PDA

View Full Version : Why Would You Leave Your Church (New and Improved Poll)



Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 02:51 PM
I just started a thread on non-essentials, but that proved to be a bit difficult. So I thought I'd make the poll a bit broader than that and make the question simply this:

Which issues are important enough for you that you would leave your church over them?

HisLeast
Jul 26th 2010, 02:58 PM
I just started a thread on non-essentials, but that proved to be a bit difficult. So I thought I'd make the poll a bit broader than that and make the question simply this:

Which issues are important enough for you that you would leave your church over them?

Objectivity and commitment to truth.
Consistency of teaching (especially in connection to above)
Practical teaching on sin (and the repentance thereof)
Culture of community.

For these 4 reasons I forsake all fellowship and take my chances on my own.

waslostnowfound
Jul 26th 2010, 03:10 PM
Wow Pilgrim....that is quite a list....I'm gonna take a bit to think about it before I vote in this one. You might want to consider adding " What kind of cookies are served after the service" that is always an important thing for me. ( Just Kidding!)

AndrewBaptistFL
Jul 26th 2010, 03:21 PM
There are some basic truths that a church must have. If those exist, the body can be brought in line through study of the word and conversation. (In an ideal setting, of course)

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 03:47 PM
Fancy that - I accidentally checked Divorce when I didn't intend to. Just so you know.

AndrewBaptistFL
Jul 26th 2010, 03:49 PM
Fancy that - I accidentally checked Divorce when I didn't intend to. Just so you know.

Why do you not have "quality of worship music" as one of the options to justify leaving??? I've actually seen it done.

HisLeast
Jul 26th 2010, 03:50 PM
Why do you not have "quality of worship music" as one of the options to justify leaving??? I've actually seen it done.

Or the existance of music at all.

AndrewBaptistFL
Jul 26th 2010, 03:53 PM
Or the existance of music at all.

It's sad that a church can be split in two simply because of music tempo or the refreshments served after the message.

markedward
Jul 26th 2010, 03:58 PM
I voted:

The Trinity
The deity and humanity of Christ
The nature of salvation
The resurrection of Christ
The return of Christ
Homosexuality
Baptism in water
Baptism in the Holy Spirit
The character of God

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 03:59 PM
A few points I'd like to clarify:

Baptism of the Holy Spirit/Tongues/Gifts: I would leave my church if they made these essential for salvation.
Homosexuality: I would leave my church if a) it promoted hate toward the individuals or b) promoted permissive attitudes toward the behavior.

Gentile
Jul 26th 2010, 04:01 PM
I have been going to the same church my whole life 39 years. It's a roman catholic church, the only reason I would leave it is becasue the priests are boring and have no life in them. Not all of them but they really need to get someone in there younger with some fire in them. I have gone to many other churches, denominations and whatnot.

I feel the quick answer for people in today's world is just to leave, that is being a coward. I don't want to conform with the masses and just move because I am not completely happy. No church is a 100% perfect, just like people. I should become more active in the church and express what is needed, maybe someone will listen.

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 04:14 PM
What I'd be interested in is why some of you chose some options but then didn't choose others.

AndrewBaptistFL
Jul 26th 2010, 04:16 PM
What I'd be interested in is why some of you chose some options but then didn't choose others.

If you have questions, feel free to ask! I'll be back after lunch :)

crawfish
Jul 26th 2010, 04:21 PM
I chose the first four. I would add that if any of the other choices in the list became a salvation issue I would possibly leave. The Apostle Paul fought harder against those who tried to add conditions to God's grace than any other subject.

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 04:23 PM
What I'd be interested in is why some of you chose some options but then didn't choose others.

To add to my previous post, the other options I chose had to do with the Essentials of the Faith:
• The Trinity
• The Deity & Humanity of Christ
• The Nature of Salvation
• The Resurrection of Christ
• The Return of Christ
• The Character of God (His Holiness, Love, Wisdom, Power, etc.)

I also chose: Baptism in water because I don't believe scripture supports it being essential for salvation and if my church suddenly decided it was essential, I'd have to leave.

crawfish
Jul 26th 2010, 04:27 PM
To add to my previous post, the other options I chose had to do with the Essentials of the Faith:
• The Trinity
• The Deity & Humanity of Christ
• The Nature of Salvation
• The Resurrection of Christ
• The Return of Christ
• The Character of God (His Holiness, Love, Wisdom, Power, etc.)

I also chose: Baptism in water because I don't believe scripture supports it being essential for salvation and if my church suddenly decided it was essential, I'd have to leave.

I should have chosen those last two. I associated the return of Christ to belief in a specific theology, and the character of God seemed a little broad.

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 04:47 PM
I should have chosen those last two. I associated the return of Christ to belief in a specific theology, and the character of God seemed a little broad.

You were thinking in terms of timeline and style of return? That I wouldn't fret about enough to leave a church but to deny that he is coming back, now that's serious business, knowwhatImean?

moonglow
Jul 26th 2010, 05:35 PM
What I'd be interested in is why some of you chose some options but then didn't choose others.

cause I didn't realize we could pick more then one option..:lol::rolleyes:

BadDog
Jul 26th 2010, 05:40 PM
I just started a thread on non-essentials, but that proved to be a bit difficult. So I thought I'd make the poll a bit broader than that and make the question simply this:

Which issues are important enough for you that you would leave your church over them?Nice poll. Surprised that you did not mentioon "eternal security." I personally would not leave a church over that, and my wife and I are looking for a new church (pastoral staff's position on tithing and a lack of accountability for pastoral staff are reasons) seriously and considering a church that does not hold to ES. The gospel is far more important IMO, and a strong Lordship position concerning the gospel is a reason for leaving for us. The purity of the gospel is critical.

BD

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 05:46 PM
Nice poll. Surprised that you did not mentioon "eternal security." I personally would not leave a church over that, and my wife and I are looking for a new church (pastoral staff's position on tithing and a lack of accountability for pastoral staff are reasons) seriously and considering a church that does not hold to ES. The gospel is far more important IMO, and a strong Lordship position concerning the gospel is a reason for leaving for us. The purity of the gospel is critical.

BD

My first list was shorter but not sufficient. I didn't want to make the list too long either, though. I did put (N)OSAS in there didn't I?

EDIT: I DIDN'T!! It was supposed to be...

moonglow
Jul 26th 2010, 06:04 PM
I have to ask a question since I have seen several mention snacks after church...is that common? I have never gone to a church that had snacks after every service..or any service actually. Once in awhile they would have a dinner after church where everyone brought something to share with others. But snacks? That just seems strange to me.

Anyway most on your list I think are good reasons to be finding another church. I really don't know why people on here seem to think its a bad thing to leave a church. I have stuck with churches much longer then I ever should have because of this kind of attitude. Where does it even say in the bible we should endure false teachings for the sake of not looking bad because we changed churches? It doesn't. In fact it encourages us to get away from those teaching falsely as fast as possible!

And there is nothing wrong with visiting different churches to find a good one either. How else is a person suppose to find a good solid bible teaching church? People again act like that is a bad thing too and I don't understand why...I think it pressures people into visiting one church, then feeling they have to stay in it so they aren't seen as church hopping..who cares..I mean really? Its not anyone's business and the bible doesn't address this one one or another. Everyone should be able to visit as many churches as they like until they find one that suits their family needs. And again..that is not a bad thing...looking for a church that will meet their family needs. Then they can serve in those churches. What sense would it make to go to a church that has nothing for children and you have six kids? It wouldn't. So you go find a church that does have programs for the children...its not being selfish or self serving doing this. Its taking care of your family as God did instruct. If we are sitting in a church so off base...we aren't going to want to serve there anyway...

God bless

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 06:04 PM
First of all, the basics of what makes up the Gospel are non-negotiable for me - things such as the Trinity, the Nature of Christ, His Atonement, Return, the eternal nature of hell. You can jump high and low but for me, a church that doesn't hold to these is not a Christian church.

Then there are other things that honestly would make being at a church very difficult for me. I'm a firm believer in water baptism and baptism in the Holy Spirit, so not preaching or allowing these would make it impossible for me to function in that church. Then I speak in tongues and really would have a hard time being at a church that wouldn't allow me to speak in tongues or boycott that for theological reasons. I cannot imagine functioning in a church that would not allow the gifts of the Spirit to function.

While I have strong convictions in other areas as well, those wouldn't cause me to leave; I could live with those no problem.

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 06:18 PM
I have to ask a question since I have seen several mention snacks after church...is that common? I have never gone to a church that had snacks after every service..or any service actually. Once in awhile they would have a dinner after church where everyone brought something to share with others. But snacks? That just seems strange to me.

It is prevalent in the 'seeker sensitive' churches to my understanding. I attended services with my brother in Asheville, NC a few months ago. They actually serve coffee and donuts in the foyer before service and people take their coffee and donuts into service with them. I wouldn't make an issue to leave a church over but it just seemed odd to me.

RabbiKnife
Jul 26th 2010, 06:21 PM
It is prevalent in the 'seeker sensitive' churches to my understanding. I attended services with my brother in Asheville, NC a few months ago. They actually serve coffee and donuts in the foyer before service and people take their coffee and donuts into service with them. I wouldn't make an issue to leave a church over but it just seemed odd to me.

Coffe and donuts and raw veggies every week after the service. Coffee and drinks are permitted in the morning service as a matter of fact. I'm pretty sure I'll have either a cup of coffee or a Dr. Pepper in my hand Sunday morning when I preach.

embankmentlb
Jul 26th 2010, 06:27 PM
It is prevalent in the 'seeker sensitive' churches to my understanding. I attended services with my brother in Asheville, NC a few months ago. They actually serve coffee and donuts in the foyer before service and people take their coffee and donuts into service with them. I wouldn't make an issue to leave a church over but it just seemed odd to me.

In the days of old it was bread & wine, now its coffee & donuts. I am all for tradition myself.

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 06:31 PM
Coffe and donuts and raw veggies every week after the service. Coffee and drinks are permitted in the morning service as a matter of fact. I'm pretty sure I'll have either a cup of coffee or a Dr. Pepper in my hand Sunday morning when I preach.

We don't allow anything but water in the sauctuary. Pastor drinks water when he preaches. I don't think it's a sin or anything. After service is less....inappropriate...IMHO than in the sauctuary during service. I treat the sauctuary as holy ground. It's not for eating or socializing. It's for ministering to other's needs and for approaching the throne of God.

RabbiKnife
Jul 26th 2010, 06:33 PM
We don't allow anything but water in the sauctuary. Pastor drinks water when he preaches. I don't think it's a sin or anything. After service is less....inappropriate...IMHO than in the sauctuary during service. I treat the sauctuary as holy ground. It's not for eating or socializing. It's for ministering to other's needs and for approaching the throne of God.

Why is it treated as "holy ground"? What does coffee have to do with holiness?
Look, I don't even talk to my wife in the morning until I have a cup of coffee. Doesn't God deserve at least the same respect? :)

moonglow
Jul 26th 2010, 06:35 PM
It is prevalent in the 'seeker sensitive' churches to my understanding. I attended services with my brother in Asheville, NC a few months ago. They actually serve coffee and donuts in the foyer before service and people take their coffee and donuts into service with them. I wouldn't make an issue to leave a church over but it just seemed odd to me.

Our church is seeker friendly...doing what Christ said in reaching the lost, but we don't do this. Now they do serve pop and coffee before church that people can take in with them for the service. But no food. :hmm: They also don't have any dinners at all after church because our pastor has to give seven services over the weekend..two on Saturday evening and the rest on Sunday. It would be impossible to have a dinner and fit all those people in!

God bless

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 06:38 PM
Why is it treated as "holy ground"? What does coffee have to do with holiness?
Look, I don't even talk to my wife in the morning until I have a cup of coffee. Doesn't God deserve at least the same respect? :)


Because I choose to treat it as such...

You should have your coffee before you go to preach...people should come to church already fed and coffee'd up....just sayin'.

I'm running away now... :P

RabbiKnife
Jul 26th 2010, 06:45 PM
Because I choose to treat it as such...

You should have your coffee before you go to preach...people should come to church already fed and coffee'd up....just sayin'.

I'm running away now... :P

So "inappropriate" is a cultural, personal choice?

kay-gee
Jul 26th 2010, 06:49 PM
I am disappointed there was no selection for All of the Above.

I firmly believe that we can know ALL the truth. There is no reason, that I can think of, that we have to accept any half truths or error.

If it is recorded for us in scripture, it IS essential, and we shall be judged on it. Rev 20:12

We are to study to show ourselves approved UNTO GOD! (2Tim 2:15) So what is approval then? 60/40 truth error, 70/30, 90/10 how much exactly?

all the best...

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 06:50 PM
So "inappropriate" is a cultural, personal choice?

Yep. Totally personal and lacking in judgement of others...

waslostnowfound
Jul 26th 2010, 06:53 PM
Coffe and donuts and raw veggies every week after the service. Coffee and drinks are permitted in the morning service as a matter of fact. I'm pretty sure I'll have either a cup of coffee or a Dr. Pepper in my hand Sunday morning when I preach.

C'mon RK...what's wrong with you?? I only bring DIET Dr. Pepper to church!!

RabbiKnife
Jul 26th 2010, 06:55 PM
C'mon RK...what's wrong with you?? I only bring DIET Dr. Pepper to church!!

I need it the way God invented it...

:)

waslostnowfound
Jul 26th 2010, 06:59 PM
I need it the way God invented it...

:)

Touche'...

15 characters

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 08:38 PM
I'm rather stunned at some of the results so far. Only 57% would leave a church over the Trinity? And only 35% would leave over the issue of the Nature of hell? Wow...

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 08:56 PM
I'm rather stunned at some of the results so far. Only 57% would leave a church over the Trinity? And only 35% would leave over the issue of the Nature of hell? Wow...

I'm shocked at the percentage for the Trinity. But, I have to admit, I did not click on "nature of hell" either. I think it is key to believe there is a hell and that those who don't accept Christ will go there, but the "nature of hell" could mean other things that really are essential elements of faith, know what I mean?

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 26th 2010, 08:58 PM
I'm shocked at the percentage for the Trinity. But, I have to admit, I did not click on "nature of hell" either. I think it is key to believe there is a hell and that those who don't accept Christ will go there, but the "nature of hell" could mean other things that really are essential elements of faith, know what I mean?

To me it's pretty crucial whether you believe hell is eternal or people only burn there for a while or are destroyed altogether in the end...

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 09:05 PM
To me it's pretty crucial whether you believe hell is eternal or people only burn there for a while or are destroyed altogether in the end...

I would agree but when we get down to it, it is not an essential of the faith. I'd argue for it being eternal because scripture says so but regardless of what someone believes about hell (eternal or not) doesn't affect their salvation as would belief in the trinity or the nature of atonement....

TexUs
Jul 26th 2010, 09:29 PM
I'd not stay with a church that doesn't have any of the core beliefs in check. I'd also not stay with a church that blatantly ignores some issues and doesn't want to deal with them (I guess if we don't want to deal with them we should just take them out of the Bible, right???)

I'd also leave a church for speaking in tongues, issues on that level. I think Scripture is rather clear there... When your entire congregation speaks English and the pastor is commanding everyone to speak in tongues on queue... That's a rather big ignoring of Scripture IMO, that I'd have to leave a church such as that.

Now, sprinkle versus dunk? I don't know... That's one of those issues I could probably handle if it was the only issue.


I would agree but when we get down to it, it is not an essential of the faith. I'd argue for it being eternal because scripture says so but regardless of what someone believes about hell (eternal or not) doesn't affect their salvation as would belief in the trinity or the nature of atonement....
I'd say it's important for people to understand what happens (consequences and where they are going) to comprehend why they need salvation, no?

John146
Jul 26th 2010, 09:42 PM
I am disappointed there was no selection for All of the Above.

I firmly believe that we can know ALL the truth. There is no reason, that I can think of, that we have to accept any half truths or error.

If it is recorded for us in scripture, it IS essential, and we shall be judged on it. Rev 20:12

We are to study to show ourselves approved UNTO GOD! (2Tim 2:15) So what is approval then? 60/40 truth error, 70/30, 90/10 how much exactly?

all the best...You can still check all the boxes if you want, though. Are you saying you agree with all of your church's doctrines then? Even their eschatological doctrine? I ask that because this poll is about those things that would cause you to leave your church.

Frecs
Jul 26th 2010, 11:50 PM
I'd also leave a church for speaking in tongues, issues on that level. I think Scripture is rather clear there... When your entire congregation speaks English and the pastor is commanding everyone to speak in tongues on queue...

This isn't the thread to get into this more than to say -- what ever gave you the idea that that is how "tongues" works? I have never seen that happen...not saying some rogue church somewhere isn't doing it....but that just isn't how it works....

karenoka27
Jul 27th 2010, 12:16 AM
If a church denied the trinity, I'm out of there.

BadDog
Jul 27th 2010, 01:47 AM
My first list was shorter but not sufficient. I didn't want to make the list too long either, though. I did put (N)OSAS in there didn't I?

EDIT: I DIDN'T!! It was supposed to be...It is a good poll with some great reasons to consider. One cannot anticipate all possibilities.

BD

LookingUp
Jul 27th 2010, 06:57 AM
Must haves:
Belief in the trinity.
Belief in the deity of Christ.
Belief in the humanity of Christ.
Belief in the bodily resurrection of Christ.
Belief in the second coming (i.e. that it will literally take place).

The option, “The nature of salvation” is vague, but the Church must believe that salvation is through Christ Jesus alone.

The option, “The Character of God” is vague, but I would leave a Church that presents sermons which question (i.e. in order to make us doubt) God’s love, holiness, wisdom and power.

I would leave a Church that believes you must speak in tongues in order to be saved.

I would leave a Church that centered its sermons on the predestination of individuals (i.e. some are destined for hell without a choice in the matter). Of course, I think this idea is in conflict with the character of God (i.e. that God is love).

