Denominations or Demon Nations ?

[bekkilyn]

Celebrating your bickering is contrary to Paul's teaching.

What I said was, "And yet Jesus is the only head of the universal church that most Christian denominations are going to accept. We don't need to bicker if we simply celebrate our diversity rather than fight each other over it."

Nothing about celebrating bickering. Diversity is a good thing. The Body of Christ wouldn't be very good at much of anything if we were all big toes headed by some human religious dictator. All the denominations have something valuable to contribute to Christ's universal church. We shouldn't diminish those contributions.

 

[Open Heart]

What I said was, "And yet Jesus is the only head of the universal church that most Christian denominations are going to accept. We don't need to bicker if we simply celebrate our diversity rather than fight each other over it."

There wouldn't BE this "diversity" if denominations weren't fighting over it.

 

[Radagast]

Celebrating your bickering is contrary to Paul's teaching.

Then shouldn't you rejoin the original Church, the Orthodox?

 

[bekkilyn]

There wouldn't BE this "diversity" if denominations weren't fighting over it.

The only reason *some* denominations are fighting over it is due to the "one true denomination" way of thinking. We need to accept and value our diversity. We do not need to be united in government in order to be united in spirit.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The only reason *some* denominations are fighting over it is due to the "one true denomination" way of thinking. We need to accept and value our diversity. We do not need to be united in government in order to be united in spirit.

My thought precisely.

 

[Open Heart]

The only reason *some* denominations are fighting over it is due to the "one true denomination" way of thinking. We need to accept and value our diversity. We do not need to be united in government in order to be united in spirit.

The only denominations that are not "fighting over it" are those that have watered down theology so much that they don't stand for anything anymore. Anything goes.

 

[Open Heart]

Then shouldn't you rejoin the original Church, the Orthodox?

I agree that if you are going to join the original Church, you must choose between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, since only those Churches can trace back via Apostolic Succession, to the Apostles. I chose the Catholic Church, as I believe there is adequate argument for the Papacy going all the way back.

 

[Open Heart]

Diversity is a good thing.

It depends. There is a saying. In what is essential, unity. In whati is not essential, diversity. And in all things, charity. I find that we do not have unity in what is essential. Protestant denominations cannot even agree on who a Christian is.

 

[bekkilyn]

The only denominations that are not "fighting over it" are those that have watered down theology so much that they don't stand for anything anymore. Anything goes.

Evidence?

 

[bekkilyn]

It depends. There is a saying. In what is essential, unity. In whati is not essential, diversity. And in all things, charity. I find that we do not have unity in what is essential. Protestant denominations cannot even agree on who a Christian is.

There is a difference between what *is* essential and what people often believe is essential based on their own church traditions. With that said, most mainstream Protestant denominations (along with Catholic and Orthodox) are in agreement concerning basic Christian doctrine. (i.e. Trinity, Jesus's resurrection, etc.) We simply all have different traditions and ways of going about it.

 

[Open Heart]

There is a difference between what *is* essential and what people often believe is essential based on their own church traditions. With that said, most mainstream Protestant denominations (along with Catholic and Orthodox) are in agreement concerning basic Christian doctrine. (i.e. Trinity, Jesus's resurrection, etc.) We simply all have different traditions and ways of going about it.

I disagree that there is unity on basic doctrine, including among most mainstream Protestant denominations. Like I said, there isn't even agreement on what makes a person a Christian.

 

[Open Heart]

Evidence?

Lots and lots and lots and lots of personal experience. Not only personal experience in actually attending various churches of sundry denominations and non-denominational churches, but also experiences talking to individuals FROM such churches.

 

[bekkilyn]

I disagree that there is unity on basic doctrine, including among most mainstream Protestant denominations. Like I said, there isn't even agreement on what makes a person a Christian.

I'm curious on just how familiar you are with the specific doctrines of most mainstream Protestant denominations to be able to make such a claim?

 

[bekkilyn]

Lots and lots and lots and lots of personal experience. Not only personal experience in actually attending various churches of sundry denominations and non-denominational churches, but also experiences talking to individuals FROM such churches.

A lot of individuals (including Catholics for that matter) aren't familiar much at all with their own doctrines, so you're certainly going to get all sorts of responses, many of which are likely to conflict with their own doctrines. However, individual lack of understanding doesn't at all imply that the doctrines themselves are watered down.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I'm curious on just how familiar you are with the specific doctrines of most mainstream Protestant denominations to be able to make such a claim?

I was wondering that myself as my experience has been much, much closer to your own than hers has. But then, I do not claim an encyclopedic knowledge of all denominations.

 

[bekkilyn]

I was wondering that myself as my experience has been much, much closer to your own than hers has. But then, I do not claim an encyclopedic knowledge of all denominations.

There would likely be some independent churches as well as some more non-traditional denominations out there that would disagree(there is always someone!), but most mainstream denominations and various Evangelical churches practically all agree on things like the Triune nature of God, that Christ was both fully divine and fully human, and that he died, rose from the dead, and will come again. Pretty standard stuff all around regardless of the denomination.

