This question has always been a concern to me. I read the Bible, and it is so so clear... but then as I look at new-Christianity... I am stunned. Take a look at this scripture, and consider the question:
Whe addressing the church of Corinth, Paul said...
"Now I beseech you, brethren, 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 judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptised in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptised none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptised in mine own name." (1 Cor. 1:10-15)
There are countless scriptures that i could quote where the apostles (namely Paul) are reminding the followers of Christ to remain together... and to remain in sound doctrine. To be one.
Jesus Christ established his church on the earth. ONE CHURCH. The apostles worked hard to keep that church together... as ONE CHURCH. But what happened? ---> they died. And what happened after they died? ----> disaster.
Christ said himself: "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth. If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand?" It was not however Satan kingdom that divided... but Christ's. With no apostles to unify the church and correct its doctrine.... the kingdom of Christ divided and divided it fell!
Catholics... which became Roman Catholics and Russian Orthodox Catholics (where's the unity there?).... then Protestant Churches... Methodists, Anglicans, Baptists, Lutherans etc. etc. etc. !!! More recently born again churches namely Pentecostals. What is going on??
There are thousands and thousand of churches! Thousands and thousands of CONTRADICTING doctrines.... thousands and thousands of confusing practices and 'essential ordinances' or conditions of worship. Can anyone sincerely tell me that this is the will of God? Didn't Christ establish only one church? didn't the disciples keep that church together? (read the above scripture). It certainly wasn't Christ's idea to divide his church.
Why did Martin Luther not remain a Catholic? why did King Henry VIII not remain a Catholic? Why did any 'new founder' found his own church? why couldn't he attend one of the other hundred or so churches that already dotted the land? One simple reason: because he disagreed with the teachings/doctrines of all the other churches. Every church is different. Every pastor claims to be correct. Every pastor claims the correct authority! (where does he or she get it from?) Is that right?? Is that God's will?
Doesn't this disaster concern anybody? If it does... tell me so. Surely I cannot be alone in this.
God did not mean for that to happen. But let's face it, the Church has more to do with Politics and Business now than when it was formed.
The story of the trinity is a great marketting tool and Jesus is a great brand name.
The Bible has become more and more open to interpretation, some believe it 100% as is written was done, others believe its metaphorical which in its self opens to thousands of interpretations and others dont follow the new testemant at all... people will divide since its so open to interpretation.
I think you answered you own question toward the end when you said "Every pastor claims to be correct." And as you said, who's to tell who is right?
So, if you look back to Luther and Calvin, who's to say that the Pope was right and they were wrong? Or that Luther was right and Calvin is wrong? Considering the quality of popes from that era, I'm definitely inclined to vote against them.
What does stem from the reformation, though, is the idea that everyone can interpret the bible for themselves. The problem with physical chuches is that they are institutions. As mentioned by someone else, they are bogged down in politics and business. Some more than others, but each in its own way.
The oft untold story about the Reformation is about the various people who discovered a very individual and personal version of Christiantiy. For them, it was about reading the bible and finding the inner light. Hearing God speak to you, in a figurative way. This is where the true church lies, in yourself. Disagreement is inevitable because everything is so personal, but violence can be avoided if you remember that you cannot enforce your form of the church on someone else.
Chuch breaks and violence come, ultimately, form inflexibility in the original institution and an effort to enforce conformity. For a simple and contemporary example, look at the crisis in the Episcopal Church right now.
- Walkere
And this is why I like the Catholic Church - it is universal, Christian, holy, and sacred. It is the first Church, founded by none other than Jesus Christ himself, with Peter (yet, the Peter from the bible) as the first Pope.
There was, however, certain people within the Roman Catholic Church that were greed-driven, not spiritually-driven, and this greed drove people from the Church - and into their new churches.
From there, it was like rabbits breeding. Surely anyone who dies in a state of grace with God will go to Heaven, but honestly, there are some 300+ subsidaries of Christianity. It's like the body of Christ Himself is divided, and I don't like that.
| jipmerite wrote: |
God did not mean for that to happen. But let's face it, the Church has more to do with Politics and Business now than when it was formed.
The story of the trinity is a great marketting tool and Jesus is a great brand name. |
well surely that's a major problem!
I'm reminded of Jesus' words when he said "..the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the father in Spirit and Truth. God is a Spirit and they that worship him must worhip him in spirit and in truth..."
It doesn't get anymore serious than that. Jesus points out that there is a difference between a worshipper and a 'true' worshipper as he tells the woman of Samaria that "ye worship ye know not what".
My first post is generally accepted as truth throughout much of Christendom. So many people are stunned and disappointed like myself to find that the kingdom of Christ was simply replaced with 'confusion'. With that confusion... significant truths have been either altogether lost or greatly misunderstood. Take for example the doctrine of baptism. Throughout Christ's ministry, this was practiced by immersion and by one who has authority to baptize (ie. John the Baptist or an apostle)... now however people think you can ask any self-proclaiming priest/vicar/pastor to baptize you regardless of wether they actually have the authority or not! AND furthermore, they'll baptize you in any way they deem fit ie. sprinkling of water, a blessing on your forehead etc. Why don't they follow Christ's teachings and baptize as he did? Because they are not true worshippers. And why are they not true worshippers? because they 'draw near with their lips, but their hearts are far from him. They have not the full truth! But claim it as if they do.
What concerns me greater than this... is that christians sit by and treat it as if it were acceptable. This is why people now become complacent and don't bother about what church they attend or what doctrines they believe.... because they know the true church of Christ is gone from the earth and his doctrines have become distorted.
On the contrary however.... that is not and never will be acceptable.Today's gospel is a watered down, compromised, false gospel. I'll bet the majority of those churches out there only preach what appeals to the most people - whatever it takes to get people to sit through church and put money in the collection plate.
It's disgusting - and a growing problem. You won't make it to heaven through man, only through the Son of Man (Jesus). And if we aren't learning the truth, then we're in trouble.
I read an entire (small) book about the watered down gospel. It was a good read. I can't remember it, but will post it if I find it.
