| Author | Message | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 225 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hmmm, you might try a 'Christian' church or Church of Christ Christian. Most of those folks understand the New Covenant very well, many know what walking in the Spirit is. Just a thought.... Bill | ||
| Thomas1 Registered user Username: Thomas1 Post Number: 105 Registered: 4-2002 |
I don't know if this "Denomination selector" was posted on this forum or another but I found the results interesting, and it hit my choices right on the nail. If it helps, fine. If not, be intertained! http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=christiandenom In His Grace! <>< thomas | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 63 Registered: 9-2003 |
I found the selectsmart analysis interesting. There were about four questions on which I had no opinion ( "Baptism saves" ) and at least one I didn't understand ( "Tradition plays a part in church" ). That said, my Methodist church came in 2nd out of 24 possible denominations... which I guess means I conform pretty well with Methodist teachings. I was surprised and mystified to have as my number 1... the Episcopal Church, which I think of as Catholism without the Pope (no offense). I know very little about Episcopalians, aside from an old cartoon (Episcopalian hell: the gentleman in evening dress at a restaurant orders himself and his wife a gourmand's meal in excruciating detail, then the devil waiter turns and says "Joey, burn 2!"). Does anyone care to take a stab at the "correct" answers? Would that be a fruitful discussion? "The Bible is free from error", for example. I know that some churches hold in the inerrancy of the Scriptures. I don't know what that means, when (most obviously) the Gospels present the same topics with different details, over and over. Do the "The Bible is free from error" holders qualify that, somehow? "The Bible is free from error of theological significance"? Uh, danger of topic hijacking. Nevermind.  Adventism came in #14. (???) - Hoytster | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 64 Registered: 9-2003 |
I just looked at my results again, and Roman Catholicism came in #19. I guess my assessment of the Episcopal church is way off. - Hoytster | ||
| Sabra Registered user Username: Sabra Post Number: 49 Registered: 10-2001 |
So many new members! How wonderful! Greetings to all! I was saved in a Pentecostal Church, migrated to a Baptist Church, then Bapticostal (my favorite) then we moved,  and we have found a non-denominational church we like pretty well. I don't think I will ever feel like I did at Central Baptist. They believed everything I do, charismatic but balanced. I do know that Mark Chironna has a church in Orlando. He is on TBN and one night I was watching him and he always has a word of knowledge at the end so I prayed for God to please give him a word for me. (I had moved from Nashville to Chattanooga with my husband's job and was broke, depressed, working in a terrible job making 1/2 what I made in Nashville and trying to decide what in the world to do) Well, next thing he said was, There is a woman watching, you're 35 and you are concerned because you left a good job and now you feel you will never find another one like it and you're unsure what to do. Within 30 days someone will call you from an old resume you sent a long time ago and offer you a better job than the one you had. Sure enough, the office manager of my previous job in Nashville called, said he needed help managing the dental offices. Offered me a great position and I packed up and moved back. I had rented out my house in Nashville, called the tenant, told her I needed the house back, she moved within 4 days and here I am! I'm not sure if it's the church for you but it might be worth checking out. It's The Master's Touch International Church and it's at 5235 Hoffner Avenue Orlando, FL 32812 the website is www.markchironna.com Blessings, glad to have you all here! Sabra | ||
| Sabra Registered user Username: Sabra Post Number: 50 Registered: 10-2001 |
PS..........after checking out his website, I'm not so sure, it seems a little weird, can't put my finger on it, but not enough about Jesus and too much about Mark. One thing I didn't like was it named him a a physician of the soul. Hmmmmmm OK, maybe scratch that one. | ||
| Steve Registered user Username: Steve Post Number: 15 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hi Sabra & Hoyster (& everyone), Sabra, you hit the proverbial nail on the head. I read the section on "About Dr. Chrionna." It's definitely about him and not about Christ. Although I read quickly, I don't believe Jesus is mentioned once. He claims to be pretty powerful as a spiritual physician for the "mind, soul and body." That kind of talk bothers me, although I'm not sure where he ends up with it all. If he goes too far, he's just an intellectual Benny Hinn. Hoyster, I want to "bite" but I have to admit that I hold to the inerrancy of scripture view, although that has been new to me for the last 3 years or so. I, like you, don't know all that that involves, but I am much more comfortable with details that are seen from different points of view, rather than seeing one scriptural passage contradicting another. Adventism left me with a horrible taste for the belief that the Bible could contain some error or even contradictory passages. (It is used primarily to support the so-called "inspiratin" of Ellen White. Too much has been shown archaeologically, scientifically and psychologically to demonstrate the Bible is more than just a theoligical statement. I believe it is, with the Holy Spirit, a lamp before my feet, guiding me in the paths I should go. I'd be interested to hear your view. Steve | ||
