PDA

View Full Version : Discussion Denominations on BibleForums?



Pages : [1] 2

Buzzword
Oct 6th 2008, 04:38 PM
Having recently become an official member of the Church of the Nazarene, after declaring myself non-denominational for several years, my curiosity has peaked on this subject.

What all denominations are represented here on BibleForums?

Apologies if I left anyone out.


EDIT:
Forgot that there's a POLLS forum. Mods please move. :P

Sold Out
Oct 6th 2008, 04:53 PM
I guess to be grammatically correct, I do not represent a denomination, since I am non-denominational!

Theophilus
Oct 6th 2008, 05:28 PM
Nazarene, baby. :)

Congrats to the Church of the Nazarene...in two days, celebrating their 100th year as a denomination. :pp

VerticalReality
Oct 6th 2008, 05:42 PM
I'm of the non-denominational denomination. ;)

sunsetssplendor
Oct 6th 2008, 05:58 PM
Non-denominational after being a Catholic for over 20 something years.

sunney4
Oct 6th 2008, 05:59 PM
im non denominational but i work at a methodist church

Theophilus
Oct 6th 2008, 06:01 PM
im non denominational but i work at a methodist church
Then you're a pseudo-Methodist.;)

crawfish
Oct 6th 2008, 06:08 PM
I'm a church of Christ guy, but to be honest my particular congregation has as much in common with non-denominational groups as it does with the mainstream CofC.

9Marksfan
Oct 6th 2008, 06:11 PM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)

Theophilus
Oct 6th 2008, 06:12 PM
I'm a church of Christ guy, but to be honest my particular congregation has as much in common with non-denominational groups as it does with the mainstream CofC.
As an aside, you have a cool avatar...

Theophilus
Oct 6th 2008, 06:13 PM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)

Thanks a lot! ;):lol:

SW28fan
Oct 6th 2008, 06:15 PM
Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) the conservative Presbies

ServantofTruth
Oct 6th 2008, 06:22 PM
Following Jesus Christ each day and praying for a home. SofTy.

crawfish
Oct 6th 2008, 06:51 PM
As an aside, you have a cool avatar...

Thanks! I like to stir the pot. ;)

Theophilus
Oct 6th 2008, 06:54 PM
Thanks! I like to stir the pot. ;)
Ha! Oh, boy...another laugh today (I've had several, due to this forum).

Thanks.:)

teddyv
Oct 6th 2008, 08:37 PM
Christian Reformed Church.

mcgyver
Oct 6th 2008, 08:59 PM
I'm one of those (as The Parson would say) hard-headed baptists :P

amazzin
Oct 6th 2008, 09:03 PM
Having recently become an official member of the Church of the Nazarene, after declaring myself non-denominational for several years, my curiosity has peaked on this subject.

What all denominations are represented here on BibleForums?

Apologies if I left anyone out.


EDIT:
Forgot that there's a POLLS forum. Mods please move. :P

What purpose does this serve? How does this promote unity? What does denominational alliance have anything to do with our relationship with God?

crawfish
Oct 6th 2008, 10:32 PM
What purpose does this serve? How does this promote unity? What does denominational alliance have anything to do with our relationship with God?

Nothing, I would hope, but it is interesting to know where other posters like to call home.

I think it's a good thing to see that people from other denominations have so much in common with us. For me, it helps break down the differences rather than solidify them.

CoffeeCat
Oct 6th 2008, 10:57 PM
Evangelical Anglican. :) I also feel quite welcome in other churches.

markedward
Oct 6th 2008, 11:07 PM
Non-denominational.

I hang out at an Assemblies of God (Pentecostal) church now and then.

Buzzword
Oct 6th 2008, 11:20 PM
Nothing, I would hope, but it is interesting to know where other posters like to call home.

I think it's a good thing to see that people from other denominations have so much in common with us. For me, it helps break down the differences rather than solidify them.

Agreed.
Most of what divides denominations are doctrinal or dogmatic details. :D

Laish
Oct 6th 2008, 11:34 PM
Christian reformed Church
Here
Your brother in Christ
Bill

Richard H
Oct 6th 2008, 11:36 PM
Spirit led Sabbath keeping Christian without denomination. J

maasive10
Oct 7th 2008, 03:46 AM
I attend a Free Reformed Church

Rufus_1611
Oct 7th 2008, 03:59 AM
Independent Fundamental Baptist here

aka

Not a fence sitting non-denominationalist ;)

Izdaari
Oct 7th 2008, 08:04 AM
My church is Assemblies of God (the largest Pentecostal denomination)... but by doctrine and sympathetic attachment, I could just as well be charismatic Anglican, and probably would be if there was a church like that near me.

9Marksfan
Oct 7th 2008, 10:59 AM
Thanks a lot! ;):lol:

Don't blame me! I didn't say I held to it!

Studyin'2Show
Oct 7th 2008, 11:22 AM
Thanks! I like to stir the pot. ;)You sure do! :lol:

I'm not anything, I guess. When I first got saved I went to a Church of God, then served in a Southern Baptist church for 7 years, attended a Messianic synagogue, now we have a home fellowship, and my hubby volunteers with the youth department at a Calvary Chapel. :D We'll pretty much go wherever we're led. ;)

Whispering Grace
Oct 7th 2008, 11:50 AM
Independent Pentecostal Holiness here.

Dragonfighter1
Oct 7th 2008, 11:54 AM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)
SO thats who we should blame!:rofl:

Dragonfighter1
Oct 7th 2008, 12:02 PM
Truth be told, I am non denominational because I can't get around Paul's lament in Corinthians: are we of peter, are we of Paul, are we of Apollos? Is Christ divided? It would be great to be denominational! But if Paul were alive today I think the verse would be edited to say: are we of Luther, are we of john Wesley (Methodist), are we of John the baptist, is Christ divided?

The Devils play book has a very large chapter titled :D Divide and Conquer".

C.S.Lewis said something about.."the vast middle ground" this is where we all need to be. Not separating ourselves by name.
Lets all kiss and make up as mom would say.:kiss:

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 12:41 PM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)
Ah! The Plymouth Brethren. Goodie for Darby. <sigh> :rolleyes:

I still love ya. :hug:

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 12:55 PM
<snip>... Divide and Conquer".

C.S.Lewis said something about.."the vast middle ground" this is where we all need to be. Not separating ourselves by name.
Lets all kiss and make up as mom would say.:kiss:

Other than some good natured ribbing. :rolleyes:
I haven't seen any derision or camping for battle on this thread.
Only unity in the presence of diversity.
'Many individuals with one lord whom we follow.
I sort of like this thread, because it gives us a little better insight behind the posts.
A context for the text.

Amid the entertainmant of doctrinal debates, I've seen more true unity in Christ and fruit of the Spirit here in these forums - than in many churches - no matter the denomination.

Richard

Besides: C.S. Lewis is just too laborious for my tastes. Heehee
'Seems like it took me forever to read The Screwtape letters and Mere Christianity, although I DID enjoy them. LW&W and Chronicles of Narnia were pretty good too.

SpokenFor
Oct 7th 2008, 01:03 PM
I grew up Methodist, Congregational, Friends and charismatic.

A few years ago I married a Lutheran and my last official church "membership" is Lutheran.

When we lived in NYC I attended a Korean Presbyterian Church (KPCNY). Now I attend a non-denominational church, but am looking to leave due to their Dominionist leanings. I'm going to check out an Evangelical Free church this coming Sunday. Then I may try an Orthodox Presbyterian, although they are a little farther away than what I want to drive. I'm finding that my beliefs lately are leaning more towards the Reformed/Puritans viewpoint, though I'm not completely a Calvinist.

So...I voted "other!"

nebula_omega
Oct 7th 2008, 01:20 PM
:wave: Southern Baptist here, but I grew up as a Methodist. I find it amusing... I hated S.B.'s with a passion when I was in high school (long story) and now I am one. How's that for ironic?

Richard H
Oct 7th 2008, 02:00 PM
The NDs are far in the lead, while the Baptists and Others battle for second.
The Catholics and Trinitarians are still at the gate.

Steve M
Oct 7th 2008, 02:05 PM
I'm a church of Christ guy, but to be honest my particular congregation has as much in common with non-denominational groups as it does with the mainstream CofC.
Ditto that. Although probably not in the same ways. (heh...)

If you know what I mean... and I think you know what I mean... although if you know what I mean I don't see why I felt the need to say that.

Whispering Grace
Oct 7th 2008, 03:33 PM
The NDs are far in the lead, while the Baptists and Others battle for second.
The Catholics and Trinitarians are still at the gate.

As far as I know, I am the lone Pentecostal Holiness person on this board.

If there is another one, I probably know him/her in real life or know someone who does! :lol:

crawfish
Oct 7th 2008, 03:53 PM
Ditto that. Although probably not in the same ways. (heh...)

If you know what I mean... and I think you know what I mean... although if you know what I mean I don't see why I felt the need to say that.

Now I'm confused. :)

Steve M
Oct 7th 2008, 03:54 PM
Now I'm confused. :)
I guess you don't know what I mean either....

tt1106
Oct 7th 2008, 04:59 PM
I frequent several churches. I believe I am part of the body of Christ. I don't believe in any one denomination.

Ninna
Oct 7th 2008, 05:38 PM
I'm one of those (as The Parson would say) hard-headed baptists :P

So am I .

Steve M
Oct 7th 2008, 06:05 PM
Ditto that. Although probably not in the same ways. (heh...)

If you know what I mean... and I think you know what I mean... although if you know what I mean I don't see why I felt the need to say that.


Now I'm confused. :)

Anyhow, what I meant is that although I eschew the excesses of the conservative wing of the CoC, I'm also at heavy odds with the liberal wing of the CoC. I stand in the middle and say that Christians fighting in carnal war is a sin and women standing in the pulpit is a sin.

So, I certainly understand branching away from a heavy-duty 'instrumental music' stance... but I'm probably not 100% eye to eye with you either. :cool:

crawfish
Oct 7th 2008, 06:15 PM
Anyhow, what I meant is that although I eschew the excesses of the conservative wing of the CoC, I'm also at heavy odds with the liberal wing of the CoC. I stand in the middle and say that Christians fighting in carnal war is a sin and women standing in the pulpit is a sin.

So, I certainly understand branching away from a heavy-duty 'instrumental music' stance... but I'm probably not 100% eye to eye with you either. :cool:

Fair enough. I'm really not that liberal doctrinally - I am just more open to possibilities, not afraid to study a subject with the mindset that I may be wrong. And that has tended to change me - some CofC doctrines I hold to more strongly (baptism, bible study, personal responsibility) and some have changed dramatically (grace, IM, civic responsibility).

The thing I stand most differently is the view of what makes a brother or sister in Christ. I used to question my denominational friends in this; now I know that despite our differences, we are still all one in Christ and that should be stressed above all else.

9Marksfan
Oct 7th 2008, 07:46 PM
Ah! The Plymouth Brethren. Goodie for Darby. <sigh> :rolleyes:

I still love ya. :hug:

Yes - should make it clear that the Christian Brethren was the name they preferred to Plymouth Brethren - Darby was identified with those who became the "Exclusives" and the Christian Brethren are generally known as "Open" now (they split after a few years). In effect, George Mueller was their leader (and I'm sure everyone has heard of HIM!) - there have been others in more recent years who have been well-known too - Jim Elliot and his colleagues were all Open Brethren - is there a more quoteable quote over the past 60 years than this one of his?

He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep. in order to gain what he cannot lose.

His widow, Elisabeth, has of course written many modern classics eg Shadow of the Almighty, Through Gates of Splendour etc

9Marksfan
Oct 7th 2008, 07:51 PM
Amid the entertainmant of doctrinal debates, I've seen more true unity in Christ and fruit of the Spirit here in these forums - than in many churches - no matter the denomination.

Richard

I agree - and that, I believe, is one of the great strengths of these Forums (as a Mod, can I say that?!?!) - well, I'll just agree with you, bro'! But it's great to see folks observing that unity.

Izdaari
Oct 8th 2008, 08:35 AM
As far as I know, I am the lone Pentecostal Holiness person on this board.

If there is another one, I probably know him/her in real life or know someone who does! :lol:
There's only two so far in the Pentecostal group. I'm one and you must be the other. And I'm Assemblies of God. So if there are any other Pentecostal Holiness people here, they haven't voted yet. :wave:

Say hi to Perry Stone for me! He's one of yours I believe? :cool:

The Preacher
Oct 8th 2008, 09:04 AM
In the light of John 17 denominations are abominations. In fact these sects can be described as heresies since they divide the body of Christ. ! Cor makes it clear that when we use such divisive naming we are carnal.

The Preacher
Oct 8th 2008, 09:08 AM
I am including my own "non denominational" classification as well so I'm not trying to get all uppity up in here.

9Marksfan
Oct 8th 2008, 10:23 AM
In the light of John 17 denominations are abominations. In fact these sects can be described as heresies since they divide the body of Christ. ! Cor makes it clear that when we use such divisive naming we are carnal.

