Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, it does, and i'm happy that you think so.
However what concerns a great many of us is that you don't appeal to the bible for your arguments.
So far all i've seen on this thread from you are Ad hominem attacks on those who believe the bible to be God's revelation, and appeals to 21st Century 'scholarship' as superseding that revelation.
Need to make up your mind about what you believe.
Correct.I believe the bible claims God is in charge, not man nor you.
Correct.
It is a start and a good place to start.
The only question i have is do YOU believe that God is in charge?
If you do that is a fine starting point.
However, it makes me wonder why you would bring up things that presume to contradict the bible.
If the bible is God's word then it is absolute truth, no matter what so-called 'contemporary scholarship' says.
Libral Christianity interprets the bible differently than the conservatives.
.....blind conservitive fundies..
i don't think that either Calvinists or non-Calvinists believe that. i expect that one would find quite a few Arminians in heaven, which would make them amongst the elect.I believe the elects believe God is in charge.
"Liberal Christianity" is by and large a completely different religion. This was demonstrated conclusively by J. Gresham Machen back in 1923. Ever notice that it is the liberals rather than the conservatives who deny what the church has taught and the bible proclaimed since it's inception?Libral Christianity interprets the bible differently than the conservatives.
Evidence please. You just can't resist flinging mud can you?Contradition is popular among the blind conservitive fundies.
And this statement means...what?Those that God chose knows God is in charge at all points, not just the statring point .
i don't think that either Calvinists or non-Calvinists believe that. i expect that one would find quite a few Arminians in heaven, which would make them amongst the elect.
Remember, it is not the purity of our doctrine that saves us...if that was true we'd all be lost...rather it is GOD who saves us.
"Liberal Christianity" is by and large a completely different religion. This was demonstrated conclusively by J. Gresham Machen back in 1923. Ever notice that it is the liberals rather than the conservatives who deny what the church has taught and the bible proclaimed since it's inception?
Evidence please. You just can't resist flinging mud can you?
And this statement means...what?
I don't wear glasses.
I use fine clear magnifying lens to read my bible, CLOSELY.
"Liberal Christianity" is by and large a completely different religion. This was demonstrated conclusively by J. Gresham Machen back in 1923. Ever notice that it is the liberals rather than the conservatives who deny what the church has taught and the bible proclaimed since it's inception?
[I use mainline rather than liberal, because mainline implies to me the kind of theology that is done in mainline seminaries. Liberal includes that, but can also include more extreme positions such as the Unitarians, and a kind of generic skepticism that truth is possible.]
I know PCUSA pastors and whole churches who are Progressive in the sense you mean. But people who hold mainline theology hold the whole range of political views. That's true of my current congregation. I used to be a Republican. With the Tea Party's influence I can't be at the moment, but I'm certainly not Progressive. I don't think you should confuse mainline theology with Progressive thought.
I know PCUSA pastors and whole churches who are Progressive in the sense you mean. But people who hold mainline theology hold the whole range of political views. That's true of my current congregation. I used to be a Republican. With the Tea Party's influence I can't be at the moment, but I'm certainly not Progressive. I don't think you should confuse mainline theology with Progressive thought.
I just wish the mainlines didn't confuse theology with Progressive thought..
What's interesting is that exactly the same complaints were made by Catholics against the Reformers in the 16th Cent. [/quote] Both the Reformers and the Catholics were correct in that assessment, as Machen was in his assessment of the theological liberalism of 1923.
Forgive the analogy, but it sounds more like "putting perfume on a pig". As for who the pig is in the analogy, i make no comment or speculation. That is in the eye of the beholder. One of the most useless statements i've ever heard in my life is "Let us agree to disagree." It is useless in that whether there is agreement or not the two parties WILL disagree if they have different views.I don't quite call it different religions, since conservatives do serve the same Lord as I do. But there is also some merit to it. Discussions within either conservative Reformed or mainline Christianity can occur with all parties agreeing on how disagreements can be settled. But the differences in approach between conservative and mainline are at a basic enough level that discussions between the two on some topics are nearly impossible. Conversion from one to the other thus looks in some ways like conversion between different religions, even though we do share ideas such as Christ being the incarnation of God and dying for us, and at a day to day lived level conservative Reformed and mainline Christian lives tend to look at lot alike.
The issue being dealt with was inflamatory ad hominem attacks on those holding to traditional doctrinal positions that are supported by scripture and church history by a certain poster. It is certainly true that two people can play that game, and that such tactics bring us no closer to truth. That was the purpose of my demonstration. Were i a gambling man, i'd bet that you immediately grasped what i was doing. i'm not about to make any apologies for it.That's one reason I try to avoid getting involved in these kinds of arguments, and advise other people to do the same. They almost always generate more heat than light.
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the EPC and the PCA? From what I can tell, they seem very similar (except for how each denomination started).
Any insights would be greatly appreciated!
-Justin
Hi. Justin. Unfortunately this thread as has been side tracked by some with their own personal agendas. But to sum it up, the "main difference" between the two is that PCA does not ordain women, while the EPC does. God bless you!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?