- This topic has 400 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
1. Biblical authority: Scripture is the ultimate guide for faith and practice.
2. Autonomy of the local church: Each church is self-governing and independent.
3. Priesthood of all believers: Every Christian has direct access to God without mediation.
4. Two ordinances: They practice believer’s baptism and the Lord’s Supper.
5. Individual soul liberty: Each person is responsible for their relationship with God.Does your church believe this too, and does 5 mean that you don’t think parents will be held at all accountable for their children’s actions? I’m not trying to start a debate. I’m just curious.
This past Sunday, we didn’t even have a sermon because our pastor felt God lead him to not do so even though he wanted to preach so bad!
🤣That’s pretty funny. My dad has never been led not to preach a sermon, but he has been scribbling new notes during readings because he felt the Holy Spirit leading him in other directions. It’s a running joke in our family that he never stays on his notes.
Just part of my summary. As far as I know, I’m pretty sure basically every denomination does singing. But we don’t just do things like hymns, and there are churches that don’t do instruments (I do know that much, lol).
That’s a relief.😅 Our church just does hymns and similar songs that aren’t classified as hymns for some reason but sound hymn-ish. At the camp I mentioned, we were doing songs around a fire, and the people leading it said we would probably know them, and I didn’t know any. 😂
Also, what does it mean to “do worship”? I’ve heard it used before, and I don’t know what it means.
There are two types of people in this world. Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Does your church believe this too, and does 5 mean that you don’t think parents will be held at all accountable for their children’s actions? I’m not trying to start a debate. I’m just curious.
You’re good, girl! I like discussions! Talking about what I believe is fun, tbh :3
Yes, we do believe in those 5 founding truths. Yes, number 5 means that each and every individual is responsible for their own relationship with God. We cannot earn our way to God, obviously (only Christ connects us to the father), but each and every individual is responsible for their own walk with God.
We believe that sin is on the individual, except when washed away by Jesus’ blood, of course, because then we are washed clean, and no one else will be held responsible for someone’s sin except for the one who sinned.
🤣That’s pretty funny. My dad has never been led not to preach a sermon, but he has been scribbling new notes during readings because he felt the Holy Spirit leading him in other directions. It’s a running joke in our family that he never stays on his notes.
Hey, you gotta do what God wants you to do. It is never a good idea to ignore the Holy Spirit. Trust me.😂
That’s a relief.😅 Our church just does hymns and similar songs that aren’t classified as hymns for some reason but sound hymn-ish. At the camp I mentioned, we were doing songs around a fire, and the people leading it said we would probably know them, and I didn’t know any. 😂
Interesting! My Grandparents’ (again, on Dad’s side) church ONLY does hymns, but my church also does more modern worship songs, so it’s really interesting to see what different churches do for worship.
Also, what does it mean to “do worship”? I’ve heard it used before, and I don’t know what it means.
*ponders how to answer this for a few minutes*
Ok, I’m not entirely sure how to describe this, but in my church, when we “do worship”, that means it’s the time during church service where we have instruments playing, sing songs, raise hands, praise God, etc.
It’s how we start just about every service, and it’s basically the time during which we show reverence for God through singing.
I’m not quite sure how else to describe it, tbh😅
✨ who the Son sets free is free indeed ✨
I’m not saying all do. What I am saying is that BECAUSE I’m Non-Denominational, we don’t have a set doctrine besides the Bible.
Oki :] I think every denomination/non-denomination has churches that drift towards different priorities, regardless of whether or not they call their priority a doctrine. I think we can agree it just depends.
I apologize if what I said was confusing. It’s hard to really explain something only through text and without being able to hear/see emotions 😅
That’s okay. I worried I was more confusing, tbh 😝
Yes, we sang and prayed and did worship for two hours without a sermon. It was absolutely A M A Z I N G
We’ve had evenings like that and they’re always so soothing! At least the way we sing XD We sit around the campfire outside our building and sing old hymns, or just inside, with the kids snoozing in their pajamas on the pews 😂🥰
Or in the middle of the day, with the dads belting out the lower notes like an organ🤣
People were feeling the presence of God, some falling, others hitting their knees on the ground and just sobbing (like me😂). Someone else was even being delivered from the presense of a demon.
