Non Denoms.... an honest question

[seajoy]

They're coming out of the woodwork today.

 

[alexnbethmom]

No assumptions there. Life history. I was a member of an ND church for 5 years. I know exactly what they teach. I notice you fail to deny any of what I wrote.

growing up i was dragged through nearly every non-denom church there is - and while i might have been young, i know what i saw, what i witnessed, the basic "feeling" in these churches - you, sir, have it backward.....what zec posted were NOT assumptions - it is the absolute truth in regards to what the non-denoms teach.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

And here's the problem, I believe you have it backwards without even realizing it. At least we agree on something.

pish posh. Without the basic core doctrines, your statements mean nothing. Atheists do what you require of Christians. Shall they join you in heaven?

 

[mwood30]

No assumptions there. Life history. I was a member of an ND church for 5 years. I know exactly what they teach. I notice you fail to deny any of what I wrote.

The thing with each ND church is that there's a lot of flavors of them. I'm sure there are plenty that teach what you wrote. And I trust you that you went to such a church.

 

[Logical_Lutheran]

pish posh. Without the basic core doctrines, your statements mean nothing. Atheists do what you require of Christians. Shall they join you in heaven?

Apokatastasis?

 

[mwood30]

pish posh. Without the basic core doctrines, your statements mean nothing. Atheists do what you require of Christians. Shall they join you in heaven?

Pish posh. Me thinks you misunderstand the Golden Rule if you think atheists are following it en masse.

But even Paul was pragmatic about it. He wrote that the blessed few unbelievers who do follow the Golden Rule are vindicated before God for doing so (Romans 2). You can poo poo the writings of Paul all you want. You just make my case for me.

 

[Zecryphon]

And here's the problem, I believe you have it backwards without even realizing it. At least we agree on something.

The difference being that we Lutherans can make our case from Scripture, you ND's can't.

 

[mwood30]

The difference being that we Lutherans can make our case from Scripture, you ND's can't.

Yawn. I've posted quite a few scriptures. I read the Bible every day.

The difference is, I assume you read the Bible too, yet we disagree. Why can't you believe ND's read the Bible, yet disagree? Must you make erroneous assumptions in a condescending arrogant manner? Is that your witness of the fruit of your denomination?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Pish posh. Me thinks you misunderstand the Golden Rule if you think atheists are following it en masse.

I know some atheists who would make better Christians than many Christians if all one had to do was love one another and be good to each other.

But even Paul was pragmatic about it. He wrote that the blessed few unbelievers who do follow the Golden Rule are vindicated before God for doing so (Romans 2). You can poo poo the writings of Paul all you want. You just make my case for me.

That's some warped idea of Romans 2 you have there. Most of Romans deals with the FAITHFUL, not the unbelievers. The righteousness spoken of comes from FAITH. Unbelievers do. not. have. faith.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Yawn. I've posted quite a few scriptures. I read the Bible every day.

The difference is, I assume you read the Bible too, yet we disagree. Why can't you believe ND's read the Bible, yet disagree? Must you make erroneous assumptions in a condescending arrogant manner? Is that your witness of the fruit of your denomination?

Keep this up and I'll report you. I'll kindly remind you that you are a guest in MY home. You don't come into my home and attack my family.

 

[DaRev]

But even Paul was pragmatic about it. He wrote that the blessed few unbelievers who do follow the Golden Rule are vindicated before God for doing so (Romans 2). You can poo poo the writings of Paul all you want. You just make my case for me.

Here's a perfect example of pulling something out of context. I believe that if you actually read Paul's writings, he clearly teaches that no one is vindicated or saved or made right with God by obeying the Law, since no one is able to obey the Law. Our desire to obey comes as a result of or in reaction to the work of God in Christ through the Holy Spirit which is the heart of the Gospel. No one is saved by obeying the works of the Law, and that's a good thing, otherwise heaven would be a very empty place.

 

[Zecryphon]

Pish posh. Me thinks you misunderstand the Golden Rule if you think atheists are following it en masse.

But even Paul was pragmatic about it. He wrote that the blessed few unbelievers who do follow the Golden Rule are vindicated before God for doing so (Romans 2). You can poo poo the writings of Paul all you want. You just make my case for me.

Again, you misunderstand Paul. Christians who do what God has said to do, are not doing so to be justified, they do so because they are justified and now want to live a life pleasing to God. You're looking at those Scriptures as laws that must be followed so that we can gain entrance to Heaven. This is wrong and not taught anywhere in the Bible. The heresy being promoted in your posts is called: works-righteousness.

 

[mwood30]

Keep this up and I'll report you. I'll kindly remind you that you are a guest in MY home. You don't come into my home and attack my family.