But Christ is speaking of a spiritual unity, not an organisational unity. As you will be aware, the Reformers did not want to leave the Church of Rome - they were forced out! So what were they to do? Not meet at all? Or "recant", give up their newly found biblical truth and plead with Rome to be asked back?

I'm not advocating that all denominations are great - many, I will concede, are a tragic example of believers not getting on with each other and splitting over minor or personality issues - but when the majority within a church advocates heretical teachings/immoral practices or will not discipline those who espouse them - isn't the biblical mandate to "go to Christ OUTSIDE the camp, suffering His reproach"?

I can feel another thread coming on - this is meant to be a poll!

One final question - if someone comes to Christ, are you saying they should not go to church unless there is a non-denom church in their area?
And, btw, Christian Brethren would not see themselves as a denom, but they have been around for 160 years or so and are recognised as a distinct grouping of local assemblies (they don't even like to use the word "church" in a local sense).

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 01:23 PM
God created us as individuals and with free will.
I choose not to belong to a denomination, because I have not found one which I agree with 100%.
If I ever did, I’d “join” ‘em. J
OK. That’s not exactly true and I know I don’t have to agree 100%.

Mostly, I don’t like being in some “box” which other people “define” in their minds. So, I’m a “Christian without denomination”. As soon as people encounter a label, they apply preconceptions and expectations.
So a "denomination" is not for me, but I welcome the existance of them, because it is a result of individual grouping - rather than everyone fitting into ONE box.

I’d hate it, if EVERYONE had to think like everybody else, believe like everybody else, and practice like everybody else. We might all be RC if that was so.

Still, despite our individuality of worship and application, we hold to the basic tenants of Christian faith and our unity is in Christ through the Holy Spirit.


…My thoughts…
Richard

Rufus_1611
Oct 8th 2008, 03:12 PM
God created us as individuals and with free will.
I choose not to belong to a denomination, because I have not found one which I agree with 100%.
If I ever did, I’d “join” ‘em. J
OK. That’s not exactly true and I know I don’t have to agree 100%.

Mostly, I don’t like being in some “box” which other people “define” in their minds. So, I’m a “Christian without denomination”. As soon as people encounter a label, they apply preconceptions and expectations.
So a "denomination" is not for me, but I welcome the existance of them, because it is a result of individual grouping - rather than everyone fitting into ONE box. What are you going to do if other people put you in a "box" regarding your non-denominationalism? Meaning, is it not possible that they might define you as a non-denominationalist in a similar manner as they do one who commits to a denomination?


I’d hate it, if EVERYONE had to think like everybody else, believe like everybody else, and practice like everybody else. We might all be RC if that was so.

Still, despite our individuality of worship and application, we hold to the basic tenants of Christian faith and our unity is in Christ through the Holy Spirit.


…My thoughts…
Richard

Buzzword
Oct 8th 2008, 03:50 PM
What are you going to do if other people put you in a "box" regarding your non-denominationalism? Meaning, is it not possible that they might define you as a non-denominationalist in a similar manner as they do one who commits to a denomination?

I've been in that situation before.

I considered myself non-denominational for about 3 years, and I had people telling me I "couldn't commit to anything" because I didn't agree with a particular group.

Richard H
Oct 8th 2008, 04:04 PM
What are you going to do if other people put you in a "box" regarding your non-denominationalism? Meaning, is it not possible that they might define you as a non-denominationalist in a similar manner as they do one who commits to a denomination?

It’s human nature to identify and classify in an effort to understand others and the environment.

Just like: if you put someone in a totally white room, their eyes would gravitate to the corners, lines of distinction – rather than the blank parts of the walls.

I too have my preconceptions when I hear "Non-Denominational”, so I choose a new label defined mostly as Christian. “Christian without denomination”.

It causes one to consider that I did not use: Non-Denominational.
Perhaps I am identifying myself as a Christian and not a member of a particular group of Christians. I follow Christ and not a group.

So what do I do about it when people try to classify me? Not much. Its human nature and I’m fairly used to it.

Why must I “commit” to a denomination? J

Richard

Studyin'2Show
Oct 8th 2008, 05:31 PM
Disciple of Messiah works for me! :D

Bethany67
Oct 8th 2008, 05:48 PM
Non-denom now, but raised High Anglican, and started my Christian life as an Open Brethren x Word of Faith mutant ;) Could probably fit quite happily into something like the AoG, but the local one didn't want me as an ex-witch, so I'm homeless and still searching. One day ...

Whispering Grace
Oct 8th 2008, 08:44 PM
Could probably fit quite happily into something like the AoG, but the local one didn't want me as an ex-witch

Shame on them.
......

livingwaters
Oct 8th 2008, 09:32 PM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)


Right on!!!!!:lol::pp

NewInHim
Oct 8th 2008, 09:32 PM
I said non-denominational because we now attend a non-denominational church. Prior to that, we attended an Independant Baptist church. No reason to leave an IB and go to a ND that had anything to do with denomination, it's just where God placed us. I am a Christian, and don't really think of myself as belonging to a denomination.

Rufus_1611
Oct 8th 2008, 09:48 PM
I said non-denominational because we now attend a non-denominational church. Prior to that, we attended an Independant Baptist church. No reason to leave an IB and go to a ND that had anything to do with denomination, it's just where God placed us. I am a Christian, and don't really think of myself as belonging to a denomination. Ultimately, Independent Baptist churches are non-denominational as well.


Denomination - A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy. (Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/denomination)

NewInHim
Oct 8th 2008, 09:59 PM
Ah hah. Thanks for the info! I always learn on this site!

Rufus_1611
Oct 8th 2008, 10:03 PM
Ah hah. Thanks for the info! I always learn on this site! Me too. I've been on many message boards and have not encountered one better than this one.

The Preacher
Oct 8th 2008, 11:21 PM
But Christ is speaking of a spiritual unity, not an organisational unity. As you will be aware, the Reformers did not want to leave the Church of Rome - they were forced out! So what were they to do? Not meet at all? Or "recant", give up their newly found biblical truth and plead with Rome to be asked back?

That's the typical response I get when I begin to address Unity.:pp
Let's start a thread somewhere to talk about it. Any suggestions?
I'm pretty new here.

FaithfulSheep
Oct 8th 2008, 11:30 PM
I'm one of those (as The Parson would say) hard-headed baptists :P

I too am a hard-headed Baptist. :hug:

Richard H
Oct 9th 2008, 12:04 AM
That's the typical response I get when I begin to address Unity.:pp
Let's start a thread somewhere to talk about it. Any suggestions?
I'm pretty new here.
By all means, start a new thread on unity. I’m all for it. :)
Dunno which forum would be best. Perhaps: "controversial". :rolleyes:<tongue-in-cheek>

9Marksfan
Oct 10th 2008, 09:42 AM
Ultimately, Independent Baptist churches are non-denominational as well.

Denomination - A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy. (Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/denomination)


Guess I should have voted non-dom as well, then!

9Marksfan
Oct 10th 2008, 09:43 AM
By all means, start a new thread on unity. I’m all for it. :)
Dunno which forum would be best. Perhaps: "controversial". :rolleyes:<tongue-in-cheek>

OK - I'll get it started - unless someone else has already?!

apothanein kerdos
Oct 10th 2008, 10:44 PM
Don't really have an affiliation. I'm somewhere between Baptist and Presbyterian. Certainly Reformed though.

Buzzword
Oct 10th 2008, 11:13 PM
Love how it seems like this thread has spawned the big discussion in Contro of "the evils of denominational disunity."

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 11th 2008, 12:05 AM
Even though being part of some name of Church doesn`t save, since it isn`t the hearers but the doers of righteousness who follow the Lamb whenever It goes.

Answering the pool question, I was rised in an adventist home, but now as God has led I am going to a kind or rather branch of the Adventist Church, based in great part in a message preached in 1888 by Waggoner and A.T.Jones.

But you know the waldenses had the Scriptures and only their teachings kept waldenses faith pure.

Go well
__________________
Peace, and so forth

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5459/natureavyty7.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3020/lifesigyyt9.gif

helios
Oct 11th 2008, 02:18 AM
I am non-denomination-I just read the lords word!:saint:

lilybetweenthorns
Oct 11th 2008, 02:45 AM
I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist for the most part, though I go to the most Biblically sound Church in an area no matter label is on the sign.

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 11th 2008, 05:36 AM
I am non-denomination-I just read the lords word!:saint:


So It could be said you are of the religion of the Bible, Helios :bounce:....


__________________
Peace, and so forth

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5459/natureavyty7.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3020/lifesigyyt9.gif

jh099
Oct 11th 2008, 12:09 PM
I went to a baptist church the first 18 years of my life and now I'm at a non-denominational one with baptist tendencies. I'm comfortable thinking of myself as either baptist or non-denominational.

9Marksfan
Oct 11th 2008, 02:47 PM
I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist for the most part, though I go to the most Biblically sound Church in an area no matter label is on the sign.

Me too! I've been to Presbyterian, Baptist, Independent and now Open Brethren - I'll go wherever the best "mix" is!

Buzzword
Oct 11th 2008, 02:57 PM
Interesting poll results.

I wonder what conclusions we could draw from them, and from the posts on this thread.

Awhile back,a friend proposed the idea that traditional denominations (ie, ones with national church hierarchies) were declining in membership, as people increasingly found them to be stale and monotonous.

These people have moved towards non-denominational evangelical groups who seem to be more interested in dynamic worship and evangelism than in "church business."

Is this a fair assessment?
Or does the poll merely show the community on this particular website?

militarywife
Oct 11th 2008, 04:20 PM
I am non - denominational.

Studyin'2Show
Oct 12th 2008, 12:12 AM
The Baptists are making a strong comeback! :lol:

Richard H
Oct 12th 2008, 01:02 AM
The Baptists are making a strong comeback! :lol:
'Coming up fast on the inside!

apothanein kerdos
Oct 12th 2008, 03:57 PM
Interesting poll results.

I wonder what conclusions we could draw from them, and from the posts on this thread.

Awhile back,a friend proposed the idea that traditional denominations (ie, ones with national church hierarchies) were declining in membership, as people increasingly found them to be stale and monotonous.

These people have moved towards non-denominational evangelical groups who seem to be more interested in dynamic worship and evangelism than in "church business."

Is this a fair assessment?
Or does the poll merely show the community on this particular website?

I think it's a very fair assessment. However, even the more "dynamic" denominations are beginning to decline due to the superficial nature they often bring to the table.

What I find most interesting is that for the first time in 1,700 years the denominations are growing in less significance. There are "orthodox" or "conservative" Christians that recognize there are differences in worship styles, and then "liberal" Christians, and then "Emergent Christians." It's really boiling down to what one believes on the basics - at least, that's where the battle lines are being drawn.

I first began to recognize this a year ago when at an apologetic conference with some pretty hefty names on the ticket, there wasn't one denomination represented. I watched a Southern Baptist and a Roman Catholic share the stage and discuss the importance of orthodoxy. They admitted that both have massive differences in beliefs, but on the core issues they do agree (boy I hope this doesn't start a debate).

In other words, we're starting to see proper ecumenicalism - agreeing and coming together on the basics while fighting against both liberal and emerging/radical orthodoxy positions.

9Marksfan
Oct 12th 2008, 09:36 PM
I first began to recognize this a year ago when at an apologetic conference with some pretty hefty names on the ticket, there wasn't one denomination represented. I watched a Southern Baptist and a Roman Catholic share the stage and discuss the importance of orthodoxy. They admitted that both have massive differences in beliefs, but on the core issues they do agree (boy I hope this doesn't start a debate).

Isn't justification a core issue? Isn't authority?


In other words, we're starting to see proper ecumenicalism - agreeing and coming together on the basics while fighting against both liberal and emerging/radical orthodoxy positions.

I agree they are big enemies today - but Rome is still Rome - can a leopard change its spots? We must maintain the Reformation principles - the five solas - Rome disagrees with us on ALL of them!

Athanasius
Oct 12th 2008, 10:03 PM
I think it's about time we declare 'non-denominational' a denomination :P

apothanein kerdos
Oct 12th 2008, 10:49 PM
Isn't justification a core issue? Isn't authority?



I agree they are big enemies today - but Rome is still Rome - can a leopard change its spots? We must maintain the Reformation principles - the five solas - Rome disagrees with us on ALL of them!


Can a leopard change its stripes? Apparently so. :)

Most of these are described as "evangelical catholics." Essentially, they deny the five solas, but accept watered-down versions.

I've even heard some argue that Scripture is above tradition, but then proceed to argue why the Church is justified scriptural or why it's a scriptural non-issue. ;)

It really is a watered down version of Catholicism, but at this point in society, I'll take any ally I can get. Besides, it opens up doors with the Catholic Church that could lead to a change in doctrine. Remember, the "Reformation" gets its name from a desire to reform the Catholic Church. If the Church - God willing - were to adopt traditional Reformational views (the 5 Solas) and apply them, wouldn't this be a good thing?

