BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Home › Forums › Denominations?
General

Denominations?

S
sermonindex

Hi everyone

The Lord brought me out of a denominational church in the early 1980's. Then He led me to a little church near home which had no official membership list. If you knew Jesus and came regularly to meetings then you were a member as far as they were concerned. I had many years of good fellowship there before moving from the area i 2002.

After some "seeking" I settled in the new local church, as the Lord directed. In this church they are very keen that one should "become a member" officially, and have put some subtle pressure on me from time to time.

But the Lord won't let me make this official "commitment" because He has placed me as a member of the whole Body of Christ, not merely that part where He has sent me to serve. I cannot be part of anything less than the whole any more.

This seems to worry folk - as If I'm a sort of a loose cannon, or not properly "committed", or "covered". Which is ridiculous! I attend meetings, love and respect the leaders of this church, pray for them and honour them for their gifts and the authority the Lord has given them to serve in this way.

Has anyone else here had a similar vision, leading or experience? Not easy to put into words, but if you have you will understand where I'm coming from.

Its far more than being open to fellowship with others, no matter what their label. It's having [b][i]no label at all[/i][/b], except as belonging to the Lord Jesus; like "walking on the water" to go to Him.

Jeannette

P
PreachParsly

Demoninations, demon nations, abominations....

There won't be any of them in heaven.

S
sermonindex


PreachParsly wrote:
Demoninations, demon nations, abominations....

There won't be any of them in heaven.

[b]AMEN Bro :-)[/b]

I
iansmith

Denominations have practical and functional benefits. Some might even argue that Antioch was the first denominational church. It was not directly associated with Jerusalem's leadership and it also established a network of mission churches through Paul's ministry.

We can look at denominations as wicked, but in the case of the Southern Baptist Church, of which I am a member, I am very proud of the 'practical' and 'functional' aspects of the denomination as well as the scriptural and leadership aspects.

The SBC is very mission concious, with at network of thousands of churches in the united states the SBC does an enormous ammount of mission work overseas -and because of the direct ties between missions, denomination and local churches we're able to work effectively for spreading the Gospel to Unreached peoples.

Practically it also helps to define leadership and unity among diverse churches. I attend a mostly Korean southern baptist church, but I know that my Pastor is most likely going to be preaching what would be considered orthadox in a mostly white or mostly black or mostly hispanic church across the country. I can walk into just about any SBC church and get the Word -without any artificial additives.

You know what, i'm going to be honest, there ARE good denominations, and bad denominations... and to lable all denominations negatively is gross negligence, just like if I said that all non-denominational churches were bad. Some are, some aren't -I personally love to listen to Zac Poonen!

Keep an open mind, find out what your church believes, if it isn't biblical, find a church that is... I'm sure there are biblical presbeterian churches, biblical methodists, biblical anglicans etc. just as much as there are unbiblical non-denominational churches.

P
preacherafla

Amen to both of you. We also came out of a mainstream denomination and started our own body of belivers with out main goals of holiness and serving the Lord with all we have.

This is not a slam against denominations but it is about being commited to God more than an organization.

-- Steve

S
sermonindex

Its far more than being open to fellowship with others, no matter what their label. It's having no label at all, except as belonging to the Lord Jesus; like "walking on the water" to go to Him.

[b]A roughly parallel thing happened when I taught in Africa for a while. There was no race prejudice, but at first I was very aware of being "white", that there was a difference.

After some months I looked at one of the schoolgirls and thought "She looks just like..." (someone at home). Yet one girl was black and the other white - I'd become "colour blind"!

A similar thing happened re denominations - the distinction between different groupings is now meaningless. The Church of Christ is all that exists, out of every tribe, tongue, nation and (if they insist :-() denomination

Jeannette[/b]

T
Tears_of_joy

"Did I ever tell you my little parable of the first two denominations? Two fellows were sitting on a park bench feeding the pigeons. One looks around and then declares with great expressiveness, “What a beautiful day it is and how wonderful it is to be able to see it!” The other man responded, “Oh, sir, I most heartily agree. You know, I used to be blind.” The other man exclaimed, “You don’t mean it! I used to be blind, too.” He went on, “I will never forget the day Jesus healed me.”

The other man said, “What? Jesus healed you? Why that is wonderful because Jesus healed me, too.” They rejoiced together in their mutual blessings. The first man said, “Yeah, I will never forget that day He spit upon the ground and made mud. He put the mud on my eyes and told me to go wash at the pool. I washed and immediately I could see clearly.”

Hearing this with great suspicion, the other man said, “Mud? What mud? When Jesus healed me He just touched my eyes and I could see, but men appeared to me like walking trees. Then Jesus touched me again and suddenly I could see clearly, but there was no mud. I don’t know what you are talking about. Are you sure you can even see at all? You must not know the Jesus I know. How could you see after such a disgusting experience? I don’t believe you know what you are talking about.”

With that, both men moved to the opposite ends of the bench and never spoke to each other again. That was the beginning of denominationalism: The Mudites and the Anti-Mudites."

[url=http://www.seegod.org/focus_on_jesus.htm]source[/url]

A
athanasius86

I personally struggle with the whole concept of joining a denomination. My home church is independent, but while I am at college I am attending a Nazarene church. I am not totally against denominations and I think that at least for now, I feel comfortable staying with church I am with. I attend this church because of the genuine spirit I feel, not just because it is Nazarene. If I knew of a Baptist church that was dedicated to prayer and holiness, I think I would be happy to go there should the Lord lead that way.

On the other hand, in preparing for the ministry, I struggle with the idea of joining a denomination, or being ordained by a particular denomination. If I was ordained by the United Methodists, then as soon as people hear that, they tend to be prejudiced because of things they have heard or experienced concerning the United Methodists. Therefore, though I believe in standing up for your beliefs, I prefer remaining independent because I think that it will leave more open doors in the long run for ministry and fellowship with believers of other stripes.

Athanasius

S
sermonindex

Hearing this with great suspicion, the other man said, “Mud? What mud? When Jesus healed me He just touched my eyes and I could see, but men appeared to me like walking trees. Then Jesus touched me again and suddenly I could see clearly, but there was no mud. I don’t know what you are talking about. Are you sure you can even see at all? You must not know the Jesus I know. How could you see after such a disgusting experience? I don’t believe you know what you are talking about.”

With that, both men moved to the opposite ends of the bench and never spoke to each other again. That was the beginning of denominationalism: The Mudites and the Anti-Mudites."

:-P :-P :-P That is really good! Thanks for sharing that, brother. The rest of that article looks really good...

S
sermonindex


iansmith wrote:
Denominations have practical and functional benefits.

[b] Yes, OK, they do. How is that relevant to the Kingdom of God - except on a merely practical or functional level? [/b]
...Some might even argue that Antioch was the first denominational church. It was not directly associated with Jerusalem's leadership and it also established a network of mission churches through Paul's ministry.

We can look at denominations as wicked,...


[b] The wicked part only comes when they give rise to artificial distinctions that are not of God. [/b]

...but in the case of the Southern Baptist Church, of which I am a member, I am very proud of the 'practical' and 'functional' aspects of the denomination as well as the scriptural and leadership aspects.
[b]Oh Dear :-( [/b]

The SBC is very mission concious, with at network of thousands of churches in the united states the SBC does an enormous ammount of mission work overseas -and because of the direct ties between missions, denomination and local churches we're able to work effectively for spreading the Gospel to Unreached peoples.

Practically it also helps to define leadership and unity among diverse churches. I attend a mostly Korean southern baptist church, but I know that my Pastor is most likely going to be preaching what would be considered orthadox in a mostly white or mostly black or mostly hispanic church across the country. I can walk into just about any SBC church and get the Word -without any artificial additives.

You know what, i'm going to be honest, there ARE good denominations, and bad denominations... and to lable all denominations negatively is gross negligence, just like if I said that all non-denominational churches were bad. Some are, some aren't -I personally love to listen to Zac Poonen!


[b] But you are completely missing the point, with all this talk about good and bad denominations etc etc. Its denominational[i]ism[/i] that's the problem, not denominations. God doesn't see denominations, He sees that which is His Church, or that which is not His Church. That is the [i]only[/i] truly valid difference that exists. Any other distinction is artificial and superficial[/b]

Keep an open mind, find out what your church believes, if it isn't biblical, find a church that is... I'm sure there are biblical presbeterian churches, biblical methodists, biblical anglicans etc. just as much as there are unbiblical non-denominational churches.

[b] What are you talking about? What do you mean by "my church"???? I don't have a church, I'm a member of [i]the[/i] Church! And so are you.

We are one in Christ - whether we like it or not! Why make distinctions where the Lord makes no distinction?

I don't care that you're a Southern Baptist, what worries me is that [i]you[/i] care that you're a Southern Baptist!


Your [i]sister in Christ[/i]

Jeannette[/b]:-P

H
HomeFree89

I think that denominations are far more divisive then helpful. It sets Christians up for controversies, "You go to what type of a church!?" We're supposed to be a body, not divided members.

Jordan


I
iansmith

What are you talking about? What do you mean by "my church"???? I don't have a church, I'm a member of the Church! And so are you.

