Originally posted by Jedidiah
View Post
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
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
The Church has lost its voice in the US
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by mossrose View PostAnd he means by that that we oughtn't do those things!
It IS a matter of what is sin. Because when you start telling people that what God clearly calls sin is not, then you are changing God's word to suit your own purposes.
I will not be united with anyone who calls sin less than what it is. I don't care what the sin is. The standard is God's, not what any denomination says it is.Last edited by themuzicman; 07-01-2015, 06:49 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by KingsGambit View PostThe Bible doesn't specifically spell out that trinitarianism is required for salvation (though you can make a very strong case for this)... but it does say that homosexuality is a disqualifier. So why does the list of issues you provided have to be the "fundamentals?"
(Incidentally, Bible scholars disagree on whether the grammar of what Jesus said on divorce and remarriage mean that the remarrying is a one time or an ongoing sin... so I don't think it's entirely clear the way 1 Cor 6:10-11 is.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostYou're dodging my questions.
Doctrine about Mary would be fundamental to the extent it affects doctrine about her Son.
Annulment is an RCC fig leaf. The EO tends to allow divorces as a concession to human frailty; ideally they would not occur. There is no official EO doctrine allowing for it.
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostWhat I'm getting at is that the Church is virtually indistinguishable from the culture around it.
Embracing gay marriage is one symptom of that.
So is embracing divorce and marrying divorcees. This is just one example (the hot button of the moment, if you will) of many areas where the Church just lacks being distinct from the world.
I pulled out that verse to show that churches that do embrace gay marriage haven't gone all the way to apostasy, and one thing the Church could do is to set aside petty differences and seek to establish a higher standard of conduct for those who attend our Churches, even if it drives away the deadwood who don't really want to be different from the culture.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostThat's an awfully broad brush. There has always been a "remnant", and if you're using "capital C Church", then this should be "all the saints through all the ages" - not just a bunch of big denominations that have strayed.
Southern Baptists make up a large part of the non-Catholic Church in the US, and we've been very clear about our position on the family.
Many of us are doing that, Muz.
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostOK, does your church marry people who do not have biblical grounds for being divorced?
Bob and Sally got married when they were teenagers. Subsequently, as a young adult, Sally received Christ as savior, and asked for forgiveness for her sins. Is her divorce "under the blood"? Is it forgiven?The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostMuz,
Bob and Sally got married when they were teenagers. Subsequently, as a young adult, Sally received Christ as savior, and asked for forgiveness for her sins. Is her divorce "under the blood"? Is it forgiven?
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostI was referring to the US church today.
And do the SBC marry divorcees?
Not enough.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAnd I'm part of that. I don't think it's helpful to use this broad a brush when there are those who are still being faithful.
Each local SBC Church is autonomous - they are not required to hold to a creed. HOWEVER, the vast majority of us hold to the Baptist Faith & Message, cited earlier. Additionally, the "SBC" (or its member Churches) does (do) not marry anybody - the pastors of those Churches do.
Sure, I wish there were MORE, but there ARE some of us who are being faithful.
And your statement doesn't mention divorce.
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostForgiveness does not mean an exemption from consequences.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostBroad brushes are meant to be general, not absolute.
And your statement doesn't mention divorce.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostAbsolutely. But Grace often does. When Jesus intervened in the woman caught in adultery, he stopped the consequences that the religious people were carrying out.
And grace is not a basis for ignoring Scripture's instructions.
Comment
-
Originally posted by themuzicman View PostWhat I'm getting at is that the Church is virtually indistinguishable from the culture around it. Embracing gay marriage is one symptom of that. So is embracing divorce and marrying divorcees. This is just one example (the hot button of the moment, if you will) of many areas where the Church just lacks being distinct from the world.
I pulled out that verse to show that churches that do embrace gay marriage haven't gone all the way to apostasy, and one thing the Church could do is to set aside petty differences and seek to establish a higher standard of conduct for those who attend our Churches, even if it drives away the deadwood who don't really want to be different from the culture.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment