working4christ2

SteveVH · #**136** Jan 29, '13, 5:49 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

There are different worship styles even within the Catholic Church.

Yes. The Catholic Church is truly the "universal" Church. It covers the entire world and so envelopes many nations and cultures. There are different styles and even some variation in liturgy between the different rites. But it is the same Mass and there is no difference there. Only the rubrics change, not the substance of the liturgy. This is very unlike the diiferences between Protestant denominations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

There are different 'denominations' even.

No. There are not different denominations within Catholicism. To "denominate" literally means to "remove one's name". You remove your name when you reject the doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church, which is not a denomination. It is the Church from which the rest removed their names (denominated).

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

Different rites within.

Yes. All of them quite beautiful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

There are definitely different opinions in the Catholic Church, just like the protestants.

Individual opinions have no affect whatsoever upon the doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church, very unlike Protestants. Catholics are obligated to believe all that the Church teaches and holds to be true. Or they are free to go start another Protestant "church".

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

Look at the forums and you will read the different views. I can read something on here about purgatory and then go to work the next day and ask my catholic co-worker a question and the answer will be quite different.

No one has control over the answers one may receive from an individual Catholic. That is why the Church publishes things like the Catechism of the Catholic Church. There should be no mystery whatsoever in what the Church believes and teaches and it is available for any and all to read if they are really interested.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

God did create diversity and we can be thankful for that, but man has a tendency to ruin what God made good.

Yes, God created diversity but he did not create chaos.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

I just look to the heavens and say 'Maranatha'!

Some days so do I.

But don't you think that it is important now, in this life, to find the truth? Christ started a Church and promised to remain with that Church until the end of time. That we know very plainly from Scripture. That means that this Church must be alive and well today. The fact that Christ started a Church makes it all important that we find that Church and remove ourselves from the world of individual conflicting opinions. Paul said that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. We can have it, right here, right now.

ephesians2 · #**137** Jan 30, '13, 8:03 am

[quote=SteveVH;10298079]Yes. The Catholic Church is truly the "universal" Church. It covers the entire world and so envelopes many nations and cultures. There are different styles and even some variation in liturgy between the different rites. But it is the same Mass and there is no difference there. Only the rubrics change, not the substance of the liturgy. This is very unlike the diiferences between Protestant denominations.

This is true, but every protestant denomination (unless they are apostate or a cult, etc...) is going to ultimately hold Christ as their head. Which is why a protestant considers and believes they are part of the One Body of Christ, aside fron the chaotic protestant "churches" which are not part of the body.

Quote:

No. There are not different denominations within Catholicism. To "denominate" literally means to "remove one's name". You remove your name when you reject the doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church, which is not a denomination. It is the Church from which the rest removed their names (denominated).

Excuse my wording. I understand the meaning of 'denomination' and that their are differences in how peoplpe understand the word. I probaby should not have used it in this context, but I meant to imply was that their are differences in the culture, and even worship styles, etc. (I dont know how you feel about the different types of Catholic churches. The different names and those who oppose the pope or his teachings. It can be confusing sometimes)

Quote:

Individual opinions have no affect whatsoever upon the doctrines and teachings of the Catholic Church, very unlike Protestants. Catholics are obligated to believe all that the Church teaches and holds to be true. Or they are free to go start another Protestant "church".

Your first sentence is true b/c the pope/magisterium is seen as the head, correct? Christ is the head of His church and a protestant church is required to use the Word of God as the guide book and the inquiry of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as their tool to carry out the gospel. They are called to be faithful to that word. Once again this is where sinful, finite minds come into play.

Quote:

No one has control over the answers one may receive from an individual Catholic. That is why the Church publishes things like the Catechism of the Catholic Church. There should be no mystery whatsoever in what the Church believes and teaches and it is available for any and all to read if they are really interested.

This is understood by me. It's just unfortunate my co-workers don't care enough to understand their religion.

Quote:

Yes, God created diversity but he did not create chaos.

I agree. But once again, sinful, finite, man ruins the good. What the non-denom church does down the street will have to be accounted for when Christ comes to take His own. Churches that say they are part of the Body and really are not will be judged. I am on this earth to glorify Him until that day comes and to do it faithfully according to what God says. I find His own words to be very helpful in that. I attend a church that is faithful to the word of God. I am not on this thread to defend all "protestant" churches because frankly there are plenty of "protestant" churches that are not part of the body of Christ. I cannot save anyone, so I first and foremost I am responsible for my own beliefs.