We are one in Christ - whether we like it or not! Why make distinctions where the Lord makes no distinction?

I don't care that you're a Southern Baptist, what worries me is that you care that you're a Southern Baptist!


Of course the church is THE CHURCH... but let's be practical, when I say, 'I belong to such and such church,' people generally know what I'm talking about.

The way I think of this is pretty easy to understand, when I say that I went home to eat with my family, some people would assume that I ate with brothers and sisters and my parents. If i was married it might mean eating with my wife and children. It could also mean eating with my grandparents, cousins, aunts and uncles and such. None of these is a wrong understanding of family, much as I see that my church is a smaller part of the church, the same and yet different.

When you say the church, you're talking about all of the extended family through generations, when I spoke of the church in the context before mentioned I was specifically talking about my parents and brothers and sisters... we were both right, the problem is when people start saying which view is right and which view is wrong, because that's how denominations get started! ^_~

And please go easy on the text-bolding =)

I
iansmith

It just occurred to me as I was stiring a pot of noodles that this whole denominational question is utter rubbish. I thought about it historically and then scripturally and then practically. Here’s what I realized.

When most people debate about which denomination is right or wrong, which one is better or worse, or whether they want to be in a denomination at all, they are making a choice. Usually the choice is pretty linier.

A. is bad, B. is worse, C. is OK, and D. is pretty good. So you have a choice between A, B, C and D. Well then comes along the person who says, “Well I don’t like any of the options, why are there all these denominations, they’re the work of the devil.’ So that person reasons to himself, ‘I won’t be any part of any denomination, I won’t pick A, B, C or D, and anyone who does is a total idiot.’

But unfortunately this person think that they’ve beaten the paradigm and are no longer restricted by the linier understanding of denominations; [b]that’s a fatal flaw[/b]! Instead of picking from options A, B, C or D, all they’ve in fact done is created option E, or F or so on –as if they’ve done something that no one else has ever thought to do.

Well let’s look back at history, I really couldn’t think of all but one denomination that actually set out to be a denomination (except in modern times, the last hundred years). And that was the Church of England.

Let’s think about this, Methodists… how did they get there start? Because John Wesley wanted his own denomination? No! Because he was booted out of the Church of England!

How about the Baptists, well they must have started out to be a denomination… wrong! They just disagreed over the nature of baptism, they didn’t set out to start a denomination, just get back to a biblical understanding of baptism.

The same can be said for just about every other denomination, none of them were out to start a new church (with the clear exception of the church of England) they just wanted to get back to biblical foundations, or other factors got involved.

[b]Today’s non-denominational churches might be tomorrow’s denominations[/b]! Yeah, that’s how it happened historically, so how can we suppose we’ll be any different.

So don’t take pride in the fact that you’re non-denominational –that in itself is a denomination! Like I said before, find out if your church is teaching biblical truth, if it is, than that’s the right church, otherwise go find one that is!

B
bereangirl

Hi Jeannette,

Somehow my first attempt at a reply malfunctioned and never posted. Odd.

Quote: This seems to worry folk - as If I'm a sort of a loose cannon, or not properly "committed", or "covered". Which is ridiculous! I attend meetings, love and respect the leaders of this church, pray for them and honour them for their gifts and the authority the Lord has given them to serve in this way.


I just wanted to say that I have come out of a controlling church environment where "covenant" was used as a means to manipulate people into staying, etc. I disagree with the notion of a membership roll, especially if it is expressed as a "covenant". While there are some legalities for a charitible organization (at least in Canada anyway...not sure about other countries but I would imagine they would be similar...)that states that they have to have an annual meeting with a quorum of members. If that's the reason for a membership sign-up so they can have a head count, then fine. But if there are overtones of "covenant" and "covering" along with membership and this arrangement is somehow spiritualized, yikes, major red flag there. It might be a controlling church. I hope that isn't the case with yours, but I thought I would mention as spiritual abuse is an unpleasant experience.

Blessings,

Sonja

T
tjservant

Non-denominational churches are good in the fact they remove the “label” (Baptist, Nazarene, Lutheran…) that might turn someone off because of a bad past experience.

One thing I have witnessed many times is when a non-denominational person mentions there non-denominational position they are asked their view on eternal security and other potentially problematic issues.

Question. Why does my town have two non-denominational churches?

I know why…because one is much more Calvinistic than the other.

Something to think about.

Peace be with you.

TJ

I
iansmith

Well I want to say this kindly, but I think a lot of it has an issue of submitting authority or wanting authority. A lot of church divisions occur when someone wants more power, or someone doesn't want to be under someone else's authority. Sometimes the desire is right, sometimes wrong.

I mean, you can look at a situation like the independence of the united states: the americans were a bunch of jerks who just couldn't submit to the authority of a monarchy (like the other colonies could). Or one could say 'well, the americans had strong leadership of their own and weren't getting the right kind of representation in the government in europe.' The same thing happens in our churches, if we look at it one way it's divisive, if we look at it from the other perspective it's liberation to break free and do something better... if the US had stayed a british colony? Who knows how we would be today? Someone could probably argue better in some ways, and others worse in some ways. The fact of the matter is that there was a split.

Denomninations are the same way, some splits in churches happen because of ambition, others because of circumstances, others because of good intentions... somehow God is going to use it all.

God told man to populate the whole earth, he had to destroy the tower of babel to get his people to do it! They disobeyed him by not going out, their main sin was that they didn't follow his command to spread over all the earth, not just because they built a tower.

Maybe God created denominations so that the Word of God would go out... maybe the Catholic church (besides it's corruption and problems with doctrine) wasn't getting the job done, so God initiated the breaking of it, maybe Lutherins and Calvinists weren't getting the job done, so God had to grind them up a bit, maybe Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians and Presbiterians weren't getting the job done so he had to throw them into the meat grinder. If we think about it, we can see God's hand into dividing up our mass enterprises to make us go out! And guess what, it's worked better that way.

With the division of protestants from catholics he got twice as much missionary activity, with the division of protestant denominations he got even more, and more, and our God is a missionary God, that's what he wants! [b]This is an epiphany! God is behind denominations! They're one of his box of tools to get his word out to all peoples! Praise God![/b]

S
sermonindex

Jesus said: "my sheep...go in and out and find pasture".

If we are determined to follow Him fully we will always, in the end, come up against those who would force us to stay inside a particular "sheepfold", and obey the customs of that narrow enclosure, instead of following where He leads.

Where He leads may be to remain in a particular "fold" for the rest of our lives. But our reasons for being there will be different from those who are still hemmed in by this false division.

Paul was bound in prison, but he said "the Word of God is not bound"!

The first disciples had no denomination (though they had plenty of arguments among themselves!) But at least they responded to the Shepherd's call, "Follow Me".

Basically no more is needed. To follow man's customs instead of following Jesus is idolatry.

What I've said here will be misunderstood by some, but I'm too tired to try to put it more clearly (its gone 1 am!)

Just to thank yoiu all for your comments, many of them were a real blessing.

Good night brethren (a generic term which includes sisters! :-D )

Jeannette

S
seanjol

1 Corinthians 1:10-13 "Now I beseech you, bretheren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement. 11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my bretheren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptised in the name of Paul?

I would put things in bold or italics but I haven't tried this out enough to figure all of that out. My point is this, denominationalism is not of God. The church of Corinth was clearly heading into denominations and Paul was correcting them here early in the letter. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time to post so I read these forums a great deal. This issue is a little endearing to me because I grew up in SBC's.

I currently go to a bible church that is independent. I really have nothing against SBC's or denominations. What bothers me is to go out on the street to pass out tracts and to witness to people and hear an answer all of the time, "yeah, I'm a baptist, or I'm a presbyterian or I'm a pentecostal." When we get down to brass tacks, "are you of Christ."

I grew up in and live in the Southeast, the bible or baptist belt. Just a few days ago there have been articles out about the SBC and baptist churches in general doing a better job in cracking down on abusive pastors (ie sexual) My point in saying this is that when we put an emphasis on an organization and attach it to
Christ as opposed to lifting up Christ alone, we give opportunities like this to arise and allow the unbeliever to wag his finger and besmirch the name of Christ. Baptists will let you down, Methodists will let you down, Reformist will let you down, But Christ will never fail.

Long story short, I am of Christ!!! Praise God, Hallelujah!!! :-D

L
lovejt

One concept that i have come to realize is, thank God for denominations. I forgot the scripture basically shows an element of division as a good thing. It sort of relates to how someone like John Wesley starts a movement and then usually after a generation or so, it starts to wane. Majority continues the downward slope while a handful who are wholehearted standup against it and start their own 'denomination' or 'offshoot'. Then the next generation of that group starts to wane and a handful of that group leaves and starts another 'offshoot'. That in a nutshell is how denominations have started. Wholehearted ones leaving a compromising church. Not all division is bad.

S
seanjol

I thank God for Christ. I don't think there is a scripture about division being good other than in a discipline situation. Isn't is interesting that could very well be why we have so many divisions, discipline.