I would leave a Church that opposed ongoing visitors who were actively homosexual, sexually promiscuous, etc. (i.e. those living a life of sin).

BibleGirl02
Jul 27th 2010, 08:57 AM
I voted other. There is no reason that I would leave my Church, the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is infallible on all matters regarding faith and morals. I may leave my own parish some day for some reason but I will never leave the Catholic Church!

Frecs
Jul 27th 2010, 11:36 AM
The Catholic Church is infallible on all matters regarding faith and morals.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

Ta-An
Jul 27th 2010, 12:28 PM
Pilgrim, some of the questions I checked can go either way.... YES because of XYZ OR NO because of XYZ.................... :hmm:

If he who leads the congregation sets a different example to what he teaches..... :hmm:

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 27th 2010, 12:30 PM
Pilgrim, some of the questions I checked can go either way.... YES because of XYZ OR NO because of XYZ.................... :hmm:

If he who leads the congregation sets a different example to what he teaches..... :hmm:

I completely know what you mean. I considered making distinctions for that purpose, but then the list would become endless.

kay-gee
Jul 27th 2010, 12:41 PM
I voted other. There is no reason that I would leave my Church, the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church is infallible on all matters regarding faith and morals. I may leave my own parish some day for some reason but I will never leave the Catholic Church!

You are a person of conviction and I gotta appreciate that.

I don't think I could ever leave the CofC either. I've moved a lot in my life so I have attended many different congregations, but always the CofC.

I don't what else to do. It is such a part of me, I couldn't break free. I'm reminded of Peter saying to Jesus. To whom shall we go? You have the words of life.

When one is convicted and committed, what else can they do?!!

all the best...

Frecs
Jul 27th 2010, 01:09 PM
Are we of Paul? Are we of Apollos? or, are we of Jesus Christ?

TexUs
Jul 27th 2010, 01:23 PM
This isn't the thread to get into this more than to say -- what ever gave you the idea that that is how "tongues" works? I have never seen that happen...not saying some rogue church somewhere isn't doing it....but that just isn't how it works....
1) Where Paul addresses that is entirely speaking of what edifies the body... So, an entirely English-speaking church speaking in tongues isn't exactly edifying the body. Now if a pastor in China gets up and spits out Mandarin and really can't speak much of it: that's edifying the body.
2) And yes, I've seen speaking in tongues like I gave the example of. It's not unusual, either.


I would leave a Church that opposed ongoing visitors who were actively homosexual, sexually promiscuous, etc. (i.e. those living a life of sin).
Who would be in the church if we didn't allow sinners in? ;)

TexUs
Jul 27th 2010, 01:32 PM
I would leave a Church that centered its sermons on the predestination of individuals (i.e. some are destined for hell without a choice in the matter). Of course, I think this idea is in conflict with the character of God (i.e. that God is love).
Now I do have an issue with that... Because you don't agree with it, it shouldn't be preached? Or you just don't think it should be central?
If the former, I'd leave a church that ignores certain issues.
If the later, I'd agree we shouldn't bring sermons back around to predestination every week. However if a preacher is Calvinist, his sermons will always have a tinge of it in them no matter what, that's just his central theology and you can't avoid it. Likewise the opposite is true, if you believe in free-will, a free-will pastor will always have a tinge of that in his sermons no matter what- that's his theological centrality.

I also think you miss Predestination, you are assuming we are all naturally good, that we start in heaven but are "sent" to hell. The reality is the opposite. We all start out in hell and by God's grace we're saved. He has called few. It really doesn't subtract from his glory but enhances it!
Of course, I'd assume this is clear but to clarify, when I say "in heaven" and "in hell" I obviously don't mean literally but rather "deserving of" or "destined to".

Pilgrimtozion
Jul 27th 2010, 01:40 PM
Just want to emphasize that this thread is not to discuss specific issues but to discuss how they affect our leaving a church.

John146
Jul 27th 2010, 02:23 PM
I also think you miss Predestination, you are assuming we are all naturally good, that we start in heaven but are "sent" to hell. The reality is the opposite. We all start out in hell and by God's grace we're saved. He has called few.No, He has called many but chosen few (Matt 20:16, Matt 22:14).

TexUs
Jul 27th 2010, 02:54 PM
No, He has called many but chosen few (Matt 20:16, Matt 22:14).

The "chosen few" is what I was referencing, I used the term called though, along with in my mind anyway the narrow gate. I guess we could split hairs on the terminology though.

Frecs
Jul 27th 2010, 02:56 PM
The "chosen few" is what I was referencing, I used the term called though, along with in my mind anyway the narrow gate. I guess we could split hairs on the terminology though.

Please, please, please take this discussion to another thread. The OP has asked nicely that we keep this thread focused on his OP.

LookingUp
Jul 27th 2010, 04:02 PM
Who would be in the church if we didn't allow sinners in? ;)A bunch of self-righteous judges? Ooh, I know, modern-day Pharisees?

LookingUp
Jul 27th 2010, 04:29 PM
Now I do have an issue with that... Because you don't agree with it, it shouldn't be preached? Or you just don't think it should be central?
If the former, I'd leave a church that ignores certain issues.
If the later, I'd agree we shouldn't bring sermons back around to predestination every week. However if a preacher is Calvinist, his sermons will always have a tinge of it in them no matter what, that's just his central theology and you can't avoid it. Likewise the opposite is true, if you believe in free-will, a free-will pastor will always have a tinge of that in his sermons no matter what- that's his theological centrality.Our Pastor is highly influenced by the notion of individual predestination. I wouldn’t say he’d bet his salvation on it, but that was how he was taught, so his sermons very often have a tinge of predestination in them. But if the Pastor was hard-core predestination and wanted to make that message central to every sermon, I’d have to leave.

I’ll give you one example of what I have seen this notion of individual predestination has done to people. My dear friend, who holds to this idea, came to a party at my home. She began witnessing to my other friend who is an unbeliever. Near the end of their conversation, my friend said (happily and without a hint of grief), “Well, it may be that your name isn’t written in the book of life, so you’re just not going to accept Jesus. Hell is simply inevitable for some.” Now, my unbelieving friend doesn’t even try to consider God, since she’s probably not picked anyway.


I also think you miss Predestination, you are assuming we are all naturally good, that we start in heaven but are "sent" to hell. The reality is the opposite. We all start out in hell and by God's grace we're saved. He has called few. It really doesn't subtract from his glory but enhances it!
Of course, I'd assume this is clear but to clarify, when I say "in heaven" and "in hell" I obviously don't mean literally but rather "deserving of" or "destined to". My view is that we begin as innocent babies, but at some point in our youth we choose evil over good.

TexUs
Jul 27th 2010, 04:47 PM
Our Pastor is highly influenced by the notion of individual predestination. I wouldn’t say he’d bet his salvation on it, but that was how he was taught, so his sermons very often have a tinge of predestination in them. But if the Pastor was hard-core predestination and wanted to make that message central to every sermon, I’d have to leave.

I’ll give you one example of what I have seen this notion of individual predestination has done to people. My dear friend, who holds to this idea, came to a party at my home. She began witnessing to my other friend who is an unbeliever. Near the end of their conversation, my friend said (happily and without a hint of grief), “Well, it may be that your name isn’t written in the book of life, so you’re just not going to accept Jesus. Hell is simply inevitable for some.” Now, my unbelieving friend doesn’t even try to consider God, since she’s probably not picked anyway.

Trying to honor the OP's wishes so even though I had typed up something, I removed it and will just post the following...

I do agree, though... If a pastor brought predestination into every sermon I'd probably leave as well. Likewise if a pastor brought free will, baptism, or any other issue into every sermon trying to push an issue, I'd probably leave that church.


One thing I seem to be finding is all the exceptional churches out there are GENERALLY elder-led. That's another reason I'd consider leaving a church, as it usually comes with the abuse of office, finances, etc... Everything that goes along with lack of accountability.

Beckrl
Jul 27th 2010, 07:41 PM
Fancy that - I accidentally checked Divorce when I didn't intend to. Just so you know.

That one almost got me, but then I chose "Others" which would include Remarriage.

ThyWordIsTruth
Jul 30th 2010, 02:24 AM
What I'd be interested in is why some of you chose some options but then didn't choose others.

I chose the following (Yes, I would leave) and my reasons below:


The Trinity

Yes: Non-negotiable tenet of the faith.


The Deity & Humanity of Christ

Yes: Non-negotiable tenet of the faith



The Nature of Salvation

Depends. I would leave if the church believes that anyone who says a prayer is born again and thus saved.

On soteriology, again it depends on how far off the pastor's teachings and beliefs are from my own. If they are not 5-point Calvinists but 2-3 points, I'd stay if everything else is good, especially faithfulness to teaching and preaching the word of God. If they are extreme, or worse hyper Calvinists, I'd leave for sure.



The Resurrection of Christ

Yes: Non negotiable tenet of the faith.



The Return of Christ

I understand this to mean believing that Christ will return. If so, yes I will leave if they don't believe that. Again non negotiable tenet of the faith.