O.O …That is quite different from my spiritual experience. I’m going to be completely honest with you… I find those situations to be potentially misleading, and I personally wouldn’t feel comfortable with it. Just something about it doesn’t sit right with me.
Ofc you were probably raised in your church, so it’s normal for you, right?
I feel the presence of God in my church, but it’s very different 😂
We have around a hundred and fifty members, and we know each other well. Every Sunday, they feel more and more like my family. I can genuinely say I have a dozen father figures who will give their clothes off their backs to take care of us… if we were in a post-apocalyptic world, that is. ;P
There’s also this unmistakable maturity that permeates our conversations. Spiritual welfare is incredibly important to us. At least one person always notices if I am acting strange or uncomfortable. And trust me, it is almost impossible to read my base expression.
Sure, sometimes people misunderstand each other, and they still sin. But when we’re at our best, I can imagine being with them for eternity, and never getting tired of it.
I cannot stress how much they mean to me, and how I can see God through them, if only in flashes.
That’s my experience :]
“Everything is a mountain”
Sorry Y’all, disappeared for a bit.
Ty for understanding and for your kindness <3
I’m still here to kindly discuss things if anyone would like, just not for debate 😊
♥
We believe baptism is not necessary for salvation and life in heaven, though obviously you should be baptized if at all possible. Some infants, such as those miscarried before birth, will not be able to be baptized. They will still go to heaven. I will need to ask my dad for the rest of his reasons and we have a book in our church stuff that explains this. Here is the answer from the Anglican Catechism.
“Why is it appropriate to baptize infants?” (Q. 129).
“Because it is a sign of God’s promise that they are embraced in the covenant community of Christ’s Church. Those who in faith and repentance present infants to be baptized vow to raise them in the knowledge and fear of the Lord, with the expectation that they will one day profess full Christian faith as their own. “
That’s fair enough to me, but I’m still confused as to what the ultimate difference is between that and someone who is baptized. You said they would call be able to call God Father, but is that just a worldly commitment then that bears no real significance in the hereafter?
I’ve seen mostly non-denoms and Pentecostals… but I haven’t asked a lot of people. I know godlyfantasy12 has some interesting Pentecostal views but I don’t think she would want a conversation about it.
Yeah, that’s been my experience. Question, what would you say your favorite denomination is, outside of Presbyterianism?
we’re independent, and that means our beliefs are purely based on the Bible and not on church doctrine. We just believe in the Bible, simply put. Not the opinions of the Church.
Oh, I was really confused for a second, this is what Freedom said, not me, lol! The thing about non-denoms is that they are secretly just thousands of mini denominations, each with their own sets of beliefs.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
many denominational churches I have seen/heard of hold so firmly to their church doctrine and some even place it above the authority of the Bible.
I’ve wondered why some churches don’t have a liturgy. I guess it’s to avoid this. In our church, we take tradition, liturgy, and the church history very seriously, but we don’t place it above the Bible, and we don’t believe it’s necessary for salvation.
You’re good, girl! I like discussions! Talking about what I believe is fun, tbh :3
Yes, we do believe in those 5 founding truths. Yes, number 5 means that each and every individual is responsible for their own relationship with God. We cannot earn our way to God, obviously (only Christ connects us to the father), but each and every individual is responsible for their own walk with God.
We believe that sin is on the individual, except when washed away by Jesus’ blood, of course, because then we are washed clean, and no one else will be held responsible for someone’s sin except for the one who sinned.
We believe that sin is primarily on the individual, but parents have a responsibility to raise and discipline their children, and pastors to pastor their flock. My dad is responsible for his congregation, and has to take care of and discipline them properly. He says that on the last day he will be held accountable for this. I suppose this would count as sin being on the individual, like maybe there were times he should have done something but didn’t.
Interesting! My Grandparents’ (again, on Dad’s side) church ONLY does hymns, but my church also does more modern worship songs, so it’s really interesting to see what different churches do for worship.