Something else occurred to me as I was thinking of this thread. Denominationalism often leads to a pride of one's certain denomination. Again, growing up a Baptist I know how the chest sticks out when proclaiming "I am a Baptist, or I am a Methodist, or I am a Presbyterian." More importantly many times it comes down to

[b]"I'm this and thank God I'm not one of them."[/b]
I am not saying that this is what anyone is implying, I am saying that this has been my experience as I have perceived it.

I like this, " He that glorieth, Let him glory in the Lord." 1Cor1:31.

Lord Bless,

sean

C
Compton

A few of my observations on this topic...

1) Unity can and does often exist even without consensus. The two are not the same at all. For instance some of my ancestors in the 19th century were United Brethren ministers who thought very highly of their Methodist brethren.

2) Differing directions of the church did not start with the Protestant Reformation. They were historically present by the second century.

3) The Catholic church has always had numerous orders and factions along contrasting and differing theological, cultural, administrative lines. Though these divisions are still under the Papal Penumbra and are not called denominations, they function as denominations very much like their Protestant counterparts.

MC

K
KingJimmy

Just my two cents: There is nothing wrong with a church being cognitively aware that they are part of a larger network of churches, call this a denomination if you will, or a network if you don't. Where sin enters the camp here is when people have a factitious spirit about them. This 1 Corinthians 1-2 and Galatians 5 condemns.

J
John173

As for me, reading this thread grieves me beyond measure. Can we really be this blind? Talk about the means justifying the end! Is abortion a good thing because some unmarried pregnant girls run into Christians outside a clinic and get saved as a result? How in the world can we manage to justify the man made divisions in the church and call it good? ACK!!!

Maranatha Lord Jesus,

In Him,

Doug

I
iansmith

Doug,

Please understand me when I poured out my heart earlier... I've been studying missions and it's caused me to look at God in a lot of new ways. I'll give you some example.

The first church was told to stay in Jerusalem until the coming of the spirit, then afterwards they were to go out to judea, then samaria etc. Well even after the spirit came they continued to stay in Jerusalem, they were preaching, but they weren't reaching out to gentiles (ie. the samaritans)

God used persecution to send the early Christian church out to Samaritan and the surrounding gentiles. God had to use punishment to get his will done, even in the early church.

After three hundred years Christians had gone from a small Jewish offshoot to the dominant religion in the Roman empire, a huge feat for such a short time, but the problem is they stopped at the borders of the empire... the early church wasn't taking the Gospel out to the barbarians (with the exception of the Arians who were forced into exile and were successful missionaries to the barbarians).

Well because of the stubborness of the roman christians to take the Gospel beyond their borders God brought the barbarians to them! Yes, the fall of the Roman empire resulted in the Christianization of millions of barbarians and spread the Gospel into parts of europe that had never been reached.

Unfortunately the lesson wasn't learned and the church became stagnant again and the vikings came in and sacked europe, in the course the vikings became Chistians, but God allowed parts of 'christian' europe to be invaded in order that his word would spread, and it did!

The protestant reformation was a big step forward for europe, but for over 200 years protestants didn't take the Gospel beyond their borders (until the moravians and william carrey) and I truly believe that God had to smash up some of the churches that developed out of the reformation in order to make them go out!

Methodists were a break away from the anglican church, they were instrumental in missions in the United states. Baptists were developed as a mission movement and were instrumental in missions around the world. God has used denominations to spread his Gospel.

God works in mysterious ways, [b]don't be grieved because of denominations... be grieved because there are millions of people around the world who are being cast into hell every day without a chance to ever hear the Gospel[/b]! We need to get our priorities straight, denomnations usually develop because the status quo church doesn't have the right priorities -missions!

K
KingJimmy

Just because God has blessed the works of various denominations doesn't mean they are of God. Galatians 5 makes it clear that denominations are a fruit of the flesh, and not the Spirit. Oh, God still might bless our Ishmael's. But the promise is bound up in the life of the one child, Isaac. So much so that God talks to Abraham in regard to Isaac as Abraham's only son. Ishmael might be made into a great nation, even as many denominations have, but that doesn't mean Ishmael is God's intent. As has been said before, the enemy of the best is the good. And this is exactly what denominations are.

R
rookie

I believe Scripture teaches us that God starts a work. The work begins with one or two faithful believers and the Holy Spirit. As these believers faithfully listen to God and obey they see the wonderful precept of God creating a congregation that is called out from the midst of this world. Many blessings are realized by that generation.

Scripture teaches, by examples given to us in the book of the Judges, of the ebbs and flows of the Holy Spirit working in each generation. Some works last for a year some for 40 years. After a time the work of God looses its "seperation of hope" for the things of God. The church begins to allow the polution of the hopes of the world to remain within it's motivations for being a church. This then begins the downward slide into denominationalism.

When the sheep realize this, those who hear His voice, seperate and go where He leads them. They hear His voice in the hearts of men who have the Lord as their hope. They hear the Spirit in the words spoken when teaching from the Scripture. They see the love, the sacrificial love of the pastor for His sheep.

There comes divisiveness where "The Church" is once again called out to start a new work. New wine is poured.

Just and observation...

In Christ
Jeff

G
Goldminer

Dear Jeannette,

We have the same testimony. The church I got saved in did not believe in denominational separation, therefore had no membership. It didn't hurt them, the fellowsip was about 1500. I went there for the first 19 years of my walk.

I then read where Watchman Nee withdrew his membership for the presbyterian church because of the very reasons you cited. The body is one and to have a lable is acknowledging separation when we are called to be one loaf. This was very difficult for him but he felt God told him to.

I now go to a church where they decided to start a membership after I had been going there for a while. I had to tell my pastor I couldn't sign a membership because it went against me conviction about the body, however he has been very gracious and understanding about it and hasn't limited my participation in any way.

I do understand what you are going through. I too will never sign my name on a list unless God tells me specifically to. I have a freind who believed the same as you and I and God told her to sign the membership because He wanted her to be lead the prayer ministry and her church wouldn't allow it unless she did.

I think this has to be according to what God speaks to each persons heart.

S
sermonindex


iansmith wrote:
...don't be grieved because of denominations... be grieved because there are millions of people around the world who are being cast into hell every day without a chance to ever hear the Gospel[/b]! We need to get our priorities straight, denomnations usually develop because the status quo church doesn't have the right priorities -missions!
I, for one, am not grieved because of denominations but because of [b][i]denominational spirit[/i][/b], party spirit, in those who claim any denomination or none! And also becaue the Lord has plainly shown that He will cause such a shaking in the world (Haggai 2:6f; Hebrews 12:26-29) and neither nations nor denominations will stand, only those who "follow the Lamb wherever He goes"!

So I fear for those who put their trust in man's structure and organisation. External structure is useful, even necessary, in practical terms, as Ian has pointed out, but to trust in them is like trusting in a broken reed.

I was called out of a denomination by God, after He had taken denominational[i]ism[/i] out of my heart. It was through a a small prayer group, (four of us, from four different denominations!). During our time together the Lord gave us such a "vision" of what the Church really is that other divisions became meaningless. Each of us eventually came out of the denomination we happened to be part of. Not because we were disillusioned but because of a specific call of God.

It was asked in prayer, "What now? Where shall we go?" The answer came at once, [i][b]"Go wherever God's people gather".[/b][/i]

For one friend this meant leaving the Elim Pentecostal Church, where she had been very happy, (she was the first to be called out) and eventually joining the (pretty dead) local Anglican church, (which she in no way wanted to do!)

For me it meant leaving the Presbyterian ministry, (loss of job), going back to live with my mother, and having no recognised "ministry" at all any more.

As it happened, the Lord used the issue of infant baptism to call me out - I couldn't do it any more. Not merely because of opinion, though I'd never been happy with it, but because the Lord forbade it.

In fact, I have [i]never[/i] been part of a strictly non-denominational church! Since leaving the Presbyterians in 1983 I have been part of two Pentecostal (AOG) fellowships and now one that began, as others have said, of what was probably a genuine move of God, but has also hardened into a denomination (though they wouldn't call themselves one).

There is a little Baptist church just around the corner from here. The pastor is a good man, and I occasionally "visit", but I cannot be part of that congregation because the Lord has called me elsewhere.

Because of certain the teachings of the present church, (Restoration based, though they have greatly moderated the "heavy shepherding" that they used to have)there have been several times when I thought "I'm outta here", but each time the Lord has sent me back - partly as a witness to them maybe?


Jeannette

J
John173

I recognize that many of todays denominations exist as a result of a necessary split from a church that was indeed a result of honest conviction and even the leading of the Holy Spirit. My grief is caused by the fact that man is so incapable of staying on track that God must begin a new work elsewhere because what may have started as a vibrant work of God has become stale and lifeless. What remains behind is usually a denomination. The Methodist church is one example. Who can argue that Wesley was not being used mightily of God? Yet today the majority of Methodist churches are empty shells. Most denominational churches fit into one of these two verses:

2 Tim 3:1-9 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! 6 For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts, 7 always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith; 9 but they will progress no further, for their folly will be manifest to all, as theirs also was.


Rev 3:14-22 "And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write,
'These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: 15 "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither *cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 17 Because you say, 'I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing'--and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked-- 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. 19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. 21 To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
22 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."'"