Richard H
Oct 12th 2008, 11:56 PM
I think it's about time we declare 'non-denominational' a denomination :P

:o I thought it was a denomination. ;););)

9Marksfan
Oct 13th 2008, 12:11 AM
Can a leopard change its stripes? Apparently so. :)

:confused


Most of these are described as "evangelical catholics."

Now THERE'S an oxymoron!!!!


Essentially, they deny the five solas, but accept watered-down versions.

Whay should we accept a watering down at all?


I've even heard some argue that Scripture is above tradition, but then proceed to argue why the Church is justified scriptural or why it's a scriptural non-issue. ;)

It really is a watered down version of Catholicism, but at this point in society, I'll take any ally I can get.

Why?


Besides, it opens up doors with the Catholic Church that could lead to a change in doctrine.

I'm guessing you'll have read church history? 500 years haven't witnessed that - but I admire your resilience! :)


Remember, the "Reformation" gets its name from a desire to reform the Catholic Church. If the Church - God willing - were to adopt traditional Reformational views (the 5 Solas) and apply them, wouldn't this be a good thing?

And pigs might fly.......

apothanein kerdos
Oct 13th 2008, 12:28 AM
:confused



Now THERE'S an oxymoron!!!!



Whay should we accept a watering down at all?



Why?



I'm guessing you'll have read church history? 500 years haven't witnessed that - but I admire your resilience! :)



And pigs might fly.......

Well, the Roman Catholic branch in the US is vastly different than it is in Europe. You have to figure, without the constant influence from the Vatican until modern communications, they really became more evangelical in their view (or liberal).

It is an oxymoron, but a good one. A lot of Catholics that I know of are beginning to question the role of the Pope in declaring doctrine. Though it's not complete, it is a good start.

As for accepting watered down solas - by accepting a watered-down version they'll move to the full version. It's simply logical - if you put them on par with tradition, they'll eventually overtake tradition.

As for waiting for change - agreed. However, change can occur. Notice that the Reformation did cause change within the ethics of the RCC. Unfortunately, the Reformation occurred during a time when the RCC held a power-grip on European politics, so any perceived change would render up that power.

I don't know, I hold out hope that the RCC will one day change, so I accept them as my ally so I can work with them now and hopefully they'll see the legitimacy in my view.

Izdaari
Oct 13th 2008, 06:25 AM
I voted Pentecostal, and I'm a member of an Assemblies of God church, but I wouldn't really say that's my denomination. Formally it is, but my heart belongs to Christ alone, and I don't think any one church has a monopoly on Him. In that sense I'm non-denominational.

I'll always have a fondness for the Anglican church because of C.S. Lewis and N.T. Wright, two famous Anglicans who are my all-time favorite Christian writers. And though I am Protestant, and glad to be because of my admiration for the work of Luther, Calvin, Wesley and others, I also have great respect for Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

scottae316
Oct 13th 2008, 06:36 PM
I voted non-denominational. I attend a Full Gospel Church, these are Pentecostal like. While I love this Church, I am like Izdaari and have great admiration for Lewis, Luther, Wesley the Anglican and Eastern Orthodox Churches. There is that missing link to the historic stream of Christianity that is missing in many Pentecostal, Charismatic, or Full Gospel Churches. I wish that these bodies would embrace the good parts of the historic Christian Church. Oh well, I digress.

PAX
Scott

brakelite
Oct 14th 2008, 12:52 AM
Accepting the RCC as an ally against what? The RCC is what we all ought to be challenging. That many now meet with them and claim, "Oh, we agree with this and that, and we can lay aside and ignore what we disagree on," is like lying down with a rattle-snake because you both like diamonds.

apothanein kerdos
Oct 14th 2008, 01:48 AM
Accepting the RCC as an ally against what? The RCC is what we all ought to be challenging. That many now meet with them and claim, "Oh, we agree with this and that, and we can lay aside and ignore what we disagree on," is like lying down with a rattle-snake because you both like diamonds.


Against:

Abotion

Materialism

Secularism

Paganism

Islam

Homosexual marriages

Decaying morality

Fact is, the RCC gets a bad rap and unnecessarily so. Their doctrines aren't that different from many of the believers on this board. When people teach we have to perform certain works to maintain our salvation, lest we render it up, they are accepting the core disagreement between the RCC and those of the Reformation (on what justification and sanctification are).

Shall we kick them off the board? Of course not. However, because they fall under different denominational titles and not "Roman Catholic Church," we have no problem with it.

Just calling for some consistency here. If we can work with those evangelicals, we can work with the RCC.

Studyin'2Show
Oct 14th 2008, 02:09 AM
I respect much of what you say on the board, ak, but not this. The RCC is so non-representative of true faith it amazes me that you miss that. I was RC for 30 years...and THEN I got saved! I don't know the content of another man or woman's heart so I wouldn't dare make any judgment about an individual. But I do know a wicked, pagan system when I see it and I want no more to have anything to do with it. :no:

God Bless!

Dragonfighter1
Oct 14th 2008, 02:12 AM
What am I?

To borrow a phrase from C. S. Lewis: I am merely a Christian.

*Hope*
Oct 14th 2008, 02:18 AM
I follow Christ. That is all.

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 14th 2008, 02:35 AM
I follow Christ. That is all.

Amen !!

That simple? :lol:


__________________
Peace, and so forth

http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/5459/natureavyty7.jpg
http://img112.imageshack.us/img112/3020/lifesigyyt9.gif

kbm0329
Oct 14th 2008, 05:48 PM
I am a Christian who is a member of a General Baptist church. ;)

JC33andDivine
Oct 14th 2008, 06:57 PM
Having recently become an official member of the Church of the Nazarene, after declaring myself non-denominational for several years, my curiosity has peaked on this subject.

What all denominations are represented here on BibleForums?

Apologies if I left anyone out.


EDIT:
Forgot that there's a POLLS forum. Mods please move. :PAnglican...not the ECUSA though.

The Preacher
Oct 15th 2008, 11:17 AM
OK - I'll get it started - unless someone else has already?!


I started one but I have lost it in the mix somehow. Is there a handy little search engine here to search for threads?

KingFisher
Oct 15th 2008, 11:52 AM
I started one but I have lost it in the mix somehow. Is there a handy little search engine here to search for threads?

Here ya go...http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=142567

I found it by "left clicking" on your user name then going to "find all posts
by The Preacher".

I also found it here...http://bibleforums.org/search.php

Hope this helps,
KingFisher

KingFisher
Oct 15th 2008, 12:02 PM
I voted baptist although it's not really a denomination...but I get the jest
of the poll.

Richard H
Oct 15th 2008, 02:16 PM
The Catholics have now left the gate, but the Trinitarians have begun grazing on the in-field. ;)
The Baptists are are making a move for the lead on the inside.

Studyin'2Show
Oct 15th 2008, 02:39 PM
...and it's neck n neck with Baptist only behind by a nose! :lol:

Emanate
Oct 15th 2008, 03:49 PM
Against:
.....
Paganism
......


RCC against paganism? that might be quite a stretch.

larry2
Oct 15th 2008, 04:01 PM
Really non-denominational - Attend an assembly without a membership - As a believer I belong to Jesus, and not a denomination. So I reckon I could be labeled "Other." :)

apothanein kerdos
Oct 16th 2008, 01:48 AM
I respect much of what you say on the board, ak, but not this. The RCC is so non-representative of true faith it amazes me that you miss that. I was RC for 30 years...and THEN I got saved! I don't know the content of another man or woman's heart so I wouldn't dare make any judgment about an individual. But I do know a wicked, pagan system when I see it and I want no more to have anything to do with it. :no:And I admit that I'm an outsider looking in at the RCC. Most people I know of that come out of the Catholic Church have a very negative view. So to me, the question becomes, who's experience (or lack thereof) is tainted with negativity? It could be that I'm simply naive having not experienced the RCC as a participant.

My experience with the RCC is admittedly biased in favor of them. Being that my field of study is in philosophy and they've been the only Christians holding down that field for 1,900 years (the 20th century finally saw an explosion of Protestant philosophers), I guess I have an affinity for what they say. Of course, when they mention something I don't agree with theologically I just fluff it off. In fact, by studying philosophy through their eyes I've seen how their doctrine has become corrupt.

But I look at people like Peter Kreeft or Frank Beckwith or G.K Chesterton or even Tolkien and I know they are Christians. They are highly misguided, but again, Christians.

Likewise, as I said, the core of Catholic doctrine - justification/sanctification - is no different than most people on this board (and I do disagree with it). So it's hard for me to just throw Catholics to the side on this issue when other evangelicals accept the Catholic view of justification/sanctification (although they don't realize they agree with the RCC).

However, as I said, I'm biased because of my field of study. Will I ever become a Roman Catholic - yes...if they accept the 5 Solas and become Reformed. :) Until then, I'll simply look at them as highly misguided and incapable of holding a complete relationship with Christ. Though saved, I would argue their relationship suffers because of their erroneous doctrine.

I also have a great affinity for Muslim thinkers (though I certainly don't think they're saved!) and I find it hard to condemn them outright. It could be that this is a flaw in my thinking, but at the same time it could be a pro-aspect of my thinking. I haven't decided yet. :)

Studyin'2Show
Oct 16th 2008, 02:17 AM
As an ex-catholic I have to agree with much of what you say, ak. I have known catholics that though misguided, I have to believe they are saved. Not by their own merit but through the blood of Messiah. However, when looking, not at the individual but at the 'system' all I see is a breeding ground for corruption.

Ashley274
Oct 16th 2008, 03:04 AM
I voted other because I am a CHRISTian and do not define myself by a demomination

Gulah Papyrus
Oct 16th 2008, 03:10 AM
I think I am...Christ-ist?:dunno:

apothanein kerdos
Oct 16th 2008, 03:04 PM
As an ex-catholic I have to agree with much of what you say, ak. I have known catholics that though misguided, I have to believe they are saved. Not by their own merit but through the blood of Messiah. However, when looking, not at the individual but at the 'system' all I see is a breeding ground for corruption.

Oh, I have nothing but contempt for the system of Catholicism. Granted, I like parts of it, but the biggest problem with the RCC is that early in her history she forewent the Holy Spirit. Anytime we undercover (or elevate) one member of the Trinity, our theology is going to be severely skewed.

Individual Catholics, however, show great merit so I can't cast them to the side.

Gospel-Witness
Oct 16th 2008, 04:41 PM
I'm simply a Christian....and I don't claim allegiance to any man made denomination. I only belong to Christ. When I placed my faith in Christ and was enjoined with him in baptism it was not to belong to some denomination....it was to be born again, to receive the grace that he made available through his love.

Denominations always place the focus on themselves....their beliefs, doctrines and traditions. What about simply loving God and following the teachings of Christ as he presented them to us through his word, the bible? I'm not interested in what a denomination has to say, I only want to hear from God and what is being said through the Holy Spirit. I'll follow Christ, but not a denomination.

I really like what Rick Warren once said...

"God is love and he wants us to grow up to be like him. The height of maturity is not how much doctrine you know. The height of maturity is how deeply you love."

9Marksfan
Oct 16th 2008, 05:14 PM
I really like what Rick Warren once said...

"God is love and he wants us to grow up to be like him. The height of maturity is not how much doctrine you know. The height of maturity is how deeply you love."


That sounds impressive, but it's actually not biblical. How about Paul's teaching on what I like to call "triniarian fulness" in Ephesians?

The fulness of God the Father

...that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height - to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fulness of God. Eph 4:17b-19 NKJV

It's not how much we SHOW love that constitutes the height of maturity - it's how much we KNOW God's love - and this knowing is both intellectual ("comprehend" - and therefore doctrinal) - and experiential ("know the love of Christ").

The fulness of God the Son

Till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine... Eph 4:13-14a NKJV

"The faith" here is used in the same way as Jude uses it in Jude 3 - the body of faith ie the core doctrines of the Christian faith that Paul has spoken about in chs 1-3 - maturity means that we are no longer confused and tossed about by doctrine - not because we have ditched it altogether, but rather because we have embraced the truth, so that not only do we KNOW CHRIST better as a result, but we can speak the truth in love to one another and build up the body.

The fulness of God the Spirit

...be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord Eph 5:18b-19 NKJV

And what do good psalms and hymns and spiritual songs contain but good doctrine, truth about God? And the word of God! The parallel passage in Colossians makes this even clearer:-

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. Col 3:16 NKJV

So, with the greatest of respect to Mr Warren, the height of maturity is not how much doctrine we know or how much love we show - it's how much of God we know (not just know about, although we can't know Him properly unless we know ABOUT Him first - and that of necessity involves doctrine - not as an end in itself but as the principal means to knowing God more and thereby loving Him (and others) more).

