Is a doctrinal statement or the Scriptures the starting point for your church?

[Amanuensis]

I have an MDiv from a Southern Baptist Seminary. We were taught the original languages, hermeneutics and exegesis. In theology, we were told about 4 end times scenerio, pick which one we thought was the right one, but be prepared to share with your congregation why you support it. Same for every other doctrinal subject. We were to start with Scripture, and back it up.

One of my big papers was on women in Ministry. Of course, the SBC do not allow women to be ordained. Although when I interview the head of the CSBC, he admitted there were women that had been ordained, and serving in ministry.

My paper was a huge defence of women in ministry. I got an A+, because I used Scripture, even if I totally disagree with the doctrine of the church. I could give you many more examples of people who preached against church doctrine, which were not disciplined.

As far as OSAS, I have believed that a long time after really searching the Bible. Yet I know others who didn't believe in OSAS, and we agreed to disagree.

You have obviously never been to seminary! My seminary had people from many denominations. Our professors were excellent and so was the library, spiritual formation, etc. We had people who were Anglican, Methodist, Mennonite, Lutheran, a few varieties of Baptists. And even some charismatics who took summer courses with us. No one was ever told to start with doctrine. We were told for every paper, every sermon, every Bible study to start with the Bible and show support. We also had some very interesting conversations during breaks & over lunch. One Reformed pastor was shocked when another pastor introduced himself as Reformed charismatic. A very interesting discussion, came out of that!

So the next time you start throwing around nonsense and misinformation like doctrine is first, I'm sure that might be true in some places. I'm working on a PhD in theology from an American theological institute. We also have people of many denominations. No one would ever dream of forcing doctrines on such a wide variety of people. As I studied theology my supervisor always had me read from a variety of sources that disagreed. I had to use my knowledge of the Bible to agree or disagree with many world renowned scholars. It always comes back to the Bible!

Great post. I love you my sister. And not just because you agree with me.

You would be the kind of sister I would ask about something because you have both the Holy Spirit and the background of exegesis on that text.

I am 59 and I serve full time in a church. I have a two pronged approach to my biblical studies. Of course I pray and read the scriptures and rely on the Holy Spirit to illuminate me. This has to be stated or someone will ask why I did not start with that.

Then my plan is to read at least 5 evangelical commentaries on every book of the bible, (currently on Luke).

And I have enrolled in the online Global University accredited Biblical Studies and Theology program. I have 6 months to complete a course after I start it. This works for me so that I can really retain the knowledge.

It is about a 6 year program if I was in a hurry but I am not so I will take my time and may not ever finish. My goal is to always be learning and this path helps me not have to figure out what to focus on next.

At the beginning it is about $500 per course so you can pay as you go and not go in debt.

I think it cost more per course in the post graduate courses, I am still in undergraduate program.

https://globaluniversity.edu/

 

[Chester]

Why do you ask?

Because you said, "My solution? Forget these denominations, move on, they're hindering the Spirit.

Or is your denomination different than these? Does your denomination not have a doctrinal statement as a starting point?

 

[Chester]

Of course the text says that directly, but does not use those exact words. Now note carefully what Paul said to arrive at that conclusion: 18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church... 20 When ye come together therefore into one place... Why do Christians come together, and when do they partake of the Lord's Supper?

So you assume that verse 18 means all of the previous verses in the chapter? Where does the text say that? The first part of the chapter says a woman should be covered "praying or prophesying" -- as far as I see it does not limit this to "in church"?

LOL! But this might be getting a bit away from the thread -- except that it goes back to the point that if we are going to make a doctrinal statement, I think the doctrine should be explicitly stated in the text.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Because you said, "My solution? Forget these denominations, move on, they're hindering the Spirit.

There's your answer.

 

[Chester]

Before I respond, what is "the issue?" Unity? The AG has 70 million members and is the largest missionary organization in the world, all in agreement and one mind and continuing the book of Acts. They seem to be an excellent modern day example of unity and agreement and preaching the whole counsel of God. I don't believe they are guilty of division by having agreed upon statements of faith. It is simply for agreement not for control.

I don't think it is sound logic to suggest that if an organization like the AG does not allow their ministers to teach that tongues has ceased that they are being divisive.

Oh, I think that is great, and I highly respect the Assemblies of God group. But the point on this thread is the issue of denominations having a doctrinal statement that then determines how all within that group must interpret the Bible. And as you say above, the AG does just exactly that with the teaching on tongues.

I am not saying that the AG is wrong or right about tongues. That is not the point here.

The further I go in this thread the more I am seeing that having a denomination with a doctrinal statement just simply puts up a system of belief (right or wrong) that then determines how the Word must be interpreted.

 

[Chester]

Because most people, non scholars, do start with their pet doctrines. But not those who have read a book on hermeneutics and put it into practice.
The solution is exegesis and hermeneutics. You will never persuade a person to abandon a traditional view until you can walk through the scriptures step by step and often the person you are talking to is not open to do that. When you find someone who is sincerely interested in only what the scriptures mean they will go through the hermeneutical exercise with you and see the light. Assuming that you are correct in your exegesis of course.

Good point, yes, they might see the light with a careful hermeneutical exercise. But not if they are loyal to their denomination first.

I wonder if someone could with a careful hermeneutical exercise convince you that the gift of tongues has ceased? LOL!

 

[Chester]

There's your answer.

So you are saying you are not a part of any denomination? Do you have no preset doctrinal statement?