| Steve Registered user Username: Steve Post Number: 16 Registered: 7-2000 |
What is "theoligical?" It's a code word for "theological!" | ||
| Doc Registered user Username: Doc Post Number: 60 Registered: 2-2003 |
Well I filled in the survey rather quickly, and the top two were Assemblies of God and Free Will Baptist, which I guess is pretty reasonable, as I have belonged to both in the past. SDA is in fourth place though, which I can't figure, because I said I did not have a preferred day for worship, so that would hardly fit, would it? I also said salvation does not depend on the church you belong to. I strongly disagree with SDA distinctive doctrines, and there were a lot of churches further down the list I would be happier with. Maybe I am not easily categorisable, but that is OK, as I definitely consider myself a Christian first of all. Praisegod - I have never been SDA, but in helping my friend work through their doctrines, I have ended up getting a much better grasp on the New Covenant than I ever had before. It's really great, but I do realise now that a lot of Christians in many churches don't really get it either. We had a visiting preacher at church last Sunday, from a new, non-denominational church in a nearby town. Most of what he said was good, but in passing, he mentioned tithing and the pre-trib rapture, neither of which I teach any more, although they are popular teachings. I let it go, I don't even know if most people noticed it, I just tend to be very critical of teachings nowadays - switch on the "filter" while listing to sermons. I was asked to translate a Christian book a few weeks ago - I work as a translator. It is published by a foundation we have a pretty good relationship with, but it was on tithing. I thought, Oh no, I may not agree with all of this. Anyway, I read it, and found I did not agree with any of it. He made statements like, "paying a tithe is part of our covenant with God," and "when God has already revealed his will on something in the Old Testament, he does not need to repeat it in the New Testament." I basically asked my elders what to do, and they were even more appalled than I was, so it was not just me going over the top. I decided just to refuse to translate it, with the explanation that the author apparently did not have a clue about the differences between the covenants. They have not got back to me yet :-) I think it is difficult if a church has a "strongly ephasised" eschatological position as part of it's basic statement of faith. Eschatology is so difficult. The other day in my Bible College class, eschatology came up, and one of the students said he was banned from taking part in his church's outreach programme because he did not believe in the pre-tribulation rapture. I think that's crazy. Enough rambling for now, Adrian | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 115 Registered: 12-2003 |
Praisegod, I understand your reaction to the eschatology statement in the Clavary Chapel statement of faith. I think it's possible, however, that you might be able to worship there without having to agree about that. I suspect (although I don't know for sure) that you would not have to say you endorsed that belief personally if you decided to join a congregation. What I've found is that in the Christian "world", there are many doctrines that are considered important but not worthy of dividing the body of Christ. In other words, Christians may hold varying beliefs about them without being judged "wrong". Eschatology is in that category, although some people believe their particular views passionately. Our pastor is "pre-trib", but that has never obscured the core gospel, Bible-centered messages he gives. I find I can hear him mention it (which he does infrequently) and find his ideas about it interesting, but I haven't bought into it completely! If you find a church where the pastor is preaching Christ-centered Bible teaching, I suspect that the eschatological views will be relatively unimportant. Mark Martin, a former Adventist pastor who hosts the website SDAoutreach.org, is a pastor of a very large Calvary Chapel in Phoenix, AZ. I believe he is now a pre-trib believer, but his sermons are always Christ-centered from a new covenant perspective. If a church stongly emphasizes eschatology, as Adrian said, that might be a problem. I just suspect , though, that many Calvary Chapels would, in practice, not make it a dividing issue. And Hoytster, I'm also a relatively new believer that the Bible is inerrant. When I believed it had mistakes or discrepancies, I could never really figure out what was true. Further, I