It is interesting. I think we’ve only done 3 modern songs ever, and I’m pretty sure at least 2 would count as hymns.
Ok, I’m not entirely sure how to describe this, but in my church, when we “do worship”, that means it’s the time during church service where we have instruments playing, sing songs, raise hands, praise God, etc.
It’s how we start just about every service, and it’s basically the time during which we show reverence for God through singing.
I’m not quite sure how else to describe it, tbh😅
Oh, okay. Our songs are more sprinkled throughout the service. We have a processional hymn, a before-the-reading-of-the-Gospel hymn, an offertory hymn, a recessional hymn, and during Christmas and Easter, a post communion hymn. We also sing the Gloria in Excelsis and a psalm. And we have a flutist.
There are two types of people in this world. Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
So your sounding more and more Pentecostal to me Freedom, would you say you identify with that at all? Pentecostals main deal is always seeking to be in attunement with the Holy Spirit, acting purely with His will, letting your own will go. Essentially if it feels right, it is right type stuff.
I honestly like Pentecostals, because they tend to be quite chill in the conversations I’ve had in most cases.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
It is more normal to me, yes. (although I haven’t necessarily been “raised” in this church…only been going to it about 6-7 years now, haha) I believe in such experiences, but I can’t explain how it feels to be in that moment, honestly…words just can’t describe it. Idk.
We all have things we are or aren’t comfortable with, and that’s ok!
We believe that sin is primarily on the individual, but parents have a responsibility to raise and discipline their children, and pastors to pastor their flock. My dad is responsible for his congregation, and has to take care of and discipline them properly. He says that on the last day he will be held accountable for this. I suppose this would count as sin being on the individual, like maybe there were times he should have done something but didn’t.
It is a parents job to raise their children and it is a pastor’s job to pastor the flock for sure! But we don’t believe that they will be held accountable if their child/church congregation sins, UNLESS they are also a part of that sin.
I hope that makes sense😅
Oh, okay. Our songs are more sprinkled throughout the service. We have a processional hymn, a before-the-reading-of-the-Gospel hymn, an offertory hymn, a recessional hymn, and during Christmas and Easter, a post communion hymn. We also sing the Gloria in Excelsis and a psalm. And we have a flutist.
That’s really interesting!!!
Here’s the thing about being Non-Denominational…you kinda agree with various denominations 😂
See, the pastor of my church was raised Baptist but became Pentacostal through the influence of his wife (who was raised Pentecostal) and together they started a Non-Denominational church.
So yes, I do identify with some Pentecostal beliefs (mainly involving the Holy Spirit) but Baptists with others.
In the end, almost every Christian denomination has at least one truth that I can agree with, and that’s where I find that it’s easier for me to go in and out of various Christian circles. I’m always willing to hear another opinion, and always willing to allow God to change my mind on things if those things need to be changed
: )
✨ who the Son sets free is free indeed ✨
Here’s the thing about being Non-Denominational…you kinda agree with various denominations 😂
See, the pastor of my church was raised Baptist but became Pentacostal through the influence of his wife (who was raised Pentecostal) and together they started a Non-Denominational church.
So yes, I do identify with some Pentecostal beliefs (mainly involving the Holy Spirit) but Baptists with others.
Makes sense to me! Yeah, like I said to Whale, my understanding is that every non-denom church is essentially it’s own mini denom, so it makes sense that it’s essentially a combination of various beliefs.
In the end, almost every Christian denomination has at least one truth that I can agree with, and that’s where I find that it’s easier for me to go in and out of various Christian circles. I’m always willing to hear another opinion, and always willing to allow God to change my mind on things if those things need to be changed
That’s a good mentality to have! Always be open to more truth, but hold to your values, and keep your heart and mind on the Savior in all times and all places:)
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
@thearcaneaxiom @theducktator @whalekeeper @freed_and_redeemed
Sorry I’ve been MIA, I had family from out of state staying with us because my great-grandfather passed away and the funeral was yesterday… but I’m back for a little bit before I leave for work!