Some "Christian" churches accept homosexuals. God clearly forbids homosexuality - well, the sex part at the very least (because merely being gay isn't the sin, it's the action that is the sin).
Dj_dan, show me one spot in the bible where Jesus cared about how someone got baptised. And where are you getting this rediculous connection between how someone is baptised and being a true worshiper of God?
You start off with a good point about worshiping in spirit, and then go into a huge tangent about the physical act of baptism. Unless you believe that our personal salvation is somehow tied into the physical act of us being baptised.
In Matthew 25, baptism seems far from Jesus's mind, its about how we treat other people because in some awesome amazing way we are all so intertwined with God, everything we to do someone else its like we are doing it to God.
Back on topic, alot of the denominational seperation is due to attitudes like this on baptism. Small points that get blown way out of proportion in a legalistic attempt to own salvation.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Today's gospel is a watered down, compromised, false gospel. I'll bet the majority of those churches out there only preach what appeals to the most people - whatever it takes to get people to sit through church and put money in the collection plate. |
The funny thing is, back in the really old days, when Puritans and Quakers around, the preached that God vengeful and was suppose to be feared. Nearly everything and anything you did could condemen you to Hell.
Now, no one wants to hear about going to Hell. Soon, churches slowly started to preach how God was a loving and caring person. Heck, even the stories in the Bible showed how vengeful God was. Smiting cities and whatnot. | Quote: |
| Now, no one wants to hear about going to Hell. Soon, churches slowly started to preach how God was a loving and caring person. Heck, even the stories in the Bible showed how vengeful God was. Smiting cities and whatnot. |
Exactly my point - nobody wants to hear about going to Hell, so they go to a church that preaches that Jesus loves everyone and you can go to Heaven by only vocalizing your belief in Jesus. Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong.
And yes, you would probably be a bit spiteful if the people you created to love you did the opposite - and lived their life full of things you've forbidden to do, completely disrespected you, etc. (and remember, they're your creation).
I'd probably smash some cities as well. God made sure those who were true in faith made it through. | Soulfire wrote: |
Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong....
|
Am I misunderstanding you, Soulfire? Are you saying acceptance of Jesus Christ as our saviour is NOT enough to get you into Heaven? That works and good living are needed also. Not desirable, but a requirement? | Soulfire wrote: |
| Quote: | | Now, no one wants to hear about going to Hell. Soon, churches slowly started to preach how God was a loving and caring person. Heck, even the stories in the Bible showed how vengeful God was. Smiting cities and whatnot. |
Exactly my point - nobody wants to hear about going to Hell, so they go to a church that preaches that Jesus loves everyone and you can go to Heaven by only vocalizing your belief in Jesus. Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God. |
Care to try and explain your stance here and your previous posts elsewhere in this forum about your like of the Catholic church because it "preaches hope and salvation, versus some other Churches which teach fear, Hell, death, and destruction."
That one comes specifically from the thread about wanting your kids to go to chruch.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| The problem is too many people come to Church in fear that something bad will happen to them. This is why I like the Catholic Church, which preaches hope and salvation, versus some other Churches which teach fear, Hell, death, and destruction. |
| a_dubDesign wrote: |
Care to try and explain your stance here and your previous posts elsewhere in this forum about your like of the Catholic church because it "preaches hope and salvation, versus some other Churches which teach fear, Hell, death, and destruction."
That one comes specifically from the thread about wanting your kids to go to chruch.
| Soulfire wrote: | | The problem is too many people come to Church in fear that something bad will happen to them. This is why I like the Catholic Church, which preaches hope and salvation, versus some other Churches which teach fear, Hell, death, and destruction. |
|
Sorry, but i tried to search where did Soulfire said that, but to my no avail. I've checked if this forum is 2 pages, but it isn't. Where did you quoted Soulfire's text anyway 
I found only this:
| Soulfire wrote: |
| And this is why I like the Catholic Church - it is universal, Christian, holy, and sacred. It is the first Church, founded by none other than Jesus Christ himself, with Peter (yet, the Peter from the bible) as the first Pope. |
| Nikkori wrote: |
Sorry, but i tried to search where did Soulfire said that, but to my no avail. I've checked if this forum is 2 pages, but it isn't. Where did you quoted Soulfire's text anyway
I found only this:
| Soulfire wrote: | | And this is why I like the Catholic Church - it is universal, Christian, holy, and sacred. It is the first Church, founded by none other than Jesus Christ himself, with Peter (yet, the Peter from the bible) as the first Pope. |
|
He said that in a different thread.
Click for Link | Nikkori wrote: |
| Sorry, but i tried to search where did Soulfire said that, but to my no avail. I've checked if this forum is 2 pages, but it isn't. Where did you quoted Soulfire's text anyway |
my bad, I did do that a bit out of order. Thanks hoobopelican | Soulfire wrote: |
| Quote: | | Now, no one wants to hear about going to Hell. Soon, churches slowly started to preach how God was a loving and caring person. Heck, even the stories in the Bible showed how vengeful God was. Smiting cities and whatnot. |
Exactly my point - nobody wants to hear about going to Hell, so they go to a church that preaches that Jesus loves everyone and you can go to Heaven by only vocalizing your belief in Jesus. Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong.
And yes, you would probably be a bit spiteful if the people you created to love you did the opposite - and lived their life full of things you've forbidden to do, completely disrespected you, etc. (and remember, they're your creation).
I'd probably smash some cities as well. God made sure those who were true in faith made it through. |
Although a little off topic once again by me... if there IS a God, I think he's too busy creating other worlds or whatnot than to listen to our prayers, whines and pleas.
Anyways, I'm not religious at all by any means, although I like to keep both perspectives in mind. The only thing I'm just curious is what did Jesus preach if he did exist at the times he was suppose to exist?