Richard H
Oct 16th 2008, 05:24 PM
I agree with 9MarksFan, but I’d like to add:

Maturity is great and even knowing doctrine, but even “knowing Jesus” does not seem to be the key.
The key is: Does Jesus know us? (Matthew 7)
We must become vulnerable to His Spirit and not hide as Adam did.

We must become sensitive to His leading, so that we are not “working” according to the flesh.

Richard

The Preacher
Oct 16th 2008, 05:43 PM
That sounds impressive, but it's actually not biblical. How about Paul's teaching on what I like to call "triniarian fulness" in Ephesians?

The fulness of God the Father

...that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height - to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fulness of God. Eph 4:17b-19 NKJV

It's not how much we SHOW love that constitutes the height of maturity - it's how much we KNOW God's love - and this knowing is both intellectual ("comprehend" - and therefore doctrinal) - and experiential ("know the love of Christ").

The fulness of God the Son

Till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about by every wind of doctrine... Eph 4:13-14a NKJV

"The faith" here is used in the same way as Jude uses it in Jude 3 - the body of faith ie the core doctrines of the Christian faith that Paul has spoken about in chs 1-3 - maturity means that we are no longer confused and tossed about by doctrine - not because we have ditched it altogether, but rather because we have embraced the truth, so that not only do we KNOW CHRIST better as a result, but we can speak the truth in love to one another and build up the body.

The fulness of God the Spirit

...be filled with the Spirit, speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord Eph 5:18b-19 NKJV

And what do good psalms and hymns and spiritual songs contain but good doctrine, truth about God? And the word of God! The parallel passage in Colossians makes this even clearer:-

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. Col 3:16 NKJV

So, with the greatest of respect to Mr Warren, the height of maturity is not how much doctrine we know or how much love we show - it's how much of God we know (not just know about, although we can't know Him properly unless we know ABOUT Him first - and that of necessity involves doctrine - not as an end in itself but as the principal means to knowing God more and thereby loving Him (and others) more).

Actually, you are wrong. We can know all kinds of information ABOUT God. It doesn't mean that we know him. We get to know him through intimacy and fellowship and this happens by experiencing his love. You quoted this scripture :

"..that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height - to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fulness of God. Eph 4:17b-19 NKJV"

This scripture clearly shows that being rooted and grounded in love allows a mutual and collective comprehension of God's love. His love then fills us collectively as the living temple created of living stones. God is then able to indwell us collectively. This is actually God's plan. To create a living temple out of living stones and indwell them through love...collectively. He just doesn't want to indwell us as individuals but also corporately.This is the church not the building we meet in. In fact, the whole reason this material reality exists can be found when Paul tells us what God's ETERNAL purpose it:

Eph 3:10-11
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:


This verse is profound. It gives us a glimpse on why God created this material universe. I love how it states that his wisdom will be known by the church and not just the pastor and teacher. These men are only capable of teaching us ABOUT God.His wisdom will be demonstrated by a group of people known as the church.



When you claimed the post was unbiblical you missed this verse:

1 John 4:7-8
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.

9Marksfan
Oct 16th 2008, 05:56 PM
I agree with 9MarksFan, but I’d like to add:

Maturity is great and even knowing doctrine, but even “knowing Jesus” does not seem to be the key.
The key is: Does Jesus know us? (Matthew 7)
We must become vulnerable to His Spirit and not hide as Adam did.

We must become sensitive to His leading, so that we are not “working” according to the flesh.

Richard

Amen - but they are in fact one and the same thing:-

But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God... Gal 4:9a NKJV

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. Jn 17:3 NKJV

But loving God is crucially important to being known by God too!

But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him. 1 Cor 8:3 NKJV

Richard H
Oct 16th 2008, 06:08 PM
Amen - but they are in fact one and the same thing:-

But now after you have known God, or rather are known by God... Gal 4:9a NKJV

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. Jn 17:3 NKJV

But loving God is crucially important to being known by God too!

But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him. 1 Cor 8:3 NKJV

Amen and Amen!!!

Yes. I never really thought about it, though.
It just seems that the more I seek Him, the more I love Him. :)

9Marksfan
Oct 16th 2008, 06:13 PM
Actually, you are wrong.

Please don't jump to conclusions. See below.


We can know all kinds of information ABOUT God. It doesn't mean that we know him.

I agree - there is an eternal difference between knwoing about Him and actuaklly knowing Him.


We get to know him through intimacy and fellowship and this happens by experiencing his love.

So it's all a bit mystical and our minds are disengaged?


You quoted this scripture :

"..that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height - to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fulness of God. Eph 4:17b-19 NKJV"

This scripture clearly shows that being rooted and grounded in love allows a mutual and collective comprehension of God's love.

Agreed - but how can we "comprehend" unless we "lay hold of" the truth of God with the mind (the meaning of katalambano)?


His love then fills us collectively as the living temple created of living stones. God is then able to indwell us collectively. This is actually God's plan. To create a living temple out of living stones and indwell them through love...collectively. He just doesn't want to indwell us as individuals but also corporately.This is the church not the building we meet in. In fact, the whole reason this material reality exists can be found when Paul tells us what God's ETERNAL purpose it:

Eph 3:10-11
10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
11 According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:


This verse is profound. It gives us a glimpse on why God created this material universe. I love how it states that his wisdom will be known by the church and not just the pastor and teacher. These men are only capable of teaching us ABOUT God.His wisdom will be demonstrated by a group of people known as the church.

Well a hearty "Amen!" to all that!


When you claimed the post was unbiblical you missed this verse:

1 John 4:7-8
7 Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.
8 He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.


I didn't say love was unimportant - it is clearly crucial, as the above verse (and a whole lot of others!) makes clear - what I am trying to say is that one doesn't throw out doctrine when considering the height of maturity - being grounded in good doctrine is NOT an end in itself - but it is CRUCIAL if we are to know God fully (or as fuklly as we can this side of eternity) and therfore love Him and love others - so I guess I am agreeing with Mr Warren in a roundabout way - but I feel he denigrates being grounded in good doctrine as the indispensible path to that great goal.

The Preacher
Oct 16th 2008, 06:31 PM
Please don't jump to conclusions. See below.





I didn't say love was unimportant - it is clearly crucial, as the above verse (and a whole lot of others!) makes clear - what I am trying to say is that one doesn't throw out doctrine when considering the height of maturity - being grounded in good doctrine is NOT an end in itself - but it is CRUCIAL if we are to know God fully (or as fuklly as we can this side of eternity) and therfore love Him and love others - so I guess I am agreeing with Mr Warren in a roundabout way - but I feel he denigrates being grounded in good doctrine as the indispensible path to that great goal.

I agree with this. I think we need to be able to defend the foundational doctrines that separate Christianity from cults. For instance we can't have a full revelation of God if we don't believe in the Trinity
However, I do think that the hallmark of maturity IS measured by how much we love and not by how much we know. This verse always speaks to me when I am debating:

1 Tim 1:5-6
5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;

If the completion(goal or main point,telos in the greek) is love out of a pure heart then I would place a higher value on that than on any other virtue I could focus on. I would also measure my maturity on how much of it is taking place in me.

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 16th 2008, 08:46 PM
Right...

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 1 Cor 13>>

brakelite
Oct 17th 2008, 12:22 AM
The Lord said through Jeremiah, "Let him that glory glory in this, that he knoweth and loveth Me..." Knowing and loving are a package deal. Both ways. And the evidence of Jesus love for us was His obedience to the Father's commandments, even to death. The evidence for our love for Him is also obedience to His commandments.
1Jo 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
Joh 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
Joh 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Joh 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.


Any church or denomination that doesn't teach the above, that obedience to God's commandments are obligatory to establishing any kind of relationship with God, is teaching a false gospel.
I voted 'other'. This is my denomination ...Re 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 17th 2008, 04:54 AM
The Lord said through Jeremiah, "Let him that glory glory in this, that he knoweth and loveth Me..." Knowing and loving are a package deal. Both ways. And the evidence of Jesus love for us was His obedience to the Father's commandments, even to death. The evidence for our love for Him is also obedience to His commandments. ..Re 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.


Hi Brakelite,

Are you talking about the 10 commandments or of the ceremonial law?

For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Ephesians 2:14,15.


This one ?

Go well

trodder
Oct 18th 2008, 04:40 AM
I was a member of the Assemblies of God for many years however, I'm now a member of a Spirit filled nondenominational church.

Colo25
Oct 18th 2008, 05:28 AM
I am member of an Evangelical church! :pp
Colo

brakelite
Oct 18th 2008, 06:48 AM
Hi Brakelite,

Are you talking about the 10 commandments or of the ceremonial law?

For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; Ephesians 2:14,15.


This one ?

Go well

Hey my brother! I mean every commandment that comes from the lips of our Father to us. If it is relevant to our walk with Him, then it must be obeyed.
This applies particularly to the 10 commandments. The ceremonial law is not essential to our walk, so no longer obligatory. That said however, observing the feasts ought not to be discouraged as much may be learnt from them by studying how the Messiah fulfilled all the shadows.

9Marksfan
Oct 19th 2008, 10:15 PM
I agree with this. I think we need to be able to defend the foundational doctrines that separate Christianity from cults. For instance we can't have a full revelation of God if we don't believe in the Trinity
However, I do think that the hallmark of maturity IS measured by how much we love and not by how much we know. This verse always speaks to me when I am debating:

1 Tim 1:5-6
5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:
6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;

If the completion(goal or main point,telos in the greek) is love out of a pure heart then I would place a higher value on that than on any other virtue I could focus on. I would also measure my maturity on how much of it is taking place in me.

Yep - I agree. What I disagree with is any teaching that says we can BYPASS a good understanding of doctrine to get to that telos - like it happens in a mystical vacuum - which is completely contrary to the NT's teaching.

JesusReignsForever
Oct 19th 2008, 10:51 PM
Why are we Apostolic's ALWAYS left out??? Goodness;) So now I have to be in the "other" catergorey bah! lol nah its okay!

9Marksfan
Oct 20th 2008, 01:30 PM
Why are we Apostolic's ALWAYS left out??? Goodness;) So now I have to be in the "other" catergorey bah! lol nah its okay!

Wouldn't you consider yourself Pentecostal?

Dragonfighter1
Oct 20th 2008, 01:32 PM
Wouldn't you consider yourself Pentecostal?
That's a behavioral similarity not a doctrinal one necessarily.

9Marksfan
Oct 20th 2008, 01:43 PM
That's a behavioral similarity not a doctrinal one necessarily.

I thought doctrinally they were in the same generally Pentecostal camp - no? What would be the main differences?

Dragonfighter1
Oct 20th 2008, 02:00 PM
I thought doctrinally they were in the same generally Pentecostal camp - no? What would be the main differences?

Actually you hit the nail on the head there!

That is the problem with denominationalisms... Paul had much to say about it in Corinthians... but somehow we never seem to pay attention to those passages!

I Cor 1:10-13
10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%201;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28360a)]"; still another, "I follow Christ."

In modern terms we say: I am of Luther, I am of the Pope, I am of Wesley, I am of ???? Fill in the blank...

It must irk God quite a bit that we find nothing unscriptural about being denominational!:crazy:

Buzzword
Oct 20th 2008, 02:19 PM
Actually you hit the nail on the head there!

That is the problem with denominationalisms... Paul had much to say about it in Corinthians... but somehow we never seem to pay attention to those passages!

I Cor 1:10-13
10 I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%201;&version=31;#fen-NIV-28360a)]"; still another, "I follow Christ."

In modern terms we say: I am of Luther, I am of the Pope, I am of Wesley, I am of ???? Fill in the blank...

It must irk God quite a bit that we find nothing unscriptural about being denominational!:crazy:

But do you really believe that Paul meant "united in mind and thought" LITERALLY?

I doubt he or Christ meant us to be robots who always agree on everything.

Dragonfighter1
Oct 20th 2008, 02:38 PM
But do you really believe that Paul meant "united in mind and thought" LITERALLY?

I doubt he or Christ meant us to be robots who always agree on everything.


Precisely so.

Q.1 I think Paul meant what he said. I can't imagine he intended deception. SO he must have meant the obvious not the perfect. (Since we aren't perfect).

Q 2. I agree!

I think PERHAPS your premise is that to be non denominational is to be "lock-stepped" in all we think and do, (and in culture and language and etc...) On reflection we realize that can't be true.

How about this though... this very chat site... We all communicate, we all are one in our pursuit of God, we allow non believers to come in and ask painful questions, we unite to help sisters and brothers in trouble or difficulty and etc.. But although we are united in this way, it is obvious that we tolerate difference of opinion, differing styles, we sharpen one another by ALLOWING differing understandings to be debated and discussed thereby sharpening our theology. When discourse is denied or strongly discouraged as it is in most denominations there is no sharpening there is only "roboting" (I do not intend to offend). Can you imagine some of the discussions we have in here being held in Sunday School at most churches? The burn him at the stake gang would be in an absolute tizzy!:o

Hope that helps.

