1. Does your institution insist that all Scripture as originally given was without error in all of its assertions including where these touch upon matters pertinent to science, history and nature?
   [ ] Yes, we do insist [ ] No, we do not insist
2. Would you allow the following positions as consistent with Scripture or as a possible interpretation of Scripture for one of your teaching staff to hold, namely:
   1. That Noah’s Flood was not global in extent?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow
   2. That God used evolution to create, starting with a simple form of life or simple matter, over a succession of long ages in which some of these creatures suffered, died and shed blood long before there was a man on the Earth?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow
   3. That man’s physical body has a genetic continuity with animal ancestors?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow
   4. That Adam/Eve were not the literal historic father/mother of the whole human race but were merely representative of mankind?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow
   5. That human death/bloodshed did not only begin to be possible after one man’s sin but was possible at all times in which any humans existed?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow
   6. That the JEPD hypothesis on the authorship of the Pentateuch is definitely correct?
      [ ] Yes, we would allow [ ] No, we would not allow

Foundational Doctrines Questionnaire

The inspiration of Scripture

1. Do you hold and insist that the inspiration of Scripture means that the Biblical texts as originally written were free of any human influence (were in effect a word-for-word dictation from God)?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
2. Do you hold and insist that the Biblical texts as originally written, though in the style of the human author and influenced by his background, upbringing and experience, were nevertheless exactly what God intended to be communicated to man?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
3. Do you hold that the Biblical texts, as originally written, may have communicated human weaknesses, cultural influences and effects which were thus not all “inspired” in the sense of being what God really wanted to be written?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
4. Do you hold and insist that the Biblical texts as originally written, allowing for the proper and appropriate use of metaphor, poetic devices, parable, figures of speech, “language of appearance” and the like, were free of any error or falsehood, or anything which would inevitably mislead?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
5. Do you hold that the Bible as originally written may have been inclusive of some human error, owing to the more limited knowledge of people at the time it was written, or to the absorption of information from the myths and legends of surrounding cultures?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.

Genesis

1. Do you hold and insist that the entire human race of today is descended from one man and woman, Adam and Eve?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
2. Do you hold and insist that no other humans or human-like creatures (e.g. soulless men) were living at the time Adam and Eve were created?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
3. Do you hold and insist that Eve was really created directly from a part of Adam’s side?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
4. 1. Do you hold and insist that Adam’s body was created directly from the dust, in a miraculous fashion, not requiring a long timespan and with no intermediate stages—in other words, contrary to “natural law”?
      [ ] Yes
      [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
      [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
      [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
   2. Do you hold that there will be a literal, actual future bodily resurrection of believers from the dead, implying a miraculous reassembling or recreating of long-decayed, burnt or scattered components of their long-dead remains, not according to “natural law”?
      [ ] Yes
      [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
      [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
      [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
5. 1 Corinthians 15:20-22 appears to link the Resurrection from physical death of Jesus Christ with the entry of physical death brought in by Adam’s sin. Do you hold and insist that the physical death of mankind entered the world only after Adam sinned?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
6. Do you hold and insist that the entire world will be one day restored/renewed/restituted/recreated, howsoever that may occur, to a state in which there will be no more death, struggle and bloodshed?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
7. Do you hold that there were millions of years of death, struggle and bloodshed (as represented by the standard interpretation of dead creatures in fossil-bearing sedimentary layers around the globe) before man (including Adam) appeared on the Earth?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
8. Do you hold and insist that the Curse consequent to Adam’s sin affected not only man but the whole of the physical creation? (Romans 8)
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
9. Do you hold and insist that the waters of the Genesis Flood of Noah flooded the entire globe?
   [ ] Yes
   [ ] No, we generally/definitely hold otherwise
   [ ] We would generally hold this, but would not see it as binding on all of our staff and co-workers.
   [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
10. Would you regard it as mandatory for your staff and co-workers to be convinced that the original creation was “very good” with no death or struggle before Adam sinned? (That is, no overt bloodshed and violence among humans or animals such as lions hunting antelopes, for example—leaving out the question of bacteria and insects for the moment.)
    [ ] Yes
    [ ] No
11. If the answer to Q. 10 was “No”, is it acceptable for someone in your organization to hold/teach that the Fall of Adam could have been spiritual and not have affected the whole world?
    [ ] Yes, it is acceptable
    [ ] No, it is not acceptable
    [ ] Possibly acceptable
12. What is your overall position on the “days” in Genesis 1?
    [ ] Ordinary earth-rotation days, with an evening and a morning
    [ ] Long periods of time
    [ ] Unsure
    [ ] We accommodate a range of differing views on this among staff.
13. How do you accommodate the vast difference in the time since Creation, deduced from a straightforward reading of Scripture (apparently thousands of years, not billions, even if there are gaps in the genealogies) and the age of the Earth held by the majority today?
    [ ] Encourage skepticism about the conclusions of fallen mankind and teach a recent Creation
    [ ] Hold that the days could have been long ages
    [ ] Hold to a possible “gap” between the first two verses of Genesis
    [ ] Hold that it is an issue of secondary importance, with many different answers
    [ ] Hold that it is important, but has more than one answer which would be acceptable to us
14. If one of your staff or co-workers believed that it was possible that man’s physical body could have descended from animal ancestors, would this be a matter of concern for you?
    [ ] Yes
    [ ] No
    [ ] Possibly