Ecumenical Harlotry

[Smalcald]

Is there anything more dangerous to the doctrinal purity of the Church than ecumenicalism? I think not. Just as Israel committed spiritual fornication with heathen nations, so are we committing spiritual fornication with apostate churches. I believe the ecumenical movement is abominable in the sight of God, and true believers will pay the price for it. Get ready for another 1300 years of Babylonian captivity.........

I agree and disagree.

I just think we need to be clear about what we mean. Technically ecumenicalism is just Christian unity. However we cannot be united with those we don't agree with on basic doctrine, on basic beliefs. So from that perspective it is very dangerous this is where I would agree. However if it simply means that among Christian groups who have commonality of belief, they can work together, then this is good.

For example, the National Association of Evangelicals would be an ecumenical group working among different evangelicals for one voice. Unfortunately they are now rocked by scandal, but that is a different topic. Focus on the Family would be ecumenical; they work with a variety of Christian denominations, congregations and believers. So it is not always bad. Worthy Boards would be ecumenical, in that most of us here do not belong to the same Christian group, not even the same denomination, yet we can agree on many of the basic things about our faith, and this is good.

I think it goes wrong when it leaves the basics of the faith. For example reaching out to Jews who practice Judaism and praying with them. We can't do that; that is where ecumenicalism goes horribly wrong. Or reaching out to Muslims and affirming that somehow we all worship the same God, this is wrong; we don't worship the same God. We cannot mix faiths in that way, Paul told us not to be yoked with unbelievers. Or worshipping with other Christian groups which have become apostate this is a problem. Unity for the sake of just getting along, versus unity for the sake of Christ alone.

I just think we need to be clear about what we are talking about is all.

[Guest shiloh357]

Well, there are two kinds of Ecumenicalism.

There is a broader version that seeks worldwide religious unity across all religious boundaries. It is promotes unity among Christians, Ba'hai, Buddhism, etc.

There is a more narrow definition which refers to unity among Christians across denominational lines. The problem is that it is not a "unity" that really appreciates and allows for diversity. It is really the belief that there should be ONE Christian faith, and in order to accomplish this, someone has to sacrifice their convictions for the sake of unity. In other words, you believe what it is necessary to believe for the sake of "unity, " not necessarily because it is true, or biblical.

I see nothing wrong with reaching across denominational boundaries in genuine Christian love, and working together for Christ; however the "unity" suggested by the Ecumenical movement (and other groups) is not genuine unity. It amounts to conformity of thought. I honestly hate having "unity" shoved down our throats, because the motives for this "unity" are usually questionable. "Unity" is not the product of "cookie cutter" Christians who all think alike. Biblical unity is the ability to come together despite our differences and work together in the Kingdom for the things that really matter. Biblical unity is not the absence of the diversity.

[Guest shiloh357]

Is there anything more dangerous to the doctrinal purity of the Church than ecumenicalism? I think not. Just as Israel committed spiritual fornication with heathen nations, so are we committing spiritual fornication with apostate churches. I believe the ecumenical movement is abominable in the sight of God, and true believers will pay the price for it. Get ready for another 1300 years of Babylonian captivity.........

I agree and disagree.

I just think we need to be clear about what we mean. Technically ecumenicalism is just Christian unity. However we cannot be united with those we don't agree with on basic doctrine, on basic beliefs. So from that perspective it is very dangerous this is where I would agree. However if it simply means that among Christian groups who have commonality of belief, they can work together, then this is good.

For example, the National Association of Evangelicals would be an ecumenical group working among different evangelicals for one voice. Unfortunately they are now rocked by scandal, but that is a different topic. Focus on the Family would be ecumenical; they work with a variety of Christian denominations, congregations and believers. So it is not always bad. Worthy Boards would be ecumenical, in that most of us here do not belong to the same Christian group, not even the same denomination, yet we can agree on many of the basic things about our faith, and this is good.

I think it goes wrong when it leaves the basics of the faith. For example reaching out to Jews who practice Judaism and praying with them. We can't do that; that is where ecumenicalism goes horribly wrong. Or reaching out to Muslims and affirming that somehow we all worship the same God, this is wrong; we don't worship the same God. We cannot mix faiths in that way, Paul told us not to be yoked with unbelievers. Or worshipping with other Christian groups which have become apostate this is a problem. Unity for the sake of just getting along, versus unity for the sake of Christ alone.