A specific eschatological position

No. No one is sure anyway.


The Nature of Creation (Big-bang, Young Earth, GAP-theory)

Yes. I believe the Scriptures are clear and inerrant, and I believe in the literal 6-solar day creation of the earth.


Homosexuality

Yes, if they permit it.


Divorce

No.


Role of women in the Church

Yes. I would leave if women are put in leadership in the church. I believe Scriptures are crystal clear on this, and if the pastor installs women pastors, it's clear to me he's more concerned about being acceptable to the world then being faithful to the commandments of God.


Baptism in water

Modes of baptism: Sprinkling, immersion, no. I believe in immersion, but don't think I'd leave if everything else is in order. However if they believe that baptism is necessary for salvation I might leave.


Baptism in the Holy Spirit

This is a vague question. All born again believers are baptised in the Holy Spirit. But if this is referring to the Charismatic belief that there is a 2nd baptism for the conferring of supernatural gifts, then yes, I would definitely leave.


Speaking in tongues

I chose Yes but again this is unclear. If the church believes in speaking in Biblical tongues (speaking in an unlearned foreign language) but that its occurrence is very rare, I might not leave.

However if the church believe in speaking in the modern day gibberish nonsense and they teach people that that is biblical tongues, then I would definitely leave.


Gifts of the Spirit

Chose yes. I assume this is referring to gifts of prophecy, healing etc. I believe those gifts have ceased. However, I'm open minded and am willing to test whatever prophecy that is given to see whether it comes to pass, consistently with 100% accuracy.


The Character of God (His Holiness, Love, Wisdom, Power, etc.)

I chose Yes. If these attributes are questioned, I'd leave.


Tithing / Giving

Chose no. My church believes in tithing, I don't. But it's a private matter and I just give as my heart leads me to give and I don't have problems with this.


Church Organization

Yes. If the church is organized as a corporation instead of a church.


The Eternal Nature of Hell

Yes.


Observing the Sabbath / Sunday rest

I think I chose yes. Scriptures is clear that there's no more need to observe these.


Other (please specify)

TexUs
Jul 30th 2010, 02:01 PM
Let me throw this out there... Even if you personally disagree... Let's say, with Calvin/Armenian...
If your pastor can BIBLICALLY back himself up and is willing to discuss the issues you have with it, would you stay?

There's many pastors that just get cookie-cutter from seminary and, like the people in the church, haven't really dealt with why they believe in certain viewpoints or have never run into it. THOSE types I'd leave if they opposed my views, as they obviously haven't dealt with the why's.
If a pastor can defend why he's X, and can deal with (instead of ignore) the scripture supporting Y... Would you stay?
It's pastors that can defend why he's X, and ignore scripture supporting Y that you've got to watch out for.

RabbiKnife
Jul 30th 2010, 02:04 PM
Let me throw this out there... Even if you personally disagree... Let's say, with Calvin/Armenian...
If your pastor can BIBLICALLY back himself up and is willing to discuss the issues you have with it, would you stay?

There's many pastors that just get cookie-cutter from seminary and, like the people in the church, haven't really dealt with why they believe in certain viewpoints or have never run into it. THOSE types I'd leave if they opposed my views, as they obviously haven't dealt with the why's.
If a pastor can defend why he's X, and can deal with (instead of ignore) the scripture supporting Y... Would you stay?
It's pastors that can defend why he's X, and ignore scripture supporting Y that you've got to watch out for.

I'm the chairman of our Elder board. We are real Elders, not a trumped up "spiritualized" name for board of directors. We have spiritual authority and obligation over the entire flock, including our pastor. He is one among equals, he just happens to get a paycheck. We and the deacons care for the congregation.

The pastor is Calvinist. The church is Reformed.
I'm Arminian.
I'm preaching this week, like I do usually once a month.

There is no issue unless we choose to divide ourselves.

TexUs
Jul 30th 2010, 02:23 PM
Doesn't answer my question though...

RabbiKnife
Jul 30th 2010, 02:27 PM
The entire Calvinism/Arminianism debate is a secondary issue that means about as much as does the toilet paper roll out over the top or underneath the roll.

As soon as I get all of the secondary theological planks out of my eyes I'll start worrying about my pastor's theological sawdust.

TexUs
Jul 30th 2010, 03:02 PM
I was referencing the comment above mine,
"On soteriology, again it depends on how far off the pastor's teachings and beliefs are from my own. If they are not 5-point Calvinists but 2-3 points, I'd stay if everything else is good, especially faithfulness to teaching and preaching the word of God. If they are extreme, or worse hyper Calvinists, I'd leave for sure."


And I agree with the Calvin/Armenian statement. However, as I said, do you stay with a pastor that refuses to look at evidence contrary to his beliefs? That choses to bypass certain passages of scripture that would challenge his theology?

RabbiKnife
Jul 30th 2010, 03:19 PM
I have a relationship with my pastor. He is my friend. I don't break friendships over secondary issues, period. Even if people hold stubbornly to them and refuse to contemplate anything different.

Him ducking any passage of Scripture is not an option, and neither is ducking on my part.

TexUs
Jul 30th 2010, 03:38 PM
"Even if people refuse to contemplate... I don't break friendships over"
"Him ducking any passage of Scripture is not an option"

Which is it?

I wouldn't break a friendship with someone over that but I would most certainly break spiritual fellowship over someone opting to duck Scripture.

RabbiKnife
Jul 30th 2010, 03:41 PM
"Even if people refuse to contemplate... I don't break friendships over"
"Him ducking any passage of Scripture is not an option"

Which is it?

I wouldn't break a friendship with someone over that but I would most certainly break spiritual fellowship over someone opting to duck Scripture.

Both. If he was so stupid as to refuse to contemplate Scripture, I still wouldn't break fellowship with him.
And as long as he is my friend, he doesn't have the luxury of "ducking Scripture," as I would be in his face about it.

Frecs
Jul 30th 2010, 04:27 PM
And as long as he is my friend, he doesn't have the luxury of "ducking Scripture," as I would be in his face about it.

Truer words have never been spoken.....

TexUs
Jul 30th 2010, 04:49 PM
As would I however my entire question was based on the fact they still opt to ignore it, LOL

PneumaPsucheSoma
Jul 31st 2010, 08:43 PM
I'm rather stunned at some of the results so far. Only 57% would leave a church over the Trinity? And only 35% would leave over the issue of the Nature of hell? Wow...


I'm shocked at the percentage for the Trinity. But, I have to admit, I did not click on "nature of hell" either. I think it is key to believe there is a hell and that those who don't accept Christ will go there, but the "nature of hell" could mean other things that really are essential elements of faith, know what I mean?

"Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God:" -1 John 4:2-3a

I can't part fellowship over Trinity, which is NT inferred, not stated. As long as they say Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, they uphold the Deity and humanity of Christ. Some of the greatest annointed preaching and teaching I've experienced has been in Oneness churches.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Jul 31st 2010, 09:15 PM
I'm the chairman of our Elder board. We are real Elders, not a trumped up "spiritualized" name for board of directors. We have spiritual authority and obligation over the entire flock, including our pastor. He is one among equals, he just happens to get a paycheck. We and the deacons care for the congregation.

The pastor is Calvinist. The church is Reformed.
I'm Arminian.
I'm preaching this week, like I do usually once a month.

There is no issue unless we choose to divide ourselves.


The entire Calvinism/Arminianism debate is a secondary issue that means about as much as does the toilet paper roll out over the top or underneath the roll.

As soon as I get all of the secondary theological planks out of my eyes I'll start worrying about my pastor's theological sawdust.


I have a relationship with my pastor. He is my friend. I don't break friendships over secondary issues, period. Even if people hold stubbornly to them and refuse to contemplate anything different.

Him ducking any passage of Scripture is not an option, and neither is ducking on my part.


Both. If he was so stupid as to refuse to contemplate Scripture, I still wouldn't break fellowship with him.
And as long as he is my friend, he doesn't have the luxury of "ducking Scripture," as I would be in his face about it.

In both my experience and observation, this great example of functional relational leadership is sadly lacking virtually everywhere.

nazzer_aij
Jul 31st 2010, 11:09 PM
I'm nondenominationlist, I do not attend to worship God in any church or chapel which was built by man.
1 Cor. 3:16 Know ye not that ye, are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
v.17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy, for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
nazzer_aij.

kay-gee
Aug 1st 2010, 12:10 AM
I'm nondenominationlist, I do not attend to worship God in any church or chapel which was built by man.
1 Cor. 3:16 Know ye not that ye, are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
v.17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy, for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
nazzer_aij.

Why not? Are you a Quaker or something?

all the best...

nazzer_aij
Aug 1st 2010, 12:31 AM
Why not? Are you a Quaker or something?

all the best...

