Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Telford Work on denominationalism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Paprika
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Better expressed? He's testing himself, not the church! And doctrine is not unimportant; the problem with Protestants using doctrine as a determinant is that there's no yard-stick.
    Rather than looking for one true denomination or local church, I have started simply discerning where God wants my family and me. Frustration turned to relief as my criterion went from doctrinal blackballing to fruits-testing: Where among God's divided people can we bear the fruit of the Holy Spirit and best exercise our spiritual gifts? As a worshiper and teaching pastor, where can I take joy in the holiness of my own tradition, and lead others to appreciate the holiness of Christ's traditions around us?
    He's testing, so as to speak, the fruit he would bear in that soil, which is also a test of the soil. It's not an either/or, nor as simplistic as you would perceive it to be.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Paprika View Post
    No one's entirely right, so we must work towards unity while taking seriously the various types of differences. "fruits-test" could have been better expressed but in context it substitutes screening using doctrinal minutiae as a determinant for which local gathering to be part of.
    Better expressed? He's testing himself, not the church! And doctrine is not unimportant; the problem with Protestants using doctrine as a determinant is that there's no yard-stick.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paprika
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    Eh, the article smacks of fatalistic relativism IMO. Nobody's entirely right, so muddle along where you are as best you can? On the other hand, we should "fruits-test" - not that we should test the fruits of the church, but how we can use our fruits there!
    No one's entirely right, so we must work towards unity while taking seriously the various types of differences. "fruits-test" could have been better expressed but in context it substitutes screening using doctrinal minutiae as a determinant for which local gathering to be part of.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
    I believe that well sums up why I felt as if I was an inbetweener, once I left the RCC.
    If you don't mind sharing, what caused you to leave?

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Pentecost View Post
    Question from the article though:

    What does "Magisterial Protestant" and "'Pentecostal' (Free Church}" mean?
    "Magisterial Protestant" refers to those denominations that got their start during the Reformation. As far as I can tell, "'Pentecostal' (Free Church)" is a conflation of two distinct groups. The Evangelical Free Church is not generally Pentecostal (though individual congregations might be; there is quite a bit of freedom left to the individual congregation - I went to college with some EFC folks).

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
    I liked this article; reading it gave me an "aha" moment and an understanding that my continual search for the "ideal" denomination or division within Christianity was really a waste of time.

    http://www.westmont.edu/~work/articl...ruechurch.html
    Eh, the article smacks of fatalistic relativism IMO. Nobody's entirely right, so muddle along where you are as best you can? On the other hand, we should "fruits-test" - not that we should test the fruits of the church, but how we can use our fruits there! He says that he belongs to the One True Church in the title, but in the body of the article claims he doesn't, because there is no One True Church. I'm getting a "wants to have cake and eat it" vibe, overall.

    I am perhaps an unusual convert to Orthodoxy in that I was not looking for another church due to dissatisfaction with my current one. I sought to be a part of the church closest to that of the NT, whether it was in my current church or not. And given my aversion to visiting strangers by my lonesome, it took a metaphorical clue-by-four to get me to switch. The Orthodox Church does not claim to be the true church by pointing at others by way of negation, but by pointing at its past.

    Leave a comment:


  • Catholicity
    replied
    I believe that well sums up why I felt as if I was an inbetweener, once I left the RCC.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pentecost
    replied
    Well, this seemed really obvious. What's the point of making an orthodox/heterodox distinction if you further reject some orthodox because of imperfect beliefs and reject their denomination because of it? (Does that make sense? Because to me the whole point of orthodoxy is being able to agree with each other on the basics if not the secondaries and therefore denominations are mostly just which club you get along with best.)

    Question from the article though:
    "It resists the smug exclusivism of any one position -- Roman Catholic (and Eastern Orthodox), Magisterial Protestant, and "Pentecostal" (Free Church)"
    What does "Magisterial Protestant" and "'Pentecostal' (Free Church}" mean?

    Leave a comment:


  • thewriteranon
    replied
    That was excellent, and total captured my struggle as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • KingsGambit
    started a topic Telford Work on denominationalism

    Telford Work on denominationalism

    I liked this article; reading it gave me an "aha" moment and an understanding that my continual search for the "ideal" denomination or division within Christianity was really a waste of time.

    http://www.westmont.edu/~work/articl...ruechurch.html

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by Rushing Jaws, 09-28-2021, 11:48 PM
4 responses
22 views
0 likes
Last Post lee_merrill  
Started by Cow Poke, 08-16-2021, 09:05 AM
110 responses
586 views
0 likes
Last Post nico
by nico
 
Working...
X