|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/2/2008 12:48:59 AM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
drmark,
The Restoration Movement has had a positive impact upon the "religious landscape" of the world. Furthermore in relation to Reformed Theology or Arminian theology the Restoration Movement has major doctrinal differences from them.
It would be a mistake for you or others to assume that church's were the same 200 years ago as they are now. The religion of that day was Calvinism and there were not confessions of Christ but rather creeds. Creeds that one MUST confess in order to be accepted as "the elect" or more precisely, Christians.
As far as anarchy goes, that is an ignorant conclusion to jump to. I don't remember the Bible promoting anarchy.
The major difference would be that the Bible is accepted as the ONLY standard for faith and practice. Not an articulated theology that must be agreed to, but the Bible.
I leave you with the words of a famous songwriter from a totally different context than he ever meant them...
"Imagine no religion, it's easy if you try."
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/2/2008 12:59:38 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3159
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Furthermore in relation to Reformed Theology or Arminian theology the Restoration Movement has major doctrinal differences from them. I keep asking for specifics, but they're not forthcoming.
quote:
It would be a mistake for you or others to assume that church's were the same 200 years ago as they are now. The religion of that day was Calvinism and there were not confessions of Christ but rather creeds. Creeds that one MUST confess in order to be accepted as "the elect" or more precisely, Christians. Actually, FSB, the vast majority of evangelical efforts in America in the mid to late 1800's were strongly Arminian in theology. I assume many leaders in the RM were influenced by non-Calvinist doctrine.
quote:
As far as anarchy goes, that is an ignorant conclusion to jump to. I don't remember the Bible promoting anarchy.
The major difference would be that the Bible is accepted as the ONLY standard for faith and practice. Not an articulated theology that must be agreed to, but the Bible. Sorry, this sounds like anarchy to me. Just believe whatever you think the Bible says and it must be doctrinal for you. If this is RM's attitude, the early founders would love these Theology discussion forums!
quote:
"Imagine no religion, it's easy if you try." It appears to be a noble sentiment, FSB, but it is fraught with potential danger. I personally have upheld the concept of Christianity as a relationship, not just a religion, many times on these forums. But if one knows nothing but "personal feelings" about their salvation, then one knows nothing about true salvation. Please don't think that's my impression of RM, but taken to an extreme it surely could lead that way.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/2/2008 3:25:26 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
Interesting that you use the word "extreme". Balance is one of the things that is missing in "hyper theologies" of any kind.
One of the differences from Calvinism would be that we don't believe that the atonement is limited. The difference from Arminianism is that we do not believe that there is "good" within man that leads him to saving himself.
drmark, it would be much more informative if you were to ask specific questions for the answers you want. If we do it in that such fashion and it is accepted as "this is the belief" as opposed to a debate on those beliefs this thread can remain open.
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/2/2008 4:12:48 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3159
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
drmark, it would be much more informative if you were to ask specific questions for the answers you want. Okay, let's start with something simple. What is the RM stance on election - conditional or unconditional?
BTW, it is not classic Arminian doctrine that teaches "there is "good" within man that leads him to saving himself." Article III of the Remonstrants clearly articulates mankind's deprivation and salvation by grace alone.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:07:01 AM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
The best concise response I can give regarding this would be that grace is unmerited but not unconditional.
As far as election goes there is not a specific teaching of "who the elect are". We acknowledge that the Pauline letters that refer to the "elect" were written to bodies of Christians. Therefore those who are Christians are the "elect". We do not subscribe to the concept that God picked a certain number of "elect" and that the atonement is "limited" to those he picked.
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 8:12:46 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3159
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
The best concise response I can give regarding this would be that grace is unmerited but not unconditional. Do you mean by this that God's grace is resistible?
What about God's grace which preserves His saints? Is the RM position that it is also "not unconditional"?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 2:14:41 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6631
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues
...Creeds that one MUST confess in order to be accepted as "the elect" or more precisely, Christians...
In addition to this erroneous and silly assertion, what other misinformation does the Restoration Movement put out about those that don't toe the "new" line?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:14:12 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
The best concise response I can give regarding this would be that grace is unmerited but not unconditional. Do you mean by this that God's grace is resistible?
What about God's grace which preserves His saints? Is the RM position that it is also "not unconditional"?