Quote:

Some days so do I.

I do all days.

That does not mean that I am sitting on my backside, looking to the heavens and waiting. I am called to spread the gospel, to spread His love and charity, to tell others that Christ is the ONLY way, the truth and the life and you don't get to be with Him unless you believe that. He is our Redeemer, Savior and Friend. God is not a God of chaos. Those who are part of the body of true believers recognize that.

Quote:

But don't you think that it is important now, in this life, to find the truth? Christ started a Church and promised to remain with that Church until the end of time. That we know very plainly from Scripture. That means that this Church must be alive and well today. The fact that Christ started a Church makes it all important that we find that Church and remove ourselves from the world of individual conflicting opinions. Paul said that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. We can have it, right here, right now.

I agree.

Now, I suppose to answer the question 'does it bother me'. I would say yes, of course. Sin bothers me. I started with it is 'trivial' to me because the question is trivial to me personally. Maybe not others. Whether you are Catholic, EO, Pentecostal, Baptist, or any other religion, there is sin. Man falls prey to it. Every man. Thanks for your time SteveVH.

johnnyjones · #**138** Jan 30, '13, 12:29 pm

[quote=ephesians2;10299901]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveVH

Yes. The Catholic Church is truly the "universal" Church. It covers the entire world and so envelopes many nations and cultures. There are different styles and even some variation in liturgy between the different rites. But it is the same Mass and there is no difference there. Only the rubrics change, not the substance of the liturgy. This is very unlike the diiferences between Protestant denominations.

This is true, but every protestant denomination (unless they are apostate or a cult, etc...) is going to ultimately hold Christ as their head. Which is why a protestant considers and believes they are part of the One Body of Christ, aside fron the chaotic protestant "churches" which are not part of the body.

Excuse my wording. I understand the meaning of 'denomination' and that their are differences in how peoplpe understand the word. I probaby should not have used it in this context, but I meant to imply was that their are differences in the culture, and even worship styles, etc. (I dont know how you feel about the different types of Catholic churches. The different names and those who oppose the pope or his teachings. It can be confusing sometimes)

Your first sentence is true b/c the pope/magisterium is seen as the head, correct? Christ is the head of His church and a protestant church is required to use the Word of God as the guide book and the inquiry of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as their tool to carry out the gospel. They are called to be faithful to that word. Once again this is where sinful, finite minds come into play.

This is understood by me. It's just unfortunate my co-workers don't care enough to understand their religion.

I agree. But once again, sinful, finite, man ruins the good. What the non-denom church does down the street will have to be accounted for when Christ comes to take His own. Churches that say they are part of the Body and really are not will be judged. I am on this earth to glorify Him until that day comes and to do it faithfully according to what God says. I find His own words to be very helpful in that. I attend a church that is faithful to the word of God. I am not on this thread to defend all "protestant" churches because frankly there are plenty of "protestant" churches that are not part of the body of Christ. I cannot save anyone, so I first and foremost I am responsible for my own beliefs.

I do all days.

That does not mean that I am sitting on my backside, looking to the heavens and waiting. I am called to spread the gospel, to spread His love and charity, to tell others that Christ is the ONLY way, the truth and the life and you don't get to be with Him unless you believe that. He is our Redeemer, Savior and Friend. God is not a God of chaos. Those who are part of the body of true believers recognize that.

I agree.

Now, I suppose to answer the question 'does it bother me'. I would say yes, of course. Sin bothers me. I started with it is 'trivial' to me because the question is trivial to me personally. Maybe not others. Whether you are Catholic, EO, Pentecostal, Baptist, or any other religion, there is sin. Man falls prey to it. Every man. Thanks for your time SteveVH.

I don't understand what you mean. Man falls prey to sin, yes of course. All denominations are sin? But you don't belong to any according to your "religion".

To help you. The question means, if you are Protestant, you belong to a body of people that are also Protestants but believe differently than your own denomination. If there were multiple Catholic beliefs , one might ask if that is a conflict. A question such as this could not be trivial.