(No offense was intended to anyone reading this who has experienced openness at their own church fellowship)

coinsistament
Oct 21st 2008, 07:07 PM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)

One of the Peterhead EB's by any chance?

I don't like 'church' but a foot or a hand withers if cut off from the body and a body malfunctions without feet and hands so 'needs must', grit teeth and see it through I guess.
If I have to go, and I suppose I must, I'll attend any old dirge, but presbyterian is my nearest convenience.

coinsistament
Oct 21st 2008, 07:19 PM
Why are we Apostolic's ALWAYS left out??? Goodness;) So now I have to be in the "other" catergorey bah! lol nah its okay!

Surely no denomination which was started up less than 1900 years ago can be apostolic?
Or do you believe 'apostolicism' extended beyond the original twelve?

Whispering Grace
Oct 21st 2008, 07:24 PM
One of the Peterhead EB's by any chance?

I don't like 'church' but a foot or a hand withers if cut off from the body and a body malfunctions without feet and hands so 'needs must', grit teeth and see it through I guess.
If I have to go, and I suppose I must, I'll attend any old dirge, but presbyterian is my nearest convenience.

Huh. I can't fathom not wanting to go and worship the Lord with my brothers and sisters in Christ.

If I felt the way you do, it would give me cause to check my salvation, truth be told.

matthew94
Oct 21st 2008, 07:25 PM
I attend a Wesleyan Church which comes from the Methodist movement through the Holiness Movement. We are most closely aligned, doctrinally, with the Church of the Nazarene, Salvation Army, and Free Methodists.

coinsistament
Oct 21st 2008, 09:27 PM
Huh. I can't fathom not wanting to go and worship the Lord with my brothers and sisters in Christ.

If I felt the way you do, it would give me cause to check my salvation, truth be told.

You have to make allowance for the world's worst extremist.
Many a time have tears rolled down my cheeks in church in utter contrition and wonderment that one as holy and magnificent as my God and Saviour should diegn to make himself present in the midst of such unworthy delinquents as sinful men.
It's just that right now there's no one around to stimulate such worship, in fact the reverse is the case.
I'll be better when the tide turns.

Whispering Grace
Oct 21st 2008, 09:40 PM
You have to make allowance for the world's worst extremist.
Many a time have tears rolled down my cheeks in church in utter contrition and wonderment that one as holy and magnificent as my God and Saviour should diegn to make himself present in the midst of such unworthy delinquents as sinful men.
It's just that right now there's no one around to stimulate such worship, in fact the reverse is the case.
I'll be better when the tide turns.

I'm not really sure what you just said, but thanks for replying.

Just because my fellow brothers and sisters are as unworthy as I am doesn't make me want to shun their presence. If I did that, I'd have to shun myself too!

I dearly love my brethren, as frail and fallible as they (and I) are.

9Marksfan
Oct 22nd 2008, 09:19 AM
One of the Peterhead EB's by any chance?

No WAY! None of them would ever be seen on here with all these "apostates"!!! :lol:


I don't like 'church' but a foot or a hand withers if cut off from the body and a body malfunctions without feet and hands so 'needs must', grit teeth and see it through I guess.
If I have to go, and I suppose I must, I'll attend any old dirge, but presbyterian is my nearest convenience.

Sorry the ethos of churches locally is so dire, but Whispering Grace has a point - the NT knows nothing of a voluntary, isolated Christian (those who were isolated were either imprisoned or exiled). Are there no house churches nearby? PCA tends to be pretty reverent and would qgree with your view of the chasm between a holy God and sinful mankind - is that the Presbyterian one you mean? OPC would be even more reverent.

mclees8
Oct 22nd 2008, 10:59 PM
Hi I'm new here but I am non denominational. In fact I do not believe God sees his church denomnationally, Protestant or Catholic. The church only consists of beleivers who walk in the spirit. You might say I am a non traditonal believer, but you could say Im full gospel.
mike123

Richard H
Oct 22nd 2008, 11:37 PM
Hi I'm new here but I am non denominational. In fact I do not believe God sees his church denomnationally, Protestant or Catholic. The church only consists of beleivers who walk in the spirit. You might say I am a non traditonal believer, but you could say Im full gospel.
mike123
Welcome, Mike! :)

ƒσяєяυииєя
Oct 23rd 2008, 04:54 PM
нєℓℓσ мιкє 123,


ωєℓ¢σмє тσ вιвℓє ƒσяυмѕ, єηנσу тнє вσαя∂.

¢уα

Chellee
Oct 27th 2008, 10:09 PM
For about a year and a half now, my husband and I have been attending a Christian church that happens to be part of the Southern Baptist denomination. However, it really feels like a non-denominational church, and they/we gladly associate with and support Christian churches of other denominations. :)

Chimon
Oct 28th 2008, 01:54 AM
May I ask why you decided to join the Church of the Nazarene?

Br. Barnabas
Oct 29th 2008, 06:06 PM
Had to go with Other because Anglican is not on there. I am a very tradational Anglican leaning more towards the Eastern Orthodox and to some extent the Romans. But like to think of my line as being in the small "c" catholic line.

Texasgirl2008
Oct 30th 2008, 04:05 PM
I am church of Christ after being raised Southern Baptist. However we have no affiliation with a denomination.

Jamey
Nov 3rd 2008, 10:03 PM
I am church of Christ, but kinda a middle of the road one. Not as many hang ups as the more conservative kind.

btw Raised cajun catholic (yes there is a difference :))
visited a Nazarene church for awhile. enjoyed it but couldn't get into the whole wesleyian thing.
absolutly love the coC we attend now.

J

Slug1
Nov 7th 2008, 02:48 PM
I go where God tells me to go... well, once I began to be obedient to where God wanted me to go :rolleyes: :lol:

I was moved away from the Catholic church and moved into a Nazarene congregation. I learned much but when God said to move to a pentecostol congregation, one that was Hispanic and did service in Spanish/English I was obedient. This was a leap of faith for me, I don't know how long God will keep me in this congregation but in my heart this is where I'll stay. Didn't have it in my heart to stay at the others, just was there to learn and even knew I'd be moved away... so I learned all I could as led by God.

turtledove
Nov 7th 2008, 03:01 PM
I grew up Catholic, went to a Catholic university, became a Catholic missionary, even married a Catholic, and became involved in the Catholic Charismatic Renewal in the 70's. Tried to leave many years ago but DH (dear husband) wouldn't go then. But now for some years we are both involved in a Pentecostal denomination - 4 Square.

Also attended some wonderful non-denoms without him over the years until we both decided on 4 Square. Enjoyed working extensively in Christian (women's) interdenominational groups for over 20 years.

BibleGirl02
Nov 7th 2008, 09:39 PM
I am an independent fundamentalist Baptist. However, I am different from many fundamentalist Baptists in that I do use modern Bible versions.

ChristianKnight
Nov 9th 2008, 10:57 AM
Used to consider myself a Baptist, now I am what I am, nothing more nothing less.

ServantofTruth
Nov 9th 2008, 12:38 PM
Recent circumstances have brought me back to the Anglican church - the death of a lady's husband. She needed a lift to church or was sitting at home. Then i was very fortunate to be able to offer to give lifts to residents of an old people's home, both to church and my bible group.

But i am trying on sunday evenings to visit a Pentecostal church and will accept an invitation anywhere. Went to a couple of Baptist churches in the last few weeks.

I follow Jesus Christ, not man. Like Slug1 - if the Lord moves me, i will follow. I am tired of struggling by my own strength, may the Spirit of God guide me. Love SofTy.

cindylou
Nov 12th 2008, 06:51 PM
Recent circumstances have brought me back to the Anglican church - the death of a lady's husband. She needed a lift to church or was sitting at home. Then i was very fortunate to be able to offer to give lifts to residents of an old people's home, both to church and my bible group.

But i am trying on sunday evenings to visit a Pentecostal church and will accept an invitation anywhere. Went to a couple of Baptist churches in the last few weeks.

I follow Jesus Christ, not man. Like Slug1 - if the Lord moves me, i will follow. I am tired of struggling by my own strength, may the Spirit of God guide me. Love SofTy.

That is so beautiful to both Slug1 and SofTy

Ichiban
Nov 13th 2008, 07:49 PM
I attend a Foursquare church (little 'c' on purpose). It's an offshoot of the Pentecostal with the main difference being that we don't believe speaking in tongues is mandatory when filled with the Spirit.

In the end, it's just a name. I'm apart of the Church (capital 'C') which is the bride of Christ.

EaglesWINGS911
Nov 13th 2008, 08:36 PM
I voted non-denom...I was raised southern baptist and had been visiting a coc church for a while, but it's not for me. I will probably look for a baptist or a non-denominational church, they seem to match my beliefs more.

Just_Another_Guy
Nov 15th 2008, 03:07 PM
Having recently become an official member of the Church of the Nazarene, after declaring myself non-denominational for several years, my curiosity has peaked on this subject.

What all denominations are represented here on BibleForums?

Apologies if I left anyone out.


EDIT:
Forgot that there's a POLLS forum. Mods please move. :P

Non-denominational myself. I've been members of Baptist, Methodist, and Pentecostal churches within my lifetime though.

kenrank
Nov 19th 2008, 02:05 PM
I don't belong to a denomination. Some refer to those of my type as Messianic, I rather prefer Hebrew Roots. Essentially. Christians who are returning to the Hebrew Roots of our faith.
Ken

Godisnumber1
Nov 19th 2008, 02:12 PM
reppin the CoG :)

Prayin_saint
Nov 19th 2008, 02:38 PM
Church of Christ, also very 'middle of the road', due in large part to my years spent on this board learning from my brothers and sisters and getting to know and love them. :)

(*chuckles* Currently trying to learn to blend my own middle-of-the roadness with the more conservative 'middle of Tennessee' atmosphere my boyfriend was raised in! Wish me luck...;))

Ascender
Nov 25th 2008, 09:37 PM
Raised Wesleyan, attended a Friends College, graduated Nazarene, ordained Free Will Baptist, hang out with Non-Doms...:rofl:

mongoose303
Nov 26th 2008, 12:00 AM
I joined a non-denominational church after getting saved about 9 months ago. That doesnt mean im a fence sitter though cause I'd be kinda sore by now.:rofl:

Im having a great time in the Lord and i enjoy going to church up to 3 or 4 times a week. The Lord has blessed me with His love and I love my brothers and sisters in the Lord .

MidnightsPaleGlow
Nov 26th 2008, 03:05 AM
I was previously Church of Christ, but I disagreed with them on some doctrinal matters and left. My theology became more Baptistic toward the end of my time in the CofC and as a result I'm now a Baptist (in the area of baptism, it became Baptistic after only a month and a half CofC, and my view on the believer's security changed from conditional to eternal just prior to jumping ship).

avlight
Nov 27th 2008, 02:03 AM
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (it's a real denomination - epc.org)

(my definition of 'evangelical' is evangelism a.k.a. 'reaching the lost', not the modern 'theo-political' definition (Rushdoony / Dobson / Robertson) that society now associates with the term 'evangelical'

9Marksfan
Nov 27th 2008, 09:12 AM
Evangelical Presbyterian Church (it's a real denomination - epc.org)

(my definition of 'evangelical' is evangelism a.k.a. 'reaching the lost',

Hmm :hmm: - I always thought that that was the definition of "evangelISTIC" - and that "evangelical" meant "Bible centred" or "gospel centred"?


not the modern 'theo-political' definition (Rushdoony / Dobson / Robertson) that society now associates with the term 'evangelical'

Wow - one learns something new every day!

avlight
Nov 27th 2008, 07:46 PM
9Marksfan:

The original (and still true) definition of 'evangelical' was a group of people who really had a heart for evangelism a.k.a. 'reaching the lost'.

However, in the 1980's era of Reaganomics, people like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and D. James Kennedy through such organizations such as the Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition (and later on James Dobson's Focus on The Family and their offshoot organizations) 'theo-politicized' the definition to try to convince us that the term 'evangelical' was really defined as people who followed and subscribed to the theocratic Christian Reconstructionalist theories made famous by R.J. Rushdoony.

JesusReignsForever
Nov 30th 2008, 05:23 AM
The only Difference between Apostolics and Pentecostal is.... In a Apostolic church you would never see a woman in the pulpit and in a pentecostal church you will. The church I currently attend is pentecostal so I have crossed over... i guess.

Emanate
Dec 5th 2008, 08:19 PM
I suppose I will finally weigh in. I am a believer in Messiah who is returning to Torah.

RANGER65
Dec 5th 2008, 09:21 PM
I am ordained and licensed under the Pentecostal denomination but am much happier being catergorized as Non-Denominational (Spirit - Filled) because there are non-denominatioal groups that are not spirit-filledor even know what that means. I grew up Baptist until I returned from the military and went to a non denominational bible college where I learned the rest of the story as Paul Harvey would say.

