I JUST HAVE TO GO PRESBYTERIAN

[BobRyan]

I don't understand your post. what are you suggesting I do ?

Well- if you are baptist and there is only a Presbyterian option with infant baptism then go - but if you have an SDA church near-by you will find something very similar to Seventh-day Baptist at an SDA church.

Like Baptist and other groups - SDAs practice open communion

 

[Smyth]

Well- if you are baptist and there is only a Presbyterian option with infant baptism then go - but if you have an SDA church near-by you will find something very similar to Seventh-day Baptist at an SDA church.

Like Baptist and other groups - SDAs practice open communion

You think a top-heavy (government) denomination with its own prophets (aka a cult) is better than a Presbyterian church that practices baptism as the NT version of Circumcision (aka a common protestant church)?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

OK......before you go further with this......I would not choose to join either option. However (and together with my younger brothers help) I believe Ive found a Conservative Baptist Church W/I 15 miles. The pastor left recently & there has been many changes, including a very good interim guy........so we shall see.

 

[Rippon]

OK......before you go further with this......I would not choose to join either option. However (and together with my younger brothers help) I believe Ive found a Conservative Baptist Church W/I 15 miles. The pastor left recently & there has been many changes, including a very good interim guy........so we shall see.

Something tells me, based on your extensive posting history of this topic that you will end up disagreeing with this CBC.

I am curious, you have spent years telling us that there was absolutely no good Baptist Church in your area. And by "area" I would assume within a radius of 15 miles.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Something tells me, based on your extensive posting history of this topic that you will end up disagreeing with this CBC.

My......what a suprise!

I am curious, you have spent years telling us that there was absolutely no good Baptist Church in your area. And by "area" I would assume within a radius of 15 miles.

Your not listening......they jettisoned the pastor & are pursuing a different agenda.

 

[Yeshua1]

I would just continue to hold o believers baptism, and would also check to see if they are conservative or liberal in their theology!

 

[BobRyan]

You think a top-heavy (government) denomination with its own prophets (aka a cult) is better than a Presbyterian church that practices baptism as the NT version of Circumcision (aka a common protestant church)?

I am curious if you are a Christian that reads the actual Bible. If so - how did you become to be so befuddled as to imagine that there were no prophets in the NT - ??? Do you test your doctrine "sola accusation" or "Sola Scriptura"??

Before attacking the Bible doctrine on prophecy and prophets... do you even know what it is??

Or do you think you are a member of a cult because the Bible writers were prophets and they describe many church members as also being prophets?

How did you come to the point of denying 1Cor 12, 1Cor 14, 1 Thess 5, Rev 12, Rev 19 etc - as if Bible-denying was the best way to avoid being a "cult"??/

In short - where does that Bible-denying doctrine come from??

How many non-Christians would be "entertained" to find out that a few Christians deny the Bible doctrine on prophets - and think they are not following the God-inspired message of any prophet??

 

[Smyth]

I am curious if you are a Christian that reads the actual Bible. If so - how did you become to be so befuddled as to imagine that there were no prophets in the NT - ??? Do you test your doctrine "sola accusation" or "Sola Scriptura"??

I'm a cessationist. With the end of the Apostolic age and the closing of the biblical canon, there's no purpose for prophets in today's church. Even if I held a different view, a prophet would still need to prove himself through miraculous signs. Phony faith-healing won't do it.

 

[BobRyan]

I'm a cessationist.

-- Consider being a Bible believing Christian that accepts Ephesians 4, 1 Corinthians 12, 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Thess 5 --- and give no weight to simply "making stuff up".

With the end of the Apostolic age and the closing of the biblical canon, there's no purpose for prophets in today's church.

Ok - well it appears you need to "quote you" for that doctrinal statement of faith. Consider the Bible instead.

Even if I held a different view, a prophet would still need to prove himself through miraculous signs.

1. No greater prophet than John the baptizer. Doing no signs at all. Agabus in the NT - no signs. Anna in the Temple - no signs. the prophets of 1Cor 14... no signs. 1 Cor 12 says those who work signs and miracles are not necessarily the same ones that are prophets. Consider the Bible as an alternative to the source you are using.
2. No Bible text says that prophets all demonstrate miraculous signs

Phony faith-healing won't do it.

Agreed - that would be a bad thing.

As I said before - we are neither Pentecostal nor Charismatic. So then no "faith healing" as in the popular form of it. But there is the James 5 form - coming to God in prayer as He states.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Smyth]

1. No greater prophet than John the baptizer. Doing no signs at all.

Which doctrines do we have based on the teachings of John the Baptist? Was not John the Baptist authenticated by Christ Jesus himself?

 

[BobRyan]

Which doctrines do we have based on the teachings of John the Baptist? Was not John the Baptist authenticated by Christ Jesus himself?

John the baptist introduced Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. A great many of the religionists of John's day refused his doctrine on the Christ. The OT did not say that Jesus would have 12 disciples or be carpenter etc - but John was given special divine revelation pointing to Jesus as the Christ before Jesus had taught anyone or done any miracle.

Still - John was not calling fire down from heaven. Luke says the religionists of John's day "rejected God's purpose for them" -- by refusing to accept John's message. A message about time prophecy "the time is fulfilled" - the time of Daniel 9's 490 year timeline predicting the coming of the Messiah.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Luke says the religionists of John's day "rejected God's purpose for them" -- by refusing to accept John's message. A message about time prophecy "the time is fulfilled" - the time of Daniel 9's 490 year timeline predicting the coming of the Messiah.

