jmoon@lehi3b15.csee.lehigh.edu (Jonggu Moon [890911]) (12/19/89)
Over here in old L.U., there are more than one Christian Fellowships. There's Lehigh Christian Fellowship of IVCF, Navigators, the Fellowship of Christian Atheletes and the Roman Catholic Newman Center. And we pretty much ignore each other. Why are there so many different Christian Groups on Earth ? If the God described in the Bible exists, why are the Presbyterians keeping their distance from the Baptists ? What are the Protestants and the Roman Catholics at each other's throats in Ireland ? Are the people who believe in one of these interpretations going to heaven while the rest go to hell ? Of all things, this area causes the greatest doubt in me regarding the validity of Christ. We have been commanded to make disciples of all nations by creating envy in them for our way of life. But here we are, literaly brother against brother, shouting from the mountain tops not necessarily God's word, but our conflicting interpretations of His word. Why would an omnipotent and loving God allow his "wife" to splinter and scatter into into miriads of conflicting pieces ? Excuse my melodramatic prose. But this topic hit home today. One of my friends feels that come the day when his family is blessed with children, it would be better if he stayed home while his wife (who has the higher salary) went to work. After all, he is the better cook and someone has to stay home to give a Christian environment to raise the children in. Apon this announcement ( far in the future since the baby won't be due for years ) another friend raised concerns that this reasoning is contrary to the word of God as expressed in Paul's writings to the churches. Now there is ill feeling between the two which looks like it will escalate to mutual alienation based on the belief that the other has it sorrowfully wrong. Now they are praying that the other's heart be softened so that he may see the "truth". Where is the holy spirit in cases like these ? Someone please enlighten me. Stuggling to know his will, Jon ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [For better or worse, the Holy Spirit does not give us unanimity in doctrine. If I were managing the Universe, I'd see to it that my Church spoke with one voice. That God has not chosen to do that may say that his values are different than mine. Perhaps he is trying to teach us humility. My theory is that it's a judgement on the Church, like the judgement described in the Tower of Babel story. The medieval church was very proud of being a single organization. So proud that it managed to confuse the organization with God. (I say this without intended to condemn modern Catholics. The medieval church was the spiritual ancestor of all of us. I see no reason to think that Presbyterians would be any more immune to institutional pride than Catholics.) God took steps to see that this would never happen again. But the problem that remains is how to deal with each other in so that we realize we are one body of Christ, but do not paper over the differences between us. It should be possible to disagree with another Christian without compromising our judgement on truth, but still retain him as a brother. This it seems to me is more the issue than the many denominations. The denominations in and of themselves aren't really that much of a problem. Sure, one has a bishop and another has a congregational polity. But nobody (I hope) confuses our rules of order with the Gospel. (Indeed perhaps that's one reason that there *are* so many -- to make sure that no one makes that confusion.) The more significant issues do not necessarily follow denominational lines: inerrancy, the role of women, abortion, etc. Some denominations have made one or another of these issues a matter of church discipline, and thus are unanimous. But generally they cut across denominational boundaries. Maybe God is trying to create a kind of unity based entirely in him. The Church is not a political party. Its unity does not consist in adopting a unified platform. Its unity consists in being members of one Lord. At least that's the only sense *I* can make out of things... --clh]
davidbu@tekigm2.men.tek.com (David Buxton) (12/21/89)
{Jonggu asks:}
> Why are there so many different Christian Groups on Earth ?
> . . . .
Here is the story as I see it:
By the time this earth's history gets to the time of Christ there is a lot
of missunderstanding about God. One very vital reason why Jesus came was
to clear this up. Jesus said - if you have seen me you have seen the
Father. He was saying that if we know what Jesus is like we know what God
is like.
Right after Jesus was here on earth the Gospel exploded out throughout the
world. But then over the years, just as man came to missunderstand God, so
man again lost sight of true Christianity. One big problem was, that for
the majority, only the priests could read the scriptures. And most of the
priests did not read it much if at all. People were taught that the Bible
was only for heretics and to be burned at the stake along with heretics.
Religion was more and more built on tradition rather than the Bible.
We also read Paul's concern that a falling away was already beginning at
his time. Many non scriptural traditions came into the early church along
with the inrush of Pagan converts and the desire of the early church to
accomodate them. One example is baptism. The earliest Cathedrals have
large baptismal tanks. The later Cathedrals opted for sprinkling.