Hi kay-gee,
I do not go to church because this is what I observe there; Acts 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotion, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.
whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, whom I declare unto you.
v.24) God that hath made the world and all things therein, seeing he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made in hands.
Quaker or something? I do not know what is it and I know no one who belong to it. You may call me as what you want, but what I can say we are children of God.
Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 12:38 AM
Nazzer is from the Phillipines, and wouldn't know what a Quaker is. Or Quake cereal. Or Quaker State petro products. :-)

nazzer_aij
Aug 1st 2010, 01:10 AM
Nazzer is from the Phillipines, and wouldn't know what a Quaker is. Or Quake cereal. Or Quaker State petro products. :-)

Brother,
Thank you for your clarification!!!Quaker cereal? That's true because we had no wheat plantation here in the Philippines. But I do know quaker oats because it was my grandchild favorite.
Do you mean Quaker of George Fox? I don't know them, nor I do not know if they exist here in our country. Quaker State petro products.I think we also don't have them.
Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 02:20 AM
Brother,
Thank you for your clarification!!!Quaker cereal? That's true because we had no wheat plantation here in the Philippines. But I do know quaker oats because it was my grandchild favorite.
Do you mean Quaker of George Fox? I don't know them, nor I do not know if they exist here in our country. Quaker State petro products.I think we also don't have them.
Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

Quake is/was a sweet kid's cereal that was sold alongside another sweet kid's cereal, Quisp. Not impotant, especially in regards to leaving a church fellowship. :-)

TexUs
Aug 1st 2010, 04:28 AM
I can't part fellowship over Trinity, which is NT inferred, not stated. As long as they say Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, they uphold the Deity and humanity of Christ. Some of the greatest annointed preaching and teaching I've experienced has been in Oneness churches.
I dunno...
Denying the Trinity is denying who God is. I don't think you and I would worship the same God if you believed the Trinity and I didn't.


I'm nondenominationlist, I do not attend to worship God in any church or chapel which was built by man.
1 Cor. 3:16 Know ye not that ye, are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
v.17) If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy, for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
nazzer_aij.
I do disagree with this.

Acts 2... We see fellowship is a key part of the life of a church ("devoted"). Discipleship is also key to strength of the church body. We're called to it (1 Cor 1:9). Hebrews 10, "Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing". Colossians 2... Fellowship/Discipleship (What I'd say "encouraged and united" refers to) is necessary for "full riches of complete understanding" so you may know Christ.
Fellowship is a function of believers, not unbelievers. A goal of which is worship. I'm not saying we can live out our acts of worship, but I'm just talking about how they go hand in hand.


Believe me, I'll be the first person to agree with you that the Church is in need of help and going about things totally wrong nowadays, especially here in America, but I don't think ceasing to be a part of a body of fellowship is the answer.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 05:22 AM
I dunno...
Denying the Trinity is denying who God is. I don't think you and I would worship the same God if you believed the Trinity and I didn't.

I understand that perspective; but scripture doesn't teach trinity, it's inferred. God is not the trinity; trinity is a tenet of God's "personhood" ascribed by a 4th century council of opposed orthodox church leaders who invented the title and terminology (and with much heated debate and furor).

By the Word, if someone confesses Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, they can only say that by the Spirit. I would leave a church if they held the Nicene Creed above the Word.

I know a number of spirit-filled believers who don't quite grasp or agree with the trinity teaching; and I have several close Oneness friends. They adamantly confess Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. They believe Jesus is God born of a virgin in the likeness of sinful flesh. They just "keep it real" and say they don't fully understand trinity descriptions. It's better than all the double-talk trying to describe and define trinity.

(I started a trinity/oneness thread earlier so as not to derail this one.)

BTW... I am not promoting Oneness.

nazzer_aij
Aug 1st 2010, 06:30 AM
I dunno...
Denying the Trinity is denying who God is. I don't think you and I would worship the same God if you believed the Trinity and I didn't.


I do disagree with this.

Acts 2... We see fellowship is a key part of the life of a church ("devoted"). Discipleship is also key to strength of the church body. We're called to it (1 Cor 1:9). Hebrews 10, "Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing". Colossians 2... Fellowship/Discipleship (What I'd say "encouraged and united" refers to) is necessary for "full riches of complete understanding" so you may know Christ.
Fellowship is a function of believers, not unbelievers. A goal of which is worship. I'm not saying we can live out our acts of worship, but I'm just talking about how they go hand in hand.


Believe me, I'll be the first person to agree with you that the Church is in need of help and going about things totally wrong nowadays, especially here in America, but I don't think ceasing to be a part of a body of fellowship is the answer.

Hi TexUs,
The purpose while we were here in Christian Messages Board/bible Forum is for fellowship by sharing to our brother and sister our view and christian faith not withstanding if what
is your religion or denomination. by giving your share or reply to every OP or thread opened our understanding in knowing if what is the will of our Lord. We do this in the name
of love for our brother and sister and not just to debate and defend our own belief but the truth inscribe in the scripture.
Thanks.
nazzer.

Firstfruits
Aug 1st 2010, 09:53 AM
Teaching that is contrary to the gospel of Christ. (Other).

Firstfruits

Ta-An
Aug 1st 2010, 10:15 AM
"Other"

I am praying at present for guidance about leaving my church......
Our Minister serves communion, because he has to ....... but he does not take part in the communion...... and I can not stay at a church like that....
I have made a financial commitment to the church...... so it influences my decision to leave.

TexUs
Aug 1st 2010, 02:29 PM
God is not the trinity; trinity is a tenet of God's "personhood"
The Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Father are one. That is who God is.
If one says Christ is not part of God then it's denying who God is.

I know you aren't promoting onenness- I'm just saying why I think denying the trinity is denying who God is. God is the Father, Holy Spirit, and Christ. Would he be a different God if he were only the Holy Spirit and the Father? I'd say so.


Hi TexUs,
The purpose while we were here in Christian Messages Board/bible Forum is for fellowship by sharing to our brother and sister our view and christian faith not withstanding if what
is your religion or denomination. by giving your share or reply to every OP or thread opened our understanding in knowing if what is the will of our Lord. We do this in the name
of love for our brother and sister and not just to debate and defend our own belief but the truth inscribe in the scripture.
Thanks.
nazzer.
I don't see how that's possible to break bread and pray with one another over discussion boards. Could you consider that "being together", "attending the temple together","breaking bread in their homes" as spoken of in Acts?

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 08:08 PM
The Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Father are one. That is who God is.
If one says Christ is not part of God then it's denying who God is.

I know you aren't promoting onenness- I'm just saying why I think denying the trinity is denying who God is. God is the Father, Holy Spirit, and Christ. Would he be a different God if he were only the Holy Spirit and the Father.

Okay, I get that. Godhead can't omit Jesus.

Frecs
Aug 1st 2010, 10:23 PM
Okay, I get that. Godhead can't omit Jesus.

The Godhead can't omit any one of the Three: Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 10:34 PM
The Godhead can't omit any one of the Three: Father, Son, or Holy Spirit.

It was a specific response; but agreed. It still doesn't have to be trinity to include them all.

Frecs
Aug 1st 2010, 10:44 PM
It was a specific response; but agreed. It still doesn't have to be trinity to include them all.

In what other way would all three be included?

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 1st 2010, 10:56 PM
In what other way would all three be included?

THAT's why I didn't select Trinity. Nobody can even express it, but they're adamant about it. The terminology is the tripper... persons. It's not in the Word, Sis.

nazzer_aij
Aug 2nd 2010, 01:31 AM
The Holy Spirit, Christ, and the Father are one. That is who God is.
If one says Christ is not part of God then it's denying who God is.

I know you aren't promoting onenness- I'm just saying why I think denying the trinity is denying who God is. God is the Father, Holy Spirit, and Christ. Would he be a different God if he were only the Holy Spirit and the Father? I'd say so.


I don't see how that's possible to break bread and pray with one another over discussion boards. Could you consider that "being together", "attending the temple together","breaking bread in their homes" as spoken of in Acts?

Hi TexUs,
I'd got your idea that it is really imposible to break bread (pray not included) with one another over discussion boards, but I do not buy "attending the temple" that is made by man or through the
house of others in breaking bread as recorded in Acts.
Please do not be provoke if I tell that it is also in vain if we do this things according to your view
in literal way. Supposed I 'll give you an example; if we are together numbering eight person,
and I buy a pizza pie it was already precut before delivery into eight pcs. so if we eat together
every one has equal share.After eating this bread, where do you know that this bread proceeded?

Mark 7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meat.
John 3:12 If i told you earthly things, and believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly
things?

This what God commandeth; Malachi 3:12 Bring ye all the titches into the storehouse, that there may meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of host, if I will not open you
the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
Did you got the meaning of this ? if not every thing I'll tell you will be imposible for you.
Things to know;
1. 10% of what is in storehouse,maybe wheat ,grain etc.
2. meat or bread to bring in Lord's house; where is it located?
3. is abundant blessing.
Answer:
1. seed maybe wheat or etc.
2.bread or body of Jesus his house, 1 Cor.3:16 you are the temple of God
3. In breaking of bread that you do in the name of Christ the Holy Ghost is indwelling on you and the praying you do is in accordance to his commandment; Do this in remembrance of me.1 Cor.11:24

Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 2nd 2010, 03:26 AM
In what other way would all three be included?

