What does "Non-denominational" mean??

[HypnoToad]

Do you believe the NT was divinely inspired?

Of course. But do you know what that actually means? Paul includes some words from pagan philosophers in his writings. Does that mean what those pagans wrote came from God?

 

[Dave-W]

Of course. But do you know what that actually means? Paul includes some words from pagan philosophers in his writings. Does that mean what those pagans wrote came from God?

Yes it does.

Did not the pagan "prophet" Baalam, who was hired to curse Israel, give a God inspired prophecy BLESSING Israel? Num 23.

Did not our Lord tell Peter this:?

Matthew 18:18
Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.​

"Binding" and "loosing" were theological terms in the day meaning what was prohibited (binding) and what was permitted (loosed) in obeying the commands of God. Difficult idea to understand, but God so trusted the "opinions" of Peter, Paul, et al, that HE said Heaven itself would back up their decisions.

 

[HypnoToad]

Yes it does.

Did not the pagan "prophet" Baalam, who was hired to curse Israel, give a God inspired prophecy BLESSING Israel? Num 23.

Nonsense. It simply doesn't follow that since Balaam was compelled once by God, that the works of other pagans that were quoted in the Bible must be divinely inspired.

At most, all that can be concluded was that Paul was inspired to include the words of the pagans in order to support the point he was making. It does NOT make the pagans themselves to be divinely inspired.

Further, Numbers clearly states that, in that specific case, God directly told Balaam to say those things. Whereas the words of Paul in question here specifically state what he's saying is NOT from God. Paul was divinely inspired to include his opinion, but that doesn't make the opinion itself come from God.

 

[Duvduv]

How do these latest postings relate to the subject of non-denominational churches??

 

[HypnoToad]

How do these latest postings relate to the subject of non-denominational churches??

You're the one who opened the door on sola scriptura back in posts 59 & 63.

 

[Micah888]

But how do they accommodate the serious theological and doctrinal differences among denominations? Or do they not take these things seriously?

Non-denominational churches are generally "evangelical", and evangelical doctrines are more our less consistent with each other.

It is not a matter of reconciling "serious theological and doctrinal differences" but rather presenting their own understanding of the fundamental doctrines of Bible Christianity.

And "non-denominational" means exactly that. They do not identify with any of the existing denominations.

 

[GenemZ]

Could folks describe for me the significance of "non-denominational" of some colleges and churches? I find it confusing. There are so many differences among the Christian denominations on essential points of religious belief and doctrine, how is a church or school that is non-denominational able to accommodate all the differences? In examining the principles of some of these colleges and churches, they appear to be Baptist. In the case of one college I checked, they describe ideas that do appear to reflect Protestantism and the Baptist denomination, except they leave out a description of the importance of baptism itself.

Ideally... non denominational means...

That someone heading the church is capable to teach the Bible objectively, and is free to make corrections when a previous assumption was proven to be incorrect.

Denominations are formed by a rigid way of thinking that sets up walls that refuses corrections when some of their traditional ways and concepts are proven wrong. Its where you go to turn off your brain and find comfort in the predictability that will remain the same.

 

[Duvduv]

Is it rigid to end up in separations because of conflicts over issues of justification, liturgy, church organization, sanctification, role of clergy, the errancy or inerrancy of the Christian Bible, etc.???

 

[ToBeLoved]

Of course. But do you know what that actually means? Paul includes some words from pagan philosophers in his writings. Does that mean what those pagans wrote came from God?

I think Paul was taking to pagan philosophers.

Those crazy sinners.

That’s how real life is out in the trenches

 

[HypnoToad]

I think Paul was taking to pagan philosophers.

Those crazy sinners.

That’s how real life is out in the trenches

No, Paul actually used quotes from several pagan writers in his letters.
Did Paul quote pagan philosophers? | CARM.org

 

[GenemZ]

Is it rigid to end up in separations because of conflicts over issues of justification, liturgy, church organization, sanctification, role of clergy, the errancy or inerrancy of the Christian Bible, etc.???

This is the real root to the problem.

2 Tim 4:3

"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great
number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."​

Its sound doctrine that would unify all believers. Paul warned that they will not tolerate/put up with/endure such excellent teaching. Instead, they will seek out many teachers to tell them what they want to hear.

Why? Sound doctrine robs them of having things their own preferred way. The Word of God is at time totally politically incorrect and can get believers in trouble when its believed and lived by. Its why Jesus warned if you are to follow Him that his disciple must deny self and take up his own cross.

