What belief in your denom do you find strange?

[Lamb]

Is there a belief within your denomination that you find strange?

 

[tango]

Hard to say since I don't really identify with a denomination as such. The church I attend now is a Mennonite church and I find the stance on pacifism to be curious, although it's reasonably well known within the church that I don't share that stance.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Hard to say since I don't really identify with a denomination as such. The church I attend now is a Mennonite church and I find the stance on pacifism to be curious, although it's reasonably well known within the church that I don't share that stance.

Wow, I am in the same situation with you. We attend online at an Amish-Mennonite church in another state and we attend in person on Wednesday evenings at a local Apostolic Church, which is also Anabaptist. I can agree with most of their teachings, but definitely do not agree with their teachings on pacifism. I don't see any conflict with the Bible on being a police officer, soldier, or even an armed citizen who will defend themself (or others) if the need arises. Jesus never condemned any of the soldiers he encountered (and they also served as police in those days). No, rather he commended the centurion for his faith. Never said, stop being a soldier. John the Baptist conveyed God's will telling the soldier not to abuse his position and to be content with his wages. That certainly does not sound like condemnation of armed service.

I'll go one further to say that obedience to government is insofar as that government is applying God's laws (1 Peter 2:14 and Romans 13:1-7). Otherwise obedience is optional but may be convenient to avoid hassles.

 

[atpollard]

“God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.”​

​

Genesis 1:27; 2:7; Matthew 6:6-7, 24; 16:26; 22:21; John 8:36; Acts 4:19-20; Romans 6:1-2; 13:1-7; Galatians 5:1,13; Philippians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:1-2; James 4:12; 1 Peter 2:12-17; 3:11-17; 4:12-19.​

- from Baptist Faith and Message​

The innate “separation of Church and State” as a long-standing Baptist Distinctive codified into the statement of faith dating back to before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock strikes me as an odd thing for a “statement of faith”.

 

[Lanman87]

The innate “separation of Church and State” as a long-standing Baptist Distinctive codified into the statement of faith dating back to before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock strikes me as an odd thing for a “statement of faith”.

You have to remember that the state was persecuted anyone who wasn't part of the "state religion".

Before the Reformation the church and state were joint powers that held each other up. The church would bring charges and convict someone of heresy and the state would execute punishment, including death. (think Jan Huss).

After the reformation countries where Lutheran or Reformed churches were the "state religion" the same thing happened. Both to Anabaptist and Catholics.

The Baptist solution was to have church and state seperate. And I agree with it. We don't want a secular authority to pick a particular church or to control the church in any way. The church should be completely free from any government oversite and intervention. This is the impetus behind the "Free exercise of Religion" clause in the Constitution.

Of course, many have turned it around. It was supposed to keep the government from persecution people for their religious belief. But modern people have made it a way to keep any religion out of any government event.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

“God alone is Lord of the conscience, and He has left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are contrary to His Word or not contained in it. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work. The gospel of Christ contemplates spiritual means alone for the pursuit of its ends. The state has no right to impose penalties for religious opinions of any kind. The state has no right to impose taxes for the support of any form of religion. A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal, and this implies the right of free and unhindered access to God on the part of all men, and the right to form and propagate opinions in the sphere of religion without interference by the civil power.”​

​

Genesis 1:27; 2:7; Matthew 6:6-7, 24; 16:26; 22:21; John 8:36; Acts 4:19-20; Romans 6:1-2; 13:1-7; Galatians 5:1,13; Philippians 3:20; 1 Timothy 2:1-2; James 4:12; 1 Peter 2:12-17; 3:11-17; 4:12-19.​

​

- from Baptist Faith and Message​

The innate “separation of Church and State” as a long-standing Baptist Distinctive codified into the statement of faith dating back to before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock strikes me as an odd thing for a “statement of faith”.