Finally history takes us to the printing press and the reformation.
Luther, for example, did not allow certain reforms because he feared that
if the reformation moved too fast it would be too much for the simple
peasants to handle. Some of the reforms reacted to one form of traditional
extreme by rushing off to the opposite extreme. Some reformers stood upon
the shoulders of previous reformers and other reformers reacted, at least
in some areas, detrimentally to previous reforms. Each reformer has had
his following that, at least at first, locked in to what each reformer
taught. Each is to a greater or lesser degree the product of the
reformer(s) that founded each church.
Some churches reformed very little from 'the church' of the traditional
centuries. Other churches are much closer to scripture, having rejected a
much higher percentage of tradition in favor of scripture. Some churches
subscribe to very little of the Bible and a few are even basically
Agnostic. At the other end of the spectrum are the churches that have
little patience with tradition, especially if there is little or no support
in terms of Bible texts to support it. Some are so radical about tradition
that they have nothing to do with Christmas, for example - which was
instituted as the Mass of Christ upon a pagan date.
Perhaps there is a message here. If we can each study the scriptures for
ourselves to find personally what it teaches; instead of trying to
reconcile what the Bible teaches with what a particular church teaches;
perhaps we could each really find the truth that the Bible offers. Our
objective is to understand what God is trying to communicate to each one of
us in His book, the Bible.
Dave (David E. Buxton)
davidbu@tekigm2.MEN.TEK.COMMATH1H3@uhvax1.uh.edu (David H. Wagner) (12/21/89)
> [For better or worse, the Holy Spirit does not give us unanimity in > doctrine. > The Church is not a > political party. Its unity does not consist in adopting a unified > platform. Its unity consists in being members of one Lord. At least > that's the only sense *I* can make out of things... --clh] I do not think I can accept a notion that makes God responsible for the disunity of the church. The Holy Spirit teaches us one body of doctrine in the written word of God. The source of false doctrine is the devil. Christ taught this in the parable of the sower and the parable of the weeds in the wheat. It is the devil who divides the visible church. God may use this division to serve his purpose, but he is not the source of the division. I believe that there is one true, undivided Christian church. This church is not my church, (the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod), but it is an invisible church, which is the body of Christ's believers. The church is present wherever the means of grace, namely the Word of God and the sacraments he instituted, (Baptism and Lord's Supper). are being used, for there God is working faith in people's hearts. To paraphrase the Lutheran Confessions (Smalcald Articles?), "We refuse to accept that the Papists are the church, for they are not. A seven year old child knows what the church is, namely the body of believers gathered in assembly." I agree that the church is not a political party. However the unity of the church does involve doctrinal unity. In 1 Cor 10 Paul wrote: "I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought." The principle here is that unity of fellowship requires unity of doctrine. (With more time I might find more Scriptural foundation for this, but this will have to do for now). Even though a visible church cannot claim to be THE church, it ought not to practice fellowship with those who teach false doctrine. David Wagner My opinions and beliefs are completely separated from my employer's.
