passion9

I'm not going to even get into that because it doesn't matter which group you belong to, it matters on each individual. Most denominations now don't even follow the doctrine that they were founded on, I know strong people of the faith from almost every denomination you mentioned, and the others I just don't know anyone who claims that denomination. I'm not a different variety Christian from anyone else who is sanctified through Jesus Christ. For those who believe anything other than that and claim to be Christians, then it is merely a claim. And that is not me looking down on anyone, or saying that any single denomination as a whole is "going to Hell" (as if that were the only reason to be saved) but merely stating the facts. Just because someone can take a verse ofthe Bible out of context and base their beliefs on it means nothing, I could probably pull a verse out and argue it about most any subject. Unless they are saved by faith through Jesus Christ, which lines up with all scriptures, then they are not Christians.

Grace and Peace

echidna

Hmmm, some Christians sanctified by Jesus Christ condone abortion, but OTOH others also sanctified by Jesus Christ, do not, which leaves me a little perplexed as to whether the Gospels are, maybe a little vague on the issue ?

passion9

No, the Bible is very clear that each person was created by God individually (Ps 139) and that He loves each one dearly. But you have to remember that not everything is black and white, and that is where people start saying that Christians can't back themselves up and that the Bible is flawed and all those type arguments. I'm not a Biblical scholar, I'm a 19 year old Undeclared freshman, so I do not know all the Scriptures to back up my points (I'm sorry). But for one, if any mother mentioned in the Bible would have considered abortion more than another... I believe it would have been Mary. Father unknown, and the fact that she was having a child out of wedlock was a total disgrace to her, her fiance and her family. Of course, Mary was Jesus's mother, and Jesus is the Messiah that was predicted in the OT and the Savior of the world.

I believe the debate comes in because of our own personal emotions and thoughts on the topic. Again, I say that we will NEVER understand God until after His kingdom comes and we leave our mortal bodies. I personally am Pro-Life, because I feel each person is a child of God and is useful in His plans, but that is my personal convictions right now, and not anything that I've studied, or prayed about earnestly, just what I have seen in the Word and what I have learned from people more mature in their faith than I am.

But no, the Bible is perfectly clear on everything. It is us that misinterprets it... and that's Biblical also.
Grace and Peace

Philosoft

Does this mean that the abortions that occur now are subverting God's plan?
Gah. The Bible's message is perfect, yet we consistently misinterpret it. We know this because... the Bible tells us. Double gah. Okay, how do we know we're not misinterpreting the Bible when we think the Bible is telling us we're misinterpreting it?

echidna

Passion9, do you find it interesting that we mere mortals misinterpret the Bible so easily, and yet people find it far harder to misinterpret our Legal Codes, indeed the lengths to which unambiguity is written in, is itself confusing to the layperson ?

But it's lucky we have unambiguous laws rather than relying on a text which seems so open to generate confusion, huh ?

It's a shame the Bible wasn't written a bit clearer. After all, if it was really written for the benefit of those struggling with life after the Fall, you would have thought it might have been written with a little less self-contradiction.

Old Man

Difficult questions. First I have no experience of many of these denominations. I really only know Pentecostal, Anglican, Baptist at first hand (and I suppose some long experience contending with Catholicism & JW). The others, I just looked up their websites.

But inevitably within each denomination below you will find people who are like chalk and cheese. You will find the adulterer and the saint, the harlot and virtuous woman. And then you need to refine the question - are you talking about the hierarchy teaching (which not everyone who attends the denomination necessarily accepts), or the individual faith of those who attend the denomination's churches? And mere attendees may hardly be invoved with the hierarchy teachings at all. The most you can do is to identify whether the hierarchy teaching is generally biblical, or whether it contains significant & obvious errors.

Serious generic criticisms can be leveled at most of the below: failure to inculcate 1 Cor 11;2-> (women covering their heads), failing to teach necessary abstinence from the world, failing to teach right relations between the sexes, failure to excommunicate the immoral, assumption of Thomas Aquinas philosophical view of Trinity (over Pauline practical view of the Trinity). Most fail to allow participation in church services by laymen, and so are perceived to serve the interests of the hierarchy over the interests of the Holy Spirit. Many fail to evangelize and some hardly preach or teach the gospel.

(no references to hell here - no-one appointed me judge)

1) Catholics

Against: Immaculate Conception & Mary cult, Thomas Aquinas teachings on the Trinity, graven images, dressing up in silly costumes; enforced celibacy, justification by works, purgatory, saint worship, pope worship, real presence, money laundering, priest idolatry, traditions take precedence over the bible, bringing the bible into disrepute by distorting it, failing to excommunicate the sexually immoral, etc.

For: against abortion, pro santity of marriage; against women priests.

2) Latter-Day Saints (the Mormons)

Against: False teaching, bringing the word of God into disrepute, idolatry of certain founders of mormonism, old wives tales, polygamy for the sake of it.

For: At least they profess the bible.

3) Evangelical Lutherans

Against: Dictatorial arrogance toward enforced giving of 10% or more to the church; puerile attitude toward the relationship between church and state; complacency in the face of evils laws and government; failure to command women to behave properly towards their husbands; some imbecilic pastors; infant baptism;dictatorial and overweight hierachy;

For: Some people who aren't complete imbeciles.

http://www.wels.net

4) Missouri Synod Lutherans

Against: Remarriage of divorced persons; ?