If he preached loved and forgiveness from God, how does one go from loving to vengful and spiteful God, back to a forgiving God? So if he's such a forgiving God, wouldn't he forgive the homosexuals, abortionists and whatnot? Afterall, Jesus had to preach something in order to get a following right? | a_dubDesign wrote: |
| Nikkori wrote: | | Sorry, but i tried to search where did Soulfire said that, but to my no avail. I've checked if this forum is 2 pages, but it isn't. Where did you quoted Soulfire's text anyway |
my bad, I did do that a bit out of order. Thanks hoobopelican |
Hey, it never hurts to ask! 
| gh0stface wrote: |
| [If he preached loved and forgiveness from God, how does one go from loving to vengful and spiteful God, back to a forgiving God? So if he's such a forgiving God, wouldn't he forgive the homosexuals, abortionists and whatnot? |
I often find myself wondering how people manage to do that to | HoboPelican wrote: |
| Soulfire wrote: | Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong....
|
Am I misunderstanding you, Soulfire? Are you saying acceptance of Jesus Christ as our saviour is NOT enough to get you into Heaven? That works and good living are needed also. Not desirable, but a requirement? |
I'm saying you can't just verbally say "I love Jesus" and expect to get into Heaven. You have to live by the Bible too, live your faith, and pray. Merely saying "I'm a Christian" gets you NOWHERE. 
| Quote: |
| If he preached loved and forgiveness from God, how does one go from loving to vengful and spiteful God, back to a forgiving God? So if he's such a forgiving God, wouldn't he forgive the homosexuals, abortionists and whatnot? Afterall, Jesus had to preach something in order to get a following right? |
Um, they are forgiven - if they ask for it. "Ask and ye shall receive." Now, the problem is, homosexuals and abortionists are living (or have done somthing) in disobedience to God, which, naturally, makes God unhappy that His creation would live against Him. So they have to stop to the best of their abilities their sins. | Soulfire wrote: |
| HoboPelican wrote: | | Soulfire wrote: | Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong....
|
Am I misunderstanding you, Soulfire? Are you saying acceptance of Jesus Christ as our saviour is NOT enough to get you into Heaven? That works and good living are needed also. Not desirable, but a requirement? |
I'm saying you can't just verbally say "I love Jesus" and expect to get into Heaven. You have to live by the Bible too, live your faith, and pray. Merely saying "I'm a Christian" gets you NOWHERE.
|
Sorry to make you bang you head like that, but I have to do it again.
I'm not talking about just verbal statements, but actual acceptance of Christ in your heart. Isn't that all that's needed? Even after we do that, we still sin. Your response still seems to imply that living according to the Bible is neccessary to be saved.Living by the Bible is necessary... You have to live by God's word, it's a requirement. Yes, acceptance of Jesus into your heart is the first step, but people can't accept Jesus into their heart, live in disobedience to God, and expect to go to Heaven. And if you sin after you accept Jesus, it's important to repent to God (say sorry) for your sins - and make an honest effort to stay away from them.
I'm not saying you have to literally take the Bible and live exactly like it, but the issue is you can't just sin left and right without repentance (this is my main point) even if you accept Jesus and get into Heaven. Perhaps pergatory, but that's a different story.
I hope this clarifies it a bit, it made sense in my head, perhaps I can word it a bit better.
| HoboPelican wrote: |
| Soulfire wrote: | | HoboPelican wrote: | | Soulfire wrote: | Live by the word? Ah, who needs it? We can live like slobs and in complete disobedience to God, but we can go to Heaven because we believe in God.
Wrong....
|
Am I misunderstanding you, Soulfire? Are you saying acceptance of Jesus Christ as our saviour is NOT enough to get you into Heaven? That works and good living are needed also. Not desirable, but a requirement? |
I'm saying you can't just verbally say "I love Jesus" and expect to get into Heaven. You have to live by the Bible too, live your faith, and pray. Merely saying "I'm a Christian" gets you NOWHERE.
|
Sorry to make you bang you head like that, but I have to do it again.
I'm not talking about just verbal statements, but actual acceptance of Christ in your heart. Isn't that all that's needed? Even after we do that, we still sin. Your response still seems to imply that living according to the Bible is neccessary to be saved. |
Yes, we do sin, but it's the daily asking of forgiveness that keeps us strong. To quote Paul,
| Quote: |
1 Corinthians 15:31
I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. |
Which to my understanding is that Paul asked daily for his sins to be forgiven.
No man will ever be perfect, and none should expect to be, but we can express geniune sorrow when we go against God's wishes even if unintentionally. | livilou wrote: |
Yes, we do sin, but it's the daily asking of forgiveness that keeps us strong. To quote Paul,
| Quote: |
1 Corinthians 15:31
I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. |
Which to my understanding is that Paul asked daily for his sins to be forgiven.
|
I'm really struggling to see where you are getting the asked daily for his sins to be forgiven in that text. I've searched through the context and am just not finding it. What I see is a very strong parallel with the other times Paul talked about "the flesh" and having to die to the sinful nature, and take up our cross and follow jesus, and the wonderful internal struggle in Romans 7&8, and being a whole new creation in Christ, and the etymology of baptism.
| Romans 7:5&6 wrote: |
| For when we were controlled by the sinful nature, the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in our bodies, so that we bore fruit for death. But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been release from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code" |
I'm espically struggling with your idea that asking for forgiveness is what gives us strength, care to explain that a bit more because I'm not seeing how that goes with anything I can think of off the top of my head. | Soulfire wrote: |
| Living by the Bible is necessary... You have to live by God's word, it's a requirement. |
care to back that up with some scripture? Because I'm not seeing it. Looking at the paralised guy who got lowered through the roof in Luke , he didn't do squat. And Jesus forgave his sins. Or how about the thief on the cross next to Jesus, he obvisously didn't live by the bible. He called his friend stupid and said "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom", and Jesus's response was "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
Why are you, and many others like you, so obssesed with trying to find loopholes to control the gospel with hedges, roadblocks, and walls? Its rediculous.
