Denominations

[patricia1]

hello guys. Why haven't I seen this post...Have I been here??? In the post on the question of scripture being insuffecient I just voiced my opinion on the fact that we may all be in sin if we take pauls statements to a deep degree when it comes to division. I have not read through this entire thread...it will take me too long.

Some times I think when we bend forward at the pulpit/altar calls some of our brains fall out.... Jesus has given us intelligence to make certain decisions. He gives us wisdom...

[Phil.2:12]

What you say, Thaddaeus, sounds so good. But I am not going to get into a point by point debate with you, for you have bought into the Orthodox doctrine big time coming from a Protestant background. I'm not into debating the pro's and con's of Orthodox over Protestant theology. You have found your "true path" and that's fine for you. I also am walking down what I believe is my "true path" and for that reason need not debate you on which path is the truer one. If I thought your path was the right one, I'd be walking down it as you are. But I don't feel that way, so I'll walk my path and you walk your path and we'll both be happy. It's been fun matching wits with you, but it is now time for an end to these games as we will be off topic in about two heartbeats. I do look forward to reading further posts of yours on other threads on Worthy Boards.

[OneLight]

And so are denominations ...

[Thaddaeus]

Phil2:12,

I'm not into debating the pro's and con's of Orthodox over Protestant theology.

But that is the point of the op and the thread. We are discussing unity and what it means versus union and or the difference.

It matters not that I happen to be Orthodox. I could use the same arguments from any perspective, Methodists, Presbyterian, and non-denominational, assuming you have not been associated with these denominations or some other so-called non-denominational church.

I can guarantee that your views or interpretations will not match if you are of a different denomination.

Now, I made a statement two posts ago, and reiterated it in the last, yet not one person responded with any substantive reply. What is your theology on the Incarnation. Leave out the early Church completely.

I know that most of you will know that there are three basic underlying theologies from which all other protestant denominations have been derived. They are Calvinism, Arminianism, and Lutheranism/Epicopalianism.

I would like anyone to explain the theology of either on the Incarnation as believed and understood by these base theologies. And then explain to me just how each can be justified as being in a unity with Christ. I do not see it by definition, but one can be in union which is what most of you are actually saying.

It is no accident that I picked the Incarnation. There are only TWO very basic tenets that defines what is known as Christianity. They are the Trinity and the Incarnation. All theologies of Christianity flows from those two tenets. The terms you will often see are Trinitarian and Christological/ Incarnational. They are saying the same thing.

As I mentioned before, Protestants, in everything I read and studied for 50 years of my life since I could read, all proclaimed that Protestants believed in the Incarnation, not just in the term but from the Ecumenical Councils.

When I was doing my study of Orthodoxy, I also went back to all the texts, the commentaries, the Systematic theologies that I had studied and taught and could not find a theological explanation on the Incarnation itself. It is assumed by definition or word usage but other aspects of salvation are not linked to the Incarnation or it has no theological connection with the other parts of the theology.

So using this can we determine if we are speaking of the same Christ?

Can we use this in a practical demonstration rather than in a philosophical or theoretical form?

[Smalcald]

I am not smart enough to answer your question.

[patricia1]

Prior to coming into any chuches or denomination I had no idea that there was any. I had a wonderful love affair with Jesus for many years before Jesus directed me. I was fearful in the search enough to be careful to listen to His direction. Had not any idea that I was a 'Born Again' Christian.

All i knew was that I loved Jesus and he loved me.

I had his word as well as the Holy Spirit.

A patient I was taking care of tried to give me a free bible as he was giving them out to all. I thought he was a bible salesman.

I had my own and told him to save for someone who needs one.

Then I asked him If he read His and after replying yes he asked me the same. He explained many things to me telling me I was Born again. Never had I heard this terminology except for reading it. I was quite leery of him thinking he was trying to recruit me to a cult.

We became good friends until he died.