Without promoting any: Triad; Tripartite; Oneness.

All can be expressed to contain all three, just not necessarily as "persons"; but the Word doesn't use that terminology in regards to God.

My point is: I would look to poll choice 2 and beyond for reasons to bail from a church. That would take care of Godhead concerns.

TexUs
Aug 2nd 2010, 01:37 PM
Triad, Tripartite, Oneness, Trinity... What difference does it make? You're splitting hairs- it all points to the same idea.

Hi TexUs,
I'd got your idea that it is really imposible to break bread (pray not included) with one another over discussion boards, but I do not buy "attending the temple" that is made by man or through the
house of others in breaking bread as recorded in Acts.
You're missing the point (this is not literal that you must eat to have fellowship), the point is that they spent time together praying, eating, worshiping together, sharing possessions, etc all of which is parts of fellowship. You can't do that on discussion boards.
Believe me, I'm as much an advocate for the modern age of the internet as anyone, however it's clear to me that Biblical fellowship is more than just "talking to other Christians".

BadDog
Aug 2nd 2010, 10:33 PM
Well, perhaps the following will be fodder for thought: I hold firmly to eternal security. I did not list that issue as a reason to leave a church (I don't think). I am in the process of becoming a member of a Wesleyan church, which has a mild form of Arminianism. So... what do you guys think?

BD

TexUs
Aug 2nd 2010, 11:12 PM
Well, perhaps the following will be fodder for thought: I hold firmly to eternal security. I did not list that issue as a reason to leave a church (I don't think). I am in the process of becoming a member of a Wesleyan church, which has a mild form of Arminianism. So... what do you guys think?

BD
I don't think I could personally break fellowship with someone based on Armenian/Calvin.

There are some that argue (And are well Biblically based on it... IE, they can present a valid argument) against that. However I PERSONALLY don't think it's an issue to divide fellowship over.

nazzer_aij
Aug 3rd 2010, 12:34 AM
Triad, Tripartite, Oneness, Trinity... What difference does it make? You're splitting hairs- it all points to the same idea.

You're missing the point (this is not literal that you must eat to have fellowship), the point is that they spent time together praying, eating, worshiping together, sharing possessions, etc all of which is parts of fellowship. You can't do that on discussion boards.
Believe me, I'm as much an advocate for the modern age of the internet as anyone, however it's clear to me that Biblical fellowship is more than just "talking to other Christians".

Hi TexUs,
Sorry, if I miss your point; I know how to deal a person if we are chating of earthly things, but I joined this board wishing I could gain spiritual growth. As posible I read and understand often every
post I read in spiritual manner.
About spiritual activities on how I make fellowship with other yes sometimes I met with other people
but not in their church neither in mine church (literal) because being non denomination I've none.
When I start studying bible in 1982 or past 24 years before I retired in my work in Westin Hotel
Within that long number of years I met different people that belong to different Christian sects
and I had a fruit of eight person who indeed learn and receive the WORD of God.

I have to inform you that we in the Philippines are one of the most religious country in the world
and we are the sole Christian country here in Asia.

Until the present times we with same faith and understanding in context of bible continuosly share
withone another every verse that we study our activities is limited to bible disccusion and eating
joking etc.no dancing and singing.We do not pray in lips but in mind, no murmoring and groaning.

If you have something you would like to ask, don't hesitate to ask me question and I'll be glad to change sharing with you.
Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

Frecs
Aug 3rd 2010, 12:53 AM
Triad, Tripartite, Oneness, Trinity... What difference does it make? You're splitting hairs- it all points to the same idea.

ummm...NO, it isn't all the same thing. I'm not familiar with the first two, but I can tell you for certain that Oneness is not the same as Trinity. Essentially, Oneness is the belief that God is One God with three manifestations: that there was God (The Father), then there was the incarnation of God into Jesus, and then after Jesus ascended to heaven God became the Holy Spirit. One God, three manifestations. The Trinity teaches that God is Three in One: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit and all three are co-existant and eternal--always was and always will be. Thus, Jesus existed as The Son prior to the incarnation (in fact, from forever) as did the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity is supported in scripture whereas Oneness is not. Can we fully understand the Trinity? No. But, we know enough from scripture to know the doctrine is true.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 3rd 2010, 01:49 AM
ummm...NO, it isn't all the same thing. I'm not familiar with the first two, but I can tell you for certain that Oneness is not the same as Trinity. Essentially, Oneness is the belief that God is One God with three manifestations: that there was God (The Father), then there was the incarnation of God into Jesus, and then after Jesus ascended to heaven God became the Holy Spirit. One God, three manifestations. The Trinity teaches that God is Three in One: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit and all three are co-existant and eternal--always was and always will be. Thus, Jesus existed as The Son prior to the incarnation (in fact, from forever) as did the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Trinity is supported in scripture whereas Oneness is not. Can we fully understand the Trinity? No. But, we know enough from scripture to know the doctrine is true.

I was wondering when you'd happen back by this way, Sis. :-)

ikester7579
Aug 3rd 2010, 02:27 AM
The Trinity: Bible numerology is part of the Bible.
The Deity & Humanity of Christ: This depends on what's being said.
The Nature of Salvation: This is according to what is being said.
The Resurrection of Christ: Denying the ressurection I would leave.
The Return of Christ: Denying the return of Christ I would leave.
A specific eschatological position: It depends on the position and what being said.
The Nature of Creation (Big-bang, Young Earth, GAP-theory): No one can have absolute truth on this. I am YEC, but I also believe that other creation beliefs have things to offer. To deny other ideas based on being dogmatic means you have a closed mind and most of the time will refuse correction. But, I will not deny the word through compromise to make someone else happy.
Homosexuality: Just read what the Bible says. Just because we deem it politically correct does not mean that God is going to judge us that way.
Divorce: I have no problem with divorce as long as it's done for the right reasons.
Role of women in the Church: Who was the first person to spread the good news of the gospel? Mary was. Who told Mary to do this? Christ did. Who came and confirmed to the apostles what Mary told them? Christ did. No man came claim this.
Baptism in water: It's in the Bible.
Baptism in the Holy Spirit: It's in the Bible.
Speaking in tongues: I understand why some deny this, but the Bible is clear about what a believer is supposed to do when someone denies the power of God: 2tim 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
Gifts of the Spirit: Denial of the gifts of the spirit fall into the answer above.
Tithing / Giving: Controversial, but I won't stop tithing. If the love of money is more important to a believer than so is.....
Church Organization: If the power of salvation, the gifts of the spirit, etc... Are present. Then God approves so who am I to judge it?
The Eternal Nature of Hell: Much is misunderstood about this. And as long as salvation is offered what misunderstood about hell is not always important.
Observing the Sabbath / Sunday rest: God says it's important. But with all the controversy about this I'm not sure what to believe. So no I would not leave the church over this.

There are no perfect churches, no perfect preachers, and no perfect doctrines. And because we are not perfect, God leaves leeway for that. The question is, where is that line drawn?

ThyWordIsTruth
Aug 3rd 2010, 04:14 AM
I was referencing the comment above mine,
"On soteriology, again it depends on how far off the pastor's teachings and beliefs are from my own. If they are not 5-point Calvinists but 2-3 points, I'd stay if everything else is good, especially faithfulness to teaching and preaching the word of God. If they are extreme, or worse hyper Calvinists, I'd leave for sure."


And I agree with the Calvin/Armenian statement. However, as I said, do you stay with a pastor that refuses to look at evidence contrary to his beliefs? That choses to bypass certain passages of scripture that would challenge his theology?

Well since this was directed to me I'll answer. I've talked to my pastor regarding this issue and his answers so far are unconvincing to me. He does give "cookie cutter" analogies many times to try to explain his beliefs. E.g. if a tap is on, all the water is going to waste anyway so what's wrong with someone putting a glass underneath and saving some.

I'm sure if asked to justify his beliefs exegetically, he can. But I might disagree with his interpretation because many verses can be interpreted very differently depending on what kind of theological glasses you're wearing (your paradigms). We talked about John 15:6 for example (we were discussing OSAS) but his interpretation is that throwing the branches into the fire is not to be read as an analogy of casting someone into hell and we're not free to make that association. To me, that analogy is quite clear, as there are several parallels to this throughout the Gospels. So we come to a stalemate.

I'm also wary of taking the debate too far and hurting the unity, which is a practical consideration for me since I'm still new to the church. Also, I always hold the mindset that he might be right, and I might be wrong, no matter how convinced of my position I am right now. Lastly, I'm aware that he knows much more than me, so I have to discount that factor too.

If I thought my pastor was intellectually dishonest and refused to talk about verses which countered his theological position, then I'd consider leaving.

TexUs
Aug 3rd 2010, 03:26 PM
I have to inform you that we in the Philippines are one of the most religious country in the world
and we are the sole Christian country here in Asia.
Oh, I know...
I wouldn't consider Catholicism a Christian denomination but rather a religion in its own, and the vast majority of the Philippines is Catholic.