For: Some people who aren't complete imbeciles.

http://www.lcms.org/belief.asp

5) Pentacostals

(various different sorts here)

Against: Tithing, erroneous doctrine of trinity (esp Oneness), unlearned enthusiasm, women not in subjection, insistence on "tongues" (not recommended in 1 Cor), doctrinal error, gnosticism.

For: Nothing

6) Baptists

(There are various different varieties and it is difficult to generalize)

Against: Worldly, don't emphasize works enough, don't teach right relations between the sexes, don't allow laymen to participate in church services; acceptance of divorce; failure to excommunicate the sexually immoral; gnosticism (some varieties); women ministers (some varieties).

For: Don't try and fleece you for money by way of tithing; believer's baptism; some learned baptists there are.

7) Unitarians

Against: Everything

For: Nothing

8) Seventh Day Adventists

Against: Tithing, too rigid & inflexible hierarchy, exclusion of laymen from church service; incorrect view of biblical relationship between the sexes; superficial application of biblical doctrines to contemporay issues.

For: "Try" to adhere to the bible.

http://www.adventist.org

9) Eastern Orthodox

Against: Similar to Catholic (I guess)

For: Similar to Catholic (I guess)

9) Anglicans (Church of England)

Against: Infant baptism; dressing up in silly costumes; failure to excommunicate the immoral; failure to preach the gospel; failure to inculcate faith; tolerance of divorce, homosexuality; women priests; failure to preach right relationship between the sexes; complacency; failure to criticize evil laws; gnosticism.

For: Don't fleece you for money.

10) Jehovah's Witnesses

Against: Serious Doctrinal Error

For: Nothing

///////////////////

And here are some you missed out, which I might look more favourably upon:

Free Presbyterian, Open Brethren, Amish, Mennonite, Unaligned .....

Biff the unclean

passion9 you've said several times that the church in Acts was the real honest to goodness church. Yet as I thumb through Acts I see the church extorting all their money out of it's members. I see (in Acts 5) Peter killing a guy called Ananis and three hours later his wife because they didn't fork over enough. Later I find Paul boring a guy in church so much that he plummets from a third floor window. And here's a part where the church burns the Jews books...not unlike the Nazi reenactment nineteen hundred years later.
What do you find so compelling about these thugs?

lpetrich

I wonder where is this about falling from the third floor?

And that's Ananias and Sapphira who were zapped for holding on to some of their wealth rather than turning all of it over to Peter. The early church had not only practiced socialism, but also Stalinism -- A and S had been pesky kulaks.

And is there any evidence of Xian houses of worship in the New Testament? Did the early Xians only meet in people's houses and other other such places?

Pliny the Younger had reported that they would gather on hilltops and sing hymns to "Christ as if a god" (christo quasi deo) just before sunrise.

If so, then using Old Man's NT-only criteria, church buildings are illegitimate.

Writer@Large

passion9, the level of ducking and weaving you showed in avoiding that question is about what I expected.

If that were true, why would there be something like 80 major denominations of the faith, not to mention the sects and subgroups?

"Ah, yes, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge!"

You're avoiding the point. The Ku Klux Klan can cite chapter and verse of scripture to support their acts, and they all profess to be sanctified through Jesus Christ. Do dead Klan members go to Heaven?

Which is exactly the problem, and the reason many atheists reject the book outright. Would a perfect word of God be so easy to manipulate? Can *you* claim that your interpretation is the correct one? How can you be sure? What is your doctrine of faith, and why is it superior?

Then how can you be sure that you're right?

I suppose one must be God to understand it, then. What a useful guide He has provided the world!

--W@L

Writer@Large

Old Man, thank you for the considered response.

I can't say I have, either. I've never known an Anglican, nor an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and I've only had aqaintance with a Jehovah's Witness. But I've known at least one of each of the rest in my time.

Doctrinal teaching. As perhaps made clearer in my response to passion9 above, I have a great deal of frustration for those who claim that there's only one Christian faith, or who evoke the "True Christian" label, clearly ignoring the hundreds of doctrinal and institutional interpretations of the literally hundreds (maybe thousands) of sects of Christianity in the world.

While I don't think we need to pick apart each of your responses, I would like to comment in general. Judging from your individual responses to the faiths, it looks like you're not entirely happy with any of them (and seriously unhappy with the Unitatians. Do you think that those who follow Unitarian doctrine can know Christ? Are they drawing people to Christ, or away from him? In short, would you call the Unitarians, Christians?

This one really got me, and I need to ask you about it individually. The text (KJV) reads:

(2) I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you. (3) But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. (4) Any man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head, (5) but any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head--it is the same as if her head were shaven. (6) For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her wear a veil. (7) For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (8) (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. (9) Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.) (10) That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels.

Do you seriously believe that a woman who doesn't wear a hat to Church, or a man who *does*, are in danger of Hell? Just for a hat? I suppose I must ask, then: have *you* ever worn a hat to Church? Do the women in your family? What church do you attend, and does your denomination stress hats for women?

--W@L