Comments on: Where Would You Go?

By: steve

steve — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Right now I’m a southern baptist, but I’d probably go to the Restoration movement because of their high regard for Scripture and generally solid doctrines. I’m not even really that southern baptist, though, so it wouldn’t be that much of a stretch to begin with.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Interesting article. I too might very well choose EO for the very same reasons. I am now, have always been, and will always be just “a Christian” first and formost - the rest is just where I have decided I wish to worship. Having met and talked with/listened to a Greek Orthodox monk, I find alot to agree with and admire.

Robert

By: Christian

Christian — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I would probably get together some other Christians to worship with on our own and fellowship with them. Not to maintain sectarianism (and although I agree with the ideology of looking to other denominational backgrounds for the good and righteous ways in which they “practice” Christianity so that I may apply those things in my life) but because like Rich Mullins says in one of his songs, “I believe what I believe” not because I made it up, but because of Scripture. Essentially, what the Restoration movement stands for, expresses what I believe, what I desire, what I am a part of, and what I strive for. Even if there were only Denominational churches around, I must stand for the accurate teaching and obedience to Scripture.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Christian,

The entire idea behind this little exercise was to see what traits about other denominations people found to be admirable. The idea was NOT for you to say you’d start the same movement all over again.

Oh, and I’d like to give a shout out to Mr. Gully. Looks my e-mail is actually working.

By: steve carr

steve carr — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Can I choose to become Jewish? I’m kinda leaning that way. Sure, I would import “the whole Jesus thing,” but some of their theology rocks ours. Wrestling with God? God In Search of Man [Abraham Heschel] Brilliant! Too bad we fear the Torah.

BUT . . . I don’t want to become a reformed Jew, because I actually believe the stuff in the Bible happened. And I don’t want to become an Orthodox Jew because I like to shave. I need some sort of happy medium.

I know some of you are thinking, “Why not become a Messianic Jew?” I would, but some of their people are crazier than the ones I associate with now, so why trade down? House of Ephraim, House of Judah, House of Pancakes, it’s all the same to me.

That was fun. I should do this again sometime.

By: Amy

Amy — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I admire a lot of the qualities of the Lutheran Church. Not the ELCA, but the LCMS (maybe even the WELS to an extent). I like how seriously they take communion. Some of the churches that I’ve visited in the past don’t even mention Christ in their Communion time and sometimes they don’t even explain that nonbelievers shouldn’t be joining in on communion. Plus their 15th century hymns are beautiful and deep. I also like how they use the creeds. It feels good to stand up with a group of Christians and proclaim why we are Christians.

By: Natasha!

Natasha! — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

I don’t think I would ever switch, just because I feel like most Pentacostal churches (I don’t know how to say this) abuse the system? However, there are a couple of doctrines in the early church that were really important that I think too many churches skip over because they are too hard. One is just the concept of the Holy Spirit in general. Two, the emphasis on finding spiritual gifts. And three, a room full of people who know that God can, has, and will do miracles today.

By: ron

ron — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

If doctrine isn’t that important we could try anything that’s has reverance. <-tongue in cheek.
Seriously though, if EO isn’t close in doctrine, which could be defined as “teachings on a particular subject”, how do we know if EO is pursuing the right “god”/GOD?
Or we could, to answer a potential objection, “assume” they have it right, because “they’ve always called themselves Christians”.
The EO may have reverance, but so do those who practice Transcendental Meditation. The EO doesn’t even have the Trinity right. Instead of going EO or anywhere else, we could help professing Christians understand the majesty and awe of God. Then the “WWJD”/”Got Jesus” things might slowly dwindle.
Reverence must have Truth for its foundation. But, so often people think of reverence(present company excluded) as a “sense” (kinesthetic, visual, olfactory) thing…Which thinking moves toward things like ambience, candles, incense, dim lighting. That’s not New Covenant worship. Things of this covenant are not touch or smell or see, but faith working through love, which is invisible! We should pursue fearing God on those foundations. Ambience, sometimes incorrectly seen as reverence, only lasts 70 minutes a week.

Thanks for reading,
Ron

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Ron,

Nice comments. First to address the doctrinal issues. When I said they were not close in doctrine I meant they were not close in terms of Christianity, not in terms of world religions. This entire exercise, by virtue of destroying the group you most identify with, is an exercise in doctrinal compromise. If I go Lutheran there’s dealing with their view of baptism and the Lord’s supper. If I go pentacostal there’s the baptism of the Holy Spirit to deal with. If I go Baptist I have to deal with once saved always saved, and a flawed view of baptism. If I go non-denominational I have a whole host of poor hermeneutics to deal with. If I go Reformed/Presbys I have to deal with TULIP. I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this. No matter what denomination I choose there’s going to be doctrinal issues.

Secondly, you’ve created something of a strawman. I didn’t say I admire their reverence for reverence sake. I admire their reverence for God which stems from their recognition of what God is. Something that a trancendentalist would have problems possessing.

I think the biggest division between the two of us is that you’re viewing this as an all-inclusive hypothetical situation, in which case I’d probably agree with you. But I mean it to be merely an exercise to bring out what we admire about other groups of Christians.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Oh, but I enjoyed your comments and I’m quite happy to find a strong commitment to doctrine within our churches.

Thanks for the commetns, I enjoyed them very much. Please post as often as possible.

Tim