|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 0:44:33 GMT
I selected "Other"... Even though multiple categories are listed for Christians, none of them fit me. Like Erjen I am a non-denominational Christian. If I fit into one of the "Christian" choices offered I would no longer be non-denominational. I am not a Protestant. If you still reject the Trinity as three-in-one and also the 'Oneness' theory of deity, then non-denominational is an apt term. Almost every Christian sect accepts(EDIT) the Trinity. However, I sense most those who calls themselves "non-denominational" are just Protestants who don't go to church.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 0:50:39 GMT
Oh, goody! I love surveys! Christian, nondenominational. I selected "Other"... Even though multiple categories are listed for Christians, none of them fit me. Like Erjen I am a non-denominational Christian. If I fit into one of the "Christian" choices offered I would no longer be non-denominational. I am not a Protestant. What religion/philosophy do you most strongly identify with? Non-demoninational Christian What does nondenominational even mean? That would be like someone saying their political affiliation is, non-affiliated. What the fuck is that? So of the billion religious affiliations, the one that most closely relects your beliefs is, none? Thank you onethreetwo, I agree. Yes, I think non-denominational is a cop out for Protestants who don't go to church.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 28, 2019 0:53:40 GMT
What does nondenominational even mean? That would be like someone saying their political affiliation is, non-affiliated. What the fuck is that? So of the billion religious affiliations, the one that most closely relects your beliefs is, none? Yup.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 28, 2019 0:55:55 GMT
Oh, goody! I love surveys! Christian, nondenominational. I selected "Other"... Even though multiple categories are listed for Christians, none of them fit me. Like Erjen I am a non-denominational Christian. If I fit into one of the "Christian" choices offered I would no longer be non-denominational. I am not a Protestant. Non-demoninational Christian What does nondenominational even mean? That would be like someone saying their political affiliation is, non-affiliated. What the fuck is that? So of the billion religious affiliations, the one that most closely relects your beliefs is, none? Thank you onethreetwo , I agree. Yes, I think non-denominational is a cop out for Protestants who don't go to church. You're not the first one to say that where I could hear it, and if I can't have a perfect world I'll settle for honesty. 
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 1:34:43 GMT
Thank you onethreetwo , I agree. Yes, I think non-denominational is a cop out for Protestants who don't go to church. You're not the first one to say that where I could hear it, and if I can't have a perfect world I'll settle for honesty. I do know ex-Catholics who have joined the Greek Orthodox Church. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are similar except the Greeks reject the infallibility of one man named the Pope. At my family's Greek Orthodox Church there is a priest of Irish descent who left the Catholic Church because he wanted to get married but remain in the priesthood. However, one needs to address what one believes are the basic tenets of Christianity. Now I respect your beliefs. But for the sake of argument, I must press you for clarification. Surely you can find one Christian church where you can accept the doctrine and have fellowship with others? You must have beliefs on various tenets found in scripture: Are you saved by grace or by works? Are God the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost three-in-one, one with no division, or three independent entities? Is our salvation pre-determined or only a matter of our will?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 28, 2019 1:45:57 GMT
You're not the first one to say that where I could hear it, and if I can't have a perfect world I'll settle for honesty. I do know ex-Catholics who have joined the Greek Orthodox Church. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are similar except the Greeks reject the infallibility of one man named the Pope. At my family's Greek Orthodox Church there is a priest of Irish descent who left the Catholic Church because he wanted to get married but remain in the priesthood. However, one needs to address what one believes are the basic tenets of Christianity. Now I respect your beliefs. But for the sake of argument, I must press you for clarification. Surely you can find one Christian church where you can accept the doctrine and have fellowship with others? You must have beliefs on various tenets found in scripture: Are you saved by grace or by works? Are God the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost three-in-one, one with no division, or three independent entities? Is our salvation pre-determined or only a matter of our will? I'm not saved until after I'm dead, and maybe not even then. It isn't my decision to make. Just because I have chosen Christ doesn't mean He has chosen me. I tend to think they are three-in-one, but with some division. Neither one. If it were predetermined or a matter of will any slob could attain it.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 1:55:39 GMT