Not only Daniel 9's 70 weeks prophecy, but all prophecy -- all the Old Testament -- being "the time fulfilled".

Daniel 9's prophecy stands on its own; it is not ~cut off~, off the 2300 evening and morning sacrifices prophecy [which in my opinion, is not ~time line~ prophecy], which was where Adventism deviated from the accepted Protestant interpretation, unfortunately.

 

[BobRyan]

Not only Daniel 9's 70 weeks prophecy, but all prophecy -- all the Old Testament -- being "the time fulfilled".

Daniel 9's prophecy stands on its own; it is not ~cut off~, off the 2300 evening and morning sacrifices prophecy [which in my opinion, is not ~time line~ prophecy], which was where Adventism deviated from the accepted Protestant interpretation, unfortunately.

Daniel 9 has a 490 year contiguous timeline prophecy pointing to the Messiah - and it works because it has a very specific start point and duration. Funny how that works.

But Daniel 8 cannot stand on its own because it does not have a specific start date. It does not get that - until Daniel 9 when the Angel comes to explain Daniel 8.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Daniel 9 has a 490 year contiguous timeline prophecy pointing to the Messiah - and it works because it has a very specific start point and duration. Funny how that works.

But Daniel 8 cannot stand on its own because it does not have a specific start date. It does not get that - until Daniel 9 when the Angel comes to explain Daniel 8.

Not funny. For some Protestants who didn't know about Adventists, the 70 weeks prophecy worked out onto Christ on Scriptural grounds (for Matthew Henry, e.g.). But no Protestant 'cut' the 70 weeks 'off' the 2300 morning and evening sacrifices, which in itself is most absurd, what Scriptural. The 2300 m&e oblations prophecy can and does stand on its own because it does not have to have ~a specific start date~. Adventism claims it has to have a starting date and that, the same starting date of the 70 weeks. It is not the prophecy or the nature of the prophecy that requires ~a specific start date~.

Why _must_ it have a ~a specific start date~?
Because Adventism gave it a specific end date, 1844. That's why. But not for your simple Protestant.

 

[Smyth]

I would just continue to hold o believers baptism, and would also check to see if they are conservative or liberal in their theology!

Presbyterian denominations:
PCUSA: Liberal, Reprobate.
Cumberland: moderate
PCA: Conservative.
OPC: Very conservative.

FYI, I consider the Southern Baptist denomination itself to be moderate. While they are conservative in some respects, the SBC tent is large enough to allow in a lot of unbiblical doctrine. There are many conservative churches within the SBC.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Presbyterian denominations:
PCUSA: Liberal, Reprobate.
Cumberland: moderate
PCA: Conservative.
OPC: Very conservative.

FYI, I consider the Southern Baptist denomination itself to be moderate. While they are conservative in some respects, the SBC tent is large enough to allow in a lot of unbiblical doctrine. There are many conservative churches within the SBC.

The PCA Churches up here are Liberal. Heretical if you consider one pastor telling me he doesnt teach doctrine.

 

[Smyth]

The PCA Churches up here are Liberal. Heretical if you consider one pastor telling me he doesnt teach doctrine.

Individual churches can and do differ. Not teaching doctrine is of the individual pastor's style. Most pastors of any denomination teach very little doctrine. Their sermons are mostly forgettable fluff. But, ironically, some pastors most concerned with preaching doctrine have a pet false doctrine they want to push.

Pastors often don't teach doctrine for fear of offending people. It's very hard to be a good pastor.

But, it's odd that he told you he doesn't teach doctrine.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The PCA Churches up here are Liberal. Heretical if you consider one pastor telling me he doesnt teach doctrine.

Individual churches can and do differ. Not teaching doctrine is of the individual pastor's style. Most pastors of any denomination teach very little doctrine. Their sermons are mostly forgettable fluff. But, ironically, some pastors most concerned with preaching doctrine have a pet false doctrine they want to push.

Pastors often don't teach doctrine for fear of offending people. It's very hard to be a good pastor.

But, it's odd that he told you he doesn't teach doctrine.

Remember this is NJ! 70% that go to church are Roman Catholics....so how you going to get them in the pews when you teach doctrine? Aint goin a happen when your primarily looking for head count.

 

[SovereignGrace]

While I disagree with lots of Presbyterian dogma, I do not see any true baptist churches in my neck of the woods so I am forced to conclude that to satisfy my need for a church that I will have to swallow my pride & start going to the local OPC church down the road from where I live. And I dread it...the horror of having to deal with paedo/ sacramental types frankly bothers me.

Brother Steve, you follow God and don't let anyone on here steer you. There is fault with the Presbyterian doctrine, but the Baptists have their faults, too. If God leads you to the local PC church, go with a heart ready to fulfill God's purpose in your life for Him. Don't be conned by landmarkism.

 

[Yeshua1]

Brother Steve, you follow God and don't let anyone on here steer you. There is fault with the Presbyterian doctrine, but the Baptists have their faults, too. If God leads you to the local PC church, go with a heart ready to fulfill God's purpose in your life for Him. Don't be conned by landmarkism.

True, as just look at how many good books have been wriitten throughout the history of the presby church, as they were indeed in many ways the ones trying to combat liberalism when it started arising in early 20 century...

Too bad that some of them seemed to forget thought that they were part of the larger church of Christ, as some seemed to see themselves as being only 'real christians"