An Open Invitation

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 9:29 am

One thing I have noticed on religious discussion boards is that Jews, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglicans/Episcopalians are nearly always very open about their affiliations.

In the case of Protestants, however, this does not always seem to be the case. And the more fundamentalistic the Protestant, the less readily s/he seems to be willing to identify denomination or specific church.

I'm not sure why that is, maybe it's just my imagination. In any case, I thought it would be nice to provide an opportunity for everyone who contributes to this board to 'plug' their denomination or specific church. It's possible that this has already been done on a previous thread, but I haven't seen anything of that nature recently, and of course, there are always newcomers like myself.

This is, of course, an anonymous board and I'm not asking anyone to identify him- or herself, only the denomination or church, providing a link to its website if possible. In accordance with the spirit of this forum, linked websites will hopefully be primarily informational and not proselytizing.

I'll start:

I am a lifelong Roman Catholic as most of those who have read some of my recent posts already know.

My neighborhood church is St. Suitbertus at SchÃƒÂ¼tzenstrasse 58 in Ratingen, Germany. The website, shared with a couple of other Catholic churches in the same city is:

http://www.st-suitbertus-ratingen.de/

When I'm 'Back in the USA', and in the Chicago area, I attend St. Alphonsus church at the corner of Wellington and Southport on the North Side. Here's their website:

http://www.stalphonsuschgo.org

When I'm in the Tidewater/Hampton Roads area I attend a wonderful, spirit-filled, combined Roman Catholic and Protestant Episcopal church, the Church of the Holy Apostles on Lynnhaven Parkway in Virginia Beach. I recommend it to anyone in the area, Catholic or Protestant, who is seeking a spiritual home. Here's their website:

http://www.us.net/sova/VirginiaBeach/HolyApostles

(This website seems to be temporarily down. Hopefully it will be back online soon)

I hope this will be the first of many posts on this thread. Don't be bashful. You're among friends here.

SweetDarlin · Post by **SweetDarlin** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:13 am

Presbyterian for the last 15-20 years.

I chose firstly because after the first 20 years of CRAP churches... I found one I liked on a long term basis. The dogma of the particular branch of religion coincided with most of my beliefs... I believe you can't fix a sinking ship from the outside... and so I joined. Simple.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:34 am

"In the case of Protestants, however, this does not always seem to be the case. And the more fundamentalistic the Protestant, the less readily s/he seems to be willing to identify denomination or specific church."

That is totally untrue, Bronwen, it has never been asked before this time. Fundamentalistic Christians are very happy to share about their faith and the church they attend.

I am Nazarene. Before that I was Four Square, and as a child raised Church of God, Anderson, Indiana. My parents were missionaries, and I was raised a fundamentalist Protestant.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:44 am

Protestants are not the only non-Catholic Christians. Some churches call themselves non-denomination, which gives it a namby pamby vanilla feel. My father joined a non-denomination church that follows the teachings of William Branham. He is adamantly non-Protestant, and points out how the Catholic Church practices blasphemy on a daily basis (praying to statues of saints, for instance).

I had a mix of that church, Southern Baptist, and United Methodist in my upbringing. I'm cynical about organized churches, but see their value in society.

SOJOURNER · Post by **SOJOURNER** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:45 am

I am an Episcopalian. This was my choise about 28 years ago.

Previously I was a born in the cradle Lutheran of the Missouri Synod.

I decided to join the Episcopal Church because my husband to be was an Episcopalian. While I believed then, as I do now, that there is but one God no matter in what ritual you may worship him, my husband was not about to change denominations, nor did he think I should either. I, however, felt very strongly that we needed to be one in our worship.

Since that time, I AM an Episcopalian and would not change to any other faith!

I still believe there is but one God and it is merely a choice of which denomination you wish to worship in, but now my feelings are very strong that this is the path that most enriches me and makes me feel one with God.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:45 am

chonsigirl wrote: [...]

I am Nazarene. Before that I was Four Square, and as a child raised Church of God, Anderson, Indiana. My parents were missionaries, and I was raised a fundamentalist Protestant.
I've never heard of Four Square.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 11:53 am

SnoozeControl wrote: Are you interested in hearing from FG members that don't have any religious affiliation because they think organized religion is unnatural and mercenary?As far as I know, it is not against the rules for such individuals to post here, but, in my opinion, such comments would be more appropriate in a separate thread. Use your own judgment.

