What is a Presbyterian?

[Elderone]

I noticed from the website of the church that I am considering that they have a class that you take before you become a member. But, you can take the class even if your not planning on becoming a member. I think perhaps I should take the course the next time it comes up, God willing. Perhaps that will help me to decide if I want to become a member.

Excellent idea. That will give you the opportunity to ask pointed questions, and beliefs possibly not mentioned will come out.

I attended a new comers class at the most conservative PCA in our area, the one we left, to find out what they believed. They were very orthodox, but, one morning the young man who was the intern mentioned he had gone to Atlanta for a PCA conference. While there he had discussions with other PCA pastors about the New Perspective on Paul, and how they had some interesting ideas about it. I consider the NPP to be heresy. They were also having a lot of youth band entertainment during the service. Thus we didn't continue with them.

The search for a good Bible teaching church can be difficult, but if you find one it can be the most satisfying thing you will ever do.

Good Luck and I will pray your search is fruitful.

 

[Knight]

I think the word I'm looking for on this is "oops."

You've got to admit that www.pca.org WAS the logical choice. What I get for not checking up on the link...

(Besides, I'd rather have a Mustang again...)

 

[Terri]

Excellent idea. That will give you the opportunity to ask pointed questions, and beliefs possibly not mentioned will come out.

I attended a new comers class at the most conservative PCA in our area, the one we left, to find out what they believed. They were very orthodox, but, one morning the young man who was the intern mentioned he had gone to Atlanta for a PCA conference. While there he had discussions with other PCA pastors about the New Perspective on Paul, and how they had some interesting ideas about it. I consider the NPP to be heresy. They were also having a lot of youth band entertainment during the service. Thus we didn't continue with them.

The search for a good Bible teaching church can be difficult, but if you find one it can be the most satisfying thing you will ever do.

Good Luck and I will pray your search is fruitful.

Thank you Elderone.

I'm not familiar with the NPP Elderone. I will have to study up on that. Thanks for making me aware of a potential problem to look out for.

I noticed at the church I am considering that they have 3 different services: a communion service, a contemporary service, and a classic reformed service. I like the fact that they have communion every week. I find that is something that is definitely lacking in the Baptist church. As soon as I am able to get out and around I think I will probably just make a day of it and take in all three services. Or, do you have to be a member of the church to take communion?

I don't mind contemporary services, but I like the classic services too. I think it would be nice to attend a church where you have the different options.

 

[Terri]

I think the word I'm looking for on this is "oops."

You've got to admit that www.pca.org WAS the logical choice. What I get for not checking up on the link...

(Besides, I'd rather have a Mustang again...)

Well Knight www.pca.org certainly sounds logical to me!

But, I really needed a good laugh and I appreciate you providing one!

 

[HiredGoon]

I was raised in a non-calvinistic baptist church. I've been reformed for a couple years and have been to PCA and OPC churches, and am now a member of an OPC. I believe the biggest differences between a baptist and presbyterian church (assuming both are calvinistic) are covenantal infant baptism, covenant theology and presbyterian church government in the presbyterian church as opposed to credo baptism, dispensationalism, and independent congregational gov't. in the baptist church.

Here's a brief overview of presbyterianism

 

[JimfromOhio]

When we were looking for a new home church, I ran across PCA and discovered I agree what they said. Many of my Christian authors are "Reformed" which I didn't realized until not long ago. I agree with reformed theology and I am very comfortable with our new church (they offer membership class). This church believe that their convictions about Christ and His exciting will for Christians should inform and guide every aspect of their life together. Church's mission statement: "Knowing and enjoying God that others may know and enjoy Him." This church understands that Christians are not just looking for a friendly church, but a place where they can make real friendship and meaningful spiritual fellowship.

 

[Elderone]

Or, do you have to be a member of the church to take communion?

A Biblical church should not require a person be a member of their congregation to take Communion. However, the pastor should strongly advise all that they should be Christians to partake.