I'm begining to understand more and more Robert Farror Capon's quote,
"However much we hate the law, we are more afraid of grace" | a_dubDesign wrote: |
| Soulfire wrote: | | Living by the Bible is necessary... You have to live by God's word, it's a requirement. |
care to back that up with some scripture? Because I'm not seeing it. Looking at the paralised guy who got lowered through the roof in Luke , he didn't do squat. And Jesus forgave his sins. Or how about the thief on the cross next to Jesus, he obvisously didn't live by the bible. He called his friend stupid and said "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom", and Jesus's response was "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." |
In the scripture, there are:
Mt 7:21 - "Not everyone who calls me "Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of heaven, but only those who do what my Father in heaven wants them to do."
Which i think is what Soulfire mean. Then, there are:
John 3:16 - "For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life."
Ga 2:16 - "Yet we know that a person is put right with God only through faith in Jesus Christ, never by doing what the Law requires. We, too, have believed in Christ Jesus in order to be put right with God through our faith in Christ, and not by doing what the Law requires. For no one is put right with God by doing what the Law requires."
etc..
Which i think is what a_dubDesign mean.
..and then, there are:
Jas 2:17 - "So it is with faith: if it is alone and includes no actions, then it is dead."
Jas 2:24 - "You see, then, that it is by our actions that we are put right with God, and not by our faith alone."
Sighs.. People have different interpretation that leads far above the bible. That's why Paul warned us not to be so far from the bible so that one would not be against one..I do agree with Soufire's main point, that we shouldn't be sinning, but my issue came about with the limits the way he stated that main idea places on forgiveness, although I dont think that it came out much in my post. Forgivness and Reconciliation are two different things, Forgivness is free, being reconciled takes some work.
Why did Martin Luther not remain a Catholic? why did King Henry VIII not remain a Catholic? Why did any 'new founder' found his own church? why couldn't he attend one of the other hundred or so churches that already dotted the land? One simple reason: because he disagreed with the teachings/doctrines of all the other churches. . . That's why Eli Soriano not remain an INC member, and like Martin Luther, he formed a new church derived from Mr. Perez's..
Yes. Every Pastor or Minister, claims to be the one who have the truth.
We protest to the Catholic teachings because we believe that it does not have the true doctrines, then, we will build our own churches. Because you have protested, does that mean that you have the truth and will claim to be the prophet for the new church?
Its a simple reason. The bible has many contradiction, corruptions and the hunger for power.
Take two or all and you can make a new Christan denomination.
there are some many churches becasue people can't agree how to just get along. instead of being able to work together, everybody splits, and nobody tries to stay together and work out the differences
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| Its a simple reason. The bible has many contradiction, corruptions and the hunger for power. |
I'm certainly glad to see someone else express that thought besides me 
Let's face it. The Bible that exists today is not God's word. So why does the Christian Church still advocate that it is? Why keep insisting that it is and make a fool of themselves? Or is it that they take us for fools? That we cannot see the truth?
As for the people who keep on beleiving in this falsehood, a friend of mine put it very simply; None is more blind than those who do not want to see. | jipmerite wrote: |
As for the people who keep on beleiving in this falsehood, a friend of mine put it very simply; None is more blind than those who do not want to see. |
Your friend stole it from Jonathan Swift. And the correct quote is "There's none so blind as they that won't see".
I think most of the contradictions you'll find in the Bible are due to literal reading and not taking into account the time and purpose of each book. I think you have to understand the background to understand the message. Sadly, I think many christians have never heard of a concordance and simply overlay their own beliefs on what they read.Let me translate for you what HoboPelican is trying to say:
"I'm smart, you're dumb"!
The Bible is the word of God. You don't need someone to interpet it for you; that's how sects get started. Everyone can read it for him-/herself.
On the church-thing: are we divided? Really? Are we not all united in the name of Christ? No, not all. Some, like JW's, like to change parts of the Bible, or add books themselves, like the LDS. But apart from a few very odd cults we are most all united in the name of Christ.
I love Jesus with all my heart. What else is there of importance?
| Verbato wrote: |
Let me translate for you what HoboPelican is trying to say:
"I'm smart, you're dumb"!
The Bible is the word of God. You don't need someone to interpet it for you; that's how sects get started. Everyone can read it for him-/herself.
.... |
I'm sorry if you can't understand what I'm trying to say. In no way am I saying anyone is stupid. You should be careful about putting words in other peoples mouths. What I'm saying is that each book of the Bible was written for a particular purpose, often to address a certain problem in the early church. Those original books exist now only in translation and there are issues about the translations. I firmly belief that if you read the word, it makes more sense and is more meaningful if you read about the times it was written in, what purposes the book was addressing and what translation issues exist. Is that such a crazy idea?People like being different and having different ways to get to heaven/god/etc.
| irsmart wrote: |
| People like being different and having different ways to get to heaven/god/etc. |
Agreed. But the problem arises when one person takes Jesus and the Bible...reads it...likes some of it and doesn't like some of it...so he adds and deletes the texts till he has what he likes... then goes and makes his own church...and still calls it Christianity....
If he had made it his own way of getting to heaven/god/etc...why validate it by attributing Christianity to it? Why not call it something new as well?I have read through all of the posts in this thread and it seems there is a lot of disagreement. Even between some of you who obviously call yourselves Christians.
The original question of this thread was why are there so many denominations when the Bible clearly teaches that there is to be unity and "one church"?
I think that reading through the thread the answer should be obvious. And the answer is people. If we read what the Bible says carefully we can still make mistakes. The problem (according to my understanding of the Bible) is that we all have this corruption within us, that the Bible calls sin. Ultimately sin is a desire to satisify ourselves apart from God rather than in God. (I suggest reading Inside Out by Larry Crabb for a great explanation of this).
Martin Luther actually broke from the Catholic church because of this same issue - well almost. The Catholic church then (and some catholic churches now) taught that to be saved required certain actions and words, often spoken by the priests on your behalf. Luther, having carefully studied Romans, realised that being saved is about faith in God, not what we do.
However in the book of James it seems to be reversed, that it is about what we do not just our faith (previously quoted in the thread). I believe that to reconcile these statements we need to switch perspectives a bit.
If we consider that Christianity is not about what we do (or not do) and is about what we are, then it changes the way we think about God and the Bible. It also changes what we think about the church.