I realize that these passages contain some very strong language. Sometimes the truth hurts. I am sure there are exceptions. I also don't mean to pick on the Methodists.

He who has a ear to hear...

In His Love (really!),

Doug

I
iansmith

Doug,
You are seriously over generalizing. That is the divisive spirit you're talking about at work in your own heart!
-Ian

J
John173

Ian,

perhaps you are right. I know this topic gets me going. I am greatly cncerned over the lukewarm condition prevalent in our western churches. This issue is very apparent to me in the majority of Methodist/Lutheran/Presbyterian/Episcopalian/etc. And yes I would add Baptist to the list. Unfortunately this is also true of many, perhaps even most non denominational and/or independant churches as well.

The divisions truly do grieve me, the lukewarm condition of today grieves me even more.

Please forgive me brother for the divisive tone/spirit of my previous post.

In His Love,

Doug

B
Burn4Christ

One thing I have noticed on this site, is that we jump on people for the smallest things. I believe it was ian who said "my church" or something along those lines. Then someone fired back "your church" Let's be practical here. We all attend a home church (hopefully), Thats what you call it. "your church" If someone says what church do you go to. You tell them the name of "your church". Come on guys lets be practical here and stop putting on a show of "superspiritual" We all know that it's Christs church and what we mean by "my church" Bottom line, you need to be under (leadership) spiritual authority. Someone quoted Watchman Nee as he withdrew his membership, but at the same time, read his book "Spiritual Authority". You need to be under someones ministry. (Oh no I said "someones ministry...i better clarify before they crucify me" we all obviously know what I mean here: again let's be practical. I know that sounds a little arogant, but for the most part, this is how we treat one another on this site.) Growing, maturing, and assemblying ourselves together with the saints. And ultimately sending us out needs to be established with the help of our "home church" Not running to and fro. God appointed Pastors over our lives and we need to be a servant to them and respect their authority. That doesn't mean you have to "become a member" lets not lose focus at the main thrust of this post. P.S. I do see your whole concern over the whole "you must be a member thing" it's rampant in american church

In His Service
Christopher

Suffering...it was the way of the master: should not the servant tread it still

I
iansmith

I dislike divisions of the church as much as anyone, I just choose to see their benefits instead of their negatives.

Right now I work for a Christian ministry that is involved with thousands of other Christian ministries world wide, of all shapes and sizes and denominations. One thing I've realized working with all these different people is that we serve the same God!

The ministry I work for employes over 1,400 people world wide, all from different church backgrounds. My manager is PCUSA, my coworker is PCA, I'm a Southern Baptist, but we're all serving Jesus!

We may structure our worship service or church organization differently, or stress different theological points, but when you get rid of all of those fluffy things, the cross is at the center!

When two Westerners run into eachother in the forests of brazil and find out they work for different mission organizations, do you think they embrace eachother or turn away because one disagrees with the other's church doctrine? Of course they embrace, not only may it be the only Westerner they've seen in months, it's also a fellow Child of God!

I admit that denominations have been behind some nasty things in the past, but so has a unified church -think about the crusades! Let's look and see how God is using the divisions in the church for his glory.

If someone has an awsome testimony, it usually involves realizing sin in a dramatic way... dramatic conversion. God can use someone's sinful life as a testimony, he can use a fractured church too!

Maybe we should look at denominations as little families, that are all part of the same family, like Uncle Bob (methodists) and Uncle Al (anglicans) etc. It'd be weird spending more than a few hours over at Uncle Al's house, they do things different over there, the silverware drawer isn't in the right place, they put cold pizza in the fridge... it's just weird! But it's still my Uncle! That's how a lot of denominations are.

S
sermonindex


John173 wrote:
Ian,

perhaps you are right. I know this topic gets me going. I am greatly cncerned over the lukewarm condition prevalent in our western churches. This issue is very apparent to me in the majority of Methodist/Lutheran/Presbyterian/Episcopalian/etc. And yes I would add Baptist to the list. Unfortunately this is also true of many, perhaps even most non denominational and/or independant churches as well.

The divisions truly do grieve me, the lukewarm condition of today grieves me even more.

Please forgive me brother for the divisive tone/spirit of my previous post.

In His Love,

Doug

I didn't think that you showed a divisive tone or spirit.

But maybe that's because of happening to agree with you! ;-)

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


Burn4Christ wrote:
One thing I have noticed on this site, is that we jump on people for the smallest things.

Perhaps because they are things that don't seem small to the individual concerned!
I believe it was ian who said "my church" or something along those lines. Then someone fired back "your church"

I think it was me commenting on something Ian said, not intending to "jump on him", but because I believe that a vision of the Church, and freedom from any kind of "party spirit" is increasingly vital for all of us in these days.
Let's be practical here. We all attend a home church (hopefully), Thats what you call it. "your church" If someone says what church do you go to. You tell them the name of "your church".

Why? The church where I meet isn't my church, just somewhere, part of the whole Body, where the Lord has placed me until further notice.
Come on guys lets be practical here and stop putting on a show of "superspiritual"

God forbid! What I'm speaking of is intensely practical, especially for the days of turmoil and shaking that are coming.

...Not many years ago I didn't understand either, and would have found my present stand at least as frustrating and perplexing, and downright dangerous as some of you probably do! Rather than "superspiritual" its simply that the Lord has placed me in a popsition, not of my own choosing, and I can't move from it, in spite of having tried from time to time!

We all know that it's Christs church and what we mean by "my church" Bottom line, you need to be under (leadership) spiritual authority.

Why? Isn't the Lord enough, as our spiritual Authority? The days are coming when He will have to be enough, because there won't be any alternative.

Are you advocating the sort of "pyramid" leadership structure that some have used? I'm sure you are not, but that is the logical end result of what you say. Eventually you have an Apoostle, Chief Elder or Pope (call him what you will)who rules the whole, and while nominally accountable to God, in practice probably does his own thing with no-one to tell him when he's wrong?

...You need to be under someones ministry. ...Growing, maturing, and assembling ourselves together with the saints. And ultimately sending us out needs to be established with the help of our "home church" Not running to and fro.

Who's running to and fro?

Certainly meeting together is a necessity - while we can. Although that's not the same as "being under someone's ministry". Surely we minister to one another, using the gifts the Lord gives (Eph 4), including leadership. Yet it is vital (whatever label the church happens to have) that we are gathered together unto Him, under one Head who is Christ.

And what happens when meeting together is impossible, or when the leader gets imprisoned or even killed - which is happening in many parts of the world even now?

`God appointed Pastors over our lives and we need to be a servant to them and respect their authority...

Indeed, there is no question of not respecting God-given authority.

Did you think there was?

Suffering...it was the way of the master: should not the servant tread it still

Yes, I suppose there can an element of suffering in following the Lord when He leads in this kind of way, especially in being misunderstood by one's brethren :-(.

Hebrews 13:7-14 seems to say all I have been trying to say - it even includes respect for leaders!

Verses 13-14 are my personal call, which ties in with what you say above...

[i][color=000099]7 [b]Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God; consider the outcome of their life, and imitate their faith.[/b] 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever. 9 Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings; for it is well that the heart be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited their adherents. 10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. 11 For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. 12 So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. [b]13 Therefore let us go forth to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured. 14 For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is to come.[/b] [/color]
[/i]
Excuse the long post but you deserved a full reply. This has also made me consider my position afresh in the light of what you say, so thank you.

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


rookie wrote:
I believe Scripture teaches us that God starts a work. The work begins with one or two faithful believers and the Holy Spirit. As these believers faithfully listen to God and obey they see the wonderful precept of God creating a congregation that is called out from the midst of this world. Many blessings are realized by that generation.

Scripture teaches, by examples given to us in the book of the Judges, of the ebbs and flows of the Holy Spirit working in each generation. Some works last for a year some for 40 years. After a time the work of God looses its "seperation of hope" for the things of God. The church begins to allow the polution of the hopes of the world to remain within it's motivations for being a church. This then begins the downward slide into denominationalism.

When the sheep realize this, those who hear His voice, seperate and go where He leads them. They hear His voice in the hearts of men who have the Lord as their hope. They hear the Spirit in the words spoken when teaching from the Scripture. They see the love, the sacrificial love of the pastor for His sheep.

There comes divisiveness where "The Church" is once again called out to start a new work. New wine is poured.

Just and observation...

In Christ
Jeff


Hi Jeff

Some good points here. New wine for new wineskins.

I might add that many of those who "came out" were forced out by the original church, because they no longer "fit". That's of course what happened with the Early Church in Acts and afterwards.

Paul and his friends always went first to the synagogue to preach. If rejected there they went elsewhere.

Eventually Judaism would no longer accept them. As I said to someone recently (she was brought up as an Anglican, though I don't think she yet knows the Lord, and her husband is Jewish. I said that probably the only major difference between Christianity and Judaism is disagreement on who the Messiah is!

The only real problem I think is when people come out for the wrong motives. Unless you are forced out because you have to obey God rather than man, the only reason must be the direct call of God.

Any other motive, such as discontent with the church you happen to be in, (unless it is because the church has departed from God's ways so much that you cannot stay) or selfish ambition, or a heart of rebellion against authority of any kind.