Here is what the Westminster Confession Of Faith says about Communion:

Chapter XXIX Of The Lord's Supper, Paragraph 8

Although ignorant and wicked men receive the outward elements in this sacrament; yet, they receive not the thing signified thereby; but, by their unworthy coming thereunto, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, to their own damnation. Wherefore, all ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Him, so are they unworthy of the Lord’s table; and cannot, without great sin against Christ, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries,a or be admitted thereunto.b

a. 1 Cor. 11:27–29; 2 Cor. 6:14–16.

b. 1 Cor. 5:6–7, 13; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14–15; Matt. 7:6.


H/W is Hodge's commentary on this paragraph:

These sections teach the Reformed doctrine as to the relation which in the Lord’s Supper subsists between the sign and the grace signified; that is, as to the nature of the presence of Christ in the sacrament, and the sense in which, consequently, the worthy recipient is said to feed upon the body and blood of the Lord. This Reformed doctrine may be stated as follows—

1. The bread and wine—always remaining mere bread and wine, without change—represent, by the divine appointment, the flesh and blood of the Redeemer offered as a sacrifice for sin. The relation between the bread and wine and the body and blood is purely moral or representative.

2. The body and blood are present, therefore, only virtually; that is, the virtues and effects of the sacrifice of the body of the Redeemer on the cross are made present and are actually conveyed in the sacrament to the worthy receiver by the power of the Holy Ghost, who uses the sacrament as his instrument according to his sovereign will.

3. When it is said, therefore, that believers receive and feed upon the body and blood of Christ, it is meant that they receive, not by the mouth, but through faith, the benefits secured by Christ’s sacrificial death upon the cross—that this feeding upon Christ is purely spiritual, accomplished through the free and sovereign agency of the Holy Ghost and through the instrumentality and in the exercise of faith alone; so that in no case is it ever done by the unbeliever. The unbeliever, therefore, receiving the outward sign with his mouth while he fails to receive the inward grace In his soul, only increases his own condemnation and hardens his own heart by the exercise. All, therefore, who are known to be unbelievers, and whose unbelief is made manifest either by their ignorance or their ungodliness, should be prevented, both for their own sake and for the Church sake, from coming to the Lord’s table until they are able to make a credible profession of their faith.

4. Hence, also, it follows that believers do, in the same sense, receive and feed upon the body and blood of Christ at other times without the use of the sacrament, and in the use of other means of grace.

 

[Hortysir]

sorry I haven't been in here.....
Got alot of reading and catching up to do

 

[Hortysir]

Will say that I'm enjoying the fellowship!!!!

 

[Zorobabel]

Here is a link to the denomination am I a member of explaining their convictions and constitution:

http://www.rpcna.org/conv_beliefs.html

 

[lmnop9876]

Here is a link to the denomination am I a member of explaining their convictions and constitution:

http://www.rpcna.org/conv_beliefs.html

sounds very similar to my Church

 

[calmcoolandelected]

They all drive Porches?
SWEEEET!!!!
LOL

or Beemers.....

CC&E

 

[edie19]

I was raised in a non-calvinistic baptist church. I've been reformed for a couple years and have been to PCA and OPC churches, and am now a member of an OPC. I believe the biggest differences between a baptist and presbyterian church (assuming both are calvinistic) are covenantal infant baptism, covenant theology and presbyterian church government in the presbyterian church as opposed to credo baptism, dispensationalism, and independent congregational gov't. in the baptist church.

Here's a brief overview of presbyterianism

As a Calvinistic baptist (born and raised Presbyterian) I need to say the statement that all baptists are dispensational is a big assumption. My church is covenantal - and I would argue that credobaptism is in keeping with covenantal theology (in fact I did on another thread). Anyhow - my pastor regularly invites other pastors to our pulpit - we've had Reformed Baptist pastors from the US and Canada - all were covenantal, not dispensational.

edie