oh@m2.ti.com (Stephen Oh) (12/21/89)
In article <Dec.19.01.41.44.1989.14469@athos.rutgers.edu> jmoon@lehi3b15.csee.lehigh.edu (Jonggu Moon [890911]) writes: >Over here in old L.U., there are more than one Christian Fellowships. >There's Lehigh Christian Fellowship of IVCF, Navigators, >the Fellowship of Christian Atheletes and the Roman Catholic Newman Center. >And we pretty much ignore each other. >Why are there so many different Christian Groups on Earth ? >If the God described in the Bible exists, why are the Presbyterians >keeping their distance from the Baptists ? What are the Protestants >and the Roman Catholics at each other's throats in Ireland ? I think that I have to add one more thing to this subject. When Jesus was at Earth, he gave us a command, "Love each other just as much as I love you." And so many modern churches are fighting each other because of thier tiny doctorines. I think this is a serious sin against God that modern churches commit. What is the most important thing being a Christian? Love or your dogma? I wish that all church could sever all nations and communities in the harmony of Love. I was raised in Roman Catholic and now I am attending a Presbyterian Church. Our Pastor alway attacks Roman Catholic and he told me that I have to go thru some service which indicating that I am accepting the doctorines of the Presbyterian Chruch. He said that he recognize the baptism from Roman Catholic Church; but since Roman Catholic is really different from the Presbyterian Church, I have to do that. I think this is not needed or even waste. +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ | Stephen Oh oh@csc.ti.com | Texas Instruments | | Speech and Image Understandung Lab. | Computer Science Center| +----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+ [Assuming you're talking about the Presbyterian Church (USA) and not one of the smaller conservative groups, I think there's some misunderstanding here. Most churches that I know ask you to confess your faith in some way when you join. This seems to go back to the early church, and simply makes sure that those joining the Church understand what it means to be a Christian. There is nothing specifically Presbyterian in what you are asked. As of 1985, the questions asked were "Who is your Lord and Savior?" [the intended answer is "Jesus Christ"], "Do you trust in him?", "Do you intend to be his disciple...", "Will you be a faithful member of this congregation, giving of yourself in every way..." [This is not intended to commit you to details of doctrine, but to point out that being a Christian commits you to being active in service]. In principle, these questions are only asked if you have never been a member of a church before. There is a procedure called "transfer of letter" by which one church certifies that someone is a member in good standing. This is normally used when you move from one church to another. If your current church (which need not be Presbyterian) will issue a letter of transfer, we will accept their testimony that you are a Christian. In that case, we ask only the last question. (Indeed from the constitution it's not clear that even that is needed.) This is a sign of the fact that when a church receives a new member, it is not a private act, but they are functioning for the Universal Church. Thus if you have already been received by another church, we accept that. Unfortunately, a Catholic church is probably not going to issue a letter of transfer to a Presbyterian church. So you'll end up being received by "reaffirmation of faith", and answering the full set of questions. It seems to me that this procedure gives the maximum possible recognition to actions of other churches, and does not ask you to any assent to anything that any Christian would find out of line. It's not at all unusual for former Catholics to join our church. Formally, they are treated no differently than people from any other church, though it's possible that some pastors would spend additional care in explaining things, since there are greater differences between Presbyterians and Catholics than between Presbyterians and other Protestant churches. There is nothing wrong with a pastor making sure that someone coming from the Catholic tradition understands the differences in our traditions, but if a Presbyterian pastor makes a practice of attacking the Catholic church, I am upset. --clh]
gross@dg-rtp.dg.com (Gene Gross) (01/01/90)
In article <Dec.19.01.41.44.1989.14469@athos.rutgers.edu> jmoon@lehi3b15.csee.lehigh.edu (Jonggu Moon [890911]) writes: >Why are there so many different Christian Groups on Earth ? >If the God described in the Bible exists, why are the Presbyterians >keeping their distance from the Baptists ? What are the Protestants >and the Roman Catholics at each other's throats in Ireland ? > >Are the people who believe in one of these interpretations going >to heaven while the rest go to hell ? Jon, you have hit upon a topic that has caused me to stop and ponder long and hard. I have no definitive answers for anyone, just the musings and thought of a middle-aged man still on a long journey. I would have a real problem with denominations if each was a separate religion. While they often act that way, they aren't. We have one God, one Lord, and one Faith. We have our differences, but different isn't wrong (necessarily) it is just different. The real problem comes when we use our denominational differences as justification for refusing to fellowship with each other. When we refuse to bow in prayer together, we are not Loving as we are commanded to do by Jesus Christ Himself. When we refuse to break bread together, we are not Loving as we are commanded to do by Jesus Christ Himself. The various denominations do serve to reach people by providing a diversity for worship and governance while maintaining the essentials of the Faith. Personally, I am unwilling to recommend that we do away with denominations at this time. I have faith that God will do away with them in His own good time. But I see no reason that we can't fellowship and worship together as the Holy Spirit moves amongst us. I think what happens