tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916923606431957884.post2013526318373143687..comments2024-01-01T13:55:05.686-08:00Comments on RC Sproul Jr: Ask RC: Can a person be evangelical and not believe in hell?RC Sproul Jr.http://www.blogger.com/profile/10021618819499117817noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916923606431957884.post-81144100722737694732011-03-30T10:01:05.479-07:002011-03-30T10:01:05.479-07:00...but back to the question in the title of your p......but back to the question in the title of your post, it sort of begs the question as to finding a "creed" for evangelicalism or even protestantism. Historically, creeds have been used to codify the beliefs of a group in a nutshell. Enter the Apostles Creed, which actually developed before and also alongside the New Testament. It was used verbally as an affirmation at the baptism of new converts as they were received into the church (many of today's modern churches have separated baptism from entry into "the family", but that is a very modern tradition indeed, unknown in the early church. In the early church, to be a "baptized Christian" was virtually redundant. To be a Christian implied that one had also been baptized upon entry - thus, "the new birth". Again, modern churches have almost completely changed the meaning, intent, and efficaciousness of this great sacrament given to us by our Lord.<br /><br />So, "can a person be evangelical and not believe in hell?" I would say, "no." They could be something else, but apparently not an evangelical...although, if there is no evangelical creed, i suppose the tenets of that sect would be up for grabs, eh? Who would have the authority to write such a creed anyway????tadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09224925631607521371noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8916923606431957884.post-30215373216706589232011-03-30T09:55:48.426-07:002011-03-30T09:55:48.426-07:00Interesting...your continued use of "Romanist...Interesting...your continued use of "Romanists", "Rome", and even "Orthodoxy" in this post and others. I rarely see you write about "Catholic". I find it terribly revealing that "catholic" means "universal" (take a peek at the blessed early church), "orthodox" means "right teaching", and "protest-ant" means, "one who stands against."<br /><br />i ask you: where in scripture are we told to "stand against" those in authority of us (whether ecclesial or civil?). Peter even tells us to "honor the emperor", which doesn't go over too well in American Protestant circles these days. What does it say about our revolt against the King of England 235 years ago?<br /><br />do we really want to be known for what we are against, or do we want to be part of single universal right-teaching Body of Christ?<br /><br />you might do well to reconsider using the terms "Romanist" and "Rome" as they don't really say much at all, and tend to only foster anti-catholic sentiment (but maybe that is your aim anyway?)<br /><br />by the way, "authority" might be a good topic here to tackle. by what authority do you preach and lead? were you ordained by another via apostolic succession as was the custom in the book of the Acts of the Apostles?tadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09224925631607521371noreply@blogger.com