On the topic of Baptists/non-demoninationals: Maybe I’m just stereotyping Baptists, but I feel like most non-denom churches I know of are charismatic/Pentecostal, and most Baptists don’t believe the gifts of the Holy Spirit are still in operation today. From what @freed_and_redeemed was saying, it sounds like our churches are very similar! My church is larger, though, so the Sunday services tend to be slightly more structured.
On the subject of baptism/infant baptism: My church has baby dedications every couple months. This basically is our way of dedicating the children to God, and after a public prayer of dedication, each family dedicating their baby will meet with a prayer minister for more individual prayer.
Then later, once the children are old enough to make their own decision to follow Jesus and accept Him as their Savior, then they can be baptized.
And random side note, acapella singing is so beautiful! During the funeral yesterday (my great-grandfather was Mennonite, and the funeral was held at his church) we sang some hymns acapella, and the harmonies in the room sounded amazing! I still prefer the more modern worship songs I’m used to, but I have an appreciation for churches who still sing hymns.
"Real love is for your good, not for your comfort." -Justin Whitmel Earley
Sorry I’ve been MIA, I had family from out of state staying with us because my great-grandfather passed away and the funeral was yesterday… but I’m back for a little bit before I leave for work!
No worries! I got work soon as well.
On the subject of baptism/infant baptism: My church has baby dedications every couple months. This basically is our way of dedicating the children to God, and after a public prayer of dedication, each family dedicating their baby will meet with a prayer minister for more individual prayer.
Then later, once the children are old enough to make their own decision to follow Jesus and accept Him as their Savior, then they can be baptized.
That’s really interesting that this is essentially the same thing as TheDucktator said, but in reverse, where there’s baptism, and later confirmation. The history is fascinating for how ideas split, diverge, and re-morph.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
@thearcaneaxiom @linus-smallprint (if you have thoughts)
Shifting this discussion is best, so we don’t flood the book review XD
Indeed we do have very different theological and cosmological prospectives. It just bugs me that that needs to be where the identity of us as Christians must be. Yes, theology is important, but what did Christ constantly denounce the Pharisees for doing? Weren’t they constantly concerning themselves about being right, and Christ was telling them how rather they should choose the right, and humble themselves before God? It just feels like there’s so much gatekeeping that is in the same spirit as those days. Mind that I bear no ill feelings to you either, but that’s my take.
At least from what I can see, Christ did not denounce the Pharisees for trying to be right – because they weren’t. They were pretending to search for truth, and instead abused the original covenant conditions by deconstructing them into aimless laws.
Theology is the biggest thing you can get right or wrong, because it is necessary to salvation. People say “oh theology isn’t that big of a deal, just be a Christian” when your view of God is literally what makes you a Christian or not. I don’t mean to sound like I’m gatekeeping, and I apologize if you feel treated unfairly by those you want to associate yourself with. However, the gatekeeping in biblical times was unfair because it restricted those of nationality, background, and abilities, and ultimately contradicted the the theme of grace.
This is not gatekeeping, this is defining of ideas. Say my little sister came up to me, and said it was unfair for a penguin to not be an ostrich. I would say they are in the same realm of species (we both believe in God, in this and that), but the two birds have different bone structures. If we combined the birds’ categories, soon we wouldn’t have any categories at all.
The term Christianity has come to mean those who believe in Jesus’ sacrifice as perfect God and perfect Man, and who believe there is no need for further atonement. They fully believe in the Bible as an infallible source of knowledge – including the Trinity and several other concepts which are necessary to how Jesus’ sacrifice works in the first place.
Maybe some people on here don’t think that. But that is my position on the subject if we have any further conversation. I can see our two perspectives have different bone and wing structures. And again, I’m not condemning you, but just feel definitions are important.
Since you brought it up, my understanding of the priesthood in the particular context you’re talking about comes down to law. Moses gave a lower law (the Aaronic Priesthood), then Christ came and told us to live by a higher law, which is the law in its entirety. As Christ put it, He didn’t come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. He wasn’t removing the Priesthood, He was completing it. It is the keys to the kingdom He gave to Peter, that Catholics believe is maintained in the line of Popes.