could never really figure out exactly how to have a relationship with Jesus. As I've come to see the Bible as a complete, inerrant whole inspired by the Holy Spirit and written by different people, the discrepancies and inconsistencies that I had thought I perceived began to clear up. It's completely astonishing to me how consistent the Bible is when I decide to accept all of it as equally inspired and to ask the Holy Spirit who "wrote" it to teach me when I study. As John Piper says in his book "Brothers, We Are Not Professionals", the difficult passages of scripture are there so we will wrestle with them and turn to God for understanding and insight. Somehow that hit me between the eyes when I read it. I'd never thought of the idea that perhaps God specifically wants us to turn to him for his insight for otherwise difficult passages. I have to say, his observation does seem to be accurate. God really is faithful to reveal his will and his truth. Colleen | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 247 Registered: 7-2003 |
Relating to the inerrancy issue...It is different to say the original language in inerrant and that the translation is inerrant. I know kj only fanatics who think the kjv is perfect, but when you point out holes, they can't respond. When you can grip that the original is inerrant, and that if there are discrepancies it is our understanding or a perspective view, therefore differing details presented, which is different than "wrong"...it provides a level of comfort. I know that when I need to understand something, the Holy Spirit will lead me. Until then, I've learned to be content in the fact I don't know it all. re: prophecy...I have a pre-trib pastor that I enjoy listening to and each time he does a passage that is "debatable" or has done studies on Revelation and Daniel, he starts his talk each time by saying that these are not issues to divide over, he has good, God-fearing friends who believe differently and they joke about who will say "I told you so". He says it is his view based upon his study of scripture, but it is not at all worth dividing over because the bottom line is we are to be a people waiting for the Lord regardless of when that is (we could all die before he comes). You feel comfortable, then, to hear his perspective and yet not agree with everything at the same time. He does not tolerate arguments or division over it as far as he can control it. That is a balanced pastor to me and healthy for the body and it's unity, to me. | ||
| Praisegod Registered user Username: Praisegod Post Number: 9 Registered: 3-2004 |
For the fun of it, I tried the denomination selector that Thomas mentioned. Hmmmm. According to that, the first time I took it I should be Assemblies of God or SDA! Needless to say, that didnít sit real well (the number 2 selection, that is.) So I went back and tried it again, only changing my ěno preferenceî of day of worship to now say Sunday. Now it says AoG, Free-will Baptist and Mennonite! While this might be fun, Iím not sure it says much about what we really believe. For instance, when you check to see how others have rated, it shows that SDA is #8 with 5.1% and just below them #9 are the Southern Baptists with 4.7%. There are TONS of SB around where I live. But I enjoyed trying it anyway. | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 65 Registered: 9-2003 |
From www.dictionary.com: in…er…ran…cy n. Freedom from error or untruths; infallibility: belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures. The last is a usage example. I *really* love the idea of trusting the Bible. In my Bible study, people will start talking about how a particular passage was obviously inserted by someone else other than the original author, or these really cannot be Jesus' words. I dislike that, and reject it. I want to believe that the words arrived there through a process that renders them valid. I want to read and get understanding and more forward in my walk with Christ, without second-guessing or reading with "yeah, buts" or other qualifications. It's Scripture, capital S. But three Gospels say that Jesus was crucified on the feast day, and John says the day before (do I remember that right?). Given that I haven't remembered incorrectly: Can someone please explain the meaning of in…er…ran…cy, when such a basic and important fact is disputed by the Gospel writers? By the way, I don't really care about such discrepancies. I trust God to give me a Bible that serves His purposes. The inconsistencies are just interesting to me, not important. - Hoytster | ||
| Dennis Registered user Username: Dennis Post Number: 47 Registered: 4-2000 |
I seems that Calvary Chapels, as an association of churches, are very charismatic. However, the Calvary Community Church that Pastor Mark Martin pastors in Phoenix, is an exception in regard to speaking in tongues. Hopefully, someone can enlighten on this matter. Dennis Fischer | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 226 Registered: 7-2000 |