SteveVH · #**139** Jan 30, '13, 6:12 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1roman

today's roman catholic church is not the same as the 1st century church Jesus and the apostiles layed the ground work.. one example is the inclusion of Man-Made cerymonies and rituals

So where is the the Church of the first century, the one that Jesus founded and for which the Apostles laid the ground work? Did it just disappear? Christ said he would remain with it until the end of time. So where is it and what is its name?

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1roman

Christianity as we know it today is a break-off from Catholicism with a good deal of false and pagan teaching.

Most of which was put in place through the mandate of Constantine.

This is what Constantine would demand,with the cooperation of the Church with its bishop's, elders & teachers.

All of which were appointed by him. Any one, especially the Jews. In order to become
what is called a Christian, he must adhere to Constantine’s Creed -

- 325 CE---Constantine's Creed

“I renounce all customs, rites, legalisms,

unleavened breads and sacrifices of lambs of the Hebrews,

and all the other feasts of the Hebrews, sacrifices, prayers, aspirations, purifications, sanctifications, and propitiations, and fasts and new moons,

and Sabbaths, and superstitions, and hymns and chants, and observances and synagogues.

absolutely everything Jewish, every Law, rite and custom

and if afterwards I shall wish to deny and return to Jewish superstition, or shall be found eating with Jews, or feasting with them, or secretly conversing and condemning the

Christian religion instead of openly confuting them and condemning their vain faith, then let the trembling of Cain and the leprosy of Gehazi cleave to me, as well as the legal punishments to which I acknowledge myself liable.

And may I be an anathema in the world to come, and may my soul be set down

with Satan and the devils.”

(Stefano Assemani, Acta Sanctorium Martyrum Orientalium at Occidentalium, Vol. 1, Rome
1748, page 105)

Furthermore, any follower of the “Jewish Messiah” (Yahushua HaMashiach)

who wished to join this “holy community” was compelled to adopt a different set of rules and customs.

Subsequently special creeds were drafted, to which the Christian would have to swear such as:

“I accept all customs, rites, legalism, and feasts of the Romans, sacrifices.

Prayers, purifications with water, sanctifications by Pontificus Maxmus (high priests of Rome), propitiations, and feasts, and the New Sabbath “So! dei” (day of the Sun, ), all new chants and observances, and all the
foods and drinks of the Romans.

In other words, I absolutely accept everything Roman,catholic every new law, rite and custom, of Rome, and the New Roman Religion.”

Additionally, in approximately 365 AD, the Council of Laodicea wrote, in one of their canons:

Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day.

Rather,
honoring the Lord’s Day. But if any shall be found to be Judaizers,

let them be anathema (against) from Christ”.

Note: Protestants are included as they still observe the holidays and Sabbath of Rome,

as in “are you going to church this coming Lord’s day”.

Do you have a question?

SteveVH · #**140** Jan 30, '13, 6:37 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

This is true, but every protestant denomination (unless they are apostate or a cult, etc...) is going to ultimately hold Christ as their head. Which is why a protestant considers and believes they are part of the One Body of Christ, aside fron the chaotic protestant "churches" which are not part of the body.

Who gets to decide who the "chaotic" protestant "churches" are?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

I dont know how you feel about the different types of Catholic churches. The different names and those who oppose the pope or his teachings. It can be confusing sometimes

I love the different rites. There are Catholic Churches who practice the eastern rites. Those who are not in communion with the Pope are grouped under the heading "Eastern Orthodox" which is made up of a number of nationalistic Churches (Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, etc.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

Your first sentence is true b/c the pope/magisterium is seen as the head, correct?

Christ is the head of the Church. It is his Church, after all. He is the founder. The pope is the vicar of Christ; his prime minister, so to speak.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

Christ is the head of His church and a protestant church is required to use the Word of God as the guide book and the inquiry of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as their tool to carry out the gospel. They are called to be faithful to that word. Once again this is where sinful, finite minds come into play.

And this is a big difference. The Catholic Church is not a Church of the Bible, but rather of the Apostles. The Catholic Church existed some 400 years before it canonized the Bible, which is a sacred book of the Catholic Church. The Bible did not give us the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church gave us the Bible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

This is understood by me. It's just unfortunate my co-workers don't care enough to understand their religion.

Amen!

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

[color="darkgreen"]I attend a church that is faithful to the word of God.