 

[Open Heart]

A lot of individuals (including Catholics for that matter) aren't familiar much at all with their own doctrines, so you're certainly going to get all sorts of responses, many of which are likely to conflict with their own doctrines. However, individual lack of understanding doesn't at all imply that the doctrines themselves are watered down.

Can I give you an example of what I mean so that we are clear what I mean when I say watered down?

I attended an evangelical Friends (Quaker) church throughout my junior high and high school years. By being evangelical it had already drifted from its Quaker roots, but it still held to pacifism, anti-sacramentalism, and arminianism. Every worship service we spent 15-20 minutes in silent spiritual communion the way Friends do.

Today this church still maintains the Friends name, but it has become a generic Evangelical church. Gone is the pacifism, the anti-sacramentalism, and the arminianism, as well as the practice of spiritual communion. Instead of being opposed to water baptism, they now teach you have the choice of being baptized or not, as you wish. Totally non-committal, as if it doesn't matter. Instead of being opposed to breaking bread and sharing the cup, they now teaching that you can have communion or not as you wish. Totally noncommittal, as if it doesn't matter. They take no stand on war, whether pacifism or just war or anything else. It is entirely up to the individual believer, with no guidance from the church at all. As if it doesn't matter.

It's not that I agree with the old Quaker views. I definitely do not. Indeed, I became a Catholic because I believe quite differently. But at least before they stood for something. Now they have no depth at all. They are not guiding their parishioners through the issues, or the storms of life. It's just "receive Jesus." As if that were the only thing that matters.

So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
Revelation 3:16

 

[Open Heart]

I'm curious on just how familiar you are with the specific doctrines of most mainstream Protestant denominations to be able to make such a claim?

I'm not going to say I'm an expert. But I have a general idea of almost all of them. I began studying theology with my father, an ex-pastor, when I was in junior high. When I was 16, realizing I was pretty sheltered (having only ever attended various evangelical/fundamentalist churches) I asked my father to take me around to all the different Christian denominations. We supplemented this by studying their denominational history and theology. Baptists were the hardest, since it seems like every Baptist denomination is different, and in the end, baptist churches are often independent.

I continued church hopping until I finally settled into the Catholic church. I've continued studying denominational histories and differences. It's kind of a lifelong hobby. You can never know it all.

 

[bekkilyn]

Can I give you an example of what I mean so that we are clear what I mean when I say watered down?

I attended an evangelical Friends (Quaker) church throughout my junior high and high school years. By being evangelical it had already drifted from its Quaker roots, but it still held to pacifism, anti-sacramentalism, and arminianism. Every worship service we spent 15-20 minutes in silent spiritual communion the way Friends do.

Today this church still maintains the Friends name, but it has become a generic Evangelical church. Gone is the pacifism, the anti-sacramentalism, and the arminianism, as well as the practice of spiritual communion. Instead of being opposed to water baptism, they now teach you have the choice of being baptized or not, as you wish. Totally non-committal, as if it doesn't matter. Instead of being opposed to breaking bread and sharing the cup, they now teaching that you can have communion or not as you wish. Totally noncommittal, as if it doesn't matter. They take no stand on war, whether pacifism or just war or anything else. It is entirely up to the individual believer, with no guidance from the church at all. As if it doesn't matter.

It's not that I agree with the old Quaker views. I definitely do not. Indeed, I became a Catholic because I believe quite differently. But at least before they stood for something. Now they have no depth at all. They are not guiding their parishioners through the issues, or the storms of life. It's just "receive Jesus." As if that were the only thing that matters.

So, because you are lukewarm--neither hot nor cold--I am about to spit you out of my mouth.
Revelation 3:16

That's a good example for watering-down, but were these Quakers bickering with other denominations before the watering-down happened? They aren't usually the first denomination I think of when it comes to initiating conflicts with other Christian groups. Quakers in general have been a pretty peaceful bunch in even a non-watered-down state. So while it's an example of watering-down, I'm not sure that it helps your point that only the watered-down denominations are able to get along without bickering.

I'm not going to say I'm an expert. But I have a general idea of almost all of them. I began studying theology with my father, an ex-pastor, when I was in junior high. When I was 16, realizing I was pretty sheltered (having only ever attended various evangelical/fundamentalist churches) I asked my father to take me around to all the different Christian denominations. We supplemented this by studying their denominational history and theology. Baptists were the hardest, since it seems like every Baptist denomination is different, and in the end, baptist churches are often independent.

I continued church hopping until I finally settled into the Catholic church. I've continued studying denominational histories and differences. It's kind of a lifelong hobby. You can never know it all.

So perhaps you've focused on the differences so much that you're having too hard of a time seeing the similarities that do exist between many of them?

 

[Open Heart]

That's a good example for watering-down, but were these Quakers bickering with other denominations before the watering-down happened?

Enough that they were a distinct denomination. My idea of "bickering" is forming a separate church or denomination rather than sitting down at the table and ironing out basic doctrine -- not giving up until a decision is reached, the way it was always done at the ecumenical councils in the past, Nicea, Chalcedon, etc.