I personally still disagree with not going to church at all however, but... I've stated my case.


Well since this was directed to me I'll answer. I've talked to my pastor regarding this issue and his answers so far are unconvincing to me. He does give "cookie cutter" analogies many times to try to explain his beliefs. E.g. if a tap is on, all the water is going to waste anyway so what's wrong with someone putting a glass underneath and saving some.

I'm sure if asked to justify his beliefs exegetically, he can. But I might disagree with his interpretation because many verses can be interpreted very differently depending on what kind of theological glasses you're wearing (your paradigms). We talked about John 15:6 for example (we were discussing OSAS) but his interpretation is that throwing the branches into the fire is not to be read as an analogy of casting someone into hell and we're not free to make that association. To me, that analogy is quite clear, as there are several parallels to this throughout the Gospels. So we come to a stalemate.

I'm also wary of taking the debate too far and hurting the unity, which is a practical consideration for me since I'm still new to the church. Also, I always hold the mindset that he might be right, and I might be wrong, no matter how convinced of my position I am right now. Lastly, I'm aware that he knows much more than me, so I have to discount that factor too.

If I thought my pastor was intellectually dishonest and refused to talk about verses which countered his theological position, then I'd consider leaving.
If he's willing to sit down, discuss, and share his beliefs then that's probably a pastor I could live with as well.

ThyWordIsTruth
Aug 4th 2010, 08:10 AM
Oh, I know...
If he's willing to sit down, discuss, and share his beliefs then that's probably a pastor I could live with as well.

He is willing to do that. He's very open and always encourages us to have a thinking faith, not just believing what we're told to believe, but to think through Scripture for ourselves. He knows I don't agree with him regarding tithing and there are many theologians he respects that doesn't either, but he doesn't push that issue with me (or hasn't so far). He also knows I am not a Calvinist, and he does try to convince me sometimes through his sermons, but I just don't find his arguments convincing enought to overturn my paradigms and understanding of Scripture, and I understand certain verses differently from how he understands them. I do pray that doesn't affect our unity to work and serve together in the church though.

nazzer_aij
Aug 4th 2010, 09:42 AM
I dunno...
Denying the Trinity is denying who God is. I don't think you and I would worship the same God if you believed the Trinity and I didn't.


I do disagree with this.

Acts 2... We see fellowship is a key part of the life of a church ("devoted"). Discipleship is also key to strength of the church body. We're called to it (1 Cor 1:9). Hebrews 10, "Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing". Colossians 2... Fellowship/Discipleship (What I'd say "encouraged and united" refers to) is necessary for "full riches of complete understanding" so you may know Christ.
Fellowship is a function of believers, not unbelievers. A goal of which is worship. I'm not saying we can live out our acts of worship, but I'm just talking about how they go hand in hand.


Believe me, I'll be the first person to agree with you that the Church is in need of help and going about things totally wrong nowadays, especially here in America, but I don't think ceasing to be a part of a body of fellowship is the answer.

Hi TexUs,
This is not to provoke yo nor challenge you just a chating and sharing so, please be not offended.
You said that you do not consider vast majority of Catholic is not a Christian denomination but a religion on itself. Ok, I'll not defend my country mate of your vicious attack.

By the way may I ask you if what denomination do you attend worshipping and fellowship/discipleship which is necessary full riches and complete understanding so you may knowing Christ.

Are you now sure that the doctrine you receive in your church lead you in knowing who is Jesus?
Do you personally know Jesus or you only believe on him as per lecture of your pastor?
Yes I also believe that scripture testifieth about Jesus, are you sure that the concept that you read
is rightfully interpreted by you and your pastor?

For an example you have mentioned in one of you post Rev.5:1-9 can you explain to me if what was written in the book that the Lion ,root of David opened. Do you know who was the elder that praise him and do you know who is the four beast. If not; ask your pastor to explain it to you.

If you know Jesus Christ what was his name now in heaven? Rev.2:17, 3:12, 19:12 this is only some
things that we must learn from Jesus Christ that no man are capable to teach us.
Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophet.
Is.28:26 For his God doth instruct him to his discretion, and doth teach him.
1 Cor.2:12-16 Now we have received not the spirit of world, but the spirit which is of God; that we
might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
Which things we also speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy
Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
But the natural man receiveth notthe things of the Spirit of Go; for they are foolishness unto him;
neither van he know them, becaause they are spiritually discerned.
But the spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judge of no man.
Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

TexUs
Aug 4th 2010, 02:43 PM
Hi TexUs,
This is not to provoke yo nor challenge you just a chating and sharing so, please be not offended.
You said that you do not consider vast majority of Catholic is not a Christian denomination but a religion on itself. Ok, I'll not defend my country mate of your vicious attack.
You don't have to defend your country at all. You aren't a Catholic, so why do you take issue with that?


By the way may I ask you if what denomination do you attend worshipping and fellowship/discipleship which is necessary full riches and complete understanding so you may knowing Christ.
I won't claim a denomination. The church I attend would not fit within any denomination, and I have issues with all denominations.



Are you now sure that the doctrine you receive in your church lead you in knowing who is Jesus?
Do you personally know Jesus or you only believe on him as per lecture of your pastor?
Yes I also believe that scripture testifieth about Jesus, are you sure that the concept that you read
is rightfully interpreted by you and your pastor?
I absolutely believe it lead to me knowing who is Jesus. Was this accomplished from the Sunday morning pulpit? No. Was this accomplished through a journey of me seeing it real in others lives and discipleship? Yes.
I don't know what you want me to say about my interpretation of Scripture. "Yep, you caught me! I don't think I interpreted it correctly!"



For an example you have mentioned in one of you post Rev.5:1-9 can you explain to me if what was written in the book that the Lion ,root of David opened. Do you know who was the elder that praise him and do you know who is the four beast. If not; ask your pastor to explain it to you.
You trying to test me now? I don't know if I should honor that request or not.
Primarily, Revelation can be taken any number of different ways. It's almost a guarantee that any two given people will have differing interpretations on it.
<Edit>I actually typed up my theories here but I am taking them out as honestly, I question your intent in choosing such a highly debatable verse.

nazzer_aij
Aug 4th 2010, 05:26 PM
You don't have to defend your country at all. You aren't a Catholic, so why do you take issue with that?


I won't claim a denomination. The church I attend would not fit within any denomination, and I have issues with all denominations.


I absolutely believe it lead to me knowing who is Jesus. Was this accomplished from the Sunday morning pulpit? No. Was this accomplished through a journey of me seeing it real in others lives and discipleship? Yes.
I don't know what you want me to say about my interpretation of Scripture. "Yep, you caught me! I don't think I interpreted it correctly!"


You trying to test me now? I don't know if I should honor that request or not.
Primarily, Revelation can be taken any number of different ways. It's almost a guarantee that any two given people will have differing interpretations on it.
<Edit>I actually typed up my theories here but I am taking them out as honestly, I question your intent in choosing such a highly debatable verse.


Hi TexUs,
No. I need not defend RCC here because may be their membership would reach more than thirty
five million adult members and I'm only a single person.
Sorry, and I apologize if the tenor of my quote seem to be not showing gentle manner maybe
because sometimes I was looking for fine words but my grammar, I admit has a shortlist in english.

I'm glad that by journey ,fellowship and discipleship that you were doing bring you in knowing
Jesus especially during visitation of other believer and we also do it here even we do not have
a church and we met in house of our fellow believer studying and sharing with the scripture.

Yes, I admit there is no single and perfect interpretation of scripture, and it has a vast meaning
base on understanding of one who read.

No, I do not test you or provoke you but my only intent is to clarify issue of Rev.5:1-9 because
it comes from you,I have just read it and want it to know your interpretation.
It only happened that we have not enough understanding on topic we were discussing and I
would like to know your position, so I can compare with mine.

So, whatsoever, your theory that you withheld, just keep it, and I no longer interested if it is
a highly debatable matter. Thank you and I repeat my apologizes if I ever offend you.

Thanks.
nazzer_aij.

TexUs
Aug 4th 2010, 05:41 PM
Hi TexUs,
No. I need not defend RCC here because may be their membership would reach more than thirty
five million adult members and I'm only a single person.
Membership is not a measure of success.

I do not consider RCC Christian DENOMINATION for a few reasons. The main reasons:
1) Mary. Worship to Mary or prayer to Mary is idolatry. Also we know Mary is not the mother of God, as some would hold.
2) Calling anyone "Holy Father" is blasphemy in my opinion. It is only used by Christ ONCE and was assigned to God the Father.
3) Idols (literally) is idolatry (bowing to statues, etc)
4) Mass and what it represents. Christ died once for all sins, forever.
5) Peter... The church is not founded on Peter but on Christ
6) Confessions. There is but one mediator between God and man.

That's just what's off my head and why I still hold that Catholicism is a religion, and not a denomination.

TexUs
Aug 4th 2010, 05:44 PM
I'm glad that by journey ,fellowship and discipleship that you were doing bring you in knowing
Jesus especially during visitation of other believer and we also do it here even we do not have
a church and we met in house of our fellow believer studying and sharing with the scripture.