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


KingJimmy wrote:
Just my two cents: There is nothing wrong with a church being cognitively aware that they are part of a larger network of churches, call this a denomination if you will, or a network if you don't. Where sin enters the camp here is when people have a factitious spirit about them. This 1 Corinthians 1-2 and Galatians 5 condemns.

Nothing wrong with it at all, to me that has never been the issue!

You are right, motives are everything!

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


Goldminer wrote:
Dear Jeannette,

We have the same testimony. The church I got saved in did not believe in denominational separation, therefore had no membership. It didn't hurt them, the fellowsip was about 1500. I went there for the first 19 years of my walk.

I then read where Watchman Nee withdrew his membership for the presbyterian church because of the very reasons you cited. The body is one and to have a lable is acknowledging separation when we are called to be one loaf. This was very difficult for him but he felt God told him to.

I now go to a church where they decided to start a membership after I had been going there for a while. I had to tell my pastor I couldn't sign a membership because it went against me conviction about the body, however he has been very gracious and understanding about it and hasn't limited my participation in any way.

I do understand what you are going through. I too will never sign my name on a list unless God tells me specifically to. I have a freind who believed the same as you and I and God told her to sign the membership because He wanted her to be lead the prayer ministry and her church wouldn't allow it unless she did.

I think this has to be according to what God speaks to each persons heart.


Amen, Goldminer. Except perhaps that I wouldn't condemn having a label [i]as such[/i]. I wanted at first to become an official member of the church where I now am, but the Lord wouldn't let me! I also know a number of people, including a pastor, who are officially joined to a particular denomination, but are free in spirit.

As you said, [b]"we are called to be one loaf"[/b] Anything that separates that "loaf" has to be resisted. Which is why I said I'm not against denominations as such abut [i]denominationalism[/i]. When we have a vision of "the whole family in heaven and earth", as Paul puts it, any lesser division is meaningless.

Ian, I didn't comment on your illustration of members of the same family being nearer or further away in practical or relationship terms, (can't remember how you put it exactly), this is the answer

In Him

Jeannette

S
SimpleLiving

I used the Search feature to find this topic because I'm in the position of choosing a church right now. I've never been comfortable with belonging to a specific denomination because I don't agree with everything any one denomination teaches. It's my desire to grow to be more like Christ and sit in the fullness of His teaching (not a denomination's).

I had fallen into the Word of Faith movement (non-denominational church) and was incredibly hurt, and abused, by it. I left that church eight years ago and haven't stepped foot in any church since. Why? Because I no longer trusted myself to pick a church that wasn't unbiblical. I didn't walk away from God, just churches.

I was introduced to Brother Paul Washer's teachings and discovered, with utter horror, that I'm not saved! I said the "sinner's prayer" 24 years ago and, although I've only ever wanted to grow in Christ, I've done nothing but "backslide and rededicate" through all of those wasted years, unchanged! (To think I could have died at any time and gone to hell! God is so merciful!)

I'm on my face, praying for God to save me. I need to get back into the body. I've missed it. I crave it. So, I'm faced with the horror of finding a church to go to again and it's scary.

Denominations bother me. I see them as divisions caused by the arrogance, ignorance and rebelliousness of man. How can I belong to one when I don't believe in everything any one denomination teaches? This is something I haven't seen addressed in this thread.

The very person who started this thread is the person I relate to the most. Little Gift/Jeannette. I'm more in line with her thinking on the subject. The only comfort I was able to find in these pages was from Jeannette when she said:

The church where I meet isn't my church, just somewhere, part of the whole Body, where the Lord has placed me until further notice.

"where the Lord has placed me until further notice." That's reassuring to me.

I called Heartcry Missionary Society (Brother Paul Washer's ministry) and asked for a church recommendation from a brother there. He recommended John Piper's church, Bethlehem Baptist. I've heard several people say that it's one of the "best churches in the country." My brain says, "Great, another mega-church where people are just anonymous numbers and getting to know the body is impossible. Sixteen weeks of membership classes before being able to serve. Business and red tape."

I'm not trying to be negative, but it's not easy getting so many years of Word of Faith abuse, lingo, and methods out of my head!

So, this is where I will be tomorrow morning at 11am. Watching a service on a video screen because three different campuses share the same pastor at the same time. I don't like it. At all. I like getting to know a congregation and being a family. When one hurts or is in need, it affects the rest of us and everyone pitches in. When one member rejoices, it gives all of us cause to rejoice! There's intimacy and closeness. It doesn't take a committee and months of planning to organize a group of people to help a senior citizen in the congregation who is alone and needs her gutters cleaned and her toilet fixed.

PLEASE pray for me. This is very difficult for me. The one and only reason I'm able to do this at all right now is because I've decided that I will consult the Father FIRST on EVERYTHING instead of running to people for their opinions and advice. Don't get me wrong, I covet my brother's and sister's wisdom and advice! I've gotten much of it here! My point is that I'm making a point to go to God as my FIRST SOURCE, instead of my second, or third, or fourth....

S
sermonindex

Aren't Denominations a pretty word for Divisions :)

1 Corinthians 3:1-3 - And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. [b]For ye are yet carnal[/b]: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, [b]and divisions[/b], are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

S
sermonindex

I liked what Adam Clarke said about Luke 12:32 -
"Fear not, little flock - Or, very little flock, το μικρον ποιμνιον. This is what some term a double diminutive, and, literally translated, is, little little flock. Though this refers solely to the apostles and first believers, of whom it was literally true, yet we may say that the number of genuine believers has been, and is still, small, in comparison of heathens and false Christians."

S
sermonindex

If I'm not mistaken, any church that calls itself a protestant church is protesting the catholic church, and denominations are the many different groups of the protestants.

I do know this for sure. Baptists do not consider themselves a denomination because they did not come out from the catholic church. The anabaptists were around along time before the reformation, they called themselves different names but they were baptist.

Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine, that's the difference in the baptists and other denominations.

S
sermonindex


sermonindex wrote:
Aren't Denominations a pretty word for Divisions :)

1 Corinthians 3:1-3 - And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. [b]For ye are yet carnal[/b]: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, [b]and divisions[/b], are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

First, thanks to Keith for reviving this thread.

It's a difficult subject for many of us, especially because of the practical and attitude problems we often have, and I'm sure it isn't "talked out" yet.

Greg, you quoted 1Cor 3. Going back to chapter 1 we get this (my emphasis):

[color=990000]12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; [i][b]and I of Christ.[/b][/i]
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?[/color]

That is, I believe, one of the greatest snares for those of us (such as myself) who consider ourselves freed by the Lord from a "denominational spirit". It's so very easy to unconsciously despise those who are still in thrall to a particular denomination or group of churches, because "[i][b]I[/b][/i] am of Christ!".

Paul speaks in 1Cor 11:29, of those, even within a local church, who fail to discern the Body, and that was a source of weakness and sickness among the people - even death in some cases.

Is this kind of thing he meant? Thinking ourselves or our church, (or even belonging to no denomination or church) as somehow making us different, separate, superior? :-(

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


chiefosiners wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, any church that calls itself a protestant church is protesting the catholic church, and denominations are the many different groups of the protestants.

I do know this for sure. Baptists do not consider themselves a denomination because they did not come out from the catholic church. The anabaptists were around along time before the reformation, they called themselves different names but they were baptist.

Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine, that's the difference in the baptists and other denominations.

Hi Chief

There are many movements that do not consider themselves a denomination, not only the Baptists (I didn't know that they didn't). Does it make any difference to what we are discussing?

"Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine"
You could say the same of Calvinists, Armenians, Charismatics, Preterists etc. But what is the [i]spirit[/i] of them?

Are they like those in the Corinthian church, as just quoted, or are they truly non-partisan? We would need to ask that concerning each pastor and each member of each congregation. Only the Lord knows our hearts.

Brother, [i]why[/i] do you defend a particular group, (denomination, doctrine or whatever), as if they are different (and by implication somehow superior)? What difference does it make to us now, if the Anabaptists came before the Reformation or not?

Personally I don't care what label, or no label, you, I or anyone else has, as long as we seek to follow the Lord fully!

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


HE_Reigns wrote:
I liked what Adam Clarke said about Luke 12:32 -
"Fear not, little flock - Or, very little flock, το μικρον ποιμνιον. This is what some term a double diminutive, and, literally translated, is, little little flock."
I appreciate the sadness of there being so few really following the Lord, but couldn't help being amused at the "little, little flock". In Wales we tend to say "small little", instead, as in "He was a small little man...", or "big huge", "There was this big huge dog..."

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


LittleGift wrote:

chiefosiners wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, any church that calls itself a protestant church is protesting the catholic church, and denominations are the many different groups of the protestants.

I do know this for sure. Baptists do not consider themselves a denomination because they did not come out from the catholic church. The anabaptists were around along time before the reformation, they called themselves different names but they were baptist.

Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine, that's the difference in the baptists and other denominations.

Hi Chief

There are many movements that do not consider themselves a denomination, not only the Baptists (I didn't know that they didn't). Does it make any difference to what we are discussing?

"Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine"
You could say the same of Calvinists, Armenians, Charismatics, Preterists etc. But what is the [i]spirit[/i] of them?