How do you know that? Does your faith community follow the teachings of the Apostles? Do you celebrate Mass? They did. Do you believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist? They did. How do you know that the faith community you have chosen is faithful to the word of God? Who would be the final authority in determining just who is following the word of God and who is not?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephesians2

I do all days.

That does not mean that I am sitting on my backside, looking to the heavens and waiting. I am called to spread the gospel, to spread His love and charity, to tell others that Christ is the ONLY way, the truth and the life and you don't get to be with Him unless you believe that. He is our Redeemer, Savior and Friend. God is not a God of chaos. Those who are part of the body of true believers recognize that.

jrtrent · #**141** Jan 31, '13, 7:31 am

Having read the entire thread, I can't find positions I agree with better than these two from the first page:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltwin

I don't have a problem with it. There are groups that I think are teaching false doctrines and people need to stay away from. But many have good teaching (even if I don't agree with all their fine points in doctrine). You just have to be watchful that you stay away from the theologically faulty groups.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbideWithMe

I'd say the same thing thing. To be honest, it's never bothered me. What does bother me is when churches can't get along charitably. So, to me, when different churches do interact charitably in spite of differences, it's more encouraging to me to see that than if everyone was in the same visible church, officially believing the exact same thing about every point of doctrine. That charity, respect and cooperation amidst differences speaks of God at work to me.

While there are very real disagreements between Protestant groups (such as the mode, subjects, and meaning of baptism and the Lord's Supper; Calvinism vs. Arminianism; and forms of church government), there is also substantial agreement on what Boettner called the essentials of the faith: that the Bible is the word of God and our authoritative guide in church affairs; the deity of Christ; His sacrificial death on the cross for the salvation of those who place their faith in Him; that Christ is the Head of the Church; the importance of baptism and the Lord's Supper; the personal and visible return of Christ; the resurrection of the body and future judgement; of heaven and hell; of moral character and spiritual life. Charles Hodge had given three reasons why the various Protestant churches remain one: they are subject to the same Lord and animated by the same Spirit; they recognize each other as Christian churches; they are subject to a common tribunal (at first the apostles, now the Bible).

Boettner pointed out the Protestant churches are also united by what they reject, saying, "Protestants thus acknowledge fellow Protestants in other denominations as true Christians. And they are united in rejecting what they believe to be the errors of the Roman Church, such as the priesthood, mass, confession, purgatory, worship of the Virgin Mary, etc." After all, Protestantism exists because it was protesting something, and that something was the Catholic Church.

That's not to say that all divisions are good. Boettner also acknowledges that "many of the divisions that have occurred in the Christian church have been unnecessary and that some have been detrimental. Some have arisen because of evil motives on the part of certain groups, or because of the personal ambitions of strong willed leaders." (Posters on this forum have also mentioned churches splitting over issues such as women's ordination and acceptance of homosexual practice.) On the other hand, "many others have arisen because of natural circumstances, such as those of race, language, nationality, geography, or honest difference of opinion . . . The spiritual unity that characterizes evangelical Protestants is more important than the organizational diversity that places them in different denominations."

SteveVH · #**142** Jan 31, '13, 3:38 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

While there are very real disagreements between Protestant groups (such as the mode, subjects, and meaning of baptism and the Lord's Supper; Calvinism vs. Arminianism; and forms of church government), there is also substantial agreement on what Boettner called the essentials of the faith: that the Bible is the word of God and our authoritative guide in church affairs;

I would agree that the great majority of Protestant faith traditions fall into this error (the authoritative guide part).

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

that Christ is the Head of the Church;

I would agree, but what "Church" do you believe Boettner was speaking of? Some invisible "Church" which is divided thousands upon thousand of times?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

the importance of baptism and the Lord's Supper;

I have no idea what this means. Baptism means something different to an Anglican or a Lutheran than it does to a Baptist or your average "Bible believing church". When it comes to the Eucharist, the "Lord's Supper", there are large voids between beliefs. So what is the meaning of "importance".

To the Catholic Church, the Ecuharist is so important that we would not have a Church without it. It is the source and summit of our fiath. How important is it to an Anglican? A Lutheran? A Methodist? A Prebyterian? A Pentecostal? A Baptist. A Fundamentalist? A Quaker, A non-denominational? We would be here for the next five years discussing degrees of importance of the "Lords Supper" in every Protestant denomination. Most believe it is absolutely unimportant in the scheme of salvation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

Charles Hodge had given three reasons why the various Protestant churches remain one: they are subject to the same Lord and animated by the same Spirit;

Even unbelievers are subject to the same Lord and animated by the same Spirit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

they recognize each other as Christian churches;

Okay. And that means what? Do they recognize each others beliefs? Obviously no or they would not be divided.