Is defending yourself an attack? I'll gladly stop posting here if that is your definition. Someone started this post with a ruse about asking some 'honest' question: Non Denoms.... an honest question. When I answered honestly all I received was negativity, arrogance, and condescension. But to point that out is attacking?

You have all made your point loud and clear. I've found this a most enlightening exchange.

Best wishes.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Is defending yourself an attack? I'll gladly stop posting here if that is your definition. Someone started this post with a ruse about asking some 'honest' question: Non Denoms.... an honest question. When I answered honestly all I received was negativity, arrogance, and condescension. But to point that out is attacking?

As it was posted in the Lutheran forum, the question was posed to the members of the forum. As a guest in this forum, you are not allowed to teach or debate points. You were the one who initiated condescension by alluding to the fact that doctrinal churches were a burden. You walked in, wiped off your feet but forgot to wash your hands.

You have all made your point loud and clear. I've found this a most enlightening exchange.

Best wishes.

I found it enlightening, too. A non-denominational member actually came in and affirmed everything I know about ND churches. Lots of fluff without a whole lot of substance. "love one another" isn't salvation.

 

[Luther073082]

Pish posh. Me thinks you misunderstand the Golden Rule if you think atheists are following it en masse.

But even Paul was pragmatic about it. He wrote that the blessed few unbelievers who do follow the Golden Rule are vindicated before God for doing so (Romans 2). You can poo poo the writings of Paul all you want. You just make my case for me.

So there is salvation in the law???
Anathema!!

Salvation outside of Christ?
Anathema!!

One can save oneself?
Anathema!!

These are the lies of Satan himself, not of Christ.

You have taught me all I need to know about Non-denominational churchs. I pray you learn the truth of the gospels, repent of your heresies and join in a confessional Lutheran church and confess the full and true doctrines of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

 

[Zecryphon]

Yawn. I've posted quite a few scriptures. I read the Bible every day.

The difference is, I assume you read the Bible too, yet we disagree. Why can't you believe ND's read the Bible, yet disagree? Must you make erroneous assumptions in a condescending arrogant manner? Is that your witness of the fruit of your denomination?

Yeah, great you read the Bible. You do so incorrectly. Why don't you try actually studying it? I do believe ND's read the Bible and disagree, and this disagreement between Christians, not just ND's and Lutherans but all Christians comes from a misunderstanding of what they're reading. We've pointed out where you err in your understanding of Scripture. We point this out because we love you and do not want you to continue in your present erroneous understanding of Scripture and what it clearly teaches, this is the fruit of the Lutheran denomination.

I wouldn't be spouting off at the mouth about me being condescending when you start off this post with the word "yawn", like you're bored at what we're writing to you, when we're simply trying to help you. It is also not allowed for you to tell us we "have it backwards" in our own forum. That is a violation of the rules here. We've been very gracious to you so far. But if you want to go down the road you've chosen in this post, that actually says more about you than it does me or the denomination of Lutheranism. I have not personally attacked you or acted bored by anything you have said. You are a guest here. You should show more respect and drop the flippant attitude.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

One of my dear friends had this to say about her ND church: "they teach a whole lot of nothing with a bunch of zilch in between." She attended a ND church for most of her childhood, teen and young adult years. She walked away from God for a bit because she didn't "feel" him the way her church told her she was supposed to. She finally joined an ELCA church, but left that not long after.

She was really tired of walking away from church hungry.

She attends a LCMS church now but is wary. I'm glad that her pastor is working closely with her.

 

[Luther073082]

Someone please confirm for me so I know I'm reading him right. Did he not just suggest that there is salvation in the law, outside of Christ, and that one can save oneself? (namely by following the law?)

I will be praying for him, he is extremely misled.

 

[Zecryphon]

Someone please confirm for me so I know I'm reading her right. Did he not just suggest that there is salvation in the law, outside of Christ, and that one can save oneself? (namely by following the law?)

I will be praying for him, he is extremely misled.

Yeah, he did. But that's what the ND church teaches once you get past the fluff and really look into their teachings. If you ever find yourself in an ND church, here's a fun thing to do, ask them why they don't teach the creeds of the Christian faith. The answer I got was a doozy. They told me, "we teach the Scriptures, not the creeds." I immediately thought, but the creeds come from the Scriptures. I don't know how the ND church justifies even half of what it does, yet alone all of what they do.

 

[alexnbethmom]

Someone please confirm for me so I know I'm reading her right. Did she not just suggest that there is salvation in the law, outside of Christ, and that one can save oneself? (namely by following the law?)

I will be praying for her tonight, she is extremely misled.

that's a guy that said that - and yeah, that's pretty much essentially what he's said.

i'm getting a headache reading this thread - i am so thankful to God for delivering me from ND churches.....