Hoyster--- The 'inerancy' statement you're working with is only partial. The full statement would be 'I believe in the inerrancy of scripture as found in the original languages'. Most discrepancies exist because we are not native speakers of the original languages. Often, especially in Greek, there are verb tenses that English does not have. There are also cultural aspects as well such as the issue of when to begin dating the reign of some of the Old Testament kings. Once archaeology began to bring to light some clues, then scholars decided that maybe the dates weren't in error..... Clear as mud? Bill | ||
| Dennisrainwater Registered user Username: Dennisrainwater Post Number: 84 Registered: 8-2000 |
Dennis, I don't think that "very charismatic" would be an accurate description of CC's generally. Perhaps that would apply more to their off-shoot: Vineyard. As I understand it, the charismatic issues of tongues and other "signs" were a primary dividing factor.... We have attended at least five different CC's since leaving Adventism. When we left the St. Helena SDA church (near PUC and Elmshaven) God planted us in a Calvary Chapel (ironically meeting on Sundays in the Napa SDA church just a few miles from St. Helena -- and very familiar to us in an SDA context). It was the ideal place for us heal and grow. It was a fantastic experience! Later on, when we had moved away from the Napa Valley, we learned a harsh lesson demonstrating that not all CCs are the same, and that while some are very safe and grounded in a good balance of Scripture, there are some that can be downright abusive. Praisegod -- *IF* you've found one of the "good" CCs, I would expect that you will not find them ramming their pre-trib and other distinctive beliefs down your throat. That was one of the things that most appealed to us about our experience with CC when we left the "One True Church". That while we were going through the time of questioning everything and reestablishing our own belief system, we were being lead by a pastor who was completely prepared to offer his views on various subjects -- but at the same time explaining other legitimate Christian views (such as end-times issues). He told us (and the church body as a whole) that we should not break fellowship with other Christians over such "nonessentials". Furthermore, he exlained gently what some of the others' views, along with their Biblical basis for those views. Then he explained his own take on the matter, stating that while each position has its own set of "problems", that he had come to this conclusion because it seemed to be the best conclusion based on the whole of what Scripture had to say... One of the best things that might be found in Calvary Chapel is their "expository" approach to preaching. This forces an honest pastor to address every subject that the Bible addresses --without omitting those parts that are thorny and difficult to understand. Or that threaten your cherished preconceptions. Furthermore, it forces you to spend time on each issue in the same proportion that the Bible focuses on those matters... We really did enjoy that part of our experience. This isn't meant to be a promotion for Calvary Chapel. In fact, it may be more of a warning. Out of the five we have "sampled", we found ONE that was fantastic. Of the rest, one was very abusive, one was okay, but into some weirdness, and two were pretty good, but had enough small issues that caused us not to 'stick around' for the long haul. (Primarily our own personal tastes in music-style, etc.) It all depends on the particular body you are a part of -- and how submitted the pastoral leadership is to truly following the lead of the Spirit of God. And because 'even' pastors are human, and struggle with egos and other human foibles; without the constraints of denominational "government", whether or not your particular CC is a good one is really kind of "Pot Luck". Seeking God in Spirit and in Truth, Den <>< | ||
| Praisegod Registered user Username: Praisegod Post Number: 12 Registered: 3-2004 |
Den, you beat me to it responding to Dennis. From what Iíve read of John Wimberís story I believe youíre right about Calvary and him needing to leave and then starting the Vineyard. I never noticed any emphasis on speaking in tongues at Calvary, but even if there were, Iím perfectly comfortable with that. Actually, I know that as an Adventist I was very fearful of anything that might be ěPentecostalî or ěcharismaticî and I smile now even thinking about my fears. I have met the pastor of the local CC twice and he seems very nice and heís a very good speaker. There is great praise and worship music. But it was on the local site that mentioned about the strong emphasis on pretrib. And I remember there certainly was in their bookstore. The pastor came out of the Baptists and that may explain his eschatology emphasis? Today I took the advice Iíve been given this week and did some checking on churches. I looked at the Evangelical Free Church and it looks very small. Iím thinking that if Iím ever to get my husband interested, he wonít feel all that comfortable in a small church. I drove by a Vineyard one and the address turned out to be that of a house in a residential neighborhood. However, on the good side of things, Iíve found a Four Square Church and two community churches that I might try. Both ěcommunityî churches appear to be ěseekerî ones. Perhaps thatís why I could easily agree with their posted doctrinal beliefs? One is non-denom and one is a member of Willow Creek. Anyone know any specifics about Willow Creek churches? It seems like Iíve heard ěshallowî but that might just have been an Adventist condemnation of grace-orientation.. Anyway, Iím praying about which one to attend tomorrow. One I found accidentally as it was across the street from the Ev Free Church. And it just so happened to have a huge sign about an Open House for tomorrow. I appreciate all the help on this board. Iím feeling so much better now that Iím moving forward again with checking things out more seriously. | ||
