Comparison of two churches: Your inquiry please

[dies-l]

very good advice, dies-l...'preciate it

Between the two you mentioned, I would probably start with the second one. But, like others have pointed out, as doctrinal statements go, the first is too specific, imo, and the second is too vague. The several statements in the doctrinal statement of the first that I would disagree with and would have trouble submitting to the church's teachings on those topics if that is what they demanded. And, the fact that they are so specific leads me to believe that they do demand compliance with their doctrinal statement.

The second one, OTOH, is so vague that I really can't know what they believe just by reading the statement, other than perhaps that they embrace ecumenism. Unless you agree line by line with the doctrinal statement of the first church, it might be nice to check out the second one. However, if you are more than slightly conservative in your Christianity, I suspect it will be more liberal than you might like. But, it never hurts to check it out.

 

[98cwitr]

I don't....Satan is not a god of any kind in my book.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The first of the two statements of faith expressly contradicts, in several places, the Bible. Furthermore, it expressly contradicts our knowledge of the Bible gleaned from the finest biblical scholarship. Moreover, it is far too restrictive, and thus does not allow for, much less encourage, the members to interpret the Bible for themselves. Therefore I would avoid such a church and those who fellowship there.

The second of the two statements of faith is far too inclusive, especially this sentence:

To establish and maintain an open and inclusive fellowship, which affirms and accepts all who seek to profess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.”

There are several churches in my community that affirm and accept the faith of practicing homosexuals and other persons of a depraved mind simply because they profess with their mouth Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and the statements of faith of these churches contain language that is similar to this second one which you have quoted.

 

[dies-l]

The second of the two statements of faith is far too inclusive, especially this sentence:



There are several churches in my community that affirm and accept the faith of practicing homosexuals and other persons of a depraved mind simply because they profess with their mouth Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and the statements of faith of these churches contain language that is similar to this second one which you have quoted.

I don't have a problem with that line per se. However, I fear that it might be code for "we don't hold our members accountable for their choices." There is nothing wrong with allowing "sinners" to be in your midst. It is a problem when churches allow unrepentant and habitual sin without rebuke or consequence.