To everyone else who has posted, thank you for your input. I hope there will be many more.

Post by **spot** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:18 pm

Accountable wrote: Protestants are not the only non-Catholic Christians.Oh, I say old chap, steady on there. There's Catholic Protestants too, you know. Perhaps you mean non Roman Catholic?

The Church of England is, famously, a Catholic denomination. You'd attract raised eyebrows in Canterbury Cathedral if you spoke otherwise.

I'm a Methodist, and I'm in England. Let me give you the party line about that: Methodism was (in theory) a society within the Church of England, not a church in its own right. The slight problem with that is the Church of England refused to recognise Methodists as members for a couple of hundred years.

We have quaint notions and we sing enthusiastically. Prime among the quaintness is the belief that all need to be saved, all can be saved and all may know themselves saved. Oh, and we're big on the priesthood of all believers too. We have rules limiting the celebrants at mass, but that's a matter of "good order" and not of dogma.

In Britain, the Methodists and the Church of England have agreed to merge in... I suppose 2014, but I might be a year out. So we'll finally, after all this while, get to be what John Wesley considered we were, a Society of Believers within the Catholic Church of England.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:26 pm

Accountable wrote: I've never heard of Four Square.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internatio ... are_Gospel

Post by **spot** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 12:33 pm

Bronwen wrote: [QUOTE=SnoozeControl]Are you interested in hearing from FG members that don't have any religious affiliation because they think organized religion is unnatural and mercenary?As far as I know, it is not against the rules for such individuals to post here, but, in my opinion, such comments would be more appropriate in a separate thread. Use your own judgment.[/QUOTE]I certainly know a number of Christians of good repute who find church affiliation difficult because they, too, think organized religion is unnatural and mercenary, Bronwen. I'd be pleased to hear their views here too - I'm fairly close to that opinion myself, in that church organization is a so often a distraction from mission rather than an aid. I'm not sure why you'd take against it, unless you were - I hope mistakenly - thinking that Snooze was looking for an opportunity to scoff.

Lon · Post by **Lon** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:27 pm

I am a Secular Humanist

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 2:55 pm

I was raised in the Fellowship Baptist Church, changed to Presbyterian and eventually found my place in the Anglican Church of Canada.

I attend services at T

"The Church of St. Martin of Tours" here on Gabriola Island. I am quite involvd in my church including the ministry of the Chalice as well as presenting sermons.

We are in the process of building a new church. It is an exciting time.

We are a very active community and support all our members and others in society when they have problems such as illness or a death in the family. We often make meals for those in need. We do many other things for our secular community as well as some overseas word.

We also go on retreats as well

The spirit in our church is absolutely wonderful. I hate to miss any activity.

Bronwen, thanks for this thread. What an excellent idea. It may not be appropriate here but I noticed one post talking about praying to statues as blasphemy. Perhaps you could explain this in this thread or one of the others.

Many fundamentalists do not understand and mistakenly condemn it.

The web site for the Anglican Church of Canada is:

http://www.anglican.ca/index.htm

Anglican Church of Canada

Shalom

Ted

Frederick · Post by **Frederick** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:20 pm

Lon wrote: I am a Secular Humanist

I too, am a Methodist. Thus said, anybody who walks into "our" church will be more than welcome,regardless of whether they are Baptists, Catholic, Pentecostal, Seventh Day Adventist or what. I personally, am a strong believer in there being no right or wrong way in which to thank God for what He has given you. There is nothing "quaint" about accepting Jesus Christ as your personal Guide and Saviour. I have just completed an Alpha Course, and highly reccomend it to anybody who would like to explore a little more deeply their personal beliefs or non-beliefs.

I am not a Catholic for the simple reason that when I became a born-again Christian I prayed that I would be guided to a church where I would find true Christian brotherhood and it is my firm belief God guided me to the church of His choice.

I have read the book In His Footsteps, about the similarities between various Christian faiths, and I agreed with most of the questions and answers format up to about halfway through the book where it then swung on to Saints by the thousand, and the Rosary. According to what I read, one is supposed to repeat the Hail Mary, Mother of Christ... no less than ten consequative times. WHY?? IS GOD DEAF? Endless repetition must surely become a mere formality towards the end. When I pray, I accept that God has heard my request, and leave it at that - I don't keep on asking the same question over and over again - that would surely drive Him mad! I also reject what I feel is the excessive adornment of gold crosses, and fine robes. It may work for some people, but for me, it creates a you and me barrier. The same as I could never, ever, say to a man confess my sins to a man - God hears my confession, not a man. To condense it into one sentance: I accept Jesus Christ as my personal Guide and Saviour, and in Him, and HIM ONLY, I place my trust In our Methodist church, you will find a plain wooden cross at the altar. To me, this represents the RISEN CHRIST, for He is no longer on it Even if there were no cross, to me personally, it would make no difference.

I hope I have not caused you any undue offence, but this being the GF, perhaps you'd care to express why you personally feel Catholicism the THE true religion. As we say, and mean it, Peace be with you, brother.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:24 pm

Accountable wrote: I've never heard of Four Square.
The Foursquare Church...........it is one of the smaller denominations. I joined a Nazarene church here in Maryland, because the nearest Foursquare Church was too far for me to drive, about 25 miles or so. I would put it on the spectrum as evangelical, the Nazarene church is very close to it's belief system.

http://www.foursquare.org/

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:02 pm

Frederick wrote: [...]

According to what I read, one is supposed to repeat the Hail Mary, Mother of Christ... no less than ten consequative times. WHY?? IS GOD DEAF? Endless repetition must surely become a mere formality towards the end. When I pray, I accept that God has heard my request, and leave it at that - I don't keep on asking the same question over and over again - that would surely drive Him mad! [...]

Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?....

:yh_rotfl

................... :-2 .................. :-3 ..............

:o

.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 8:26 am

SnoozeControl wrote: "Offering up your pain to Christ." Why? That never made sense to me.

Making 6 year olds memorize prayers that make absolutely no sense for first communion. Why? To show what good memories they have?

Babies that haven't received their baptism before dying going to purgatory/hell. What sick bastard came up with that one?Snoozer, we'll put you down as undecided.

Seriously, if you'd care to re-post that as a new thread, I'll be happy to reply, and I suspect other posters, pro and con, would too.

The purpose of this thread is to give Christians an opportunity to 'plug', so to speak, their own denom and give links to informative - not proselytizing - websites if possible.Accountable wrote: 1. My father joined a non-denomination church that follows the teachings of William Branham.

2. He is adamantly non-Protestant, and points out how the Catholic Church practices blasphemy on a daily basis (praying to statues of saints, for instance).1. Never hoid of him (Mr. Branham, that is. Of course, I've never heard of your father either, but he must exist because here you are!). Maybe you could give us some idea of what Mr. Branham espouses.

2. If he 'points that out', then permit me to 'point out' that he is one confused dude.spot wrote: I certainly know a number of Christians of good repute who find church affiliation difficult because they, too, think organized religion is unnatural and mercenary, Bronwen. I'd be pleased to hear their views here too - I'm fairly close to that opinion myself, in that church organization is a so often a distraction from mission rather than an aid. I'm not sure why you'd take against it, unless you were - I hope mistakenly - thinking that Snooze was looking for an opportunity to scoff.spot, with all due respect to both yourself and your 'Christians of good repute', I cannot see how ANY Christian, Catholic, Protestant or otherwise, could find that opinion compatible with their Christianity. Christianity is COMPLETELY about organization, about brother/sisterhood in the community of believers that Christ founded on His original disciples, and which He left here on earth as His Mystical Body after His human body was taken up.

What do you regard as 'mission' apart from Church membership? Maybe I'm missing something here.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:32 am

Bronwen wrote: 1. Never hoid of him (Mr. Branham, that is. Of course, I've never heard of your father either, but he must exist because here you are!). Maybe you could give us some idea of what Mr. Branham espouses.
No, for two reasons: (1) I am not well-versed on the foundational practices of the church that arguably broke up my family some 35 years ago, and (2) I'm not interested in your arrogant, condescending opinion of them.

Lil~Basco · Post by **Lil~Basco** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:36 am

Accountable wrote: No, I'm not interested in your arrogant, condescending opinion of them.

:yh_clap :yh_clap Well said Acc!

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:42 am

Accountable wrote: No, for two reasons: (1) I am not well-versed on the foundational practices of the church that arguably broke up my family some 35 years ago, and (2) I'm not interested in your arrogant, condescending opinion of them.In that case, I don't understand why you're posting on this thread.

If it's just to be a 'spoiler', I think you've failed miserably, becuase such attitudes, considering the sources from which they spring, tend to strengthen rather than diminish the faith of believers.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:01 am

Bronwen wrote: In that case, I don't understand why you're posting on this thread.

If it's just to be a 'spoiler', I think you've failed miserably, becuase such attitudes, considering the sources from which they spring, tend to strengthen rather than diminish the faith of believers.
Forgive me, I'd originally thought the thread was for Christians to plug their churches. Since I have none, yet am a Christian, I explained my "roots" as succintly as I could.

I see now you're trying to set yourself up a skeet shoot, so you can explain why other churches are inferior to your own.

In the pithy words of Chipbeef: Carry on.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:16 am

Accountable wrote: 1. Forgive me, I'd originally thought the thread was for Christians to plug their church.

2. Since I have none, yet am a Christian, I explained my "roots" as succintly as I could.

3. I see now you're trying to set yourself up a skeet shoot, so you can explain why other churches are inferior to your own.1. No forgiveness necessary. That was my purpose in starting the thread.

2. OK, as I said, I'm not sure how that is possible, because Christianity is, by definition, a COMMUNITY of believers. There are divisions within Christianity, and most Christians believe that these all will be resolved in the future, but it is a community nonetheless. You are certainly welcome to explain your 'every man for himself' version of Christianity, but this you have refused to do, so you'll forgive me if I don't understand it.

3. Absolutely not. If I wanted to do that, I could do so in a separate thread.

To me, the important thing is that many dedicated Christians of various denominations contributed to the thread, and I hope that others will follow.

The few, like yourself, who seem determined to somehow 'upset the apple cart' of Christian fellowship, also, I suppose, have your own story to tell. My question remains, why not do so by starting a separate thread where such comments would be more appropriate?

And if that sounds arrogant, then please write it off to my literary style, as that is not my intention.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:28 am

I need you to tell me where I represented myself as you say, because I've re-read my posts and can only write it off to your own prejudice.

Bronwen wrote: [...]You are certainly welcome to explain your 'every man for himself' version of Christianity, [...]

The few, like yourself, who seem determined to somehow 'upset the apple cart' of Christian fellowship, [...]

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 10:49 am

Accountable wrote: I need you to tell me where I represented myself as you say, because I've re-read my posts and can only write it off to your own prejudice.You said that you have no church and yet you are a Christian.

I would like to know more about how that works, as I cannot conceive Christianity except as a community, and the entire history of the Church, before and after the various divisions took place, supports this.

Yet you seem unwilling or unable to expound but rather to be confrontational, in a sort of nebulous way. I'm not sure exactly what you're confronting.

SweetDarlin · Post by **SweetDarlin** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:11 am

I can maybe help... maybe it isn't wanted... but that's never stopped me before... :sneaky: I've been a Christian my whole life. I didn't always have a church... a branch, and affiliation.

Christianity "in general" is defined by the belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God.

That AND the holy spirit is within us so we can have a DIRECT relationship with Him and not need a priest or pope to intervene for us... is what separates this religion from others...

I can be a Christian... and have been... without belonging to a particular church... or any.

Clear as mud??? :-2

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:21 am

SweetDarlin wrote: I can maybe help... maybe it isn't wanted... but that's never stopped me before... :sneaky: I've been a Christian my whole life. I didn't always have a church... a branch, and affiliation.

Christianity "in general" is defined by the belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God.

That AND the holy spirit is within us so we can have a DIRECT relationship with Him and not need a priest or pope to intervene for us... is what separates this religion from others...

I can be a Christian... and have been... without belonging to a particular church... or any.On the contrary, it IS wanted. That's the entire purpose of the thread.

Your position seems similar to Acc's, but minus the enormous chip on the shoulder, and I appreciate your contribution.

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:22 am

While 'community' is important to some people, it is not a necessity.

"Virtually all Christian traditions affirm that Christian practice should include acts of personal piety such as prayer, Bible reading, and attempting to live a moral lifestyle. This lifestyle includes not only obedience to the Ten Commandments, as interpreted by Christ (as in the Sermon the Mount) but also love for one's neighbor in both attitude and action Ã¢â‚¬â€ whether friend or enemy, Christian or non-Christian. This love is commanded by Christ and, according to him, is next only in importance to love toward God; which includes obedience to such injunctions as "feed the hungry" and "shelter the homeless", both informally and formally. Christianity teaches that it is impossible for people to completely reform themselves, but that moral and spiritual progress can only occur with God's help through the gift of the Holy Spirit who dwells within all faithful believers. Christians believe that by sharing in Christ's life, death, and resurrection, they die with Him to sin and can be resurrected with Him to new life."

Post by **spot** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 11:25 am

Bronwen wrote: spot, with all due respect to both yourself and your 'Christians of good repute', I cannot see how ANY Christian, Catholic, Protestant or otherwise, could find that opinion compatible with their Christianity. Christianity is COMPLETELY about organization, about brother/sisterhood in the community of believers that Christ founded on His original disciples, and which He left here on earth as His Mystical Body after His human body was taken up.

What do you regard as 'mission' apart from Church membership? Maybe I'm missing something here.Maybe you are, Bronwen. Methodist teaching is consistent since the society was founded, probably because we have continued to sing Charles Wesley's hymns. "One family we dwell in him, one church above, beneath, though now divided by the stream, the narrow stream of death; one army of the living God, to his command we bow; part of his host have crossed the flood, and part are crossing now." The community consists equally of the Church Militant, still fighting the good fight, and the Church Triumphant, "our friends above who have obtained the prize", "for all the servants of our King in earth and heaven are one."

I agree that we are a community. I regret that we are an organization. Mission is engagement with the world, not a badge of affiliation.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:20 pm

posted by bronwen

One thing I have noticed on religious discussion boards is that Jews, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglicans/Episcopalians are nearly always very open about their affiliations.

In the case of Protestants, however, this does not always seem to be the case. And the more fundamentalistic the Protestant, the less readily s/he seems to be willing to identify denomination or specific church.

I'm not sure why that is, maybe it's just my imagination. In any case, I thought it would be nice to provide an opportunity for everyone who contributes to this board to 'plug' their denomination or specific church. It's possible that this has already been done on a previous thread, but I haven't seen anything of that nature recently, and of course, there are always newcomers like myself.

Possibly in order not to give offence. A protestant is by definition someone who protests against the corruption and venality of the Roman Catholic church and most especially the power of the pope in Rome. If you have an organised religon that insists they are the only true church and everyone should worship as they do then any dialogue is not going to go far.

To fundamentalist protestants the road to god is by self study and reading the bible and following it's teaching not by ceremony and the worship of idols such as statues of the virgin mary or praying to saints and most especially not by priests telling you what to believe, which kind of makes TV evengelism a bit of a puzzle-at least to me.

http://www.schoolshistory.org.uk/protes ... mation.htm

he Protestant Reformation

The Protestant Reformation is the name given to a religious and political development in the early 16th century. The reformation was led by Martin Luther, a monk from Germany. He said that the Roman Catholic church was corrupt and that it should be reformed. Luther also argued that a reformation was needed of other things. In particular reformation was required with regards: the language that the Bible was produced in: most people couldn't read Latin; the selling of forgiveness, this was considered to be immoral by Luther but had been standard practice by some monks and priests for years. The ideas behind the Protestant Reformation were simple. The church should be changed, or reformed, so that it was less greedy, fairer and accessible to all people, not just the rich and well educated.

The protest against the church was not entirely new. In England there had been similar protests in the 14th century: although these had been crushed. Luther though gained a lot of support for his ideas. Many people were unhappy with the Pope and the church.

The Protestant Reformation in England

King Henry VIII was initially opposed to the ideas of Luther. he was praised by the pope for a pamphlet that he wrote in 1521 that criticised the German monk. However after the Split with Rome many of the things that Luther said should happen, did happen in England. Henry VIII ordered Bibles to be published in English and took much money and land from the church. However Henry did this for political gains, not because he supported the ideas of Luther. However because of his actions Henry VIII laid the foundations of Protestantism in England which under the rule of Edward and Elizabeth would transform England from a Catholic to a Protestant nation. By 1603 the Protestant Reformation in this country was complete.

If you want a bit more background.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/state/chur ... w_01.shtml

posted by Spot

Oh, I say old chap, steady on there. There's Catholic Protestants too, you know. Perhaps you mean non Roman Catholic?

The Church of England is, famously, a Catholic denomination. You'd attract raised eyebrows in Canterbury Cathedral if you spoke otherwise.

But then they have the statues and the fancy prayers so arguably not that different from the catholic church in its teachings.

I'm not actually religious any more and if push came to shove would describe myself as agnostic, but was brought up in the free Church of Scotland-a more fundamentalist offshoot of the presbytarian church. I always remember the first time i went to an episcopalean service as a wee boy, was amazed at the decoration and the way you were provided with footstools and the culture chock of people kneeling to pray I still remember. When abroad I like looking at all the churches simply because I have so seldom seen such fantastic decoration.

I also live in an area where sectarianism is rife and have no time for any of it. It's almost impossible to talk about religon without sectarianism coming in to it sooner or later. Muslims and hindus just add a little colour (no pun intended) to the mix and look on in amazement at the violence.

We have a largely secular society perhaps because the alternative is to have the godly tearing each other to bits.

One of the things that always puzzles me about monotheistic religons is how, when they all believe in one god, who made all man, they can waste so much time and effort and outright warfare trying to force others to worship in the way they do above all others. One god, one mankind, should you really burn someone at the stake because they sit when they pray instead of kneeling or prostrating themselves. Who cares if the virgin mary is holy or not enough to kill someone over it. I think it is a truism that it takes religon to make a good man do bad things.

Not being of a religious disposition I don't care what people choose to believe and am happy enough for all religons to be given equal say and people worshipping as they please. I do however, find it alarming that in the 21st century we have religious wars starting up again-it's like something out of the middle ages and bible thumping preachers being given credence by an alarmingly gullible public, especially it seems in america. luckily religious fundamentalism hasn't yet taken a hold in the UK as it has in the US-maybe it's a tribal memory of the horrors caused by fundamentalism in the past that make us naturally wary of extremists in general.

So do you believe in god? If you do why does your religon matter at all and what on earth are you all falling out over? Surely if you all believe that JC is the risen son of god the fact you can bring yourselves to believe it in the first place should be enough to make any differences irrelevant.

If you follow a different version of christianity does that somehow make you less godly, and if someone worships in a different way why do you want to fight them? Why do catholics believe non catholics go to hell? Why do muslims believe infidels go to hell? Why do you believe in hell in the first place which is a concept nicked from the pagans anyway and used by priests to exert social control.

Why is it that christians-who presumably believe in the teachings of JC and the preaching of love and forgiveness are so fond of the old testament with the vindictive caprricious gid depicted therein? Personally I would suggest that someone who urelies on the old testament to teach them how to behave and conduct their lives is not a christian. Did JC ever say an eye for an eye?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 2:27 pm

Clancy wrote: ...now we'll be cited as, backslidious hypocritious

Thabut's Ribut, manby.

Uncle Kram · Post by **Uncle Kram** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:00 pm

Clancy wrote: ....some may say, we're a godless bunch, but we plan to recant on our deathbeds.

Can't say fairer than that.

Yes I can, .... watch this...........fairer than that

Fairer than tht..Fairer thn th...Far than tat...........I can't say fairer than that

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 4:26 pm

Uncle Kram wrote: Fairer than tht..Fairer thn th...Far than tat...........I can't say fairer than that :oFair enough.

Hick · Post by **Hick** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:10 pm

Why is it that christians-who presumably believe in the teachings of JC and the preaching of love and forgiveness are so fond of the old testament with the vindictive caprricious gid depicted therein? Personally I would suggest that someone who urelies on the old testament to teach them how to behave and conduct their lives is not a christian. Did JC ever say an eye for an eye?