He sent me to a church, denomination will remain nameless, I went...I felt like I was going to a funeral sitting there. He did not believe me and then I told him what I thought. He laughed knowing I really was there. I told him Jesus will get be to the right one.

I ended up in a church. I loved the pastor. I stayed in the front. Lifting my hands , actively praising the Lord...shouting some praise Gods and hallelujas.

Afterwards the pastor said it was nice to have some pentecostals here with us. I turned around to look, without having any idea he was talking about ME!

Through that church I was guided to another and found my home church.

It was not the church nor the body so to say...It was a pastor who was sold out to God and preaching Gods heart...pure unadulterated messages .

You see it is not the denomination, it is the fact you love Jesus and be guided to where he wants you.

One may not like where they are...but you may need to be a bridge , a light a encouragement , a help it is wher God wants you. Sorry for this long statement. Why one is where they are does not mean where the other is the wrong place!

[Guest shiloh357]

Phil2:12,

I'm not into debating the pro's and con's of Orthodox over Protestant theology.

But that is the point of the op and the thread. We are discussing unity and what it means versus union and or the difference.

It matters not that I happen to be Orthodox. I could use the same arguments from any perspective, Methodists, Presbyterian, and non-denominational, assuming you have not been associated with these denominations or some other so-called non-denominational church.

I can guarantee that your views or interpretations will not match if you are of a different denomination.

Now, I made a statement two posts ago, and reiterated it in the last, yet not one person responded with any substantive reply. What is your theology on the Incarnation. Leave out the early Church completely.

I know that most of you will know that there are three basic underlying theologies from which all other protestant denominations have been derived. They are Calvinism, Arminianism, and Lutheranism/Epicopalianism.

I would like anyone to explain the theology of either on the Incarnation as believed and understood by these base theologies. And then explain to me just how each can be justified as being in a unity with Christ. I do not see it by definition, but one can be in union which is what most of you are actually saying.

It is no accident that I picked the Incarnation. There are only TWO very basic tenets that defines what is known as Christianity. They are the Trinity and the Incarnation. All theologies of Christianity flows from those two tenets. The terms you will often see are Trinitarian and Christological/ Incarnational. They are saying the same thing.

As I mentioned before, Protestants, in everything I read and studied for 50 years of my life since I could read, all proclaimed that Protestants believed in the Incarnation, not just in the term but from the Ecumenical Councils.

When I was doing my study of Orthodoxy, I also went back to all the texts, the commentaries, the Systematic theologies that I had studied and taught and could not find a theological explanation on the Incarnation itself. It is assumed by definition or word usage but other aspects of salvation are not linked to the Incarnation or it has no theological connection with the other parts of the theology.

So using this can we determine if we are speaking of the same Christ?

Can we use this in a practical demonstration rather than in a philosophical or theoretical form?

Thaddeus, you need to start a different thread as you are off topic. The OP is only concerned about existance of various denomiations. If you want to discuss theological differences, you need to start another thread. If you continue to hijack the thread your posts will be reported.

[Elbit Pada]

Shalom,

There is a difference in denominationalISM and belonging to a denomination, IMHO.

If people look to their denomination to save them and don't emphasize a personal, individual relationship with Jesus, being born-again, filled with the Holy Spirit and walking in His ways. That is the problem.

OTOH, denoms are just sub-groups of the Body that gather according to similar beliefs.

I agree.

OTOH??

Shalom Marnie,

OTOH = On The Other Hand

thanks for the explanantion of the shorthand, that would have kept me up for awhile

Shalom David,

Try this: http://www.netlingo.com/emailsh.cfm

Hey thank you vickilynn ... i was wondering where i could find something like this...

[Adarian]

Certain denominations are excellent and useful: The $5, the $10, the $20 for instance.

[Phil.2:12]

Certain denominations are excellent and useful: The $5, the $10, the $20 for instance.

Never quite heard it put that way, but I must agree as I ROFLOL . However this only holds true as they retain their numerical position. If they ever assume a theological position (outside the offering plate) all bets are off!