Are they like those in the Corinthian church, as just quoted, or are they truly non-partisan? We would need to ask that concerning each pastor and each member of each congregation. Only the Lord knows our hearts.

Brother, [i]why[/i] do you defend a particular group, (denomination, doctrine or whatever), as if they are different (and by implication somehow superior)? What difference does it make to us now, if the Anabaptists came before the Reformation or not?

Personally I don't care what label, or no label, you, I or anyone else has, as long as we seek to follow the Lord fully!

Blessings

Jeannette

I don't think that the baptists are superior, but I do believe they a biblically sound in their doctrine. There are many baptist groups that I do not agree with. Also baptists are not a movement either. I really am sceptical of movements. They almost always result in a church split, and there is no excuse for that.

R
roadsign

I started out in the Reformed church. And we thought we were the best. Then I became a Baptist, and we thought we were the best. One old man even said, “Only Baptists will be in heaven.’ Eventually we joined another evangelical denomination. By and by the Toronto Airport fans thought they were better than the rest of us and we had multiple troubles. Some of us where called out during those days. In time that church stopped thinking they were the best because they obviously were not. Now I am in the Presbyterian Church and NOBODY there thinks they are the best. That’s what happens over the years when humiliating things happen.

I say, one of the most dangerous denominations to be in is one that is on the top of the mountain. When you are doing well, pride subtly slips in and by and by, you slide down. You may still think you are the most right because of your creeds or doctrine or traditions. But the Spirit may be long gone from your midst, and you may be flying on the wings of past successes.

I once said, ‘The best church to be is where they are close to the ground.” And, that happens after the pride is knocked out. It’s not pretty, but then, the path to God is down the mountain, not up.

Jesus arrived during the height of Jewish sectarianism and hypocrisy, and entered their turf. It’s not the type of “church” I would have chosen! Yet, if he could serve his heavenly father by going there, than who are we to think we must join only the “best” place?

I don't care what label, or no label, you, I or anyone else has, as long as we seek to follow the Lord fully!

Amen! Our identity is not a denomination label (or lack thereof), or how successful our group is. It is our Lord, and we serve him wherever he puts us.

Now, all this rambling sounds so straightforward, but trust me, it took me most of my life to come to this level of thinking. And, no doubt God will tweak it up further. Give me ten years, and I'll say something different, I'm sure.
Diane


S
sermonindex


roadsign wrote:
I started out in the Reformed church. And we thought we were the best. Then I became a Baptist, and we thought we were the best. One old man even said, “Only Baptists will be in heaven.’
This would be funny if it wasn't so tragic!

Eventually we joined another evangelical denomination. By and by the Toronto Airport fans thought they were better than the rest of us and we had multiple troubles. Some of us where called out during those days.
That's the key, isn't it - CALLED out!

I have a friend who is being called out, but (as most of us do at first) she's resisted - for years. I know what the Spirit is saying to her but can't say much to help because she can't hear, yet. She's so unhappy in the church where she is, although she thought it was wonderful at first.

But she still keeps worrying about me, that I'm not getting proper fellowship or teaching as I would if I joined her group of churches!

It took me years to realise that she was actually projecting her own fears onto me. I thought it must be me who was wrong in some way, just because [i]she[/i] thought so!!!

In time that church stopped thinking they were the best because they obviously were not. Now I am in the Presbyterian Church and NOBODY there thinks they are the best.
That's amusing but rather sweet. Maybe "sweet" isn't quite the right word, but it made me think, "Aaaaah, bless them!"

I say, one of the most dangerous denominations to be in is one that is on the top of the mountain. When you are doing well, pride subtly slips in and by and by, you slide down. You may still think you are the most right because of your creeds or doctrine or traditions. But the Spirit may be long gone from your midst, and you may be flying on the wings of past successes.

I once said, ‘The best church to be is where they are close to the ground.” And, that happens after the pride is knocked out. It’s not pretty, but then, the path to God is down the mountain, not up.

That is so true, thanks for that thought.

Jesus arrived during the height of Jewish sectarianism and hypocrisy, and entered their turf. It’s not the type of “church” I would have chosen! Yet, if he could serve his heavenly father by going there, than who are we to think we must join only the “best” place?
A very challenging thought! Think I said before on this thread that I had a friend who the Lord "called out" just before me. She left a lively Pentecostal church where she was very happy, but she just couldn't stay!

Then the Lord led her to a rather dead Anglican (= Episcopalian) church! She hated it at first, but knew it was where the Lord wanted her - to minister to the "dead wood in the pews"!

Our identity is not a denomination label (or lack thereof), or how successful our group is. It is our Lord, and we serve him wherever he puts us.
AMEN!

Now, all this rambling sounds so straightforward, but trust me, it took me most of my life to come to this level of thinking. And, no doubt God will tweak it up further. Give me ten years, and I'll say something different, I'm sure.
:lol:

S
sermonindex


chiefosiners wrote:

I don't think that the baptists are superior, but I do believe they a biblically sound in their doctrine. There are many baptist groups that I do not agree with...

So what's the point defending a mere label for a group of people - even if you do think them "biblically sound"?:-P

in Him

Jeannette

R
roadsign

If I'm not mistaken, any church that calls itself a protestant church is protesting the catholic church, and denominations are the many different groups of the protestants.

I do know this for sure. Baptists do not consider themselves a denomination because they did not come out from the catholic church. The anabaptists were around along time before the reformation, they called themselves different names but they were baptist.

Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine, that's the difference in the baptists and other denominations.


Self-perception and reality are often two very different entities!

I wonder how many protestant adherents today are actually prtesting against the RC. Few I believe. Why not take a survey? Perhaps Baptists are the most protestant, in reality!
Diane

S
sermonindex


LittleGift wrote:

chiefosiners wrote:

I don't think that the baptists are superior, but I do believe they a biblically sound in their doctrine. There are many baptist groups that I do not agree with...

So what's the point defending a mere label for a group of people - even if you do think them "biblically sound"?:-P

in Him

Jeannette

I see what your saying. For the most part many baptists don't even know the difference between baptist and presbyterian ,ect..

I just believe the baptist doctrine is good doctrine, that's all.

S
sermonindex


roadsign wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, any church that calls itself a protestant church is protesting the catholic church, and denominations are the many different groups of the protestants.

I do know this for sure. Baptists do not consider themselves a denomination because they did not come out from the catholic church. The anabaptists were around along time before the reformation, they called themselves different names but they were baptist.

Baptists are not a denomination they are a doctrine, that's the difference in the baptists and other denominations.


Self-perception and reality are often two very different entities!

I wonder how many protestant adherents today are actually prtesting against the RC. Few I believe. Why not take a survey? Perhaps Baptists are the most protestant, in reality!
Diane

So have you ever looked at your churches statement of faith or bylaws. You might be surprised. Some of these churches that go way back are still under the same rules and regulations and statement of faith that were drawn up during the reformation. :-D

I'm not going along with a group of church goers whos ancestors killed my ancestors. Calvinists and Lutherans killed more baptists than the catholic church did, so don't even go there and their doctrine has'nt changed. That same spirit lurkes in the deep dark trenches of their reformed doctrine just waiting to come out once again.

I will defend the baptist doctrine as long as I live because it's the only doctrine that gives you any freedom as a christian, everything else puts you in bondage. That problably makes your blood boil, but I will not give in one iota. I am a Baptist a proud of it. Thank God I'm a Baptist.

I
iansmith

I just thought I'd throw in my two cents... I was reading DL Moody's book 'DL Moody's Latest Sermons' and there was a sermon about revival.

He pointed out that almost every modern denomination (this being said in 1899) was birthed in revival. The Baptists, the Methodists, the Presbyterians, the Pentecostals. They were born as God moved upon a group of people and renewed their hears to serve God.

We look on denominations negatively, but I believe that the problem isn't with the doctrines but with the people themselves.

Non-denominationalists are the largest and most negative denomination I've ever met! They bash on other denominations more than anyone else. They defend their doctrines more than anyone else... unfortunately very few of them agree on these anyways. There is just as much sexual sin, backsliding and pride among non-denominationalists as any denomination... oh, and dead religiosity too!

The problem with every denomination (even the non-denomination denomination) is that they're all made up of sinful human beings.

P
PaulWest

Ian, your entire last post was exceptional. Thank you.

Brother Paul

S
sermonindex


iansmith wrote:

The problem with every denomination (even the non-denomination denomination) is that they're all made up of sinful human beings.

True

I don't even have a non-denominational denomination any more.

That really [i]is[/i] freedom!!! :-P

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


chiefosiners wrote:

I'm not going along with a group of church goers whos ancestors killed my ancestors.

Hi again, Chief

In the UK, that's why some Welsh, Irish and Scots people still hate the English!

Calvinists and Lutherans killed more baptists than the catholic church did, so don't even go there and their doctrine has'nt changed. That same spirit lurkes in the deep dark trenches of their reformed doctrine just waiting to come out once again.
You're probably right, but how can you be sure some different kind of wrong spirit isn't also present in Baptist churches? Maybe to do with somehting else other than doctrine...