is that too often folks believe, rightly or wrongly, that they have received *THE* truth and *KNOW* all the correct doctrine. And just about the time they have God in their box for Him, He breaks out. I know because I've done this myself many times when I first became a Christian. Then I found myself praying, studying, and worshipping with Brothers and Sisters who were from different denominations. It had an interesting impact upon my life to find out that we were following the same Lord and God. It was also interesting to me to note that the differences need not separate us so long as we Loved each other as commanded. Such Love would not let us harm or hurt another. We were quite sensitive to the needs of each other and to the doctrine we had each learned. We found that we could discuss our doctrinal differences in a Loving manner. Eventually, we found more unity than we did disunity. Where did denominations come from? One pastor that I've read suggested that it was done by Satan in an attempt to derail the Church. Maybe it is as Brother Hedrick suggests--God's doing. I confess that I do not know. But maybe this is quite as important as what do we do now? Do we allow this to interfere with the furtherance of the Gospel? Do we let this prevent us from fellowshipping and worshipping together? Or do we rise above all of the pettiness and in Love for our Master and each other press on toward the high calling that is in Jesus Christ our Lord? This is not a call for ecumenicism as much as it is a call for those of us who call ourselves Christian to respond as Christians. What ever we do must be done in and through Love. If it is not, then we have missed the boat. Jesus told the world, and us, how the world would know we are His--by our Love. I can't speak for anyone else at this point, but for me this means a number of very specific things. If someone is hurting, I must first deal with the reason for their pain. If someone is hungry, I must deal with their hunger. If someone is sick, I must first deal with their disease. If someone is in any need whatsoever, I must deal with that need. I must do so with no strings attached and without any demands on them. I must live a life that is uniquely Christian in action and perspective. And none of this has anything to do with denomination. But it does have everything to do with Christ and the Faith that I call Christian. I don't know if this helps much at all. Brother, I love you and don't want anything to sway you from the simplicity and Love that is in the Gospels and, more importantly, in Jesus Christ. The issue you brought up about the two brothers is IMHO clearly a matter that each of them must decide for themselves. I can find support for both positions in the text of Scripture. So I can only say that it is a matter that must be submitted to God in earnest prayer and supplication. Then when a decision is reached, the rest of us be in support of the decision of that Brother. But again, this is my humble opinion, for whatever it is worth. It simply occurs to me that maybe God has a reason for the Brother to stay home and for his wife to work and support the family. When we become dogmatic about such things as this, we start building that God-box again. Peace be to you, His Peace, Gene Gross
car@cblpn.att.com (Clarissa A Brower) (01/01/90)
In article <Dec.21.03.10.42.1989.22125@athos.rutgers.edu>, oh@m2.ti.com (Stephen Oh) writes: > In article <Dec.19.01.41.44.1989.14469@athos.rutgers.edu> jmoon@lehi3b15.csee.lehigh.edu (Jonggu Moon [890911]) writes: > >Over here in old L.U., there are more than one Christian Fellowships. > >There's Lehigh Christian Fellowship of IVCF, Navigators, > >the Fellowship of Christian Atheletes and the Roman Catholic Newman Center. > >And we pretty much ignore each other. > >Why are there so many different Christian Groups on Earth ? So called "traditional" denominations (Methodist, Baptist, etc.) usually attract a certain kind of Christian. Often, these are middle class families with children. Of course, there are exceptions, this is a generalization for the sake of argument. The fellowships such as IVCF, Navigators, etc. are often called the "parachurch." These are focusing on a specific group of people that for one reason or another may not belong to a "traditional" church. The informality and common age group are examples of what might attract a person to a parachurch. There is a place and a role for both. For a good discussion on how the two approaches could be combined read, "Unleashing the Church" by Frank(?) Tillapaugh. > >If the God described in the Bible exists, why are the Presbyterians > >keeping their distance from the Baptists ? What are the Protestants > >and the Roman Catholics at each other's throats in Ireland ? In the case of the two examples above, often political differences are as much a problem as doctrinal. In the town where my parents grew up, many of the other Protestants do not appreciate the fact that the Baptists led the temperance movement back in the 20s. Of course, that was a long time ago, but it gives you an example of how churches can that may agree on doctrine can disagree in ways that create division. With the situation in Ireland, there is a prolonged political and economic conflict there that goes back long before Protestant vs. Catholic. As for the differences in denominations, it is a good idea to find out from each group what their doctrine and beliefs are. Some of the denominations are close in beliefs, some are not, I won't even try to go into the differences and whether or not some are "more right" than others. There is an ecumenical movement that attempts to build unity among Christian congregations. Those that do not participate feel that, for one reason or another, some of the churches involved are not correctly preaching the word of God. I hope this has been helpful. I chose not to state my position on ecumenicism since it is a controversial issue that many churches disagree on. As a result, you could see postings for and against ecumenicism for days and you wouldn't have an "official" answer of if it is right or wrong. C. Brower AT&T-NS -I don't speak for AT&T