Would you stay in a church if...

[Esphes45]

you did not believe 100% of what is being taught is truth?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Esphes45

you did not believe 100% of what is being taught is truth?

Maybe, I've come to realize that absolute truth is not as important as I once thought and that's mostly because there's truth to be found in most anything.

[Esphes45]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Maybe, I've come to realize that absolute truth is not as important as I once thought and that's mostly because there's truth to be found in most anything.

So you could go to a church and be perfectly fine with only saying AMEN 80% of the time?

If so, that's interesting.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Esphes45

So you could go to a church and be perfectly fine with only saying AMEN 80% of the time?

If so, that's interesting.

Yes. I'd even go as far to say that as long as I could say Amen 1% of the time I'd be okay with it.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Esphes45

So you could go to a church and be perfectly fine with only saying AMEN 80% of the time?

If so, that's interesting.

I don't say "Amen" or anything else during the preaching..Im trying to listen and I wish others would do the same

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I don't say "Amen" or anything else during the preaching..Im trying to listen and I wish others would do the same

I hear you bro

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Esphes45

So you could go to a church and be perfectly fine with only saying AMEN 80% of the time?

If so, that's interesting.

I'm okay with saying it only 50% of the time.

[Esaias]

We are instructed to maintain the unity of the Spirit until we come to the unity of the faith. Therefore there are some things which come over a pulpit that can be put on the back burner so to say.

Also, unless one claims to have perfect knowledge of all things one has to admit one is still learning, and therefore a disagreement may be caused by one's own error rather than the church's.

Can two walk together except they be agreed? Yes, in fact, but only so far as they are in agreement.

On a practical basis, I would say fundamental doctrines are essential, such as the unity of God, the Lordship of Christ, repentance and faith, baptism, the Holy Ghost, the reality of healing, resurrection and eternal judgment. Other issues like the structure, purpose, and function of the church, the proper form and substance of the liturgy (the work of the assembled saints aka the "service"), the issue of headcoverings, prophecy, etc etc are things that each individual must decide for themselves after MUCH prayer and study, as to whether or not those will be determiners of fellowship.

For me, I could not be a regular member of a non Holy Ghost church, a trinity or two-ness or "Jesus is not God" church, or one where testifying and Spirit filled meetings are not allowed, or one that was all about money and entertainment, or a miniature popedom where the pastor and his immediate family run EVERYTHING and everyone else is just a resource for them... or one where clucking and barking are all the rage.

Oh and if the women have big blue hair tons of makeup and ten inch fake eyelashes...

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

We are instructed to maintain the unity of the Spirit until we come to the unity of the faith. Therefore there are some things which come over a pulpit that can be put on the back burner so to say.

The highlighted portion of your statement is excerpted from a "tradition of man" (composed by Witherspoon at the meeting in which two ministerial licensing agencies joined to form the UPC), however, it is NOT Scriptural! Indeed, it is far from it. Please allow me to explain ...

In the words of Ephesians 4:1-3 (NLT) it is written - "Therefore I, a prisoner for serving the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of your calling, for you have been called by God. Always be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowance for each other’s faults because of your love. Make every effort to keep yourselves united in the Spirit, binding yourselves together with peace.”

Within the context of these passages Paul is speaking of the "unity of the Spirit" among brethren, sort of another way of saying the same thing he penned in the words of I Corinthians 1:10 - "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."

However, in the words of Ephesians 4:11-13 (NLT) Paul is speaking of an entirely different matter, to wit: "Now these are the gifts Christ gave to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers. Their responsibility is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ. This will continue until we all come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God’s Son that we will be mature in the Lord, measuring up to the full and complete standard of Christ.”

Do you grasp the different issues being addressed within the context of these two portions of Paul's writings? In the former he is referring to "unity" among brethren to the extent that it "mirrors" that of the Spirit, whereas in the latter he is referring to the "functions" and "purposes" of the various gifts which God gives to some members of the church which will bring them into a "unity of the faith." These are two distinctly different issues, and NOT as Witherspoon concluded.

Now if that was not bad enough, Witherspoon really went "off the deep end" and added this addendum to his Fundamental Doctrine Statement: "We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the faith, at the same time admonishing all brethren that they shall not contend for their differing views to the disunity of the body." That statement stands in direct conflict with Jude's admonition, to wit, “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3, KJV).