The point of the Bible (as I understand it) is to show us that we are God's people, we are rebelious toward God, we are (according to God's law) deserving of punishment, but we are forgiven and set free from any punishment because Jesus has/is taking that punishment for us.
However, our relationship with God is dependant on our willingness to accept His fogiveness and live as if we have been forgiven. To me that means changing the way I live (with God's help) so that I am not longer living my way (the thing that damages my relationship with God), but God's way (the thing that strengthens my relationship with God).
So the denominational issue is basically a sin issue. Denominations exist because people are more interested in being right in people's eyes (including their own) than being right in God's eyes.
Mind you there are verses that talk about necessary divisions, but I will leave that for now because this is already a long post.
Thanks for your time and I look forward to comments.
For the denominations:
| Quote: |
In the early 1500s, a German monk named Martin Luther was so conscious of his sins that he spent up to six hours in the confessional. Through study of the Scriptures he found that salvation didn’t come through anything he did, but simply through trusting in the finished work of the cross of Jesus Christ. He listed the contradictions between what the Scriptures said and what his church taught, and nailed his "95 Theses" to the church door in Wittenberg, Germany. Martin Luther became the first to "protest" against the Roman church, and thus he became the father of the Protestant church.
Since that split, there have been many disagreements about how much water one should baptize with, how to sing what and why, who should govern who, etc., causing thousands of splinter groups. Many of these groups are convinced that they alone are right. These have become known as Protestant "denominations."
Despite the confusion, these churches subscribe to certain foundational beliefs such as the deity, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Bible says, "The foundation of God stands sure, having this seal, The Lord knows them that are his" (2 Timothy 2:19). Thomas Jefferson once wrote of a preacher, Richard Mote, who "exclaimed aloud to his congregation that he did not believe there was a Quaker, Presbyterian, Methodist, or Baptist in heaven, having paused to give his hearers time to stare and to wonder. He added that, in heaven, God knew no distinctions." |
For the religions:
| Quote: |
It has been well said that "religion" is man’s way of trying to deal with his guilt. Different religions have different ways of attempting to rid their adherents of sin and its consequences. They fast, pray, deny themselves legitimate pleasures, or chasten themselves, often to a point of inflicting pain. They do this because they have a concept of what they think God (or "the gods") is like, so they seek to establish their own righteousness, being "ignorant of God’s righteousness." The Good News of the Christian faith is that no one need suffer the pains of religious works. Christ’s blood can cleanse our conscience from the "dead works" of religion (Hebrews 9:14). Jesus took our punishment upon Himself, and He is the only One who can save us from sin and death. See Acts 4:12 and John 14:6. |
I enjoyed your quotes thpn.
Just wondering where you found them? - book publisher etc?
Of course, I got them from a book that I have called The Evidence Bible. It is a book that answers many questions about evangelism today and is used frequently on the hit show The Way of The Master. You can find an online version here. Thanks for that.
Looks like an interesting website - I will check it out more anon.
| thpn wrote: |
| Of course, I got them from a book that I have called The Evidence Bible. It is a book that answers many questions about evangelism today and is used frequently on the hit show The Way of The Master. You can find an online version here. |
Never heard of the show, assuming thats probably a good thing for me based on the website you linked up. I'm not a big fan of books that pigeon hole people to the point where they aren't really people any more, just an object on the outside that we have to "bring jesus" to. Nor am I am fan of boks that claim to know exactly what Jesus would do in every situation by stringing together single passages of text, pulled completely out of thier context. Unfortunately, after a few minutes on that site thats what the book seems to be. I looked, but couldn't find, any church history stuff, which was a let down after your sweet post about Martin Luther and hsi 95 Theses. | Soulfire wrote: |
And this is why I like the Catholic Church - it is universal, Christian, holy, and sacred. It is the first Church, founded by none other than Jesus Christ himself, with Peter (yet, the Peter from the bible) as the first Pope.
|
i don't agree
there is no even a slightest similarity between christianity founded by Jesus and christianity founded by peter.
catholic blief isn't even second or third church | Soulfire wrote: |
| Some "Christian" churches accept homosexuals. God clearly forbids homosexuality - well, the sex part at the very least (because merely being gay isn't the sin, it's the action that is the sin). |
One could point out that if you don't kill any child you see disobeying its parents you are also sinning. | Soulfire wrote: |
| Some "Christian" churches accept homosexuals. God clearly forbids homosexuality - well, the sex part at the very least (because merely being gay isn't the sin, it's the action that is the sin). |
I missed this the first time through, but when did being perfect become a prerequisite to church attendance? | palavra wrote: |
| Soulfire wrote: | And this is why I like the Catholic Church - it is universal, Christian, holy, and sacred. It is the first Church, founded by none other than Jesus Christ himself, with Peter (yet, the Peter from the bible) as the first Pope.
|
i don't agree
there is no even a slightest similarity between christianity founded by Jesus and christianity founded by peter.
catholic blief isn't even second or third church |
I wonder why the Catholic Church has been in existence for around 2000 years then, hrmm. After a period of corruption, most of the church has reverted back to it's original days. And the word catholic itself means "universal."
And if you could kindly point out the differences, perhaps I would give some creditibility to your statements. Until then, I must dismiss them as nonsense.
| Quote: |
| One could point out that if you don't kill any child you see disobeying its parents you are also sinning. |
You can try, but no - nowhere does it say that. It also says "Thou shalt not kill." You can't justify that statement anywhere, but you're welcome to try.
| Quote: |
| I missed this the first time through, but when did being perfect become a prerequisite to church attendance? |
I missed the point of this statement. When did I ever imply that you had to be perfect to go to church? I just said that God forbids homosexuality, which He does. We all sin, but to live in a lifestyle of constant sin probably isn't the best for a relationship with God.One of the main reasons we have so many denominations is because when someone disagreed with what they were being taught, instead of going to that person and talking it out, they decided to go out and start their own church.