The Word of God when its properly and accurately taught would destroy the racket denominations have become. They collect lots of money in pleasing certain kinds of people in the name of Jesus. They have become like fast food institutions (junk -feel good - teachings), not like a living organism that continues growing in knowledge and understanding.

There are very few men who are capable of such level of excellent teaching.

Paul warned Timothy that these people will gather to themselves MANY teachers to foot the bill of their personal desires. James 3:1 tells us that only a few should ever be led of God to be teachers. Yet, we find MANY.

 

[ToBeLoved]

No, Paul actually used quotes from several pagan writers in his letters.
Did Paul quote pagan philosophers? | CARM.org

Call me crazy but I don’t consider 4 words of a line to be a quote.

He may have riffed off part of well known philosophers by using phrases, but I don’t consider most three or four word phrases of a sentence to be a quote

 

[HypnoToad]

Call me crazy but I don’t consider 4 words of a line to be a quote.

He may have riffed off part of well known philosophers by using phrases, but I don’t consider most three or four word phrases of a sentence to be a quote

The references are there. Feel free to consider whatever you want.

 

[GenemZ]

Of course. But do you know what that actually means? Paul includes some words from pagan philosophers in his writings. Does that mean what those pagans wrote came from God?

Paul used some logic extracted from paganism to draw a parallel to their fulfillment in God's truth. He was not promoting paganism.

Paul even used "terms" found in Stoicism to show others the true fulfillment was to be found in the power of God's grace. Stoics had unattainable ideals. Paul was showing it was possible, but only by God's grace. That is why he used the terminology to draw in their attention. After all, he was evangelizing the pagan world. He simply found some common ground that they could relate to!

Virtue was conceptualized and attempted by Stoics, but they ended up becoming closed-in and mechanical - devoid of emotion. Paul showed how virtue was only attainable by God's gift of enabling power (grace)... And, that virtue (by grace) has with it a tranquility of soul and inner happiness. A very relaxed and free flowing emotional state. Just the opposite of how the Stoics ended up trying to achieve their ideal in the energy of their flesh.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The references are there. Feel free to consider whatever you want.

Well whatever.

I expect a quote to ba at least a complete sentence.

I wish people chose their words better.

 

[HypnoToad]

Paul was using some logic extracted from paganism to draw a parallel to the truth. He was not promoting paganism. Where do you get that Paul was promoting paganism?

When did I ever say Paul was promoting paganism??

 

[HypnoToad]

Well whatever.

I expect a quote to ba at least a complete sentence.

I wish people chose their words better.

Titus 1:12 (which is specifically mentioned in the article I linked to):
A certain one of them, in fact, one of their own prophets, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.”

Is that not "a complete sentence" that Paul is quoting??

 

[GenemZ]

When did I ever say Paul was promoting paganism??

I just edited my post. It should have not said that.

 

[GenemZ]

Call me crazy but I don’t consider 4 words of a line to be a quote.

He may have riffed off part of well known philosophers by using phrases, but I don’t consider most three or four word phrases of a sentence to be a quote

Maybe this will sit better with you....

Paul used some logic extracted from paganism to draw a parallel to their fulfillment in God's truth. He was not promoting paganism.

Paul even used "terms" found in Stoicism to show others the true fulfillment was to be found in the power of God's grace. Stoics had unattainable ideals. Paul was showing it was possible, but only by God's grace. That is why he used the terminology to draw in their attention. After all, he was evangelizing the pagan world. He simply found some common ground that they could relate to!

Virtue was conceptualized and attempted by Stoics, but they ended up becoming closed-in and mechanical - devoid of emotion. Paul showed how virtue was only attainable by God's gift of enabling power (grace)... And, that virtue (by grace) has with it a tranquility of soul and inner happiness. A very relaxed and free flowing emotional state. Just the opposite of how the Stoics ended up trying to achieve their ideal in the energy of their flesh.

 

[GenemZ]

Titus 1:12 (which is specifically mentioned in the article I linked to):
A certain one of them, in fact, one of their own prophets, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.”

Is that not "a complete sentence" that Paul is quoting??

Do you believe that when it says the Word of God? That all it contains should be directly from God?

Do you believe the NT was divinely inspired?

All Scripture is God breathed. Not just the NT.

Do you believe that when it says its the Word of God? That all it contains should be directly from God's mouth? That God's Word can not contain references to what others say in order for God's Word to make a point?