Many people call themselves "Christian" because it's convenient, not because they are convicted. A lot of Christians don't even know the majority of what the Bible says. They go by the 11th commandment, "Thou shalt feel good about thyself", while forgetting the 10 others. Christ's dying signified the end of all the ordinances of the OT, not the commands. It seems that more worth is put into ritual religion than true biblically-defined service to God.

You only love God as much as the person you love the least.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 5:35 pm

Hick wrote: Many people call themselves "Christian" because it's convenient, not because they are convicted. A lot of Christians don't even know the majority of what the Bible says. They go by the 11th commandment, "Thou shalt feel good about thyself", while forgetting the 10 others. Christ's dying signified the end of all the ordinances of the OT, not the commands. It seems that more worth is put into ritual religion than true biblically-defined service to God.

You only love God as much as the person you love the least.
Welcome, Hick!

Do you claim a particular denomination?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 9:19 pm

I am in comlete disagreement with Hicks. But I would suggest that it would be better to leave the judging up to God. That is his role alone.

The Bible, of course should not be taken literally. It was not written with that in mind.

Shalom

Ted:-6

theia · Post by **theia** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 2:33 am

Hick wrote:

You only love God as much as the person you love the least.

I find that statement very thought provoking. Thank you.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 5:16 am

Hick wrote:

You only love God as much as the person you love the least.

I don't think so, some people have God as the central focus in their lives.

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 11:46 am

Hick wrote: You only love God as much as the person you love the least.In passing - there's a variation on that theme by Archbishop Desmond Tutu which deeply impressed me: "God is as weak as the weakest of his partners, or as strong as the morally strongest."

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:05 pm

spot wrote: Maybe you are, Bronwen. Methodist teaching is consistent since the society was founded, probably because we have continued to sing Charles Wesley's hymns. "One family we dwell in him, one church above, beneath, though now divided by the stream, the narrow stream of death; one army of the living God, to his command we bow; part of his host have crossed the flood, and part are crossing now." The community consists equally of the Church Militant, still fighting the good fight, and the Church Triumphant, "our friends above who have obtained the prize", "for all the servants of our King in earth and heaven are one."

I agree that we are a community. I regret that we are an organization. Mission is engagement with the world, not a badge of affiliation.Very well put, spot, and of course, Methodism is in some ways as hierarchical as Catholicism, and Methodist ministers take vows of obedience to their bishops just as Catholic priests do.

Seems to me the alternative would be a DISorganized community, and there are certainly plenty of examples of that in the more 'fundamentalist' outer regions of Protestantism, where there is no hieracrchy or accountability whatever and the most outrageous nonsense is claimed to be 'Gods' word'. But I will leave further discussion of them to another thread.

Bronwen · Post by **Bronwen** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:18 pm

gmc wrote: A protestant is by definition someone who protests against the corruption and venality of the Roman Catholic church and most especially the power of the pope in Rome. If you have an organised religon that insists they are the only true church and everyone should worship as they do then any dialogue is not going to go far. gmc, it sounds to me like YOU are in the right Church for YOU, and God knows, I'm not trying to convert you.

Some of the rest of us feel that the traditionalism, including the pomp and cermony, of Anglicanism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Roman Catholicism is one of the most attractive aspects of our religion and that it gives great glory and honor to the Lord.

One thing I hope we can agree on is that we are fortunate to live in countries where freedom of worship is guaranteed. So much of the world, particularly the Islamic countries, have no such freedom.

Post by **spot** » Sun Mar 19, 2006 12:19 pm

Bronwen wrote: Methodism is in some ways as hierarchical as Catholicism, and Methodist ministers take vows of obedience to their bishops just as Catholic priests do.It depends on the setting, Bronwen. John Wesley refused during his lifetime to ordain ministers in the UK, maintaining that Methodism was a Society within the Church of England and that he had no authority to ordain. When he sent his first preacher to America, Francis Asbury, Wesley named him first Bishop of the American Methodist church so that ordination would be possible abroad and Methodism had a means to grow on the continent. After his death, the preaching contingent in the UK decided to declare ordination for the circuit riders, but they granted authority for recognition to the national annual Conference rather than setting up a heirarchy that involved Bishops. UK Methodism consequently has none. The vocation of Methodist Minister is still tested and recognised by Conference, while elsewhere in the world Methodism has Bishops. It's a historical artifact, not a dogmatic distinction.