I am just a Christ like one everyday growing stronger. "Be ye Holy, for I am Holy". :pray:

DParker
Dec 9th 2008, 10:53 PM
Well, I answered "Pentecostal", as that is our conviction, even though it really isn't a denomination. Is kinda like saying "Calvinist". There are many Pentecostal denominations (Assembly of God, Church of God in Christ, Church of God, Foursquare), Charismatic denominations, (Vineyard, Calvary Chapel) and many more non-denominational Pentecostal/Charismatic churches.

I was raised Nazarene and still have many relatives in that church. As an adult we were members for 26 years of a large non-denominational church that was an "affiliated congregation" with the Assembly of God. For the last two years we have attended a large non-denominational church that is actually more 'Pentecostal' in teaching and practice than the AoG church. It is affiliated with Willow Creek and Rhema.

Walstib
Dec 10th 2008, 12:19 AM
Voted non-denominational as I never really felt the need to become a member of any of the places I go to fellowship. I don’t want the tax break and voting on things seems strange to me.

Last place I was attending was a fellowship Baptist place in this small town I live in. Mostly because I wanted to be of use in my own community. My wife and I were leading the songs with her on piano and me on guitar. We had a congregation of about 10 people. Had to close down as the money dried up and we could not heat and repair the place just ourselves, years since a pastor made a wage there. It was over 150 years old… sad really. I heard of times that people were looking through the windows as there was not enough room. Seems like nowadays everyone wants to drive 40 min to places with all the bells and whistles rather than forgive the small things and unite the community.

Over the years I have attended a bunch of different churches with affiliated and non affiliated congregations. A Lutheran Laestadian one the other week, that was interesting lots of extended vans there with the size of the families. One thing I know is that every place I have gone I have met people who want to get together and worship our Lord. Will be great to find somewhere to go regularly again. Too bad we now have to travel so far.

I miss the days of innocence I had when I first came to believe, I had no idea there was so much division or multiple denominations and derivatives thereof until I found my first Christian message board, then it hit me square in the face. I have learned a lot through it all but also have been greatly grieved. But greater the blessing of seeing the underlying unity among almost all those here. Just in my heart that it would spread past the essentials. Maybe some real persecution of all the believers is what it will take to get things moving together instead of having a new denomination every week, what an honour that would be……. Just my thoughts.

Joe

greenrangerx
Dec 10th 2008, 03:18 AM
I consider myself to be Baptist, but I go to a non-denominational church because that's where my mom and sister go.

angelwind
Dec 10th 2008, 09:01 PM
I just belong to the Lord's body...the believing church. If I could attend church I would look into those that call themselves "Reformed"...I listen mostly to So Baptist's and Presbyterians online.

My mother was a Catholic...when the Lord saved my, I left that church, went into charismatic-non-denominational types...got very lost in there for many years...found some evangelical type churches and things got more stable...now the internet church is my church.

mccain22
Dec 10th 2008, 09:37 PM
I attend a baptist church as well as a non denominational. But can't I just be known as a guy who follows Jesus Christ and put his faith in Him?;)

Jerome1
Dec 10th 2008, 10:36 PM
Lot of baptists on here. You maybe should have included Anglican and Orthodox in your poll. I know of a few Anglican posters that post on here. I'm a Roman Catholic.

Emanate
Dec 10th 2008, 10:54 PM
I attend a baptist church as well as a non denominational. But can't I just be known as a guy who follows Jesus Christ and put his faith in Him?;)


No, sorry, you are stuck with baptist.:rofl:

James of Sunshine
Dec 10th 2008, 11:12 PM
I was baptized and "trained up" in the independent, fundamental Baptist church (Buzzard Baptists :)) so that's my greatest denominational persuasion. My prayer is that all Christian churches preach the Gospel.

DParker
Dec 11th 2008, 03:22 AM
I do think it is encouraging that so many are now "non denominational". I know many think that a negative, but I see it as progress.

Bex4Jesus
Dec 11th 2008, 02:39 PM
The more I read and talk to people, the more I think I might be what people call a "progressive Christian." I don't know what denomination that would be.

Love to all,

Bex

Beukeboom
Dec 22nd 2008, 04:40 AM
For whatever it's worth, I've always been a member of the United Methodist Church.

fishbowlsoul
Dec 23rd 2008, 04:19 AM
Church of God "The Singing Church" Cleveland, TN here.

Not the Church of God (Anderson, IN) - Don't know much about them except Charles Schulz and Bill Gaither were/are a part of them

Not the Church of God of Prophecy though we are cousins.

Not the Chuch of God With Signs Following though we are cousins once removed. God Bless'em and more power to them but I'll leave the snakes to them.

Not the Worldwide Chuch of God. We are not related. Ol' Herbert Armstrong was little too outside of scripture for us.

Plus a whole bunch of other denominations with Church of God in their title.

However when we all get to heaven we will sing and shout like good Pentecostals then maybe sit down like good Baptists and listen to the old old story then have communion like good Presbyterians and of course like good Methodists we'll be lookin' good in those new choir robes. Didn't mean to leave anybody out but I could think of anymore.

But hey I hear there is gonna be banquet with food so maybe more people will show up.:D

monergist
Jan 2nd 2009, 12:05 AM
I said Presbyterian because that's the closest to my denomination. The Christian Reformed Church is my denomination, and we are very close in belief to the Presbyterian Church in America, except for my denomination allows for individual congregations to decide whether or not a female pastor is permissible.

yaza
Jan 2nd 2009, 12:43 AM
Christian Brethren - not too well-known in the US, but you'd never have got the Pre-Trib Rapture doctrine without our founders! ;)
we never got the pre-trib rapture false doctrine from the bible thats for sure!!!!!

jrick
Jan 2nd 2009, 01:27 AM
I voted Other. I currently attend a United Reformed Church, and will probably attend an EPC when I move to Ann Arbor, Michigan for college next fall.

Diggindeeper
Jan 3rd 2009, 08:26 AM
Well, I'll weigh in. But won't do much good one way or the other, because when I first joined this board I made a decision, and that was: just kind of keep a low profile, but speak up when I really feel its time to speak up and speak out.

But, I don't think I've ever really shared on this board what kind of church I attend. And that's worked well for me.

You see, my husband and I have attended, supported, and helped in any way we can for the church where we have gone for the past 6 years or so. We DO feel the Lord wants us right where we are, so that's where we are.

However, doctrinally we just can't agree with the denominational beliefs there, and the Pastor knows we don't agree. But, we just do what the Lord wants us to do, and we've never been led to "rock the boat" or stir up controversy. We HAVE talked to the Pastor about why we believe or don't believe his way, but that's been in private, with him only.

Actually, we don't join churches any more. Several years back, we got to counting the churches we had been members of over the years, and would you believe...we were still members of a couple of Baptist churches, an AoG, CoG, non'denom, a Christian church, let me think what others....
anyway, we learned that if you leave a Southern Baptist church for an Independent Baptist, the first one won't send your letter on to the next church! And they sure don't send it on to a Cog or AoG or non denom.
So we just kept joining by statement.

I reckon all those different churches just kidnapped our membership, and put us in a drawer somewhere in the basement or attic and termed us inactive members, even tho' we were working diligently in another church! We moved a lot and found we could go to different churches and fit in, and for several years we just kept joining different churches till we were members of at least 6 churches!

Aren't you all glad I didn't vote in the poll? And I just betcha anyone would be totally surprised at where the Lord has us now! Or maybe I'm mistaken, and some have guessed what kind of church I attend and work for the Lord in???

One more thing...the Pastor were we attend, well...he sure does study a LOT! And we do learn from him, and love him. But I just keep praying that eventually the good Lord will open his eyes concerning some of his denominational leanings. And I am just old enough and silly enough to believe God will do exactly that.

One more thing...this church is not right around the corner from us. We drive 45 minutes to get to that church, and 45 minutes to get back home, because its exactly where God has planted us!

I know. I'm not much help in the poll, and I apologize.

Diggindeeper
Jan 4th 2009, 12:56 AM
Uh...er I didn't mean to put the brakes on this good discussion. :blush:
This happens to me sometimes...now I'm embarrassed again.... http://www.smilieland.com/graphics/party004.gif
(I need to accept the fact that I must be the board brakes.) :B

13 pages. Then, I finally post. And ZAP! Everybody gets really quiet....
(sorry)

Athanasius
Jan 5th 2009, 05:51 AM
I've actually taken the Protestant reformation to the nth extreme degree and follow the church of ... Whatever church I happen to walk into that particular Sunday, Friday, Saturday, etc. I'm a Christian first and yes, I do religion. Right now I identify with a Pentecostal church but that's not something absolutely set in stone.

9Marksfan
Jan 12th 2009, 10:19 AM
we never got the pre-trib rapture false doctrine from the bible thats for sure!!!!!

:lol:

I did some research into the history of the Brethren movement and there were lots of post-trib guys even at the start - but ole JN Darby sure has a lot to answer for with all that "we'll escape suffering, because God doesn't intend for us to suffer" nonsense - no wonder it's so popular in our "God wants you to prosper" age! :mad:

shepherdsword
Jan 12th 2009, 10:34 AM
*Non-Denominational *


I am hard core post tribber. I have a friend who went to one the large charismatic churches here in Ft. lauderdale. He was told before he could be considered for leadership he would have to accept thier pre-trib rapture doctrine.:eek: They use Perry Stone's "rapture shown by the jewish feasts" videos as an apology. I watched them and they are pretty interesting but when he gets into the bible he butchers the texts he uses to back his position. He does break down a few verses and I actually agreed that he had proven that one of them referred to a taking away of the righteous but it didn't back his claim that it was BEFORE the tribulation.
Mat 24:29 says "AFTER the tribulation of those days" but he ignores that and goes on to verse 40 and 41 where it talks about one shall be taken and the other left. I had always had the post trib view that it was refferring to a removal of the wicked. However, he makes a decent case that it doesn't
The greek word for "taken" in that verse is paralambano.It is defined as an
"intimate association"
The greek word for "left" in the other shall be left is aphiemi. That word is defined as "forsake" or too be left aside. That information made me change my interpretation of that verse but it still ignored the fact that it occured AFTER verse 29. A fact that Rev Stone leaves out in the video.



I have a question..what is "other" I thought non-denominational covered all the bases?

one_lost_coin
Jan 15th 2009, 06:57 PM
I am a member of the Church not a denomination

Ixthus
Jan 15th 2009, 07:02 PM
I am a Christian nothing more or less.

9Marksfan
Jan 19th 2009, 09:46 AM
*Non-Denominational *


I am hard core post tribber. I have a friend who went to one the large charismatic churches here in Ft. lauderdale. He was told before he could be considered for leadership he would have to accept thier pre-trib rapture doctrine.:eek: They use Perry Stone's "rapture shown by the jewish feasts" videos as an apology. I watched them and they are pretty interesting but when he gets into the bible he butchers the texts he uses to back his position. He does break down a few verses and I actually agreed that he had proven that one of them referred to a taking away of the righteous but it didn't back his claim that it was BEFORE the tribulation.
Mat 24:29 says "AFTER the tribulation of those days" but he ignores that and goes on to verse 40 and 41 where it talks about one shall be taken and the other left. I had always had the post trib view that it was refferring to a removal of the wicked. However, he makes a decent case that it doesn't
The greek word for "taken" in that verse is paralambano.It is defined as an
"intimate association"
The greek word for "left" in the other shall be left is aphiemi. That word is defined as "forsake" or too be left aside. That information made me change my interpretation of that verse but it still ignored the fact that it occured AFTER verse 29. A fact that Rev Stone leaves out in the video.



I have a question..what is "other" I thought non-denominational covered all the bases?

Well I guess there are other denominations not covered - eg Reformed, Quaker, Anglican etc etc

CoffeeCat
Jan 20th 2009, 06:10 PM
Way back when I first voted, I was happy enough to vote "other" because although I worship at an Anglican church, I'm Christian first and foremost before I'd consider myself a member of any denomination. I've felt more and more convicted and convinced of that lately. I've happened to have found a church that deliberately does community outreach and has a passion for spreading the gospel and the love of Christ, but an important point for anyone to realize is that MANY of us go to churches where we could say the exact same thing, regardless of denomination. I feel blessed to know that -- we really are linked strongly with one another across denominations and non-denominational believers in the body of Christ, and that's how we should be.

9Marksfan
Jan 21st 2009, 11:55 AM
Way back when I first voted, I was happy enough to vote "other" because although I worship at an Anglican church, I'm Christian first and foremost before I'd consider myself a member of any denomination. I've felt more and more convicted and convinced of that lately. I've happened to have found a church that deliberately does community outreach and has a passion for spreading the gospel and the love of Christ, but an important point for anyone to realize is that MANY of us go to churches where we could say the exact same thing, regardless of denomination. I feel blessed to know that -- we really are linked strongly with one another across denominations and non-denominational believers in the body of Christ, and that's how we should be.

Amen, sister! :agree:

Emanate
Jan 21st 2009, 09:48 PM
*Non-Denominational *



Non denominational usually means a charismatic church without denominational ties.