SteveVH · #**143** Jan 31, '13, 3:42 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

they are subject to a common tribunal (at first the apostles, now the Bible).

They follow the precepts of their various organizations, in some cases just one preacher, or a small committee. They interpret the Bible differently than the next so it is of no use as any kind of authority. And besides, the Bible is not a tribunal. A tribunal is made up of men (and/or women) who make decisions based upon an interpretation of evidence. The Bible cannot interpret itself. If it could we would have no Protestant divisions. Boettner's attempt to anthropomorphize the Bible into some living authority is ludicrous. And this is how the Protestant denominations are "one"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

Boettner pointed out the Protestant churches are also united by what they reject, saying, "Protestants thus acknowledge fellow Protestants in other denominations as true Christians. And they are united in rejecting what they believe to be the errors of the Roman Church, such as the priesthood, mass, confession, purgatory, worship of the Virgin Mary, etc."

The true Christians. We finally know who they are. Those who can pretty much believe anything they want so long as it is not anything Catholic (oh, excpet the Bible, they somehow got that right). He even throws in the lie that we worship Mary. Why would you think that anything that Lorraine Boettner has to say would hold any credibility on this forum? He is truly a rabid anti-Catholic, worse than Jack Chick because people actually believe him. Case in point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

That's not to say that all divisions are good.

Why would any division be good? Aren't we called to be "one"? Truly one, with the same beliefs and everything?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

The spiritual unity that characterizes evangelical Protestants is more important than the organizational diversity that places them in different denominations."

Interesting. He is speaking only of "evangelical Protestants" as far as having spiritual unity. Sorry for the rest of you. I don't know, do all Protestants consider themselves to be "evangelical protestants"? And "organizational diversity" is the culprit causing all the divisions. Sounds like all it would take to bring unity to Protestantism is a good organizational seminar.

Attejohannes · #**144** Jan 31, '13, 4:18 pm

I have said this before, but this multitude of protestant groups, which I also noticed when I stayed in the USA in 1980'ies, is a ver American thing. In Europe most protestants belong to the established Anglican, Lutheran or Reformed churches. This has also made it possible to have doctrinal and ecumenical dialogue between Catholic and Orthodox Churches ( though I am rather pessimistic, whether the results will be anything more than changing the word "anathema" to " limited but not perfect communion with the Church")

SteveVH · #**145** Jan 31, '13, 4:23 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Attejohannes

I have said this before, but this multitude of protestant groups, which I also noticed when I stayed in the USA in 1980'ies, is a ver American thing. In Europe most protestants belong to the established Anglican, Lutheran or Reformed churches. This has also made it possible to have doctrinal and ecumenical dialogue between Catholic and Orthodox Churches ( though I am rather pessimistic, whether the results will be anything more than changing the word "anathema" to " limited but not perfect communion with the Church")

I think you're correct. Its that good old American spirit of "individualism". "No one's going to tell me what to believe. I'll start my own church."

jrtrent · #**146** Jan 31, '13, 6:29 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveVH

Why would you think that anything that Lorraine Boettner has to say would hold any credibility on this forum? He is truly a rabid anti-Catholic, worse than Jack Chick because people actually believe him. Case in point.

You've done a dandy job of shredding my post apart with your Catholic convictions; however, I was simply responding to the OP's question about whether I, as a Protestant, am bothered by the gazillion denominations, and for the most part, I'm not, and for the reasons given.

As to Loraine Boettner's credibility here, I wouldn't expect him to have any amongst Catholics, but this is, after all, the non-Catholic Religions forum, and he was one of the most influential of the Reformed Protestant writers of the 20th century.

SteveVH · #**147** Jan 31, '13, 8:43 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrtrent

You've done a dandy job of shredding my post apart with your Catholic convictions; however, I was simply responding to the OP's question about whether I, as a Protestant, am bothered by the gazillion denominations, and for the most part, I'm not, and for the reasons given.

As to Loraine Boettner's credibility here, I wouldn't expect him to have any amongst Catholics, but this is, after all, the non-Catholic Religions forum, and he was one of the most influential of the Reformed Protestant writers of the 20th century.

What I was really doing was shredding Lorraine Boettner's notions. I mean really. Catholics worship Mary? That gives you an idea of this guys perspective and it doesn't stop with that issue. I'm sorry, but that kind of stuff cannot go unanswered. I mean no disrespect to you.

jrtrent · #**148** Feb 1, '13, 7:41 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveVH

What I was really doing was shredding Lorraine Boettner's notions. I mean really. Catholics worship Mary? That gives you an idea of this guys perspective and it doesn't stop with that issue. I'm sorry, but that kind of stuff cannot go unanswered.

I can appreciate that position, and understand how the use of the word "worship" can be seen as an offensive polemical device. The use of the word worship can imply putting a creature, Mary, on a par with God, a heresy I know Catholics do not commit and would find as or more repugnant than any Protestant would. It is, however, the word I find most often used by Protestant writers, and if I'm to quote accurately, I have to include it. At any rate, I think it's fair to say that most Protestants find the position and qualities ascribed by Catholics to Mary to go beyond what they find Biblical, and to be a shared reason for their "protest" against Catholicism.

Quote:

I mean no disrespect to you.

Thank you for that, and I'll add that I didn't find your response offensive or disrespectful, just surprising. The OP asked how Protestants feel about the multitude of denominations that exist, and I agreed with Itwin and AbideWithMe, adding some thoughts about the type of unity many Protestants believe they have with one another despite organizational separation and some significant doctrinal differences. I know that Catholics see unity and being one in a very different way, but I thought I was just sharing a Protestant perspective, not entering into debate.

Quote:

Interesting. He is speaking only of "evangelical Protestants" as far as having spiritual unity. Sorry for the rest of you. I don't know, do all Protestants consider themselves to be "evangelical protestants"?

Interesting question. As Boettner used it, I believe "evangelical Protestant" referred to the movement in the first several decades of the 20th century that reacted against what became known as modernism or liberal Protestantism:

Twentieth-century evangelicalism has been primarily shaped by theological battles that occurred in the first three decades of the century, most notably by what is called the fundamentalist-modernist controversy. This controversy was fought largely in Presbyterian and Baptist denominations over what many conservative Protestants perceived as a dilution and modification of classical doctrines of the Christian faith. Evangelicals felt that liberal Protestants, or “modernists,” were altering core doctrines of the faith in order to accommodate the findings of modern science, especially Darwinian evolution. Evangelicals found modernists to be increasingly untrustworthy in their theological orientation as they reinterpreted the faith in accordance with the new “higher criticism” of scripture and the naturalism of the new science. http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.co...oc=b&type=ctbf

Boettner was a member of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, which was started by J. Gresham Machen and others after their attempts to turn back modernistic theology within the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America and preserve adherence to the historic Westminster Standards and Calvinistic theology proved unsuccesful. Here's a little idea of what they had been fighting against:

The doctrinal decadence of the Presbyterian Church in the USA came to a head in 1924, when some twelve hundred leaders in that denomination affixed their names to the Auburn Affirmation. That infamous document denounced the infallibility of Holy Scripture as a "harmful" doctrine. It also stated as the conviction of the signers that it was unnecessary for a minister in the church to believe in the virgin birth of Christ, his bodily resurrection, or the miracles of the Bible generally. The precious doctrine that Christ's death on the cross was a sacrifice by which he expiated sin and satisfied divine justice was further decried as but one of many theories of the atonement and nonessential to the faith. http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/Kuiper.html

"Fundamentalism" has a somewhat pejorative connotation today, but originally it was simply a fight against liberalism, and defended such concepts as the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture, the deity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth of Christ, the substitutionary, atoning work of Christ on the cross, and the physical resurrection and the personal bodily return of Christ to the earth. These "first generation fundamentalists included Presbyterians, Baptists, Reformers, Reformed Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, Congregationalists, and Wesleyan Holiness brothers." (http://thriceholy.net/fundamentals.html) A diverse group, but united in some important core beliefs.

working4christ2

Sunday, February 24, 2013

Re: Are Protestants bothered by the gazillion denominations?

No comments:

Post a Comment