Certainly the Restoration churches (a newer group, that would still consider themselves non-denominational) still have the spirit that caused them to be very much into "heavy shepherding" in the 1970's when (so I understand) they began. Even though the church I fellowshipped with until recently was much freer than most of this grouping still are, the spiritual "false covering" was still present. That's probably the main reason the Lord wouldn't let me become a member.

Yet they are part of a larger grouping of churches that calls itself "Churches Without Borders". They have as much border as a lobster has shell, but don't know it! Even though they make a point of interacting and co-operating with members of other churches, they are still so very bound...

I will defend the baptist doctrine as long as I live because it's the only doctrine that gives you any freedom as a christian, everything else puts you in bondage.
The last time I went to a Baptist church service (it [i]was[/i] Evangelical) I felt utterly stifled! The spiritual atmosphere was so oppressive I couldn't wait to get from there!

Yet the people were lovely - warm, friendly and welcoming. I felt a fraud, smiling and chatting after the service, then getting out as quickly as politeness would allow, knowing I would never be back. One dear lady asked me if I enjoyed it. I cautiously said (with perfect truth) that it was different from what I was used to. Thankfully she assumed that meant I [i]had[/i] enjoyed it!

I could have wept for them!

...So what's so special about Baptist doctrine? If you mean, as opposed to Reformed doctrine, maybe it is superior, I wouldn't know enough about the differences to be sure.

But even if it is an improvement on Reformed theology, that doesn't mean it needs defending as such!

I can't really understand where you're coming from in this... Why defend a particular doctrinal system instead of simply holding to the truth of Scripture? Any doctrinal system (Baptist or not) should of course agree with the Bible, but it seems very second-hand to maintain this instead of holding directly to the Word itself.

That probably makes your blood boil, but I will not give in one iota. I am a Baptist a proud of it. Thank God I'm a Baptist.
But [u][b][i]why[/i][/b][/u]? Why be proud (even in the right sense of pride, without arrogance, thanking God) of anything [i]less[/i] than knowing Christ?

It doesn't make my blood boil, it makes me sad...

It makes no sense why [i]anyone[/i] should be "a...and proud of it", whether it be to do with religion, race, nationality, job, position in society, colour of hair, age or anything else...

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


LittleGift wrote:

chiefosiners wrote:

I'm not going along with a group of church goers whos ancestors killed my ancestors.

Hi again, Chief

In the UK, that's why some Welsh, Irish and Scots people still hate the English!

Calvinists and Lutherans killed more baptists than the catholic church did, so don't even go there and their doctrine has'nt changed. That same spirit lurkes in the deep dark trenches of their reformed doctrine just waiting to come out once again.
You're probably right, but how can you be sure some different kind of wrong spirit isn't also present in Baptist churches? Maybe to do with somehting else other than doctrine...

Certainly the Restoration churches (a newer group, that would still consider themselves non-denominational) still have the spirit that caused them to be very much into "heavy shepherding" in the 1970's when (so I understand) they began. Even though the church I fellowshipped with until recently was much freer than most of this grouping still are, the spiritual "false covering" was still present. That's probably the main reason the Lord wouldn't let me become a member.

Yet they are part of a larger grouping of churches that calls itself "Churches Without Borders". They have as much border as a lobster has shell, but don't know it! Even though they make a point of interacting and co-operating with members of other churches, they are still so very bound...

I will defend the baptist doctrine as long as I live because it's the only doctrine that gives you any freedom as a christian, everything else puts you in bondage.
The last time I went to a Baptist church service (it [i]was[/i] Evangelical) I felt utterly stifled! The spiritual atmosphere was so oppressive I couldn't wait to get from there!

Yet the people were lovely - warm, friendly and welcoming. I felt a fraud, smiling and chatting after the service, then getting out as quickly as politeness would allow, knowing I would never be back. One dear lady asked me if I enjoyed it. I cautiously said (with perfect truth) that it was different from what I was used to. Thankfully she assumed that meant I [i]had[/i] enjoyed it!

I could have wept for them!

...So what's so special about Baptist doctrine? If you mean, as opposed to Reformed doctrine, maybe it is superior, I wouldn't know enough about the differences to be sure.

But even if it is an improvement on Reformed theology, that doesn't mean it needs defending as such!

I can't really understand where you're coming from in this... Why defend a particular doctrinal system instead of simply holding to the truth of Scripture? Any doctrinal system (Baptist or not) should of course agree with the Bible, but it seems very second-hand to maintain this instead of holding directly to the Word itself.

That probably makes your blood boil, but I will not give in one iota. I am a Baptist a proud of it. Thank God I'm a Baptist.
But [u][b][i]why[/i][/b][/u]? Why be proud (even in the right sense of pride, without arrogance, thanking God) of anything [i]less[/i] than knowing Christ?

It doesn't make my blood boil, it makes me sad...

It makes no sense why [i]anyone[/i] should be "a...and proud of it", whether it be to do with religion, race, nationality, job, position in society, colour of hair, age or anything else...

Blessings

Jeannette[/quotBelieve me I know how harf it is to find a good church specialy when your as introverted as me.

I grew up in a crazy movement that called themselves the Independant Fundamental Baptists.
These people thought they were so mocho and manly, they would force people into sucmission to their standards and laws. They hurt alot of people. I think their still around but their dying out. Pure legalism at it's worst. I hated church and the preacher and anything to do with these groups.
I went on a five year crusade when I turned 28 to find out what I really believed. I was so brainwashed that I thought all churches were like this. You know what I found out? There are no perfect churches and no perfect people, but I also learned that I was truly saved and I was a true Baptist.
It took alot of work for God to get me where I am today. I explored every doctrine, theology, and denomination in my quest to find truth. You know what I found out? Jesus is truth. Jesus is peace. Jesus is grace. I don't hate those people anymore, but I'll never be put under control of any kind of doctrine, theology, denomination, or so called pastor again, and yas know what else? I'll not ever let my kids grow up in that garbage either. What really matters is that we know who we are in Christ and that we trust HIM.

As far as Baptist doctrine is concerned I agree with it and I support it. I will bring my kids up in a Baptist church and as long as I live they will never be put under the yoke of any human, or man made doctrine as long as I live. And if one day I pastor a church I will watch for those wolves that come to devour the flock, ya know why? Because I can see them coming a mile away, I can smell their religious spirit and it nauseates me.

I'm venting. This is not directed toward you Little Gift, I just feel really strongly about this. It's very important to me.

R
rowdy2

Reply to LittleGift

Thank God I’m parochially challenged and intend to remain as un bigoted as possible in matters pertaining to religions and try to follow the teachings of my High Priest..

KJV
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

S
sermonindex

Hi again Chief

Thank you for your response. It has helped to understand a little more where you are coming from. I suppose I was probing a little - maybe too much. Only the doctor has a right to poke and prod and ask, "does this hurt?"

so I won't do it again! :-)

in Him

Jeannette

PS could you put the missing ] on one of your quotes so its easier to read the parts you wrote?

Thanks

S
sermonindex


rowdy2 wrote:
Reply to LittleGift

Thank God I’m parochially challenged and intend to remain as un bigoted as possible in matters pertaining to religions and try to follow the teachings of my High Priest..

KJV
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Thanks Rowdy!

I
iansmith

This is an excerpt from a sermon DL Moody preached two months before he went to be with the Lord. I have added in a few words to clear up the context, which are marked in Italics.

***

I believe when God revives His work, people will go back to His Book. People are tired and sick of this awful controversy [i]{this sermon was about the doctrines surrounding revival, but could easily be applied to a debate over denominations}[/i]. Sam Jones'motto has been, "Quit your meanness.'' I hope the motto of the ministers of this country will be, "Quit your fighting and go to work, [b]and preach the simple gospel[/b] {emphasis mine}.''

Now the question is, shall we have a great and mighty harvest, or shall we go on discussing our differences?[i]{shall we?}[/i] As far as I am concerned, I am terribly tired of it, and I would like before I go hence to see the whole church of God quickened as it was in [i]18[/i]'57, and a wave going from Maine to California that shall sweep thousands into the kingdom of God.

Why not?

Talk about this work not lasting; Pentecost isn't over yet!

***

It's amazing what we [i]haven't[/i] learned since 1899.

R
roadsign

I don't even have a non-denominational denomination any more.

That really is freedom!!!

I’m going to address your words indirectly, Jeanette. Bear with me:


Soon after reading your words, my husband told me of a radio interview of a lady who back in the sixties decided to move into a prison in order to reach the prisoners. She is now in her eighties and plans to die there. The inmates are “her boys”. How’s that for “denominational” imprisonment! But is that not the ultimate expression of freedom? That reminds me of Paul’s words,

“Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone to win as many as possible.” 1 Cor. 9:19
In other words, freedom is not our circumstances but our conscience. I believe that many who have escaped from the church are still enslaved by it. Just listen to them talk for a while. They are still fighting a “court case” against the voices of the past. One day I said to a man, “You came out of the RC, didn’t you?” He said, “Yes, how did you know.” I said, “I can tell because you are still talking to them.”