SirTanTee
Jan 22nd 2009, 02:51 AM
Non-denominational with Catholic leanings, since I was brought up with Her. Oops, I probably shouldn't say that! :lol: Catholics get a lot of hatin' on these forums.

grit
Jan 23rd 2009, 04:40 PM
:D not usually from those of us who genuflect regularly.

and I've never liked the term non-denominational - it sounds so negative, like someone who doesn't really believe anything at all. I'd much prefer the term multi-denominational, or maybe trans-denominational. Let's start a movement. :D

lacy+chk
Jan 24th 2009, 04:50 PM
DH and i attend a non-denominational church, but he would say he is Baptist...i was raised Catholic and was saved almost two years ago, so non-denom is all i really know right now :)

Teke
Jan 24th 2009, 04:57 PM
I'm in the 'other' category. :D
I am part of the ancient faith of Eastern Orthodox in the US. My church is affiliated with the Russian branch.
In my beginnings I was a Baptist. (I went searching for historic truth after my revelation of the Son)

catholicdude
Jan 25th 2009, 05:54 AM
The Church Instituted by Christ, aka the Catholic Church (I'm probably gonna get an earful for that one!)


and I've never liked the term non-denominational - it sounds so negative, like someone who doesn't really believe anything at all.

Hi Grit,

what exactly do Non-Denominational Christians believe? I've been wondering about this for a while.

Thanks!
Zach

Emanate
Jan 25th 2009, 04:26 PM
:D not usually from those of us who genuflect regularly.

and I've never liked the term non-denominational - it sounds so negative, like someone who doesn't really believe anything at all. I'd much prefer the term multi-denominational, or maybe trans-denominational. Let's start a movement. :D



No, non denominational simply means that it is not submitted to a denomination's leadership (rules, by laws, and monetary attachments)

Sandusky
Jan 25th 2009, 05:28 PM
Another Catholic here. ;)

Just curious, what exactly is the Nazarene denomination? It's the only one on the list I'm not familiar with.

grit
Jan 25th 2009, 06:04 PM
Another Catholic here. ;)

Just curious, what exactly is the Nazarene denomination? It's the only one on the list I'm not familiar with.

It comes from Methodist and Holiness roots : Church of the Nazarene (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Nazarene) (wiki).

one_lost_coin
Jan 26th 2009, 05:52 PM
Where in the bible did Jesus say he was going to start the Nazarene Church one thousand eight hundred and ninety five years after Pentecost? How can I be sure they are the true Church established by Jesus Christ containing the fullness of truth for the salvation of souls?

KingFisher
Jan 26th 2009, 05:57 PM
Where in the bible did Jesus say he was going to start the Nazarene Church one thousand eight hundred and ninety five years after Pentecost? How can I be sure they are the true Church established by Jesus Christ containing the fullness of truth for the salvation of souls?

Simply put...

Jesus says:
Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I
am there in the midst of them.”

one_lost_coin
Jan 27th 2009, 06:14 PM
Simply put...

Jesus says:
Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I
am there in the midst of them.”

First lets read the verses that come before it as bible proof texting is never a good idea.

Matthew 18:"If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16: But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17: If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18: Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.19: Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20: For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

There are actual people who deny God is Trinity. They are two or three people gathered in His name (at least they say so) and they deny a true doctrine which came out of a Church Council that did indeed meet in Jesus Name and with the autority to loose and bind. Does the group of 2 or 3 who prayed and are convinced they should deny the Trinity have any authority over the Church? Should I even give them the time of day when they pray together and think God is telling them the Churches formal truth of the revealation of God is wrong? Of course not. That verse hardly means that false things will become true or vain requests are granted to two or three people when they pray.

The above verses say I should take such a fault ulitmately to the Church if it need go that far. The bible also states that it is the Church which is the pillar and foundation of the truth and the authority for us to know how to behave in the Church. Which Church? It would be my guess at least one criteria to knowing which Church that would have to be would be that it could trace its origins to the Great Commission 2,000 years ago. A group that starts up 1,800 or so years later would be a matter of concern to me as I can find nowhere in scripture that the Church Jesus Christ established the Apostolic Church was not going to be sufficent enough to endure till the end.

Concerning the verse you cite I thought you might be interested to hear what a member of the primitive Church had to say concerning it.

Cyprian of Carthage [200-270 AD] - Treatise 1TTreatise 1 reatise 1
Nor let any deceive themselves by a futile interpretation, in respect of the Lord having said, "Wheresoever two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Corrupters and false interpreters of the Gospel quote the last words, and lay aside the former ones, remembering part, and craftily suppressing part: as they themselves are separated from the Church, so they cut off the substance of one section. For the Lord, when He would urge unanimity and peace upon His disciples, said, "I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth touching anything that ye shall ask, it shall be given you by my Father which is in heaven. For wheresoever two or three are gathered together in my name, I am with them;" showing that most is given, not to the multitude, but to the unanimity of those that pray. "If," He says, "two of you shall agree on earth:" He placed agreement first; He has made the concord of peace a prerequisite; He taught that we should agree firmly and faithfully. But how can he agree with any one who does not agree with the booty of the Church itself, and with the universal brotherhood? How can two or three be assembled together in Christ's name, who, it is evident, are separated from Christ and from His Gospel? For we have not withdrawn from them, but they from us; and since heresies and schisms have risen subsequently, from their establishment for themselves of diverse places of worship, they have forsaken the Head and Source of the truth. But the Lord speaks concerning His Church, and to those also who are in the Church He speaks, that if they are in agreement, if according to what He commanded and admonished, although only two or three gathered together with unanimity should pray--though they be only two or three--they may obtain from the majesty of God what they ask. slays He, "am with them;" that is, with the simple and peaceable--with those who fear God and keep God's commandments. With these, although only two or three, He said that He was, in the same manner as He was with the three youths in the fiery furnace; and because they abode towards God in simplicity, and in unanimity among themselves, He animated them, in the midst of the surrounding flames, with the breath of dew: in the way in which, with the two apostles shut up in prison, because they were simple-minded and of one mind, He Himself was present; He Himself, having loosed the bolts of the dungeon, placed them again in the market-place, that they might declare to the multitude the word which they faithfully preached. When, therefore, in His commandments He lays it down, and says, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am with them," He does not divide men from the Church, seeing that He Himself ordained and made the Church; but rebuking the faithless for their discord, and commending peace by His word to the faithful, He shows that He is rather with two or three who pray with one mind, than with a great many who differ, and that more can be obtained by the discordant prayer of a few, than by the discordant supplication of many.

The above is a better way to hear those verses in the context of the question I have asked and one that has stood the test of time.

Peace be with you

always
Jan 27th 2009, 06:40 PM
COGIC - Pentecostal

KingFisher
Jan 27th 2009, 06:41 PM
Well one_lost_coin,

As a "hard headed baptist" I find those traces you're speaking of...

Although where you're probably leading this discussion is better
suited for contro. per the board rules.

KingFisher

Reynolds357
Feb 11th 2009, 08:15 PM
I consider myself non-denominational. I do not care to belong to an official faction, or division, in the body of Christ. The Body is to be unified, not divided into factions.

Emanate
Feb 11th 2009, 09:42 PM
I consider myself non-denominational. I do not care to belong to an official faction, or division, in the body of Christ. The Body is to be unified, not divided into factions.


Non denominationalism is a faction without a governing hierarchy. a faction is a faction. The division only comes when we let it.

Reynolds357
Feb 11th 2009, 09:48 PM
Non denominationalism is a faction without a governing hierarchy. a faction is a faction. The division only comes when we let it.
Non-Denominational is not a faction. That really makes no sense whatsoever to me. What does non-denominational belive?

Emanate
Feb 12th 2009, 02:39 PM
Non-Denominational is not a faction. That really makes no sense whatsoever to me. What does non-denominational belive?


They usually believe in the basic christian creeds and are charismatic, but usually not over the top charismatics. All non denominational churches I have seen seem to follow this mold, as if they were the same denomination.

Reynolds357
Feb 12th 2009, 04:30 PM
They usually believe in the basic christian creeds and are charismatic, but usually not over the top charismatics. All non denominational churches I have seen seem to follow this mold, as if they were the same denomination.
Non-denominational churches are just that, non-denominational. This means they are totally independent. Some have pentecostal beliefs, some have baptist beliefs, some have methodist beliefs, etc. etc. Many have combinations of beliefs that make them similiar to one or more denominations, yet distinctly different. There is no set of beliefs that makes one "non-denominational."

Rosebay
Feb 12th 2009, 11:40 PM
Church of God "The Singing Church" Cleveland, TN here.


However when we all get to heaven we will sing and shout like good Pentecostals then maybe sit down like good Baptists and listen to the old old story then have communion like good Presbyterians and of course like good Methodists we'll be lookin' good in those new choir robes. Didn't mean to leave anybody out but I could think of anymore.

But hey I hear there is gonna be banquet with food so maybe more people will show up.:D

I love that! It's funny and friendly and reminds us that we will all be together through the saving grace of Jesus Christ.

I'm currently Methodist myself so you can be sure there will be a banquet. The saying goes that wherever two or three Methodists are gathered together -- bring a covered dish.;)

imon32red
Feb 13th 2009, 05:39 PM
I belong to The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints. The more readily known nickname that has been given us is Mormon. I believe in the Bible as do all of you.

I also believe that Christianity is too divided among denominations and more effort among all Christians should be put towards working together, rather worry about the differences between us.

RabbiKnife
Feb 13th 2009, 06:39 PM
Imonred32,

Not to be offensive, but please understand that many -- perhaps even a majority -- of the posters on this forum consider the LDS to be a non-Christian cult that worships a false Jesus.

imon32red
Feb 13th 2009, 07:17 PM
Imonred32,

Not to be offensive, but please understand that many -- perhaps even a majority -- of the posters on this forum consider the LDS to be a non-Christian cult that worships a false Jesus.

I actually joined this forum to better understand what other Christian denominations believe. So far I am quite impressed with the depth of some of the posts. I have no problems discussing what I believe. But at the same time I do not wish to force my religious beliefs on anyone else anymore than I wish them to force their religious beliefs on me.

I guess the question here is, "Am I welcome in this forum, or am I not welcome in this forum?"

RabbiKnife
Feb 13th 2009, 10:08 PM
That might be a question for the moderators.

Studyin'2Show
Feb 14th 2009, 01:20 AM
I actually joined this forum to better understand what other Christian denominations believe. So far I am quite impressed with the depth of some of the posts. I have no problems discussing what I believe. But at the same time I do not wish to force my religious beliefs on anyone else anymore than I wish them to force their religious beliefs on me.

I guess the question here is, "Am I welcome in this forum, or am I not welcome in this forum?"I'm not a moderator but I know that this forum welcomes people of all faiths. However, they do not allow non-Protestant based beliefs (like LDS) to be preached anywhere on the board. You may want to go to the Chat to the Moderators (http://bibleforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=84) forum to ask how and where you would be allowed to post. :dunno:

God Bless!
Denise

meowmix
Feb 14th 2009, 02:00 AM
anyone know anything about American Baptists? Sorry if this was mentioned, but I'm not reading all 15 pages :P

9Marksfan
Feb 24th 2009, 11:59 AM
anyone know anything about American Baptists? Sorry if this was mentioned, but I'm not reading all 15 pages :P

They're generally very good - John Piper and Mark Dever are two of their most prominent pastors and they are both excellent - but the denomination also has open theists like Clark Pinnock, so it can be a bit of a mixed bag......

Teke
Feb 24th 2009, 10:25 PM
I wonder why we didn't all just say "Trinitarian". :hmm: Seems that bar would be the longest.

Is there such a denomination specifically called "Trinitarian"?

RabbiKnife
Feb 27th 2009, 06:36 PM
There are more that 300 different Baptist groups...

I'm sure there's a "Trinitarian" something out there...

:saint:

grit
Apr 15th 2009, 02:26 PM
The Church Instituted by Christ, aka the Catholic Church (I'm probably gonna get an earful for that one!)



Hi Grit,

what exactly do Non-Denominational Christians believe? I've been wondering about this for a while.

Thanks!
Zach
Sorry to take soooo long to reply, Zach and others.

LOL, I genuinely think non-denoms are very pro-Christians who deserve a more possitive moniker, but they often are the most diverse in beliefs of any Christian group or non-group.

kay-gee
Apr 15th 2009, 09:33 PM
I am Church of Christ.

I consider myself non-denominational and here is why. I do not believe that the Church that Christ built, and was in exsistence at the time the NT was written, was a denomination. Denominations came centuries later when men began to stray from truth and began mixing traditions and commandments of men in with Christian worship.

Jesus refers to Gods word as "seed" in the parable of sower. Now if you took a perfectly preserved apple seed from the first century and planted it later regardless of the date or millenium, you would still get what?....an apple tree.

If Gods word is followed and planted in any time period, the result should be the same...the Church exactly like the first century one. Nothing added...noting subtracted!.

all the best...