Yes we do understand that there are people that resist the Holy Spirit, that would be a more accurate understanding.
As far as grace that "preserves the saints" we view the New Covenant as a relationship with Christ. I do am not aware of any teaching that defines when someone "falls from grace".
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:20:47 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues
...Creeds that one MUST confess in order to be accepted as "the elect" or more precisely, Christians...
In addition to this erroneous and silly assertion, what other misinformation does the Restoration Movement put out about those that don't toe the "new" line?
I'm sorry Jimbo, I don't know that I fully understand your question as stated, perhaps you could dumb it down a bit for me.
There is a statement of faith that is asked upon acceptance and baptism. "Do you believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God?"
If that's what you mean, I'm sorry I have a hard time accepting that as erroneous.
Beyond that I welcome to any attacks you have concerning my beliefs in the form of a PM too keep this thread from being killed.
I'll answer questions as accurately as possible. This thread is not for argument, it was asking for information. I'm plenty chastised enough in other threads of this forum.
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:28:50 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3159
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
Well, FSB, if my tally is accurate, then the doctrinal position of the Restoration Movement as discussed in your above posts aligns essentially with all Five Articles of the Remonstrants. Since you claim that RM theology is based solely on Scripture, then you must also accept that basic Arminian theology is likewise supported by sound Biblical interpretation. Are you now ready to retract your assertion in post #16 that there is "Arminianist Theology with points that do not fully align with the Bible"?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:29:41 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6631
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: FolkSingerBlues
...Creeds that one MUST confess in order to be accepted as "the elect" or more precisely, Christians...
In addition to this erroneous and silly assertion, what other misinformation does the Restoration Movement put out about those that don't toe the "new" line?
I'm sorry Jimbo, I don't know that I fully understand your question as stated, perhaps you could dumb it down a bit for me.
There is a statement of faith that is asked upon acceptance and baptism. "Do you believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God?"
If that's what you mean, I'm sorry I have a hard time accepting that as erroneous.
Beyond that I welcome to any attacks you have concerning my beliefs in the form of a PM too keep this thread from being killed.
I'll answer questions as accurately as possible. This thread is not for argument, it was asking for information. I'm plenty chastised enough in other threads of this forum.
I've known of Reformed agreeing with creeds so that there is unity in belief, but I have never heard of any that reject anyone's salvation for failing to "confess" a creed.
There are, however, non-negotiable doctrines that all Christians accept that might be contained in certain creeds that would exclude people as Christian if the reject them. Things like the virgin birth, deity of Christ, The Triune Godhead, or the death, burial, & resurrection of Christ. If someone rejects those type doctrines, then they are something other than Christian.
FWIW, I do not debate via PMs. I use PMs as friendly communication and ignore attempts to debate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 5:52:49 PM
|
|
|
FolkSingerBlues
Posts: 555
Joined: 1/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
Well, FSB, if my tally is accurate, then the doctrinal position of the Restoration Movement as discussed in your above posts aligns essentially with all Five Articles of the Remonstrants. Since you claim that RM theology is based solely on Scripture, then you must also accept that basic Arminian theology is likewise supported by sound Biblical interpretation. Are you now ready to retract your assertion in post #16 that there is "Arminianist Theology with points that do not fully align with the Bible"?
drmark,
I suppose you can count your tally any which way you'd like.
I retract nothing, and I make no claim to being an "Arminian". The "5 Points of Arminianism" is only a synopsis of that theology.
Furthermore I didn't know that I ever claimed to be the judge of who "lost their salvation". I did however affirm that I believe it to be a relationship with God through Christ. Furthermore, the "5 Points of Arminianism" does not cover what the New Testament teaches in it's entirety. Why then should I make claim of such a theology?
_____________________________
My New Blog site
Proof texting is a very dangerous thing...If we were given the Scriptures it was to humble us into realizing God is right and the rest of us are just guessing.
-Rich Mullins
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Non-denominational churches - 9/3/2008 6:41:33 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3159
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I suppose you can count your tally any which way you'd like. Then I suppose you can continue to make erroneous claims that "Arminianist Theology does not fully align with the Bible" any which way you'd like. Just don't expect any of us to believe them! The theology of RM as presented by you is fully Arminian, FSB, regardless of what you claim to call it. It is also fully Biblical!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