I just think we need to be clear about what we are talking about is all.

Actually none of the examples you gave are "ecumenical." Worthyboards is far from ecumenical, as is Focus on the Family.

[Smalcald]

Is there anything more dangerous to the doctrinal purity of the Church than ecumenicalism? I think not. Just as Israel committed spiritual fornication with heathen nations, so are we committing spiritual fornication with apostate churches. I believe the ecumenical movement is abominable in the sight of God, and true believers will pay the price for it. Get ready for another 1300 years of Babylonian captivity.........

I agree and disagree.

I just think we need to be clear about what we mean. Technically ecumenicalism is just Christian unity. However we cannot be united with those we don't agree with on basic doctrine, on basic beliefs. So from that perspective it is very dangerous this is where I would agree. However if it simply means that among Christian groups who have commonality of belief, they can work together, then this is good.

For example, the National Association of Evangelicals would be an ecumenical group working among different evangelicals for one voice. Unfortunately they are now rocked by scandal, but that is a different topic. Focus on the Family would be ecumenical; they work with a variety of Christian denominations, congregations and believers. So it is not always bad. Worthy Boards would be ecumenical, in that most of us here do not belong to the same Christian group, not even the same denomination, yet we can agree on many of the basic things about our faith, and this is good.

I think it goes wrong when it leaves the basics of the faith. For example reaching out to Jews who practice Judaism and praying with them. We can't do that; that is where ecumenicalism goes horribly wrong. Or reaching out to Muslims and affirming that somehow we all worship the same God, this is wrong; we don't worship the same God. We cannot mix faiths in that way, Paul told us not to be yoked with unbelievers. Or worshipping with other Christian groups which have become apostate this is a problem. Unity for the sake of just getting along, versus unity for the sake of Christ alone.

I just think we need to be clear about what we are talking about is all.

Actually none of the examples you gave are "ecumenical." Worthyboards is far from ecumenical, as is Focus on the Family.

Why are they not? The definition is simply to promote Christian unity.

[Guest shiloh357]

Why are they not? The definition is simply to promote Christian unity.

Well as I stated earlier, their purpose is to create ONE Chrisitan faith, meaning that Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists and so on would have to sacrifice certain doctrinal positions particular to their denomination for the sake of "unity." It means that if don't believe that homosexuals should be ordained as clergy, much less be considered Christians, then for the sake of unity, you might be expected to forsake that belief. The problem is deciding who gets to decide what the "doctrine" of this "ecumenial" faith would be. Who gets to decide for everyone else what they will and will not believe?

[graymousey]

"Is there anything more dangerous to the doctrinal purity of the Church than ecumenicalism? I think not. Just as Israel committed spiritual fornication with heathen nations, so are we committing spiritual fornication with apostate churches. I believe the ecumenical movement is abominable in the sight of God, and true believers will pay the price for it. Get ready for another 1300 years of Babylonian captivity........."

I agree, ----- what you say is absolutely true, ---- but true believers will never be paying for it. They will get out of this unity, and they will not be part of it.

True Christian unity requires oneness of mind, and this is a very narrow basis of unity. True Christian unity is not "unity in diversity".

When the Lord Jesus said "Father, I pray that they may all be one," He spoke of this kind of unity. The finishing of His sentence proves it: ....."as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.."

We know that the Father and the Son always were in perfect unity, and the basis of Their unity is truth.

[eric]

Shiloh has it right. It means you have to lay aside your own particular thoughts about gay preachers and listen to a sermon preached by a homosexual pastor if you are to be ecumenical and that is only one reason to preclude myself from such a movement. There are many more. There are some who call themselves pastors. who I would sooner gag than listen to, but then again that's just MHO.

[Guest Jude 1:3]

"Father, I pray that they may all be one." (Jesus)

But of whom is He speaking? The Elect, of course: the true believers!

[saint_spoz]

Ok this is not saying I agree with homsexual behavior but there are many gay preachers/pastors and the like with more love in there heart then some of these so called wholesom hetro conterparts I mean just look at "pastor" fred phelps and the Loonies at WBC I would sooner go to an all gay congregation church before I would listen to such hate mongers.

[billie]

I'd rather have a Biblical pastor, if you please.