I would rather heed Jude's words than Witherspoon's.

Also, unless one claims to have perfect knowledge of all things one has to admit one is still learning, and therefore a disagreement may be caused by one's own error rather than the church's.

Very true!

Can two walk together except they be agreed? Yes, in fact, but only so far as they are in agreement.

Christ Jesus said otherwise in the words of Matthew 12:25, to wit, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand."

On a practical basis, I would say fundamental doctrines are essential, such as the unity of God, the Lordship of Christ, repentance and faith, baptism, the Holy Ghost, the reality of healing, resurrection and eternal judgment.

Sadly, many today, do just have you've done; fail to take heed to two “key” words the Hebrews writer used in prefacing the six elements or components which comprise the entire teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ.

“Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment” (Hebrews 6:1-2, KJV).

These two words are “principles,” or truths which form the very “foundation” of everything which our Lord taught. What happens when imperfect mortals, such as we all are, neglect to take note of these two words? Well, we begin to add to them, or change them in one form or another, just as you’ve done, and yet you classify them as “fundamental.” Admittedly, all of the things you stated as being “fundamental” are true, but they are NOT those “principles” which comprise the “foundation” of our Lord’s doctrine!

My thoughts about the matter.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Lafon

The highlighted portion of your statement is excerpted from a "tradition of man" (composed by Witherspoon at the meeting in which two ministerial licensing agencies joined to form the UPC), however, it is NOT Scriptural! Indeed, it is far from it. Please allow me to explain ...

In the words of Ephesians 4:1-3 (NLT) it is written - "Therefore I, a prisoner for serving the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of your calling, for you have been called by God. Always be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowance for each other’s faults because of your love. Make every effort to keep yourselves united in the Spirit, binding yourselves together with peace.”

Within the context of these passages Paul is speaking of the "unity of the Spirit" among brethren, sort of another way of saying the same thing he penned in the words of I Corinthians 1:10 - "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."

However, in the words of Ephesians 4:11-13 (NLT) Paul is speaking of an entirely different matter, to wit: "Now these are the gifts Christ gave to the church: the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, and the pastors and teachers. Their responsibility is to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ. This will continue until we all come to such unity in our faith and knowledge of God’s Son that we will be mature in the Lord, measuring up to the full and complete standard of Christ.”

Do you grasp the different issues being addressed within the context of these two portions of Paul's writings? In the former he is referring to "unity" among brethren to the extent that it "mirrors" that of the Spirit, whereas in the latter he is referring to the "functions" and "purposes" of the various gifts which God gives to some members of the church which will bring them into a "unity of the faith." These are two distinctly different issues, and NOT as Witherspoon concluded.

Now if that was not bad enough, Witherspoon really went "off the deep end" and added this addendum to his Fundamental Doctrine Statement: "We shall endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit until we all come into the unity of the faith, at the same time admonishing all brethren that they shall not contend for their differing views to the disunity of the body." That statement stands in direct conflict with Jude's admonition, to wit, “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 3, KJV).

I would rather heed Jude's words than Witherspoon's.



Very true!



Christ Jesus said otherwise in the words of Matthew 12:25, to wit, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand."



Sadly, many today, do just have you've done; fail to take heed to two “key” words the Hebrews writer used in prefacing the six elements or components which comprise the entire teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ.

“Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment” (Hebrews 6:1-2, KJV).

These two words are “principles,” or truths which form the very “foundation” of everything which our Lord taught. What happens when imperfect mortals, such as we all are, neglect to take note of these two words? Well, we begin to add to them, or change them in one form or another, just as you’ve done, and yet you classify them as “fundamental.” Admittedly, all of the things you stated as being “fundamental” are true, but they are NOT those “principles” which comprise the “foundation” of our Lord’s doctrine!

My thoughts about the matter.

I am not sure what you are trying to say in reference to my statement about fundamental doctrine. I referenced Heb 6, including all six parts, but fundamental doctrine is not limited to just those six things. For example the identity of Christ is part of the very foundation of the faith.

In regards to the unity of the Spirit, I will study and pray about that. Thank you for bringing up Witherspoon, I was not aware of him. It sometimes happens that we think we remember Scripture when we are really remembering tradition.

As for Paul and the "second advent" I'd like to at least hear your presentation of this mystery.