Is this too much compromise?

[berkeley]

You felt the need to say it twice.

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by consapente89

He is still a compromiser regardless of what the SOF says.

Why do you say that? Does he not preach the Acts 2:38 message?

[1ofthechosen]

Originally Posted by consapente89

He is still a compromiser regardless of what the SOF says.

Whether you accept it or not he's right anyway. But why do y'all try to corner people into not saying what they truly believe? Instead of speaking up on what's presented you go, and lash out at him and his beliefs. If you don't feel that way, that's fine. But why can't he simply state what something is, without it turning into a personal attack? And then turn ridicule into the weapon to try to get someone to move off of it. Ridicule is no match for true convictions, but we see a double standard imposed when someone stands against something. Then you watch the ridicule begin, and never give a scripture based reason for any of it. But anyway carry on..I said enough.. Have a good day in Jesus Name!!

[Esaias]

Already said this on page1, but here it is again:

There is nothing Biblically incorrect about what is said on the website. Rather, there are things NOT said on the website, that nevertheless ARE biblically correct, and without THOSE things a visitor to the website would never think that THOSE things are believed by the church. If THOSE things are in fact believed by the church, then it amounts to a bait-and-switch. If those things are NOT believed by the church, then the church is in doctrinal error.

There is a trend these days for churches to post as little as possible about what they believe and teach on their websites. They try to appear as wide-ranging as possible, as generic as possible, in order to attract the most people and provide least possible amounts of reasons for other churches to not fellowship them. It's a marketing ploy, and it's dishonest, in my opinion.

A church that believes Jesus is the Father and the Holy Ghost should boldly proclaim it. A church that believes one must be baptised in Jesus' name and filled with the Holy Ghost, as part of regeneration, should boldly proclaim it. Failure to do so means either they don't believe it, or they are trying to fly under the radar. Either way, it's just plain wrong.

[navygoat1998]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Already said this on page1, but here it is again:

There is nothing Biblically incorrect about what is said on the website. Rather, there are things NOT said on the website, that nevertheless ARE biblically correct, and without THOSE things a visitor to the website would never think that THOSE things are believed by the church. If THOSE things are in fact believed by the church, then it amounts to a bait-and-switch. If those things are NOT believed by the church, then the church is in doctrinal error.

There is a trend these days for churches to post as little as possible about what they believe and teach on their websites. They try to appear as wide-ranging as possible, as generic as possible, in order to attract the most people and provide least possible amounts of reasons for other churches to not fellowship them. It's a marketing ploy, and it's dishonest, in my opinion.

A church that believes Jesus is the Father and the Holy Ghost should boldly proclaim it. A church that believes one must be baptised in Jesus' name and filled with the Holy Ghost, as part of regeneration, should boldly proclaim it. Failure to do so means either they don't believe it, or they are trying to fly under the radar. Either way, it's just plain wrong.

I agree! Each church, no matter the denominational view needs to have it's doctrine on the homepage.