Well, that's church.

Perhaps I made an assumption (my apologies) that you knew what I was talking about, but the building has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

The church, in the Biblical sense and what I was also referencing, is the body of believers- it's not a building. Getting together for fellowship in your home is perfectly fine, don't get into your mind that I was condemning not going to a BUILDING, not at all... I just made an assumption you didn't gather together at all.

BadDog
Aug 8th 2010, 08:34 PM
I don't think I could personally break fellowship with someone based on Armenian/Calvin.

There are some that argue (And are well Biblically based on it... IE, they can present a valid argument) against that. However I PERSONALLY don't think it's an issue to divide fellowship over.

TU,

I agree. But I'm not talking about "breaking fellowship." I'm talking about joining an Armenian church when I am distinctly "eternal security" based.

BD

TexUs
Aug 9th 2010, 02:47 PM
TU,

I agree. But I'm not talking about "breaking fellowship." I'm talking about joining an Armenian church when I am distinctly "eternal security" based.

BD
Well, it's still joining or not the fellowship of Armenian people, right?

I don't know what people do in smaller towns with little to chose from. ???

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 02:59 PM
It should not be an issue.

I'm Arminian in theology and an Elder in a Reformed Church. Secondary issues.

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 03:29 PM
It should not be an issue.

I'm Arminian in theology and an Elder in a Reformed Church. Secondary issues.

Exactimusly!....

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 03:39 PM
Back to the whole Godhead issue; it comes down more to Christology for me. If someone holds that Jesus is uncreated and pre-existent, then I wouldn't leave a fellowship over Godhead differences related to trinity.

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 04:15 PM
I don't know what people do in smaller towns with little to chose from. ???

:lol: Well, I was faced with that connumdrum when I went to work at a PRTF in the mountains of Kentucky. I had the choice of Presbyterian, holiness-none-snake-handler, and holiness-snake-handler! When I was on duty, I went with the girls to the Presbyterian church (they all thought me quite odd for carrying my Bible with me). When off-duty, I went to the holiness-non-snake-handler church where I was considered odd for being over 30 and not married....:lol: ya'll think Armenian/Calvinist is so important! priorities, guys, priorities! :lol:

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 04:38 PM
:lol: Well, I was faced with that connumdrum when I went to work at a PRTF in the mountains of Kentucky. I had the choice of Presbyterian, holiness-none-snake-handler, and holiness-snake-handler! When I was on duty, I went with the girls to the Presbyterian church (they all thought me quite odd for carrying my Bible with me). When off-duty, I went to the holiness-non-snake-handler church where I was considered odd for being over 30 and not married....:lol: ya'll think Armenian/Calvinist is so important! priorities, guys, priorities! :lol:

I think you missed the REAL priority... Snake Handling. That's REAL faith, right there...:o;)

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 05:13 PM
Snake handling.

Saw that once in a service up in Eastern KY mountains once.

Will never see that again. (I hope).

Where the line between presumption and faith is I do not know, but what I saw up near Greasy Holler scared and amazed the snot out of me.

amazzin
Aug 9th 2010, 05:14 PM
I think you missed the REAL priority... Snake Handling. That's REAL faith, right there...:o;)

Real FAITH? Read Genesis chapter 22 and hebrews 11. Those are my faith hero's

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 05:33 PM
Real FAITH? Read Genesis chapter 22 and hebrews 11. Those are my faith hero's

Those are great. Frecs and RabbiKnife grabbing rattlers by the tail would be broadcast-worthy, IMHO! :-)

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 05:55 PM
Those are great. Frecs and RabbiKnife grabbing rattlers by the tail would be broadcast-worthy, IMHO! :-)

Never never ever grab the wrong end of a rattler! :eek:

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 06:03 PM
Those are great. Frecs and RabbiKnife grabbing rattlers by the tail would be broadcast-worthy, IMHO! :-)

I would certainly be speaking in a "tongue," but probably one that would violate current FCC standards...

:)

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 06:28 PM
I would certainly be speaking in a "tongue," but probably one that would violate current FCC standards...

:)

:rofl: reminds me of the story my Pastor tells about when he first moved here from Goldsboro and was doing some door-to-door around the county. He was invited into a single-wide trailer and soon found himself being shown a room full of aquariums with snakes in them….his feet didn’t hit the ground until he was back at his truck! My Pastor is a wee bit afeared of snakes! :rofl:

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 06:28 PM
I would certainly be speaking in a "tongue," but probably one that would violate current FCC standards...

:)

FCC = Federal Catholic Church?:rofl::pray:

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 06:41 PM
Never never ever grab the wrong end of a rattler! :eek:

Please thoroughly demonstrate the correct method, Ms. Bluegrass.:eek:;)

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 06:45 PM
Please thoroughly demonstrate the correct method, Ms. Bluegrass.:eek:;)

You want me to pick up a rattler? Are you NUTS! :eek: You mistake me for a hillbilly! All I know about picking up rattlers is: a) don't pick them up by the rattles and b) don't pick them up!

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 06:53 PM
You want me to pick up a rattler? Are you NUTS! :eek: You mistake me for a hillbilly! All I know about picking up rattlers is: a) don't pick them up by the rattles and b) don't pick them up!

I don't mind picking them up, field dressing, and frying AFTER the business head is first removed with the handgun of choice followed by good steel.

TexUs
Aug 9th 2010, 06:55 PM
I don't mind picking them up, field dressing, and frying AFTER the business head is first removed with the handgun of choice followed by good steel.
... But but... Thou Shalt Not KILL! How dare you do that. You're violating the commands of Christ and your blessings in Heaven will be stripped away! :P

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 06:58 PM
... But but... Thou Shalt Not KILL! How dare you do that. You're violating the commands of Christ and your blessings in Heaven will be stripped away! :P

Perhaps I will be redeemed, for on one rather frightening occasion, I did have the opportunity to "crush the serpent's head under my heel" -- quite by accident, I promise you...just prior to the poor rattler's cranial/lumbar dissection.

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 07:03 PM
I don't mind picking them up, field dressing, and frying AFTER the business head is first removed with the handgun of choice followed by good steel.

Do they really taste like chicken?

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 07:44 PM
Do they really taste like chicken?

Everything tastes like chicken... sorta. I say just eat chicken, then. :-)

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 07:47 PM
Perhaps I will be redeemed, for on one rather frightening occasion, I did have the opportunity to "crush the serpent's head under my heel" -- quite by accident, I promise you...just prior to the poor rattler's cranial/lumbar dissection.

Cranial/lumbar dissection...:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 07:48 PM
Everything tastes like chicken... sorta. I say just eat chicken, then. :-)

Why is it that everything tastes like chicken? And, why is it that people ask what something tastes like anyway! I told Mother that I'd eaten escargot once and loved it and she asks me "what did it taste like?" Well, it tasted like escargot, of course! :B

PneumaPsucheSoma
Aug 9th 2010, 07:50 PM
... But but... Thou Shalt Not KILL! How dare you do that. You're violating the commands of Christ and your blessings in Heaven will be stripped away! :P

Then arises the question: If we beat our swords into ploughshares; but we kill with the ploughshare... Is it really even war OR killing?!?

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 09:14 PM
Do they really taste like chicken?

Actually, a little more like catfish...

But tasty.

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 09:14 PM
Why is it that everything tastes like chicken? And, why is it that people ask what something tastes like anyway! I told Mother that I'd eaten escargot once and loved it and she asks me "what did it taste like?" Well, it tasted like escargot, of course! :B

I tried escargot, and it tasted like garlicly snails to me.

notuptome
Aug 9th 2010, 09:23 PM
I tried escargot, and it tasted like garlicly snails to me.
To make them hillbilly you would need to serve them over grits.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 09:28 PM
Actually, a little more like catfish...

But tasty.

I like catfish though I like mullet better...my grandfather would fry up a mess of mullet in his giant cast iron skillet set over a makeshift grill (upturned aluminum trashcan over a fire)...GOOD EATS.

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 09:29 PM
I tried escargot, and it tasted like garlicly snails to me.

But tasty garlicly snails!

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 09:30 PM
To make them hillbilly you would need to serve them over grits.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

I think to make it hillbilly, you would need to make it with mountain oysters instead of snails...and serve those over grits....

RabbiKnife
Aug 9th 2010, 09:30 PM
Everything is better with grits....

Except mountain oysters. Nix on the mountain oysters.

Seriously....how hungry did some cave man have to be to say "Hey, let's eat those!"?

Frecs
Aug 9th 2010, 09:48 PM
Seriously....how hungry did some cave man have to be to say "Hey, let's eat those!"?

verrrrrrryyy verrrrrrryyy hungry!

Izdaari
Aug 11th 2010, 07:43 AM
These. All else I'll at least think about and be willing to discuss. But a church that's got these wrong is clearly not for me:

• The Trinity
• The Deity & Humanity of Christ
• The Nature of Salvation
• The Resurrection of Christ
• The Return of Christ
• The Character of God (His Holiness, Love, Wisdom, Power, etc.)