And no where does it say we have to be perfect. In fact, that's impossible. But I do agree with some of soulfire's comments. I do not agree with homosexuality and things like that. I think it's against what God wants and how He disigned things to be.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Quote: | | One could point out that if you don't kill any child you see disobeying its parents you are also sinning. |
You can try, but no - nowhere does it say that. It also says "Thou shalt not kill." You can't justify that statement anywhere, but you're welcome to try. |
Deut 21:18-21
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Quote: | | I missed this the first time through, but when did being perfect become a prerequisite to church attendance? |
I missed the point of this statement. When did I ever imply that you had to be perfect to go to church? I just said that God forbids homosexuality, which He does. We all sin, but to live in a lifestyle of constant sin probably isn't the best for a relationship with God. |
In the context of your post it was obvious that only a church which preaches a false gospel, and wouldn't even qualify as christian (the church) in your opinion, would accept someone who is a homosexual.
You go on a mini-tirad about how there's a false gospel being preached to make people happy and give the church money, and how its disgusting. You end your little tirad with the line I quoted, being " some "Christian" churchs accept homosexuals." Obviously this false doctrine and the acceptance of people who are homosexual are related in your head.
So I guess the better question than the one I asked would be how is it not christian to accept someone, anyone, even if they are in the midst of something you believe to be utterly sinful? And how is someone being gay, which ever definition you choose to use, less acceptable then the simple failure to take care of orphans (James 1:27)?
But back to your question of my question. You said homosexuality was a sin, and homosexuals are only accepted by false churches that put forth a false gospel. So unless you have elevated homosexuality above all other sins, which many conservative christians have, any true church preaching the true gospel wouldn't accept people who sin, hence the question on having to be perfect. | livilou wrote: |
| One of the main reasons we have so many denominations is because when someone disagreed with what they were being taught, instead of going to that person and talking it out, they decided to go out and start their own church. |
I can't speak for actual denominations, but if it's anything like new church plants the opposite is usually true. I've talked numerous times with people who are church planters (people who make new churches), and one common thing that seems to runs through most (if not all) of the stories was hardcore corruption in the leadership, and when the leadership was approached about it, they were pretty much banned from the church and totally ostracized. I've heard some pretty messed up stories about that kind of thing. Then it usually ends up that the person who was banned and the people who realized what was really going on get together and start thier own church. Its generally not about some sort of disagreement with something being taught, but incredibly high levels of corruption. While that story is for churches, I'd imagine that there was that type of attempt of accountabilty for those in power played a role in Luther and his split.
| livilou wrote: |
| I do not agree with homosexuality and things like that. I think it's against what God wants and how He disigned things to be. |
Regardless of what anyone believes right or wrong on the issue of homosexuality, its pretty much become an impordonable sin in many peoples eyes. And many people are quick to point out this one sin of someone else instead of dealing with the plank in thier own eye.
Guess I was wrong. I don't know if the kid was stones for disobedience or "being a profligate and a drunkard." At any rate, it's the Old Testament, and it's not followed as closely as the new testament.
| Quote: |
| In the context of your post it was obvious that only a church which preaches a false gospel, and wouldn't even qualify as christian (the church) in your opinion, would accept someone who is a homosexual. |
When God forbids something, and you preach it as okay - to me, that makes it a false gospel.
| Quote: |
You go on a mini-tirad about how there's a false gospel being preached to make people happy and give the church money, and how its disgusting. You end your little tirad with the line I quoted, being " some "Christian" churchs accept homosexuals." Obviously this false doctrine and the acceptance of people who are homosexual are related in your head.
So I guess the better question than the one I asked would be how is it not christian to accept someone, anyone, even if they are in the midst of something you believe to be utterly sinful? And how is someone being gay, which ever definition you choose to use, less acceptable then the simple failure to take care of orphans (James 1:27)? |
I could've worded it better, sure, but I'm much more tolerant than one would think. Hate the sin, not the sinner, because we all sin. The only thing about homosexuality is that it is a lifestyle of sin. And Churches, in my opinion, shouldn't be preaching against God's word. Don't jump to conclusions, and I do accept openly people who are known homosexuals, because even Jesus loved the sinners.
| Quote: |
| But back to your question of my question. You said homosexuality was a sin, and homosexuals are only accepted by false churches that put forth a false gospel. So unless you have elevated homosexuality above all other sins, which many conservative christians have, any true church preaching the true gospel wouldn't accept people who sin, hence the question on having to be perfect. |
I said NOTHING about false churches, you're putting words in my mouth and you need to stop immediately. I have NOT elevated homosexuality above all sins - a sin is a sin, and like I said before, the problem with homosexuality is that it is a lifestyle of sin, almost constant sin. We all sin, and we can all repent for it. For me, for a homosexual, for anyone. Besides, I'm not convinced that homosexuals go to Hell either, and between the time I made my post and now I've had a little bit of a thought revival.
Jesus Himself says "Whosoever believes in me shall not perish, but have eternal life." | Soulfire wrote: |
Guess I was wrong. I don't know if the kid was stones for disobedience or "being a profligate and a drunkard." At any rate, it's the Old Testament, and it's not followed as closely as the new testament. |
I think this one of the many reasons there are many Christian churches. You, Soulfire, are willing to toss out parts of the OT (correctly, I think), but others think the word of God is the word of God and try to believe that everything in the Bible is true and should be followed today. When Disagreements over this sort of thing arise, people split and form a sect that follows their beliefs. They all belief basically the same, but the insistence that a given understanding is "right" will fragment the faith.