I agree Christ completed the priesthood. But he is the ultimate Priest who fully fits the role, so we need no more priests or continuation of the Aaronic Priesthood. The picture of the Priest is meant to reflect how we don’t need to make our own atonement, as he does everything for us unconditionally. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you… ? I’ve just starting reading through the Book of Mormon and that was a detail that doesn’t necessarily contradict the theme, but certainly doesn’t aid it.
So why do you not tell me more about your beliefs so that I do not make another assumption? What would you say makes someone a Christian?
Linus makes a great point! I should let you talk some more, before I talk my way out of town… XD
“Everything is a mountain”
@linus-smallprint @whaley
(Also, as you and Whaley have suggested, perhaps we should take this over to the Apologetics chat and leave this to people who want to discuss Tress of the Emerald Sea)
I agree, so I’m just going to make the switch right now.
A couple of things. Firstly, I did not realize the term ‘Mormon’, is offensive, I am sorry for using it and will be more careful in the future. Secondly, I did not realize that you are a member of The Church of the Latter-Day Saints. Your question from earlier makes so much more sense now.
No worries at all. We just don’t like the term because it takes the focus off of Christ. We respect Mormon as a great prophet who compiled the record now known as the Book of Mormon, but we don’t esteem him as anything beyond that. It’s our belief that this is a restoration of Christ’s Church first and foremost, so we try to make sure to use the proper name to express that. As Christ said in the Book of Mormon: If it be a church of a man, name it after a man, but this is my Church, so you shall call it in my name.
Sorry I didn’t specify btw, I thought of editing the question to “why deny his devotion to Christ” instead of ‘our’, but decided against it.
Now in response to your question as to why I draw a line between Christians and The Church of the Latter-Day Saints. There are some things The Church of the Latter-Day Saints gets wrong that I believe are some primary issues. As Whaley was saying, I can’t know whether or not you are a Christian and I am not saying you aren’t, as we have seen, I have already got a couple of things wrong about you. I know you even less, which makes it harder for me to tell. So why do you not tell me more about your beliefs so that I do not make another assumption? What would you say makes someone a Christian?
Thank you for you’re openness. So as I’ve discussed with Whaley, we do have some very fundamentally different beliefs. Nicene Christianity has made a construct of primary and secondary issues to define where we can collectively agree on what needs to be professed to be Christian. Unfortunately for people like me, I differ in those primary issues. However, I personally have issues with the construct as a whole. A primary issue for example is the understanding of God’s triune nature, but a secondary issue is an understanding of whether God chooses who’s saved vs if we have the full ability to choose God, or whether baptism is necessary for salvation. I would personally say that those secondary issues are actually far more relevant to our experience, because they changes the nature of the Good News for us fundamentally. In contrast, knowing the nature of God, while important, I don’t think changes the way we should live our lives and seek and praise Him.
Ultimately to me, when it comes down to what defines a Christian, I think the only one who has any right to define it is God. That being said, I personally believe a Christian to be exactly what the name etymologically implies: a follower of Christ. Christ said that the world will know us as His disciples if we love one another as He loves us. There can be a Catholics, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Members of the Church of Jesus Christ, ect, who are not true Christians, because they do not seek to follow Christ, even if they are dedicated to correct theology. Each of those groups can have true Christians though, as long as they sincerely love and follow Christ faithfully. Now, while that’s my personal definition, I do fit in a more narrowed definition many traditional Christians would agree with. I believe and worship the same Christ spoken of in the New Testament. He walked the earth, and lived a perfect life, and He was eternally humble and loving in that ministry. I believe that He died on the cross, suffering for our sins, and literally rose on the third day. There is no way I am saved but by His grace, for He is my Savior. I would say that that should cover it, but still some will disagree, and that’s ok. Only God can judge. (Thanks for listening to my rant😅)
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
Oh, lol, you beat me to the switch, I’ll read through your post now
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
At least from what I can see, Christ did not denounce the Pharisees for trying to be right – because they weren’t. They were pretending to search for truth, and instead abused the original covenant conditions by deconstructing them into aimless laws.