I guess not in the Statement of Faith, but in a broader list of teachings. I would add that it is the Christian's duty to not only operate in the spiritual realm to further the Gospel, but also to do what they can to make this world a better place, e.g., run for office or serve in legitimate government positions and discharge your duties faithfully in accordance with God's will, not man's will.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

Of course, many have turned it around. It was supposed to keep the government from persecution people for their religious belief. But modern people have made it a way to keep any religion out of any government event.

And worse, a way to keep individual Christians out of any government actions, so a Supreme Court nominee might be said to be disqualified because of their fundamental Biblical beliefs.

As for the roughly 1000 years of Church/State, I believe that is where infant baptism really took off because it was how the state made one a member of the church (as all citizens had to be members of the church) and how they got on the tax rolls, etc. so it was about control more than genuine concern for souls. One could live a pretty immoral life so long as they agreed with state-church teachings, but cross those teachings and it didn't matter how saintly one was, it would be recant or burn at the stake, or imprisonment.

 

[atpollard]

It reminds me of a quote from Winston Churchill:
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all of the other forms that have been tried.”

I understand WHY Baptists hold that position.
I even agree with the Baptist position (mixing church and state too often corrupts both).
As a HUGE fan of ‘Sola Scriptura’, I just have some personal reservations that God has made separation of Church and State an ‘Article of Faith’ comparable with things like the Deity of Christ, or Baptism of Believers.

 

[Albion]

Is there a belief within your denomination that you find strange?

There might be some, but I can't think of any offhand. And if there is one, it isn't about an important doctrine. That's one reason I feel comfortable belonging to that church.

 

[RichWh1]

We can disagree on secondary doctrines although we must agree on primary doctrines of faith. The primary doctrines are the ones that unite us
They are 1) the Deity of Christ, 2) Salvation by Grace, 3) Resurrection of Christ, 4) the gospel, and 5) monotheism.
(From CARM.org )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Albion]

We can disagree on secondary doctrines although we must agree on primary doctrines of faith. The primary doctrines are the ones that unite us
They are 1) the Deity of Christ, 2) Salvation by Grace, 3) Resurrection of Christ, 4) the gospel, and 5) monotheism.
(From CARM.org )


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Something like your "short list" probably does represent the minimum that we'd expect of anybody who wants to be considered a Christian, but it doesn't answer the question asked by the Original Post, does it?.

 

[Fritz Kobus]

While I don't have a particular denomination as I do not belong as an official member of a church, I am more closely aligned with the Anabaptists right now. I find the practice of the holy kiss rather strange as it is not part of our culture. They cite scriptures for this practice, but I think we can read it as a general thing to greet one another warmly. Likewise for footwashing. It is odd for a church to practice footwashing since it is not a custom our our day. Here I would think that showing hospitality and serving one another is the key point.

 

[tango]

While I don't have a particular denomination as I do not belong as an official member of a church, I am more closely aligned with the Anabaptists right now. I find the practice of the holy kiss rather strange as it is not part of our culture. They cite scriptures for this practice, but I think we can read it as a general thing to greet one another warmly. Likewise for footwashing. It is odd for a church to practice footwashing since it is not a custom our our day. Here I would think that showing hospitality and serving one another is the key point.

Good point on foot washing. When Jesus did it you can be pretty sure the disciples' feet were pretty gross, if they had been wearing open-toed sandals and walking in the heat and the dust all day. That job was typically done by the lowest ranking servant, so Jesus doing it was very symbolic.

These days we have closed-toed shoes, air conditioned vehicles and you can be sure on the day that foot washing is done people make sure their feet are clean. There's nothing to wash, it's purely symbolic. I wonder how many people would rush to wash the feet of a street beggar who turned up and who might have been wearing the same shoes and socks for several weeks.

 

[RichWh1]

Something like your "short list" probably does represent the minimum that we'd expect of anybody who wants to be considered a Christian, but it doesn't answer the question asked by the Original Post, does it?.

Fair enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk