How much of your church's doctine do you have a really good understanding of? Are there any assumptions you hold that may or may not be a doctrinal standard in your church? How important do you think it is to understand the doctrine's of your church?

I have been recently confronted with the fact that I'm not really too familiar with my church's doctrine or more precisely where the line is drawn on certain doctrines. I feel that it is important for me to understand this so that I can be assured, as much as my limited reason can allow, that I am worshipping in the way the Lord wishes me to. I desire to worship the Lord in Spirit and in Truth, therefore I think I need to start by studying the Word and the doctrinal standard of my particular church.

Do ya'll think this is a worthwhile pursuit or is it a distraction from serving and worshipping Christ?

[This message has been edited by Mrs. Lovelight (edited 12/29/2005 2:26p).]

What if you come to the conclusion that your Church's doctrine is not what you think the truth from the scripture is?

Go to the scriptures -- if the place you worship is not abiding in the doctrine of Christ -- then I would leave and go somewhere that was abiding in the doctrine of Christ.

Well, I imagine that I will cross that bridge when I come to it and do so w/prayer and counsel.

I want to make myself clear, I'm not dissatisfied w/my current church but I do want to know and better understand it's doctrine.

I would encourage anyone to learn with an open mind.

Very True!

Great question!

My church is pretty cool in that it is right up front with its beliefs. We have broken them down into what we call the "30 Core Competencies."

These core competencies consists of:

10 Core Beliefs

10 Core Practices

10 Core Virtues

Here is an example:

quote:

---

Authority of the Bible

I believe the Bible is the Word of God and has the right to command my belief and action.

2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

---

The 30 Core Competencies are really very good and thought provoking. Basically, Pastor Randy Frazee, in consultation with some brilliant men like Dallas Willard, distilled the "basics" from the Bible. The 30 competencies overlap, but they are a great way to "think about" what it means to be a Christian.

If you want to check them out, click here: http://www.pantego.org/resources/30core.html

Or download this PDF file: http://www.pantego.org/30cc.pdf

FTA

p.s. Randy Frazee is no longer with my church. He is now with Willow Creek in Chicago, and I believe Willow Creek is adopting the 30 Core COmpetencies as well. Our new pastor, David Daniels, has embraced the concept.

[This message has been edited by Fightin TX Aggie (edited 12/29/2005 2:50p).]

quote:

---

I would encourage anyone to learn with an open mind.

---

And lots of discernment.

quote:

---

Authority of the Bible

I believe the Bible is the Word of God and has the right to command my belief and action.

2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

---

Did he even know what the scripture was up to that point? Did he know what other people were writing and what would go into the modern day Bible?

i think my church doctrine is "blah, blah, blah". the pastor loves to hear himself speak. it seems like the song/worship part of the service will be done away with some day. it's not a service anymore, it's a lecture.

blueagman:

2 Timothy was written probably around the year 66 AD, so Paul was likely referring to the Torah.

It is possible he had read some of the Gospels by the year 66, but that is just speculation.

Now, Paul wrote his letter to the Romans about 10 years earlier, but one wonders if he considered it to be scripture!

Some date Galatians to 48 AD!

quote:

---

Do ya'll think this is a worthwhile pursuit or is it a distraction from serving and worshipping Christ?

---

I think it is a necessary and worthwhile pursuit.

Once you understand what your church "believes", then you have to compare that to what you believe (or what you are accepting based on your church). My experience is that this step can be a distraction depending on how quickly you want to come to a conclusion on all of the issues.

--very good question. I am constantly astounded by people who tell me that they are Catholic, Baptist, Pres., Luth., etc, then when we start discussing things, they have no idea what their church teaches. Most time I know more about their church doctrine than they do, and I am far from knowing that much.

Also, there is the "party line" and what many actually believe in the denomination.

[This message has been edited by The Lone Stranger (edited 12/29/2005 7:40p).]

I would hope every member of a church would know what the offical doctrine is. And I would hope that you would agree with that doctrine. And I would hope that you would think that your church is the best. Otherwise, I would leave there and find one that does.

Too many people are put off by talk of religion and politics, and use that as an excuse not to ever discuss them. I never have felt that way, and I never will. I try to dig into theology daily, because it brings me closer to Jesus. After all, if you love someone, don't you want to know everything about that person?

Knowing doctrine and teaching is without question important. And there is never any harm with becoming more familiar with the Bible, the better to worship in truth.

The issue for me is what I would term spiritual honesty. Is it possible to remain formally a part of organized Christians who think abortion and homosexuality are okay - sometimes, in some cases, ect - and are afraid of speaking unfashionable truths no matter consequences?

This was an attraction of the Church. Thinking through Christianity seriously, for example, for me means abortion is always wrong, no exceptions. None. It is the taking of innocent life. But what denominations would stand on that today? Not even the Southern Baptists (as an organization).

My church does.

Chris Osborne at Central Baptist is VERY out of the closet on being pro-life. He has nothing good to say about abortion.

Southern Baptists have a book called BAPTIST FAITH AND MESSAGE which is the official statement of doctrine for the denomination. In theory every church with the SBC label is supposed to back this 100% and not regard it as a cafeteria line for selective picking and choosing.

In theory.

Chris Osborne is the man! Love that dude.

Southern Baptists, no question, are better than the other denominations on this issue.

But you still have public figures like Clinton and Jimmy Carter, church autonomy (differences on important social issues, including this one), American Baptists, and...
look at this, re: Southern Baptists:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/baptist/sbcabres.html
Be it further RESOLVED, That we call upon Southern Baptists to work for legislation that will allow the possibility of abortion under such conditions as rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother

I thought Southern Baptists were against abortion in any and all cases?

Can't you people get it straight.

Catholics......good

Protestants....bad

No, more like a strong pro-life stand and the long-held teaching that marriage is an indissoluble ideal – firmly against the prevailing winds of what is popular, even as most denominations are incapable of taking position on the most basic of moral issues – are signs of solid doctrine.

Lone - Your posts are becoming as boring as muster's. Do you not like to discuss and debate?

quote:

---

Lone - Your posts are becoming as boring as muster's. Do you not like to discuss and debate?

---

More of your intellect, wit, and charm. I like to debate and discuss, and if you have read most of what of what I have posted that would be obvious, but then again, you are reaching for a point, maybe one that isn't there.

Ad hominem's do not become you. And happy new year.


[This message has been edited by The Lone Stranger (edited 12/31/2005 9:30p).]

I don’t have any problem with my Church’s doctrine (RC), only with priests who don’t know it, or either through ignorance or rebellion teach against it.
One breath of fresh air has been the conversion of Dr. Scott Hahn to RC. He has been teaching the true (documented) RC doctrine.

Lone, He was referring to your divisive response, trying to drive a “RC vs. Protestant” wedge into the discussion.

Happy New Year!

quote:

---

But you still have public figures like Clinton and Jimmy Carter...

---

Oh please you reeeaally don't want to go there now, do you?

quote:

---

Lone, He was referring to your divisive response, trying to drive a “RC vs. Protestant” wedge into the discussion.

---

The real problem is the constant attacks on Protestantism that we have seen from these two guys (Texasag & Resdtone). It seems that they almost live for it… TLS has had a history of very evenhanded responses, and I think he is just reacting in a certain way after hitting a brick wall with them once too often. At some point, one must conceed that they have returned to the same ways too many times to overlook.


[This message has been edited by Notafraid (edited 1/2/2006 8:45p).]

SiValley,

quote:

---

Lone, He was referring to your divisive response, trying to drive a “RC vs. Protestant” wedge into the discussion.

---

Actually, it was Redstone as usual who started the RC vs Protestant stuff. Go back and read. This thread was never meant to be for comparing churches only for how well you know the doctrine of your particular church. But REDSTONE had to go and make it a this vs that thing.

Which is fine if that's what everyone wants this board to be, but don't whine when it's the protestants who initiate it.

Or do I need to go back and post all the old "Catholic bashing" posts? 'Cause I got lots of time on my hands...

As for the issue of abortion,my church is pro-life, as are most CONSERVATIVE protestant churches as opposed to the LIBERAL protestant churches.

SiValleyAg68,

quote:

---

Lone, He was referring to your divisive response, trying to drive a “RC vs. Protestant” wedge into the discussion.

---

Lovelight is right. It was Redstone who was the actual perpetrator of what you perceived that Lone was doing. He was simply calling attention to it again, as you were.



[This message has been edited by Notafraid (edited 1/2/2006 8:49p).]

"your divisive response, trying to drive a “RC vs. Protestant” wedge into the discussion." --SiValleyAg68


So we see that Roman Catholics are able to recognize this, but are there any so committed to “unity in the truth” that they would be willing to say something to their fellow Catholic, Redstone (in love) about his doing that? Or is it too much about “our side” / “your side”?

I noticed that SiValley never spoke up again to correct the truth. I for one was waiting to cheer him, not for any selfish reasons, but because it would be one of the first examples of an RC sticking up for the truth over party loyalty. I believe that unless people like him begin to, that the status quo will continue.

Lovelight,
The problem with abortion in protestant churches is a growing one. As a protestant myself that has worked in pro-life organizations I can tell you first hand that a lot of churches are perfectly willing to say that they are pro-life but be unwilling or uneasy to support pro-life ministries. many, once asked, will have many different responses to when abortion is ok. This is really an analogy to church doctrine as a whole. Liberalism broke onto the scence in the 19th century as man sought to eliminate the need for God, and worked its way into the 'christian church'. When looking into church doctrine, don't just go by what your church says their doctrine is, go by discernment on how your church conducts itself. Where are it's motives, and who does it serve? Does it serve man? Or does it serve God? I would suggest reading a book or finding a sermon series on protestant church history over the last 150 years. You would then see what has happened to the interpretation of 'truth'. with that said, if your church follows the essential church doctrines, then there is no need to declare them heretics and march the streets.

ghostofbucky,

I don't think my church's doctrine is wrong. I just wanted to have a better understanding of it. I want to understand what is meant by spiritual presence in communion as well as get a better understanding of what baptism is and how it is made effectual as well as what it effects.

I have a superficial understanding of these things and I have accepted them but I want to have a deeper understanding.

The reason I started questioning these things is, in my denomination (PCA), there have been some questions on certain doctrines such as justification, union with Christ and things of this nature. These things were accepted at face value but there seems to be some movement in the defining of these things so that they are no longer what they once were. I suppose it would be better to define that change as an elasticity that has happened. So that these things which were once taken for granted and static have now encompassed other meanings.

I don't know if this makes any sense or not but it is something that has been sort of nagging at me for a while. I like things to be plainly defined and pretty much black and white. I'm beginning to wonder if this is right or not or how much things can be stretched until they lose their original meaning and intent. That is my reason for wanting to better understand the doctrine because if I don't correctly understand it, how can I be aware of changes in the historic doctrines.

Lovelight,

Those are excellent questions. PCA has always been pretty solid on their doctrinal stances, but like every other protestant church in the last 20 years, there has been a whirlwind of activity and we're starting to see churches, and whole denominations start to trim their sails to fit societal norms. This is the liberalism that we talk about, and it extends to farther reaches than just homosexuallity and abortion, but is starting to move into church doctrine, which is I believe, black and white. I don't like to post on here, but this topic is one that gets me very hot under the collar. However, before you start to look at church doctrine, I would challenge you to decide what the purpose of the church is. Is it a building to house believers? Is it a government authoritarian system to guide rules and legalality? Determine first, biblically, what the church is, and then decide on what church doctrine is. I would suggest, as I see that your profile says you are from Ft. Worth, that you invest the 45 minutes this sunday and drive to Denton and hear Tommy Nelson speak at Denton Bible Church. I would also suggest going to their media website, www.dbcmedia.org and listen and/or purchase the series on foundations of the faith. I would then listen to the series on systematic theology. It's not your normal sunday sermon, but it's also not seminary level, so I think it would be perfect for what you are wanting to gain. There is a wealth of information on that website that could help guide any believer to a more precise knowledge of biblical truth.

Here is what Catholics believe (or at least are supposed to!!)...

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/entiretoc1.htm