christ as Saviour, Lord and God.
7. All things necessary for our salvation are either expressly set down in Scripture or may be deduced by good and necessary consequence from Scripture.
8. Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary.
9. Jesus Christ rose bodily from the dead, ascended to Heaven, and is currently seated at the right hand of God the Father, and shall return in person to this Earth as Judge of the living and the dead.
10. Satan is the personal spiritual adversary of both God and man.
11. Those who do not believe in Christ are subject to everlasting conscious punishment, but believers enjoy eternal life with God.
12. The only legitimate marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. God has commanded that no intimate sexual activity be engaged in outside of marriage.

link

I've bolded the parts I disagree with.

Here's why I disagree--

#2--I believe that the creation story in Genesis is an allegory. Whether or not there was a literal guy named Adam and he had a woman named Eve, the creation story tells us that from our very inception mankind rebelled against God.

#7--To me salvation by grace through faith is as clear as rat droppings in a sugar bowl if you read the N.T. This is kinda a minor nit-picky point with me, but in all fairness I want to lay out all differences I have with AIG, including the ones I feel are pretty minor.

The reason I've posted this thread is because a read through the AIG site has me kinda angry. They deny yet imply that a person's theology is going to be fouled up by not taking the creation account in Genesis literally as opposed to believing that it tells the truth employing a literary device.

So for the heck of it, let's see how much our belief that evolution occurred affects our theology and leads us to different conclusions than the ones they have reached. Where do you disagree with AIG?

Oh, I'm editing to add this link. This might function as a helpful cheat sheet for finding the flaws in our faith that suppodedly arise from being TEs. This comes from AIG.

 

[shernren]

Very telling that I have never seen reason to disagree with any of these points, even point 2, anywhere along my transition from YEC to TE.

 

[Melethiel]

I can't see any immediate point of disagreement, though I'm sure I could get nitpicky if I tried.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

and is currently seated at the right hand of God the Father,

it is an anthropomorphic metaphor.


The only legitimate marriage is the joining of one man and one woman. God has commanded that no intimate sexual activity be engaged in outside of marriage.

the fact that this is even in such a list reflects the current political situation not theology. i wonder what the word legitimate means in a theological context.

 

[jereth]

I read the following on the AIG website--it's their stated theology:

But what is truly disturbing is that they put the following before the "theology" section.

BASICS

1. The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority in everything it teaches.
2. The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.
3. The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the Earth and the universe.
4. The various original life forms (kinds), including mankind, were made by direct creative acts of God. The living descendants of any of the original kinds (apart from man) may represent more than one species today, reflecting the genetic potential within the original kind. Only limited biological changes (including mutational deterioration) have occurred naturally within each kind since Creation.
5. The great Flood of Genesis was an actual historic event, worldwide (global) in its extent and effect.
6. The special creation of Adam (the first man) and Eve (the first woman), and their subsequent fall into sin, is the basis for the necessity of salvation for mankind.
7. Death (both physical and spiritual) and bloodshed entered into this world subsequent to and as a direct consequence of man’s sin.

So here we have a bunch of assertions which are full of crap (I can't be bothered putting it any more politely), and which, as far as AiG is concerned, is worth putting ahead of their theological statement (which you quoted in the OP).

And here is their mission statement:

Mission

• We proclaim the absolute truth and authority of the Bible with boldness.
• We relate the relevance of a literal Genesis to the church and the world today with creativity.
• We obey God’s call to deliver the message of the Gospel, individually and collectively.

I really have trouble believing that AiG is a legitimate Christian organisation -- the individual people may be Christians, but
the organisation as a whole, with its aims and mission statement, is seriously flawed. I think AiG has caused untold damage to the Protestant church, and to the preaching of the gospel. I sincerely hope that their destructive work is brought to an end soon; the recent schism between AiG and CMI makes me hopeful.

 

[Redneck Crow]

I really have trouble believing that AiG is a legitimate Christian organisation -- the individual people may be Christians, but
the organisation as a whole, with its aims and mission statement, is seriously flawed. I think AiG has caused untold damage to the Protestant church, and to the preaching of the gospel. I sincerely hope that their destructive work is brought to an end soon; the recent schism between AiG and CMI makes me hopeful.

In my opinion, AiG's biggest danger lies in placing a stumbling block before the unsaved. They make it appear as if accepting their YEC beliefs is an integral part of the Christian faith.