I don’t necessarily see how those ideas are mutually exclusive. Mind you that I didn’t say that the Pharisees were “trying to be right”, but rather concerned themselves about “being right” in the prideful sense. The connotation I’m implying here is that they believed themselves to be right, and were boastful in that belief. They didn’t lack belief in God, and they believed they were chosen teachers. They simply indulged themselves to pride, and were not open to real truth. This went so far into the extreme to the point that they also indulged in corruption and sin. Even when Christ pointed out their obvious self contradiction, and improper practice, they refused to listen. They new deep down that He was right, but they were so drugged up on pride that they refused to actually look upon their own faults.
Theology is the biggest thing you can get right or wrong, because it is necessary to salvation. People say “oh theology isn’t that big of a deal, just be a Christian” when your view of God is literally what makes you a Christian or not. I don’t mean to sound like I’m gatekeeping, and I apologize if you feel treated unfairly by those you want to associate yourself with. However, the gatekeeping in biblical times was unfair because it restricted those of nationality, background, and abilities, and ultimately contradicted the the theme of grace.
I don’t necessarily disagree to an extent. Personally, I believe that we are judged by our understanding, but if we end up having a wrong understanding, we’ll be ok, because we worked best with what we had to seek truth honestly, if that is what we truly sought. If we come to an understanding that there is more or different truth than what we have, yet willfully reject it, whether because of pride or fear or something, then we have a problem. If I’m wrong about, say, the Trinity, that comes out of a fundamental belief that it isn’t true, so I reject it, but only out of ignorance. I don’t think you’d agree with this view, but a lot of Christians I’ve chatted with do.
Think about it this way. I have a best friend who I wrongly assume has ketchup for blood. Does this misconception of mine impact the relationship I have with my friend? It may be wrong, and it may ultimately not make sense, but I would still be able to talk to and love my friend. There are layers to this though. Say I now believed instead that my friend was invisible. Does this impact my relationship with my friend? Heavily. Now when my friend walks up to me, and says hi, I will reject them as my friend, because of the incorrect belief that they are invisible.
Similarly, there are kinds of views of God’s nature that can indeed destroy the relationship you have with Him, but there are also some that while incorrect, God could accept and forgive our ignorance. Maybe that’s wrong, but that’s what I believe.
One thing I should mention is that I don’t necessarily desire to be associated with traditional Christianity. I love them as fellow disciples, and I believe we can all draw closer to Christ by drawing closer together, but I am devoted to my own faith. I do however, wish to be associated with Christ, which is why I defend my identity as a Christian so much. I say this with not an inkling of disrespect, but I’m just clarifying that I’m not trying to join the club, I just find these views on what is an isn’t Christian to be ultimately incorrect. I don’t believe you have treated me unfairly, in fact, I quite enjoy our conversations, and find them productive. Indeed you’re absolutely right though that life in general is unfair, and that God has chosen Israel. He didn’t even condemn things like slavery. You and I view those things in very different lenses though. I don’t see God choosing Israel as condemning the rest of the world.
This is not gatekeeping, this is defining of ideas. Say my little sister came up to me, and said it was unfair for a penguin to not be an ostrich. I would say they are in the same realm of species (we both believe in God, in this and that), but the two birds have different bone structures. If we combined the birds’ categories, soon we wouldn’t have any categories at all.
Now you’ve actually given an analogy that works on my behalf. A penguin is not an ostrich, and have very different body plans, but they are both birds. The question is, does the title of “Christian” act as the category of “bird” or like the sub category of “penguin”? Are not the body plans of a Presbyterian and a Lutheran different? Maybe they are both subspecies of penguin, and penguin is the true Christian body-plan, but maybe penguin is only one body plan out of all the Christian bird species, vs the rest of the non-Christian non-bird animal kingdom. You’re 100% right about needing to define ideas. I just ask if ideas as important as this we can simply say is only a penguin, then what is the name for ‘bird’, and what separates that name from ‘animal’?
