I believe that by being part of the new WCRC, we are embarking on something good and powerful, which will bear fruit for the Kingdom and which will bless the member denominations, including the CRCNA.
From Ecumenical Relations Committee (ERC) to Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations Committee (EIRC)
Synod 2010 said that part of the responsibility of the Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations Committee (EIRC) is: Compiling resources for the Christian Reformed Church which will guide interfaith encounters. Do you have suggestions for the EIRC as it tries to fulfill this instruction from Synod?
What do you think makes for a good relationship between churches in other parts of the world and the CRC?
I'm wrestling with what the real implications of denominationalism ought to be.
In the relatively new push by the CRCNA to become a part of a much bigger organization (first WARC and REC, which folded into WCRC), I for one have a number of questions to which I lack answers.
How do we as Christians get involved in discussions where literalists and "genre-ists" have different views about Genesis 1-11? How do YEC and OEC people examine these issues together? Or must they simply build a big fence between them and turn their backs on one another?
There are many people working in science who do not hold to evolution, and yet are scientists, some with a PhD in science, or M.Sc. or BSc. Does an ecumenical attitude allow respect for these scientists, or is our ecumenical approach limited to "churchy" practices, or theological beliefs?
If someone is licensed and ordained an interfaith minister, whose ecclesiastical authority would they be responsible to?
A Muslim could engage a Christian or a Christian could engage a Muslim to become "dialogue partners" in order to eliminate prejudices, to come to understand the other, and possibly embrace their religion. But are the terms of the engagement as simple as meets the untrained eye? I would suggest absolutely not.
As we encounter Muslim believers it would be wise to understand the Islamic doctrine of al-walāʾ wa-l-barāʾ. We briefly examine four scenarios in how this doctrine works out in real life. Challenges to Muslims and Christians are detailed as well.
Rev. Mark Durie posted an explanation on Feb 21/2015 of the ISIS video that accompanied the slaughter of their Coptic victims.
Muslims were unashamed of telling the Christians exactly what Islam wants and what it thinks every human needs but were doing it in language that sounded Christian at first glance.
Let us examine Accad's attempt towards a "balanced approach" and look at what he calls his SEKAP scheme. We will look at the strengths and weaknesses of his overall approach as well as his overall recommendations.
The perennial lure of idolatry--not just measured by some kind of human-fabricated actual statue made of solid materials of wood, or stone, or kryptonite,--is that they are creations of the human imagination.
It would appear to be incumbent on the likes of Back to God Ministries, Home Missions, World Renew and World Missions to ask if their theologizing is driven more by the social sciences than by solid theological method. Here is where Eitel's simple schema is helpful.
William Kilpatrick, a Roman Catholic professor and author, states that Catholics could learn more about Islam from the Egyptian president al-Sisi, than from a crowd of Bishops pontificating about their positive views on this religion.