 

[Chester]

I am going to guess that most nondenominational churches will have similar beliefs that are like an existing denomination. A Bible Fellowship has a particular culture that you can pick up on when you go to a non denominational church where the pastor has a Bible Fellowship background. The same with Reformed. The reformed culture will show up in a non denominational church where the leadership is reformed.

Will the visiting believer really experience anything different when they visit a nondenominational reformed church vs a denominational one? Besides a full band copying charismatic music without the charismatic part?

Well-said!

 

[peldom10]

It seems that for most churches (at least denominational ones) once doctrine is written down, then that becomes the starting point.

For example, if I become a pastor in a Southern Baptist Church, or a Lutheran Church, or a Holiness Church, etc., dare I start my teaching by going to the Word and teaching what (I) think it says? No, I must begin with that church's doctrinal statement. I have liberty of Scriptural interpretation as long as I abide by the doctrinal statement.

I can't pastor a Southern Baptist Church unless I begin with OSAS
I can't pastor a Holiness Church unless I begin without OSAS
I can't pastor a Lutheran Church unless I begin with infant baptism
I can't pastor a Baptist church if I baptize infants
I can't pastor an Assemblies of God church if I preach tongues was for Acts only
I can't pastor most fundamental evangelical churches if I preach that tongues is needed to be filled with the Spirit

I don't want this thread to be just another discussion of these doctrinal issues; that is not the point here.

The question is how to resolve this dilimma? Of course, this is done by unaffiliated, independent churches. But what is the solution at a denominational level? What denominations actually begin with Scripture rather than doctrinal statements?

What dilemma?...there is no dilemma .....Teach God's word...what has changed that to cause you to ask such question.

The basis of your question is....the reason many of us have no church. Because they ignore God's word and follow denominational script.
The reason God doesn't even acknowledge denominations in His word.
He knew.
That is a no no!

If you need an answer to such question....you do not need to be teaching God's word.

 

[Amanuensis]

Oh, I think that is great, and I highly respect the Assemblies of God group. But the point on this thread is the issue of denominations having a doctrinal statement that then determines how all within that group must interpret the Bible. And as you say above, the AG does just exactly that with the teaching on tongues.

I am not saying that the AG is wrong or right about tongues. That is not the point here.

The further I go in this thread the more I am seeing that having a denomination with a doctrinal statement just simply puts up a system of belief (right or wrong) that then determines how the Word must be interpreted.

It is more like Taking A Stand on controversial interpretations. They discussed the scriptures before they developed the statements.

 

[Eli1]

But aren’t non-denominational churches a domination?

 

[Amanuensis]

Good point, yes, they might see the light with a careful hermeneutical exercise. But not if they are loyal to their denomination first.

I wonder if someone could with a careful hermeneutical exercise convince you that the gift of tongues has ceased? LOL!

I have read many of the best presentations from a long list of scholars on cessationism and they are just awful. It is not hard to concede to the presentations of the scholarly continuationists. The scriptures are very verbose on the subject. Most cessationist don't even present all the text because it will ruin their bias. Which might be a case in point where they are allowing their denominational stand to cause them to violate their normal intellectual honesty. This I see from the cessationist side not the continuationists.

 

[Amanuensis]

But aren’t non-denominational churches a domination?

No. But they might have a statement of faith and that list might be similar to an existing denomination.

 

[Eli1]

No. But they might have a statement of faith and that list might be similar to an existing denomination.

No? Are you sure? Because according to Google it says this:

A non-denominational church is a Christian church that holds no connection with the recognized denominations and mainline churches such as the Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Methodist churches. Church denominations are larger organizations that hold a particular identity, set of beliefs, and traditions.
https://graceplano.church/about/non-denominational-churches-explained/

So this means and is another denomination which says “I have no other connection with these other guys”.

 

[Amanuensis]

No? Are you sure? Because according to Google it says this:

A non-denominational church is a Christian church that holds no connection with the recognized denominations and mainline churches such as the Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Methodist churches. Church denominations are larger organizations that hold a particular identity, set of beliefs, and traditions.
https://graceplano.church/about/non-denominational-churches-explained/

So this means and is another denomination which says “I have no other connection with these other guys”.

Well it would be an independent then.

 

[Eli1]

Well it would be an independent then.

Yeah so that’s a denomination. Lol

 

[Nehemiah6]

except that it goes back to the point that if we are going to make a doctrinal statement, I think the doctrine should be explicitly stated in the text.

It is explicitly stated (for those who can discern the truth) in all sixteen verses (which should all be referenced). As for others, that is their problem, since many are willfully ignorant.

 

[Chester]

But aren’t non-denominational churches a domination?

did you mean denomination? LOL!

 

[Amanuensis]

No? Are you sure? Because according to Google it says this:

A non-denominational church is a Christian church that holds no connection with the recognized denominations and mainline churches such as the Baptist, Catholic, Presbyterian, Lutheran, or Methodist churches. Church denominations are larger organizations that hold a particular identity, set of beliefs, and traditions.
https://graceplano.church/about/non-denominational-churches-explained/

So this means and is another denomination which says “I have no other connection with these other guys”.

Each church has a history. Did the pastor just feel the call to start a

Yeah so that’s a denomination. Lol

Not in the English definition of the word.

It's a complex topic. Each church has to be considered on it's own. What is the history, how did it start.

 

[Eli1]

Sorry for the auto correct spelling first of all but I think you guys are funny with your definitions in your mind.
Basically your rationality is “I’m right and everyone else throughout history is wrong” lol
“So I’m either going to take a verse from the Bible and make a church out of it“ like baptism or “ I’m gonna reject everything and create a church out of this idea”.