The term Christianity has come to mean those who believe in Jesus’ sacrifice as perfect God and perfect Man, and who believe there is no need for further atonement. They fully believe in the Bible as an infallible source of knowledge – including the Trinity and several other concepts which are necessary to how Jesus’ sacrifice works in the first place.
Yeah, if that’s the definition, then that’s the definition, and I don’t fit in it. What I stress though is that we don’t make the definitions of who truly follows God, God does. You will of course stress that God has made this definition clear in the Bible, but I would push back on that strongly. And it may be the case that we will just need to agree to disagree on it, though I’d love to discuss the biblical side if so desired.
Maybe some people on here don’t think that. But that is my position on the subject if we have any further conversation. I can see our two perspectives have different bone and wing structures. And again, I’m not condemning you, but just feel definitions are important.
As I’ve previously admitted, we have very different views. I just don’t see why we can’t see each other as birds, despite those different bone and wing structures. Once again, is Christian the same as penguin, or the same as bird🤷♂️ This is a question worth asking.
I agree Christ completed the priesthood. But he is the ultimate Priest who fully fits the role, so we need no more priests or continuation of the Aaronic Priesthood. The picture of the Priest is meant to reflect how we don’t need to make our own atonement, as he does everything for us unconditionally. Maybe I’m misunderstanding you… ?
This is correct in many ways. Let’s consider the law of sacrifice. Because Christ was the ultimate sacrifice, and the lamb was the symbol for the sacrifice, we no longer make literal lamb sacrifices. However, this does not imply that the law of sacrifice is no longer in force in our lives. The law of sacrifice now takes the form of offering a broken heart and contrite spirit. We still must offer that sacrifice daily. It’s just the higher and holier form of the law.
Now in the case of the Priest, if the priest is a symbol for the atonement also, and Christ fulfills that role, then that doesn’t imply the removal of priests. Revelation 20:6 states: “Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years”. This can imply a different manifestation of the priesthood, as priesthood is connected to things like sacrifice, it’s now connected to the new sacrifice we make today.
I’ve just starting reading through the Book of Mormon and that was a detail that doesn’t necessarily contradict the theme, but certainly doesn’t aid it.
Cool! Where are you at currently? Also, could you elaborate on what you’re referring to a point that doesn’t contradict the theme? Do you mean that the view of the priesthood I just gave doesn’t aid the theme of the Book of Mormon so far?
Linus makes a great point! I should let you talk some more, before I talk my way out of town… XD
No worries! You can see my explanation to Linus if you want to know how I define it.
He is perfect in Justice, yet He is perfect in Mercy, even when we fail Him. For this, He is good.
Ultimately to me, when it comes down to what defines a Christian, I think the only one who has any right to define it is God. That being said, I personally believe a Christian to be exactly what the name etymologically implies: a follower of Christ. Christ said that the world will know us as His disciples if we love one another as He loves us. There can be a Catholics, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Presbyterians, Members of the Church of Jesus Christ, ect, who are not true Christians, because they do not seek to follow Christ, even if they are dedicated to correct theology. Each of those groups can have true Christians though, as long as they sincerely love and follow Christ faithfully. Now, while that’s my personal definition, I do fit in a more narrowed definition many traditional Christians would agree with. I believe and worship the same Christ spoken of in the New Testament. He walked the earth, and lived a perfect life, and He was eternally humble and loving in that ministry. I believe that He died on the cross, suffering for our sins, and literally rose on the third day. There is no way I am saved but by His grace, for He is my Savior. I would say that that should cover it, but still some will disagree, and that’s ok. Only God can judge. (Thanks for listening to my rant😅)
Thank you for providing this answer. I do agree with a lot of what you said, such as how whether or not God chooses who he will save is a secondary issue and how going to a church, no matter what the denomination, does not determine whether or not someone is a Christian. However, I still would like some more clarification, if you do not mind. You say that to be a Christian, you must follow Christ. Could you define what following Christ means?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.