| Lydell Registered user Username: Lydell Post Number: 576 Registered: 7-2000 |
Den, actually the Vineyard churches can't be termed "very charismatic". But then maybe a definition of the term is called for. The "very charismatic" churches are those that believe that the gifts of the Spirit are active today in the church, including the working of signs and wonders (Vineyard agrees with this). However, the "very charismatic" churches also teach that the gift of tongues is THE gift of validation that someone is Spirit-filled (Vineyard strongly disagrees). The "very charismatic" church believes in praying for healing (the Vineyard does also), and that if the person prayed for is not healed, it is an indicator that the person didn't have enough faith, or that the one doing the praying didn't have enough faith. The Vineyard strongly disagrees with that. "Very charismatic" church services are usually marked by a degree of disorder: for instance, everyone suddenly speaking loudly in tongues. Vineyard believes there should be order in the service. You will generally only hear tongues used as a private prayer language, sometimes used during ministry times in a service. I am not certain on this, but I believe the "very charismatic churches" also have some emphasis on eschatology? Vineyard churches consider eschatological views a non-issue. | ||
| Carol_2 Registered user Username: Carol_2 Post Number: 148 Registered: 2-2002 |
Hi everyone! And a very warm welcome to Packer Eric & BDale - we love to hear your stories and comments - thanks for sharing with us. This is not really the right thread I'm afraid, but just wanted to comment on my experience yesterday at church. Every week I attend (Wesleyan Fellowship in the Atlanta suburbs) I am more amazed and awed by the children's and youth programs. At every chance I strongly recommend my friends with children find a church that is strong in this area. I help with a group of 4-year olds, and we had a "Friendship Sunday" with a carnival theme yesterday. All the children from age 3 to grade 6 were asked to invite a friend. As a very large group of 3 year olds to 6 year olds watched a play by the older children, it was drilled into these children how much God loves them, how He sent Jesus to die for their sins, etc. All the kids were so excited, and one little 3 year old couldn't contain herself, shouting out "And Jesus died on the cross, then rose again!!!" as loud as she could (as the leader was telling the significance of Easter.) I began to think how week after week we are so focused at this church on filling these children with Christ's love, of reassuring them of His love and acceptance of them, it's no wonder they grow up in love with the Lord. (This church has a strong youth and young adult membership, very on-fire!) I then began to reminisce about my days in Sabbath School, as well as the years I taught Primary SS classes. All I could remember was learning or teaching stories about the Sabbath, or stories about Bible characters who disobeyed and were punished. What a contrast! I love you all! Prayers, Carol | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 248 Registered: 7-2003 |
praisegod, my church does a lot of willow creek stuff...from my experience, it is more a worship style than theological discussion. When I hear the term willow creek in reference to a church, I think of a contemporary worship style with praise team lead and a band rather than hymnals and an organ. It is upbeat and "louder" than traditional hymnal singing ... at least in my experience. I can't imagine anyone ever genuinely experiencing the Willow Creek worship style and calling it shallow. Willow Creek itself is a real church in Chicago, I believe, and it has worship and arts conferences each year to teach how to spread the word of God using worship and arts as well. We incorporate a lot of skits now in our services to modernize a biblical truth being taught. Though I have never been to "the" willow creek church, many in our worship staff go each year as well as leaders from the various arts areas. In our church, it is all about how to create an atmosphere of genuine worship for all participants. That's quite a quest given age differences and personal preferences. We may do an old hymn with the band, or in the traditional style or acapella. So, I don't know where the "shallow" term comes from in connection to willow creek, but the Willow Creek I am familiar with is just the opposite ... trying to move people beyond the pews into the very presence of almighty God. |