I do know ex-Catholics who have joined the Greek Orthodox Church. Catholicism and Orthodoxy are similar except the Greeks reject the infallibility of one man named the Pope. At my family's Greek Orthodox Church there is a priest of Irish descent who left the Catholic Church because he wanted to get married but remain in the priesthood. However, one needs to address what one believes are the basic tenets of Christianity. Now I respect your beliefs. But for the sake of argument, I must press you for clarification. Surely you can find one Christian church where you can accept the doctrine and have fellowship with others? You must have beliefs on various tenets found in scripture: Are you saved by grace or by works? Are God the Father, Christ and the Holy Ghost three-in-one, one with no division, or three independent entities? Is our salvation pre-determined or only a matter of our will? I'm not saved until after I'm dead, and maybe not even then. It isn't my decision to make. Just because I have chosen Christ doesn't mean He has chosen me. I tend to think they are three-in-one, but with some division. Neither one. If it were predetermined or a matter of will any slob could attain it. Okay, so which denomination agrees with you?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 28, 2019 2:04:45 GMT
I'm not saved until after I'm dead, and maybe not even then. It isn't my decision to make. Just because I have chosen Christ doesn't mean He has chosen me. I tend to think they are three-in-one, but with some division. Neither one. If it were predetermined or a matter of will any slob could attain it. Okay, so which denomination agrees with you? I don't know, but I doubt the Mormons would agree with me. To my way of thinking, calling yourself a saint while you're still alive is as pompous as saying you've run a marathon before you've crossed the finish line.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 2:11:34 GMT
Okay, so which denomination agrees with you? I don't know, but I doubt the Mormons would agree with me. To my way of thinking, calling yourself a saint while you're still alive is as pompous as saying you've run a marathon before you've crossed the finish line. Mormons reject the Trinity. So you're not Mormon. My point is that there are Christian churches which agree with you on probably every religious issue. So your religious beliefs are not really non-denominational.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on May 28, 2019 2:23:39 GMT
I don't know, but I doubt the Mormons would agree with me. To my way of thinking, calling yourself a saint while you're still alive is as pompous as saying you've run a marathon before you've crossed the finish line. Mormons reject the Trinity. So you're not Mormon. My point is that there are Christian churches which agree with you on probably every religious issue. So your religious beliefs are not really non-denominational. So why do I have to be pigeonholed into one of them, when Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists are not?
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 5:50:47 GMT
I selected "Other"... Even though multiple categories are listed for Christians, none of them fit me. Like Erjen I am a non-denominational Christian. If I fit into one of the "Christian" choices offered I would no longer be non-denominational. I am not a Protestant. If you still reject the Trinity as three-in-one and also the 'Oneness' theory of deity, then non-denominational is an apt term. Almost every Christian sect rejects the Trinity. However, I sense most those who calls themselves "non-denominational" are just Protestants who don't go to church. There are many that consider themselves "non-denominational" who attend church regularly, as members of formally organized congregations. These are independent churches which are not affiliated with any sect (denomination). Typically they more closely resemble Protestants than other denominations, but strictly speaking they did not separate from the Catholic church. As such they really are not Protestants. I attended a non-denominational church in Bangkok that drew pastors of various backgrounds. In the congregation were people that had attended various churches in their home countries, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans. etc. Services were more generic than those in such sects. I am not even sure what the "Oneness" theory might be but I do not ascribe to belief in the Trinity theory. But is it correct to say that "almost every sect of Christianity rejects the Trinity"...? I think it is the other way around. I think you mist be using a different definition of what this entails than most people.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 5:59:25 GMT
Oh, goody! I love surveys! Christian, nondenominational. I selected "Other"... Even though multiple categories are listed for Christians, none of them fit me. Like Erjen I am a non-denominational Christian. If I fit into one of the "Christian" choices offered I would no longer be non-denominational. I am not a Protestant. Non-demoninational Christian What does nondenominational even mean? That would be like someone saying their political affiliation is, non-affiliated. What the fuck is that? So of the billion religious affiliations, the one that most closely relects your beliefs is, none? Thank you onethreetwo , I agree. Yes, I think non-denominational is a cop out for Protestants who don't go to church. No, that is not what many of us that are non-denominational are all about. There are mega-churches where tens of thousands attend church almost every week that are non-denominational. Many that are non-denominational simply don't care for the politics that gets spouted in Baptist or other congregations by pastors that rigorously adhere to the strictures of their sects.