Does this make sense?
| Soulfire wrote: |
Guess I was wrong. |
Yeah its a really obscure refrence, I actually only know about it because I worked for a few years at a secure residential treatment facility, which is real intesive therapy for kids who have been abused and act out violently and sexually because of it. The particular facility I worked at was the last stop before juvie, or for the older units, the big house. I could tell stories that could send shivers deep into your bones (some good and amazing stories of redemption, and many horrible stories of what happened to the kids before landing there). Back to my point, when things would get really bad in the house, one of us staffs favorite coping mechanism was looking at each other and just saying quickly muttering Deuternomoy, and we all knew instantly what the other was talking about, and we'd laugh and calm down a bit to handle the situation.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| When God forbids something, and you preach it as okay - to me, that makes it a false gospel. |
I think we have a differing idea on what is Gospel, and what is not, but chances are its a semantics issue, so I won't go into that. But preaching that homosexuality is a sin, and accepting homosexuals
| Quote: |
| I could've worded it better, sure, but I'm much more tolerant than one would think. Hate the sin, not the sinner, because we all sin. |
a bit of advice, don't say that in conversations with people you don't think are in a redemptive standing with God. I used to use that term all the time when I was younger, but after some actual conversations with people outside the Curch, I learned how bad that saying is recieved. Like many things, its well meaning, but doesn't come accross as such.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I said NOTHING about false churches, you're putting words in my mouth and you need to stop immediately. |
Watch the bossiness there homes.
Back on topic, when you put a regularly accepted term in quatation marks, espically when used as an adjective like you used it in, its used to show disagreement with the term. As an example, if I were to write a paragraph or two about government lying to its people, and were to finish up with the line... Don't buy into the "truth" the government is telling us... its pretty obvious what I'm talking about. You didn't need to use the words false church, your quotation marks, and the context of talking about false gospels, say it loud.
(Have I ever mentioned that I did journalism stuff for a while?)
| Soulfire wrote: |
Besides, I'm not convinced that homosexuals go to Hell either, and between the time I made my post and now I've had a little bit of a thought revival.
Jesus Himself says "Whosoever believes in me shall not perish, but have eternal life." |
I'd love to hear more about your thought revival, thats got me excited.
edited to add...
ps - Soulfire, what would it take to get you to change the song in your signature? I'll avoid the long thoughts, but that song has so much wrong with it, and in my opnion is the epitome of whats wrong with christian music (feel free to shoot me a PM of you're interested in those thoughts). Whatever it takes, I'll do pretty much anything in my power. | a_dubDesign wrote: |
| livilou wrote: | | One of the main reasons we have so many denominations is because when someone disagreed with what they were being taught, instead of going to that person and talking it out, they decided to go out and start their own church. |
I can't speak for actual denominations, but if it's anything like new church plants the opposite is usually true. I've talked numerous times with people who are church planters (people who make new churches), and one common thing that seems to runs through most (if not all) of the stories was hardcore corruption in the leadership, and when the leadership was approached about it, they were pretty much banned from the church and totally ostracized. I've heard some pretty messed up stories about that kind of thing. Then it usually ends up that the person who was banned and the people who realized what was really going on get together and start thier own church. Its generally not about some sort of disagreement with something being taught, but incredibly high levels of corruption. While that story is for churches, I'd imagine that there was that type of attempt of accountabilty for those in power played a role in Luther and his split. |
I've seen it both ways. And no matter what causes it, it's a shame that more people can't seem to get along. If we all have the same God, it shouldn't make a difference. Unfortunately, most people want to say "If you don't think as I do, then you're wrong and I'll have nothing to do with you." It's not a philosophy that I agree with. All people can get along, as long as they are willing to realize that we're all entitled to to our own opinion.
| a_dubDesign wrote: |
| livilou wrote: | | I do not agree with homosexuality and things like that. I think it's against what God wants and how He disigned things to be. |
Regardless of what anyone believes right or wrong on the issue of homosexuality, its pretty much become an impordonable sin in many peoples eyes. And many people are quick to point out this one sin of someone else instead of dealing with the plank in thier own eye. |
I do realize that I sin, and I work on it everyday. I also don't think it's impordonable, if a person is willing to understand that it's against certain beliefs, which mine is one. The only sin that I know of that is unforgivable is blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. | Soulfire wrote: |
| Quote: | | One could point out that if you don't kill any child you see disobeying its parents you are also sinning. |
You can try, but no - nowhere does it say that. It also says "Thou shalt not kill." You can't justify that statement anywhere, but you're welcome to try. |
Don't have to try; it actually says "Thou shalt not commit murder," then goes on to give dozens of "righteous" reasons to kill people. Several of them are right around Leviticus 20:13, the verse you and Fred Phelps love so much.
KJV:
Exodus 21:15
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
Exodus 21:17
And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. (Repeated and rephrased in Leviticus 20:9 - somebody sure had a hardon for offing kids)
Exodus 22:19
Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
Exodus 22:20
He that sacrificeth unto any god save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed
Exodus 31:15
Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:11
And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Leviticus 20:12
And if a man lie with his daughter in law, both of them shall surely be put to death: they have wrought confusion; their blood shall be upon them.
Leviticus 24:16
And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.
Rather than quote Deuteronomy 5-7's slaughterfest in the name of the Israelites taking the Promised Land, I'll let you all go read it for yourselves.
Deuteronomy 22:13-22
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her ... and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the ****** in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
Deuteronomy 22:23-24
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.Another problem is that Christianism is getting... well, getting old.
It was all written by many people in times of trouble, when the followers of God were persecuted by the Romans who killed them recklessly. No wonder they wanted to be unified: back then, their survival was at stake.
Also remember that the doctrin was very advanced for those days, but still written with much different cultural and historico-scientific background than ours. Time changes, but the Bible didn't...
Of course, everyone should be united. But idealism is rarely the reality! The separation of different churches happened when the Christian leaders abused of their authority, and I respect that decision. I do not believe that the popes of those days were any close to a sinless life.
| Soltair wrote: |
Another problem is that Christianism is getting... well, getting old.
It was all written by many people in times of trouble, when the followers of God were persecuted by the Romans who killed them recklessly. No wonder they wanted to be unified: back then, their survival was at stake.
Also remember that the doctrin was very advanced for those days, but still written with much different cultural and historico-scientific background than ours. Time changes, but the Bible didn't...
Of course, everyone should be united. But idealism is rarely the reality! The separation of different churches happened when the Christian leaders abused of their authority, and I respect that decision. I do not believe that the popes of those days were any close to a sinless life. |
I suppose you could think of it as "growing pains" throughout the Christian Church. As more and more people become Christian, there are more and more ideas as to what exactly "Christian" is, and when those ideas begin to differ from person to person, splitting of Churches occurs.