Heirphoto
May 9th 2009, 01:08 AM
While not fully in agreement with all of the man made doctrine of either denomination I usually alternate Sundays between the Mennonite Church and the Church of the Brethren. I have more conservative tendancies, my wife a bit more progressive so we have not yet fully settled but are finding the Brethren just feel like family to us.
I could be happy as a clam, in a plain suit kneeling towards my hard wooden pew in prayer, I need nothing more to feel close to God. She would prefer more progressive dress and organ music during a service.
We were both raised Catholic, but like those during the reformation, we see things a bit differently than they do.

Tony

JWayne
May 12th 2009, 01:19 AM
I am a Southern Missionary Baptist

Nikos
May 15th 2009, 12:56 AM
I am one of those on fire Pentecostals taking the world for Jesus! We believe in the power of God working among us TODAY!

Cope
May 18th 2009, 12:41 PM
I'm nondenominational and go to an interdenominational church, but if had to choose one specific that I identify most with, it would be the Assemblies of God (Pentecostal).

KATMAN
May 18th 2009, 08:34 PM
I attend The Salvation Army. It goes with the beliefs of John Wesley.So I guess I identify with the Nazarene and the Wesley Methodists denomations.

undertheblood
May 21st 2009, 07:58 AM
:note: I am of the Church of the First Born. Get my drift. :lol:

brdhggns
May 21st 2009, 10:44 PM
i attend a pentecostal church and i love it but i hate denominations.. is christ divided? nope lol :D

Nikos
May 21st 2009, 11:20 PM
I love my denomination! It is great! Thank God for my Denomination!

kenramse
May 25th 2009, 01:53 AM
There's only two so far in the Pentecostal group. I'm one and you must be the other. And I'm Assemblies of God. So if there are any other Pentecostal Holiness people here, they haven't voted yet. :wave:

Say hi to Perry Stone for me! He's one of yours I believe? :cool:


I have to consider myself a pentecostal/charismatic. Though I started out as a heathen. My wife grew up in the PH and likes to brag that "I was nothing before she found me"...We often attend the PH church she grew up in and consider it our "home" church. We love the people there.

We at one time were part of the leadership at an independent Charismatic fellowship where I was associate pastor for 7 years. The church voted to join the Assemblies of God after the pastor who had established the church felt the call to move to another city. I did not feel led to take over as pastor so...we left the church when it became AG.

There is a lot to be said for fellowship and unity, forsaking not the assembling of yourselves together. Where 2 or more come together in His name, He truly is in their midst.

I heard a story once (and many of you probably have heard something similar and can use any denomination as the group that is mentioned in the story)where a group of newly departed saints were walking around heaven and being given a "tour" of the city and an "orientation" so that they would be familiar with their neighbors and how to get around later.
The guide or leader of the group was pointing out the different areas of the city and telling of the many wonderful things that awaited the saints. The group came upon an area that had a high wall around it and the guide admonished the group to silence saying "Shhhhhhhh, please be quiet, on the other side of this wall are the ________________(you can fill in the blank) and they think that they are the only ones up here."

It is wonderful to know that we can have differences in doctrine and secondary beliefs, can attend a church of our choice and worship with those who are like-minded with us. It is also wonderful to know that we can all come together in unity and enjoy each other "In the Lord" rejoicing that we are each one a member of the Body of Christ.

winners
May 26th 2009, 01:31 AM
I really don't identify completely with any denominations but I'm a member of the Baptist church. I believe in letting the Holy Spirit teach me and reveal things to me in my Bible studies that I find difficult to understand.
Basically I'm a little toward the conservative side but I don't think I'm narrow minded. I certainly don't think that I know it all. LOL

God Bless

brdhggns
May 28th 2009, 04:25 PM
soooo... there any emergents on this site?

Youssarian
May 29th 2009, 07:54 PM
Me = Assembly of God.

Izdaari
May 29th 2009, 08:48 PM
soooo... there any emergents on this site?
Well, there's me, the Emergent Pentecostal. :pp

At least to this extent: I enjoy reading EC authors like Brian McLaren, Don Miller and Rob Bell, and I learn a lot from them, but I'm a lot more conservative than they are. I'm EC pretty close to the same way Mark Driscoll is (though I consider him an MCP (http://womenshistory.about.com/cs/60s70s/g/gl_mcp.htm)).

Athanasius
May 30th 2009, 12:37 AM
Well, there's me, the Emergent Pentecostal. :pp

At least to this extent: I enjoy reading EC authors like Brian McLaren, Don Miller and Rob Bell, and I learn a lot from them, but I'm a lot more conservative than they are. I'm EC pretty close to the same way Mark Driscoll is (though I consider him an MCP (http://womenshistory.about.com/cs/60s70s/g/gl_mcp.htm)).

Don Miller isn't so bad, Brian McLaren and Rob Bell, however, have the potential to be dangerous in their teaching, as they can be more or less misguided (get out your stones) when it comes to a lot of things (especially that thing called the Bible). Of the two, McLaren is probably the closest to outright dangerous - so much for not being aberrant in that truth question, eh? Not meaning to jump on you Izdaari, the emergent church as it's generally held (not trying to nail down specifics) is a dangerous thing.

Moxie
May 30th 2009, 03:46 AM
I am first and foremost a follower of Jesus Christ. I was raised in the Church of Christ and from pre-adolescence until I left I questioned many of their teachings. My family and I attend a very healthy Southern Baptist church that appears to be non-denominational on the surface and our member mix has many types of denominational backgrounds. However, if I had to label myself I would say I was Bapti-costal. :D

Izdaari
May 30th 2009, 06:41 AM
Don Miller isn't so bad, Brian McLaren and Rob Bell, however, have the potential to be dangerous in their teaching, as they can be more or less misguided (get out your stones) when it comes to a lot of things (especially that thing called the Bible). Of the two, McLaren is probably the closest to outright dangerous - so much for not being aberrant in that truth question, eh? Not meaning to jump on you Izdaari, the emergent church as it's generally held (not trying to nail down specifics) is a dangerous thing.Yeah, I know. I've had similar conversations with our philosopher friend, AK. McLaren has some great insights (or at least, I think so), but he's very theologically liberal. He doesn't take the bible or the divinity of Jesus very seriously, and he's completely unconcerned about correct doctrine. I don't agree with him on any of that, but he still is interesting and useful to me.

As I said, my own position is fairly close to that of Mark Driscoll, who will associate himself with the term "emerging church" but not with "Emergent" because to him "Emergent" signifies the group known as Emergent Village, who are by and large very liberal. In contrast, Driscoll is an almost-fundamentalist charismatic Calvinist who cusses a little. His emergentness is more in his style than in his substance. If he weren't such an MCP, I'd probably go to his church, which is in my neighborhood.

Izdaari
May 30th 2009, 06:43 AM
I am first and foremost a follower of Jesus Christ. I was raised in the Church of Christ and from pre-adolescence until I left I questioned many of their teachings. My family and I attend a very healthy Southern Baptist church that appears to be non-denominational on the surface and our member mix has many types of denominational backgrounds. However, if I had to label myself I would say I was Bapti-costal. :D
"Bapticostal" is a word often used to describe Calvary Chapel. You might want to check them out sometime.

"Bapticostal" also fits my AG church fairly well, and that might be because our pastor is himself former Calvary Chapel.

Anje
May 30th 2009, 11:26 AM
Pentacostal here. Attend a small assembly close by. Sometimes attend my friend's "meetings" and she's part of the "Brethern".

Live in a small town of 7,500 people and there are 27 churches - of all denominations, which I thought was kind of neat.

brdhggns
May 31st 2009, 02:11 AM
Don Miller isn't so bad, Brian McLaren and Rob Bell, however, have the potential to be dangerous in their teaching, as they can be more or less misguided (get out your stones) when it comes to a lot of things (especially that thing called the Bible). Of the two, McLaren is probably the closest to outright dangerous - so much for not being aberrant in that truth question, eh? Not meaning to jump on you Izdaari, the emergent church as it's generally held (not trying to nail down specifics) is a dangerous thing.

i myself like izdaari am pentecostal but dub into emergent material

ive never read anything by miller. heard some about him though. as for mclaren... ive read some of his stuff. theres times he left me thinking wow thats amazing and times im like he has no idea what hes talking about

as for rob bell.. i own everything he has. i know alot of people think hes the devil reincarnated but ive never read or heard anything by him that was wrong, but the thing about rob bell is he can go on tangets that lead away from the word which is dangerous. overall ive learned alot from bell.

which in the end with the emergent guys.. just be careful and be sure what your hearing lines up with scripture

Athanasius
May 31st 2009, 02:32 AM
i myself like izdaari am pentecostal but dub into emergent material

ive never read anything by miller. heard some about him though. as for mclaren... ive read some of his stuff. theres times he left me thinking wow thats amazing and times im like he has no idea what hes talking about

as for rob bell.. i own everything he has. i know alot of people think hes the devil reincarnated but ive never read or heard anything by him that was wrong, but the thing about rob bell is he can go on tangets that lead away from the word which is dangerous. overall ive learned alot from bell.

which in the end with the emergent guys.. just be careful and be sure what your hearing lines up with scripture

I've yet to read anything by McLaren that has made me go 'Wow!' -- I own all his material. A lot of 'what are you talking about?' Moments though, and not in a way I don't understand what he's saying. Whereas McLaren is just way out in left field, Bell is subtle. He believes most of the central tenets of Christianity (if not all), yet will say it doesn't matter if 'such and such' happened - that's getting into dangerous territory. His teaching on Peter walking on water was always my favourite, for all the wrong reasons.

There are some good teachings, unfortunately they undermine any foundation for that teaching.

Moxie
May 31st 2009, 05:32 AM
"Bapticostal" is a word often used to describe Calvary Chapel. You might want to check them out sometime.

"Bapticostal" also fits my AG church fairly well, and that might be because our pastor is himself former Calvary Chapel.


That is interesting, I did not realize there was anyone who used this term.

brdhggns
Jun 1st 2009, 09:21 PM
I've yet to read anything by McLaren that has made me go 'Wow!' -- I own all his material. A lot of 'what are you talking about?' Moments though, and not in a way I don't understand what he's saying. Whereas McLaren is just way out in left field, Bell is subtle. He believes most of the central tenets of Christianity (if not all), yet will say it doesn't matter if 'such and such' happened - that's getting into dangerous territory. His teaching on Peter walking on water was always my favourite, for all the wrong reasons.

There are some good teachings, unfortunately they undermine any foundation for that teaching.

i think "what are you talking about moments" is a better choice of words for what i ment. probably the one thing that sticks out to me most about mclaren is "the seagull wish to be the peacock".. that stuck with me but also "a new kind of christian" is all ive read of mclaren. what of his books would you recomend most

and i agree on the teachings of peter walking on the water. very excelent... not my favorite though. i would say my favorite would be his teachings on YHVH but to me that seems more philospical than anything. not really grounded in the word but yet it doesnt contradict anything in the word. that what it seems like alot of bells teachings are.

jobee
Jun 1st 2009, 09:40 PM
Independent Fundamental Baptist here

aka

Not a fence sitting non-denominationalist ;)

so your women dont wear pants? Sounds like bondage to me :thumbsdn:

Athanasius
Jun 3rd 2009, 09:31 PM
i think "what are you talking about moments" is a better choice of words for what i ment. probably the one thing that sticks out to me most about mclaren is "the seagull wish to be the peacock".. that stuck with me but also "a new kind of christian" is all ive read of mclaren. what of his books would you recomend most.

None of them, actually.

Izdaari
Jun 6th 2009, 08:16 PM
i think "what are you talking about moments" is a better choice of words for what i ment. probably the one thing that sticks out to me most about mclaren is "the seagull wish to be the peacock".. that stuck with me but also "a new kind of christian" is all ive read of mclaren. what of his books would you recomend most.
I found A Generous Orthodoxy to be quite thought-provoking. But there's something in it to offend almost everyone.

poppa_50
Jun 6th 2009, 11:40 PM
I am of the persuasion:

Faith Alone in Jesus Christ, our works do not save us.

Grace Alone, if a man does anything to save himself it is no longer grace.

Word Alone, this Word is the judge and authority of the Church and what it teaches. There is no greater authroity over the Christian than the Word of God.

If your church holds to that, Amen brother!

If your church does not accord with that, I cannot abide as warm and friendly as you may be.

And if your church is still trying to decide what Jesus meant, when He said "if you love me, keep My Word", I suggest finding a church of the above 3. What's more important than following Christ?

If you think doctrines divide, you might as well say it is the Bible that divides.

But put me down for other.

Ayala
Jun 6th 2009, 11:48 PM
"Bapticostal" is a word often used to describe Calvary Chapel. You might want to check them out sometime.

"Bapticostal" also fits my AG church fairly well, and that might be because our pastor is himself former Calvary Chapel.


I belong to a CC church...Can't say I've heard that term before though lol.