I think a lot of our emergent people are still in bondage to their past denominational ties, and that’s why they are working so hard to counteract their past unpleasant experiences. Really they are trying to clear their memories and consciences. They need to find freedom in Christ, not in their counteractive new forms of worship. They still have to work through the process of forgiveness.

Paul found freedom in Christ, and so could become like one under the law without losing his freedom – and all that in order to win those under the law (from 1 Cor. 9:21,22). But his freedom was costly! It cost him his life!


I'm not going along with a group of church goers whos ancestors killed my ancestors.

So long as you feel this way, you are enslaved to your enemies of the past! They still hold you hostage in your conscience. I trust that God will enable you to forgive them, though long dead, and lead you into a freedom that you have never yet known.

Diane

S
sermonindex


LittleGift wrote:
Hi again Chief

Thank you for your response. It has helped to understand a little more where you are coming from. I suppose I was probing a little - maybe too much. Only the doctor has a right to poke and prod and ask, "does this hurt?"

so I won't do it again! :-)

in Him

Jeannette

PS could you put the missing ] on one of your quotes so its easier to read the parts you wrote?

Thanks

That's o.k. It don't hurt anymore. I think it's made me stronger and I see things that not many can see, only because i've experienced it. Most people don't really know why bad doctrine is bad, but when youve seen what it does to people first hand it sheds light on things. I've also saw first hand what it could do to me. Not pretty. the inner termoil, the doubt, the fear. Been there, done that.

I can honestly say that I'm as solid as I've ever been and I know what real peace is.

S
sermonindex

Diane wrote:
I think a lot of our emergent people are still in bondage to their past denominational ties, and that’s why they are working so hard to counteract their past unpleasant experiences.

Really they are trying to clear their memories and consciences. They need to find freedom in Christ, not in their counteractive new forms of worship. They still have to work through the process of forgiveness.

Hi Sis Diane. In your post above, that really didn't apply to Jeanette, I wondered if you truly believe there is a psychological type reasoning behind people's choices to go off doctrinally, or is it just what is called freewill and choice of heresy?

The main feature I see in this emegerent thing, is trying to obtain the kingdom on earth, without the presence of The King. Dominionism and worse, as far as entangling themselves with the secular powers that be, to achieve something that has come to where, even other religions or none at all, are welcome to join them in their quest.

If we give any type of 'reason' for people to go that far off into such territories, aren't we making excuses for their heresy or apostasy, that isn't afforded or backed by Scripture?

If I suddenly become Jehovah Witness, could I blame my bondage to my past denominational ties? Or would God see it that way, or as a quenching of or rebellion against the Spirit of Truth in my life and the response of a hardened heart toward the truths in His Word?

They feel they are more "forgiven" then us. In fact, they see that we who are not joining ranks with them, will not find forgiveness for not going along and have threatened in some cases to sue those who have disagreed with them.

They have been compounding heresy upon heresy at an almost break-neck speed now - so what would God's Word say their reasons are?

Thank you for your consideration.

Love.

Annie

S
sermonindex


roadsign wrote:
Paul found freedom in Christ, and so could become like one under the law without losing his freedom – and all that in order to win those under the law (from 1 Cor. 9:21,22). But his freedom was costly! It cost him his life!
That's quite a challenge, isn't it! Like my friend who joined a dead Anglican church (after leaving a lively Pentecostal church, also at His call) because the Lord told her to; or like your example of the lady who lives in a prison.

I'm not going along with a group of church goers whos ancestors killed my ancestors.

So long as you feel this way, you are enslaved to your enemies of the past! They still hold you hostage in your conscience. I trust that God will enable you to forgive them, though long dead, and lead you into a freedom that you have never yet known.
Just to make clear that I didn't write the above quoted!

It's true though that we can be out of a denomination yet be still bound in spirit to that denomination. Like Israel in the wilderness - they were out of Egypt but was Egypt out of them?

Or whatever grouping it may be - it applies to things like culture, race or class too.

I spoke before (on this thread?) about when, after leaving the Presbyterian Church a friend said that i still had my "Presbyterian corset in the back of the wardrobe"! (Not a literal undergarment I should add!) I knew she was right, so in the Lord's strength I got rid of it!

Blessings

Jeannette

S
sermonindex


HE_Reigns wrote:
Diane wrote:
I think a lot of our emergent people are still in bondage to their past denominational ties, and that’s why they are working so hard to counteract their past unpleasant experiences.

Really they are trying to clear their memories and consciences. They need to find freedom in Christ, not in their counteractive new forms of worship. They still have to work through the process of forgiveness.

Hi Sis Diane. In your post above, that really didn't apply to Jeanette...

Hi Annie

I don't think she thought it did (she said she was going to respond indirectly...)

Did you Diane?

It probably does apply to many who leave a denomination though. That's why it HAS to be at the will of God, not one's own will.

Can't remember if I said that the Lord has fairly recently brought me out of the Restoration church He had me in for over 3 years. I could have come out before because of various things wrong, but it wasn't His time.

The first thing was that I just didn't [i]want[/i] to go on Sundays. My friend was away for several weeks, or not able to go to the meetings for some other reason (we used to share transport as we live near each other), so there was no obligation to go. I'd had occasional Sundays of feeling the Lord wanted me to give the meeting a miss that week, but that was very rare.

But suddenly it seemed I couldn't even force myself to go at all, for no obvious reason!

In the end I asked the Lord what was going on - was it time to leave? He gave a specific word of Scripture that confirmed that it was, and that was it.

So what the next step is I have no idea. I did think it might be to a particular local church, where Jacob Prasch spoke at a couple of meetings one weekend, but no. The meetings were good and it was a lovely little fellowship, but just not the place He wanted me.

So just waiting, while God is working...

Blessings

Jeannette

R
roadsign

Jeanette said, regarding my earlier post:

Just to make clear that I didn't write the above quoted!

You ladies are holding me accountable for how I quote. Good girls!

Jeanette, I put your words through the “strainer”, so to speak – not because I am assessing your motive in particular (you understood right, this is not about you) but I am addressing the possibility that the very same words could betray a misunderstanding of freedom. Freedom is not merely the physical withdrawal of a constricting environment, but a freedom in the conscience. It is also a process of forgiveness. One is never really free as long as he or she holds unforgiveness – that is, is still blaming people for their misery, be it conscious or unconscious. Annie, that may sound “psychology-esque” to you but it is scriptural. How can one move towards forgiveness without acknowledging the sin of blame and unresolved anger. I still say, anger and resentment over past experiences seem to be an underlying current of heretical movements. Scripture tells us why people fall into heretical movements. It is not merely ignorance, but also roots of sin.

“They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires” 2 Timothy 3:6


a friend said that i still had my "Presbyterian corset in the back of the wardrobe"

I love it! Thanks for the tip. I may use this as a sermon illustration some day. (one way to get into trouble!) Seriously, though, it depicts a real problem. One lady told me last Sunday that as a child she was told that it was bad manners to turn around and look at the person behind you. So she still can’t handle the “passing of the peace”. She needs to forgive her past experience the freedom of Christ.

Diane

S
sermonindex

I still say anger and resentment over past experiences is an underlying current of heretical movements.
I totally agree. The pastor that I grew up under was not ordained as a minister because he had been divorced. He had alot of bitterness because of that. He also was not well educated and he was very defensive about that as well.
Just so you know roadsign, I visited that church not too long ago with my wife and kids to get some closure. I talked with the pastor, he's still there. He apologized to me and told me he was "better now". You see, religion is a sickness. It's kind of like a junky waiting for the next fix. You have to keep trying different drugs to get the same high. Legalism is one of the hardest addictions to break. It's also one of the hardest to detect. Most every religious endeavor I've tried has had some type of bondage added to it. The bible does say to "test the spirits". The only one that does'nt is the baptist faith. Unless "holiness baptist", "independant baptist", "Calvinistic baptist(primitive baptist)","(hardshell baptist)", "Missionary baptist", ect.... Personally I think the southern baptists do it pretty well, but depending on which church you go to that could vary.

S
sermonindex

Hi Diane, I don't think this emerging thing is that simple.

I'm in a wonderful PCA (not PC USA) and I love it - even though our eschatology is not the same, as you well know.

Same reason I don't feel this Emerging Merger is the same as why some folks may get into much less dangerous heresies.

Take care.
Love.

Annie

S
SimpleLiving

Zac Poonen has a wonderful video sermon called [url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/singlefile.php?lid=7651&commentView=itemComments]Freedom From Denominationalism.[/url]

I have never understood the concept of denominations when unity is supposed to be our goal. Anyway, I just wanted to post a link to this sermon in case anyone is interested. God bless you.

S
sermonindex

SimpleLiving said:Zac Poonen has a wonderful video sermon called Freedom From Denominationalism.

I have never understood the concept of denominations when unity is supposed to be our goal. Anyway, I just wanted to post a link to this sermon in case anyone is interested. God bless you.

Hi Keith

Do you know if this is available as a transcript? I find it difficult to concentrate on the spoken word, whether video or audio, and always make notes in meetings to help me focus!) A transcript also makes it possible to mark parts of special note.

Thanks

Jeannette

This discussion is archived and closed to new replies. Start a new discussion to carry the subject on.
Archived
First
1 of 71 posts
Last

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate