Are too many churches caught up in being a donimination and not about following God's message?

[keithnurse]

I believe another point is that we believe the Scripture IS THE STANDARD against which all points of doctrinal consideration is measured/weighed...

The church of christ I attend,Have no such book ,and I still had never heard of solo till you said it.

Not "solo". It's Sola Scriptura, which is Latin for Scripture Alone. Martin Luther, when he started the Protestant Reformation taught the "Three Solas of the Reformation: Sola Gratia ((Only by Grace) Sola Fide (only through faith) and Sola Scripture (only in the scriptures). Lutherans, Baptists, Pentecostals and many other denomination agree that the Bible alone is the ultimate standard for doctrine. The Churches of Christ teach doctrines based on the Bible that are different from the doctrines of the Baptist, Lutherans, etc. That is what makes the Churches of Christ a denomination. Or if an individual congregation is not affiliated with a larger organization then that congregation is its own denomination.

 

[keithnurse]

The church of christ I attend,Have no such book ,and I still had never heard of solo till you said it.

Are you going to say with a straight face that the people at your Church of Christ never use a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance? or commentaries to help them understand the Bible better? If they do then they DO use other books to help them understand the bible. You may say "yeah, but those other books only help to understand the bible. The Bible is our only basis for doctrine". that is EXACTLY the same thing Lutherans, Baptists, Pentecostals, Nazarenes, and other denominations say, so the Churches of Christ are NO different than other denominations on that issue.

 

[Katzpur]

Are you going to say with a straight face that the people at your Church of Christ never use a Strongs Exhaustive Concordance? or commentaries to help them understand the Bible better? If they do then they DO use other books to help them understand the bible. You may say "yeah, but those other books only help to understand the bible. The Bible is our only basis for doctrine". that is EXACTLY the same thing Lutherans, Baptists, Pentecostals, Nazarenes, and other denominations say, so the Churches of Christ are NO different than other denominations on that issue.

Good point. There is really no such thing as sola scriptura. Oh, the concept is real enough, but in practice, it simply doesn't exist, even among those who are the most insistent that that's what they believe.

 

[sojourner]

Good point. There is really no such thing as sola scriptura. Oh, the concept is real enough, but in practice, it simply doesn't exist, even among those who are the most insistent that that's what they believe.

My own denomination (DOC) is part of the Stone/Campbell Movement, same as the Churches of Christ. Obviously, we're decidedly more liberal. That's neither here nor there. Churches of Christ tend not to embrace modern Biblical criticism. That's OK. But they need to realize that Alexander Campbell, himself, was firmly in the literary criticism camp, and often argued with the southern leaders (which eventually became the Churches of Christ) over that very issue in The Millenial Harbinger.

 

[sojourner]

The Churches of Christ are no different than Roman Catholics and Orthodox and Jehovahs Witnesses and Mormons in the sense that they all make the self serving claim that they are not "just another denomination" but are the true church that follows the New Testament and there be no more divisions if only everyone would just join them. But all these above listed groups act like denominations, look like denominations. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

With the exception that there is no defining doctrine, and there is no denominational polity. Congregations are completely autonomous. They all just happen to be like-minded.

 

[sojourner]

I have never heard of sola scriptura,but I do know that most,I know of several that use nothing other than the bible. Dont try to tell me other wise I have been there.

Yes they do. I have several in my library. They do use commentaries and study guides, and they have printed worship guide booklets, too. And they do use the OT, as well as the NT. Don't try to tell me otherwise, I'm a member of the Stone/Campbell Movement, too.:cover:

 

[Katzpur]

The Churches of Christ are no different than Roman Catholics and Orthodox and Jehovahs Witnesses and Mormons in the sense that they all make the self serving claim that they are not "just another denomination" but are the true church that follows the New Testament and there be no more divisions if only everyone would just join them. But all these above listed groups act like denominations, look like denominations. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

I've never heard a Latter-day Saint claim that our Church is not a "denomination" of Christianity. On the other hand, I really don't see why people are so offended by the idea that certain denominations claim to be "the true church." Why would anyone want to be affiliated with a denomination that claimed that it was "more or less true, somewhat accurate, as good as the next"? I don't find the Catholic claim that theirs is the "true church" anywhere near as offensive as I find the Protestant claim that it doesn't really matter what church you belong to or what you believe because it's all the same to God. Of course it suddenly seems to matter very much to God when they find out you're a Catholic or Orthodox Christian or, heaven forbid, a Mormon. They see God as very tolerant, as long as you fit into some pretty narrow parameters.

 

[sojourner]

I've never heard a Latter-day Saint claim that our Church is not a "denomination" of Christianity. On the other hand, I really don't see why people are so offended by the idea that certain denominations claim to be "the true church." Why would anyone want to be affiliated with a denomination that claimed that it was "more or less true, somewhat accurate, as good as the next"? I don't find the Catholic claim that theirs is the "true church" anywhere near as offensive as I find the Protestant claim that it doesn't really matter what church you belong to or what you believe because it's all the same to God. Of course it suddenly seems to matter very much to God when they find out you're a Catholic or Orthodox Christian or, heaven forbid, a Mormon. They see God as very tolerant, as long as you fit into some pretty narrow parameters.

Heeeyyyy! Don't lump me in with them!

 

[Katzpur]

Heeeyyyy! Don't lump me in with them!

Sojourner, Christine, Dawny, Dallas and Charity are exempt from this gross generalization, as is anybody else who reminds me that they don't fit into that mold.