My uncle has a theory that before Jesus' second coming, all of the Christians will form One, just One Holy Church. It's sort of a pre-rapture occurance, and it's actually quite complicated, I don't know how to explain it very well, but if I ever get to talk to him again I'll be sure to listen closer.I want to know, what is the difference between Protestant and a Catholic?
First of all, know that the protestants aren't just one separation. There are the lutherians, the calvinists, the orthodox and many more.
While in some cases there are absolutely no ornament in the churches, orthodox church is filled with incredibly rich decoration. In many protestant religions, the priests can have a wife, which is not the case in basic christianism. Also, the philosophy is not exactly the same. The authority of the pope is not recognized by any protestant church (to my personal knowledge). Some are following the Queen of England, some have nobody.
So it's quite a mess, I guess Jesus died on the cross for our sins, that is the universal belief in all denominations(by definition, that is what a christian is, one who accepts Jesus as thier savior). Beyond that, there are many different interpretations of the bible.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.", this says, to me anyway, that WHOEVER accepts jeses as thier savior shall be saved. The great thing about our god is that he separates who you are and what you do, by accepting jesus you are given(you didn't earn it) forgiveness for ALL of your sins. That doesn't mean you should go on sinning, like if you are gay, you should stop having sex because it IS a sin. If you were a murderer, you are forgiven by god, but you should not go out and kill someone else. One should show immense gratitude for what they have been given. But at the same time what Jesus did on the cross has no limit.
Ok so it seems that generally we agree that the reason there are so many denominations is because of the fact that people across the globe cannot settle on a unifing concept that binds us all together. Just the fact that we are all bound to this planet and that we seem to think that there is some heavenly goal that our spiritual lives are traveling is not enough to unite us to a "Universal Church". The truth is that a Church is a man made structure supporting a man made religion. Now communion with God is a natural process that every human knows how to do if given the proper chance. So what is going to be this chance? Peace? Religion? Dogma? Death?
Ok so it seems that generally we agree that the reason there are so many denominations is because of the fact that people across the globe cannot settle on a unifing concept that binds us all together. Just the fact that we are all bound to this planet and that we seem to think that there is some heavenly goal that our spiritual lives are traveling is not enough to unite us to a "Universal Church". The truth is that a Church is a man made structure supporting a man made religion. Now communion with God is a natural process that every human knows how to do if given the proper chance. So what is going to be this chance? Peace? Religion? Dogma? Death?
| The Czar wrote: |
| I want to know, what is the difference between Protestant and a Catholic? |
Protestants do not believe the Pope is an authority figure. There really is no difference, I mean, the belief system is the same. Just minor changes from a mass to a service. The Catholic Church is very traditional and ritualistic, afterall, it is 2000 years old. The Protestant Churches (there's 300+ of them, all different denominations), are much more contemporary.All I can say humans often times break laws.
| frozenhead wrote: |
| All I can say humans often times break laws. |
how is that being related to the denominations, it seems like theres a connection you have there that I'm just missing.Definitely an interesting thread. My Filipina wife is, as are about 80% of the population of the Philippines, a devout Roman Catholic. I have never been, and never shall be, a Catholic of any kind. I refuse to explain why.
One of my brother-in-laws recently asked me what religion I belonged to (and he actually meant denomination), and I replied that I was not Catholic or Protestant. This led him to believe that I had no religion. I quickly corrected him by saying that I was a non-denominational Christian.
Matt. 18:20: "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."
This is the one true church, not a denomination of/or a religion.
Variety is the spice of life.
Personally i do not feel that there should only be one religion. Recently there has been a new discovery of the new evidence towards evolution through the remains of a baby girl apparently known as 'Lucy'. Nobody knows which religion is the Real one? Perhaps there are more than one God in this galaxy? Who can tell? Sure, signs and wonders do happen in the christian world. But there are also this thing called self-belief. Some people are determined not to die and they really do not die even after a car crash. Miracles do happen but how do we know that it os not because of self belief that led to this miracle? We cannot proof that. Determination is a strong thing. It is a catalyst to make it or break it. Even there are so many denominations in Christianity. Goodness. We are all so divided. Yet we are all beings.... Same yet different.
| Dj_Dan wrote: |
| Why did Martin Luther not remain a Catholic? Doesn't this disaster concern anybody? If it does... tell me so. Surely I cannot be alone in this. |
Martin Luther was excommunicated and never intended to be a sectarian. (Sects are all the various spider web religious offshoots people make when they are unhappy with this teaching or that.) Yes it is disheartening. You are faced with a choice though. Do you reduce the Gospel to a "bare minimum" that is required for fellowship. Some would say Trinity, Death and Resurrection of Jesus for the forgiveness of sins. Any more than that is unnecessary. This simplified version of Christianity opens the door to many other problems. Such as, (if you believe it is God's Word) Jesus said many other things than the very "basics" of Christianity. How many of them can be changed or understood in diametrically opposed ways before "fellowship" must be broken?
If one Christian says we should baptize and another says faith alone, can we still be in fellowship? If one says it is "real" and another "spiritual" concerning the Lord's Supper, can both be right? It is or is not, there is no in-between. Hence the argument and division.
Even a better example, those "Christian" religions which really deny the deity of Jesus. Are they to be allowed and who makes the decision of who is in and who is out?
Obviously not all issues are to be divided over, however even the decision as to how much in common is needed to have fellowship is an argument. It's late and I'll write more later on the subject but for now I close with...
BTW... lots of the other posts here are quoting Old Testament verses for killing kids and such... please try to put these into context and understand that God wasn't all about mindlessly smiting children and such...
Mis-contextuallizing and paraphrasing and paint an ugly and untrue picture of anyone, anything, any religion
It should be the goal of every Christian to seek peace and dialogue with every other Christian out there to reach the truth and understanding with each other. If differences remain... keep dialoging
