2. Introduction
So the question has often been asked, in
discussions about fellowship matters: “How do we define first
principles?”
One answer is obvious: “Why, of course,
first principles are those Bible teachings listed in the Birmingham Amended
Statement of Faith.” (This should not imply that this present study has
nothing to say about the Birmingham Unamended Statement of Faith.
With the exception of BASF Clause XXIV (see chapter 14m), the two statements are
practically identical. So, virtually all of the following analysis will equally
apply to the BUSF.) However, the phrase “first principles” is used
throughout this work as it is commonly used by Christadelphians: to mean
fundamental, essential, or saving Bible Teaching. This answer may sound a bit
like: ‘How dare anyone even suggest that our venerated Statement of
Faith, which has been handed down to us by our forefathers, which has withstood
more than 100 years of assaults by the wicked, is not completely
satisfactory!’
But is this definition of first principles
Biblical, or merely traditional? To define “first principles”
Biblically, we must ask: “What makes some doctrines essential,
while others are not?” To answer this question is to attempt to
distinguish, on a Biblical basis, between:
- matters of exposition on which a difference of opinion may
— and should — be tolerated, and
- those
fundamentals of our faith where it is critical that there be a unity of
view.
It may well be that, in attempting to define
first principles, we confirm and validate the generally-accepted answer
(‘the BASF, of course!’). But it may also be that Bible-based
research may suggest reasonable improvements upon the BASF (and, to a similar
degree, upon the BUSF also).