Let me clarify the question that Glenn Lucke has about the T4G statement for Greg or any other elder that wants to take a crack at an answer.  Glenn, of Common Grounds Online, is not arguing that a statement of faith cannot include second order issues.  He is arguing that in the T4G statement, complementarianism is made a first order issue.  In other words, if the denial of complementarianism is significant enough to damage one’s witness to the Gospel (as Article 16 of the T4G statement asserts) it must be a first-order and not a secondary issue.  Does that make sense?  So the question Glenn seems to be posing is, how is it that the women’s issue is a second-order issue and yet rises to the level of damaging one’s witness to the Gospel?

Posted in Church Life, Theology & Doctrine |