I have never been Protestant and I continue to go to church. I, and many others like me are simply more ecumenical and accepting of worshiping with those who have come out of any Christian tradition.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 6:02:22 GMT
I don't know, but I doubt the Mormons would agree with me. To my way of thinking, calling yourself a saint while you're still alive is as pompous as saying you've run a marathon before you've crossed the finish line. Mormons reject the Trinity. So you're not Mormon. My point is that there are Christian churches which agree with you on probably every religious issue. So your religious beliefs are not really non-denominational. By definition "non-denominational" is not about theology. It is not about collective beliefs. I could be aligned perfectly with say, the beliefs of the Methodists, and choose to worship apart from them.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 6:13:58 GMT
You're correct. Lumping Gnosticism in with the Occult was a mistake. I've seen Mormon theologians claim Mormonism is a form neo-Gnosticism. But the Gnostics were looking into ideas which Rome considered heresies. The Gnostics were mystics. I was trying to offer broad categories as opposed to dividing the whole theme into dozens of smaller sects. Have you actually seen Mormon theologians that claimed their theology was a form of neo-Gnosticism? I never have, the only such claims I have seen like that come from non-Mormons, most typically from those hostile to the LDS church and its theology.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 6:43:05 GMT
If you still reject the Trinity as three-in-one and also the 'Oneness' theory of deity, then non-denominational is an apt term. Almost every Christian sect rejects the Trinity. However, I sense most those who calls themselves "non-denominational" are just Protestants who don't go to church. There are many that consider themselves "non-denominational" who attend church regularly, as members of formally organized congregations. These are independent churches which are not affiliated with any sect (denomination). Typically they more closely resemble Protestants than other denominations, but strictly speaking they did not separate from the Catholic church. As such they really are not Protestants. I attended a non-denominational church in Bangkok that drew pastors of various backgrounds. In the congregation were people that had attended various churches in their home countries, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans. etc. Services were more generic than those in such sects. I am not even sure what the "Oneness" theory might be but I do not ascribe to belief in the Trinity theory. But is it correct to say that "almost every sect of Christianity rejects the Trinity"...? I think it is the other way around. I think you mist be using a different definition of what this entails than most people. That was a typo. I said the opposite of what I meant. I meant to say that sadly almost every Christian sect accepts the Trinity. I think the Trinity is balderdash found nowhere in scripture. But that comes from my Mormon background. Oneness is a movement among Pentecostals who reject the Trinity and say there are not three-in-one, only one, God the Father and Christ are the same and there is no distinction. I believe this is the premise of most Unitarians as well. Churches which split off from other Protestant churches and not the Catholic Church are also Protestant. Methodism is a good example which split from the Anglican church. I think it's disingenuous for most non-denominational believers to claim they are not Protestant. Their skepticism and independence was born from Protestantism. They may be non-denominational but still Protestant.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on May 28, 2019 6:55:11 GMT
You're correct. Lumping Gnosticism in with the Occult was a mistake. I've seen Mormon theologians claim Mormonism is a form neo-Gnosticism. But the Gnostics were looking into ideas which Rome considered heresies. The Gnostics were mystics. I was trying to offer broad categories as opposed to dividing the whole theme into dozens of smaller sects. Have you actually seen Mormon theologians that claimed their theology was a form of neo-Gnosticism? I never have, the only such claims I have seen like that come from non-Mormons, most typically from those hostile to the LDS church and its theology. Here is a Mormon source. Read the section "Parallels to LDS Theology".