 

[keithnurse]

I've never heard a Latter-day Saint claim that our Church is not a "denomination" of Christianity. On the other hand, I really don't see why people are so offended by the idea that certain denominations claim to be "the true church." Why would anyone want to be affiliated with a denomination that claimed that it was "more or less true, somewhat accurate, as good as the next"? I don't find the Catholic claim that theirs is the "true church" anywhere near as offensive as I find the Protestant claim that it doesn't really matter what church you belong to or what you believe because it's all the same to God. Of course it suddenly seems to matter very much to God when they find out you're a Catholic or Orthodox Christian or, heaven forbid, a Mormon. They see God as very tolerant, as long as you fit into some pretty narrow parameters.

I'm not offended by groups claiming to be the "one true church". I just think they are wrong. It seems to me that all religions and all churches teach some truth mixed in with a lot of BS. Religions that emphasize this world and this life and don't claim absolute knowledge about gods and goddesses and the afterlife make more sense to me.

 

[sojourner]

Sojourner, Christine, Dawny, Dallas and Charity are exempt from this gross generalization, as is anybody else who reminds me that they don't fit into that mold.

Welcome to the "Just Exempt Society of Unbiased Seekers," or, J.E.S.U.S.
:camp:

"Kum bah yah, my Lord..."
:guitar1:

 

[smitten508]

While I don't like referring to the Catholic Church as a denomination, I suppose for this thread its relevant. Its my belief that while all denominations may mean well, there are certain ways in which worship and celebrating Christ should occur. That being said, ill tell you that I'm Roman Catholic, so the Holy Spirit has undoubtedly led me here. As the historical church, I would only suggest looking to 'the books' to show which Church carries on the tradition of original Christian worship.lol.

 

[sojourner]

While I don't like referring to the Catholic Church as a denomination, I suppose for this thread its relevant. Its my belief that while all denominations may mean well, there are certain ways in which worship and celebrating Christ should occur. That being said, ill tell you that I'm Roman Catholic, so the Holy Spirit has undoubtedly led me here. As the historical church, I would only suggest looking to 'the books' to show which Church carries on the tradition of original Christian worship.lol.

Western Catholic worship harks early, but not "original."

 

[smitten508]

Western Catholic worship harks early, but not "original."

Do you know of an earlier one??? Because eastern orthodox was the first schism at like what 500 years in? Please please PLEASE don't say Church of Christ!Lol

 

[blackout]

Do you know of an earlier one??? Because eastern orthodox was the first schism at like what 500 years in? Please please PLEASE don't say Church of Christ!Lol

2 gathered.

beyond that, gathering in homes.

 

[Katzpur]

Do you know of an earlier one??? Because eastern orthodox was the first schism at like what 500 years in? Please please PLEASE don't say Church of Christ!Lol

The Church of Christ sounds like a pretty reasonable answer to me. Jesus Christ said He was going to build His Church, and He did. I don't know that it went by that name, but it was quite a few years before there was a Roman Catholic Church, and those of us who are not Catholic are not convinced that the Church known as the Catholic Church today is the same Church Jesus Christ established. The post-apostolic Church was incredibly splintered. There were dozens of different "denominations," if you will, by as early as the end of the first century. While it is true that one of them became dominent and took on the designation of "catholic," that in and of itself does not mean that it was the "original" Church. (The "original" one believed in "Mom," by the way. )

 

[sojourner]

Do you know of an earlier one??? Because eastern orthodox was the first schism at like what 500 years in? Please please PLEASE don't say Church of Christ!Lol

Yeah. Not even Rome can corroborate an unbroken succession of bishops back to Peter. (And I have a lot of respect for the Apostolic Succession). What about the early communities that were pre-gospel? They certainly weren't "catholic." Uniformity didn't really come along until Constantine. The Church has always been a multi-track animal.

 

[sojourner]

The Church of Christ sounds like a pretty reasonable answer to me. Jesus Christ said He was going to build His Church, and He did. I don't know that it went by that name, but it was quite a few years before there was a Roman Catholic Church, and those of us who are not Catholic are not convinced that the Church known as the Catholic Church today is the same Church Jesus Christ established. The post-apostolic Church was incredibly splintered. There were dozens of different "denominations," if you will, by as early as the end of the first century. While it is true that one of them became dominent and took on the designation of "catholic," that in and of itself does not mean that it was the "original" Church. (The "original" one believed in "Mom," by the way.

)

The Church of Christ was begun in the early 1800's as an arm of the Stone/Campbell Movement. Although they may claim to be "original," they are not, for reasons I will not go into here.

The Church is the Church is the Church, whether it's Catholic, or Pentecostal, or Church of the Tighty-Whitey's. Don't kid yourself. The Church has always been splintered. Even the "apostolic" Church was splintered. From the very beginning. The only uniformity that has ever been achieved was achieved by Constantine, and even that was contested.

 

[keithnurse]

The Church of Christ was begun in the early 1800's as an arm of the Stone/Campbell Movement. Although they may claim to be "original," they are not, for reasons I will not go into here.

The Church is the Church is the Church, whether it's Catholic, or Pentecostal, or Church of the Tighty-Whitey's. Don't kid yourself. The Church has always been splintered. Even the "apostolic" Church was splintered. From the very beginning. The only uniformity that has ever been achieved was achieved by Constantine, and even that was contested.

Very well said. Every time people start a church or group and claim they are going "beyond" denominationalism and getting back to what they determine to be "original" christianity what they always end up doing is setting up yet another denomination. That is exactly what happened with the Stone/Campbellite movement which became the Disiciples of Christ and Church of Christ denominations.

 

[blackout]

2 gathered.

beyond that, gathering in homes.

Just wondering why no response.....
(was my comment that stupid?)