|
|
|
|
Post by Morgana on May 28, 2019 10:19:10 GMT
What religion/philosophy do you most strongly identify with? There probably are, but since I don't know every single Christian church there is, and wouldn't care to join one anyway, I am non-denominational. I believe in God, in Jesus as being sent by God. I don't believe in Original Sin and I think that we are all capable of earning God's forgiveness for any sins we do commit.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 10:40:22 GMT
There are many that consider themselves "non-denominational" who attend church regularly, as members of formally organized congregations. These are independent churches which are not affiliated with any sect (denomination). Typically they more closely resemble Protestants than other denominations, but strictly speaking they did not separate from the Catholic church. As such they really are not Protestants. I attended a non-denominational church in Bangkok that drew pastors of various backgrounds. In the congregation were people that had attended various churches in their home countries, Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans. etc. Services were more generic than those in such sects. I am not even sure what the "Oneness" theory might be but I do not ascribe to belief in the Trinity theory. But is it correct to say that "almost every sect of Christianity rejects the Trinity"...? I think it is the other way around. I think you mist be using a different definition of what this entails than most people. That was a typo. I said the opposite of what I meant. I meant to say that sadly almost every Christian sect accepts the Trinity. I think the Trinity is balderdash found nowhere in scripture. But that comes from my Mormon background. Oneness is a movement among Pentecostals who reject the Trinity and say there are not three-in-one, only one, God the Father and Christ are the same and there is no distinction. I believe this is the premise of most Unitarians as well. Churches which split off from other Protestant churches and not the Catholic Church are also Protestant. Methodism is a good example which split from the Anglican church. I think it's disingenuous for most non-denominational believers to claim they are not Protestant. Their skepticism and independence was born from Protestantism. They may be non-denominational but still Protestant. If the "Oneness Theory" is something just in the Pentecostal movement I don't even know why you brought it up in a discussion of being "non-denominational." Quite frankly it sounds far more difficult to try and rationalize or explain this concept than the Trinity as it does not match with the scripture at all. By the very nature of being non-denominational it is unlikely that many that are in such ranks would accept such a fringe idea. Those holding to it would likely identify as being Pentecostal.
Just being non-Catholic does not make one a Protestant. Yes, denominations that split from those that had an original rift with the Catholic Church are Protestant, but there have been denominations that have come into existence since that schism that have little or nothing to do with separating from a previous denomination.
I doubt that most non-denominational believers claim that they are not Protestant. I would guess that the vast majority of them would claim that they are Protestants. I just said that "strictly speaking" they are not, and that is my opinion. There are independent non-denominational churches that did not split from any prior denomination. So, strictly speaking they are not Protestant. There are non-denominational people such as myself that were never either Catholic or Protestant. The "Protestant" label simply does not fit those like me.
The Book of Mormon is written in a more Trinitarian manner than the Bible. There are just suggestions in one or two biblical verses that hint at the possibility of the Trinity being a correct concept, but far more that are contrary. THe book of Mormon incurs Trinitarian formulas rather commonly.
|
|
|
|
Post by geode on May 28, 2019 10:58:12 GMT
Have you actually seen Mormon theologians that claimed their theology was a form of neo-Gnosticism? I never have, the only such claims I have seen like that come from non-Mormons, most typically from those hostile to the LDS church and its theology. Here is a Mormon source. Read the section "Parallels to LDS Theology". In skimming through this paper I found nothing that supports your claim, "I've seen Mormon theologians claim Mormonism is a form neo-Gnosticism." Please point out where this is present here. It is true that Gnosticism is given a cursory discussion as Brown notes that the Nag Hammadi collection in general is regarded as having what is typified as a Gnostic viewpoint. He then goes on to discuss some parallels in this writings to Mormon theology, whether Gnostic or not, and also many dissimilarities.
The only mention of a Gnostic connection I saw noted was here:
"A notion related to that of the premortal existence taught that creation was the activity of many gods. In fact, the gnostic picture grew rather complex. The divinities were seen to live in a number of heavens—numbered variously up to 365, depending largely on the metaphysical foundations of the system which enumerated them. Each heaven was thought to operate according to its special laws, and each performed a specific function in the overall scenario. In addition to many heavens and deities, we find the notion that female deities and other notables played roles in their respective celestial abodes. In contradistinction, the traditional Christian view had it that but one heaven was inhabited by God, accompanied only by his Son and the Holy Spirit. Those who composed and transmitted the Nag Hammadi texts held no such belief."
"In the view of some of our documents, it was knowledge of such celestial truths which Adam had possessed before he came to the earth and which were subsequently removed from his consciousness. This loss of celestial knowledge became the basis for the gnostic salvation drama: because it was lost, it had to be restored. Thus, when Adam and Eve partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil they recovered what had been lost and, now being able to see the world for what it was, set about to escape the influence of its vengeful god."
Interesting, but hardly a basis for a claim that Mormonism is Gnostic in my opinion. The Mormon view of heaven seems closer to the Traditional Christian view than what is described as Gnostic here. The Adam and Eve connection seems slight.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2019 11:51:47 GMT
I am an agnostic atheist, but agnostic atheism is neither a religion nor a philosophy so I didn't vote.
|
|
