Author Topic: christian denominations (Read 17071 times)

Red · « **Reply #25 on:** May 09, 2009, 06:00:09 PM »

Babtist.

Minister Polarius · « **Reply #26 on:** May 09, 2009, 07:28:04 PM »

Presbyterian.

SoulSaver · « **Reply #27 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:01:24 PM »

Mormon here

Rrulez · « **Reply #28 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:05:13 PM »

Forget I said anything.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #29 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:09:34 PM »

I was unaware that Mormons referred to themselves as "Christians"; therefore, I stand corrected.

Rrulez · « **Reply #30 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:10:10 PM »

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 09, 2009, 11:09:34 PM

I was unaware that Mormons referred to themselves as "Christians"; therefore, I stand corrected.

Not yet.

SoulSaver · « **Reply #31 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:10:30 PM »

Rrulez · « **Reply #32 on:** May 09, 2009, 11:22:54 PM »

Of course

Sean · « **Reply #33 on:** May 10, 2009, 12:29:46 AM »

Quote

Mormon here

Really?

Rrulez · « **Reply #34 on:** May 10, 2009, 12:36:54 AM »

Did you read the above posts?

Korunks · « **Reply #35 on:** May 10, 2009, 07:53:17 AM »

I should have put "bible believing" in quotes. I have actually attended(very shortly) bible believing churches which actually weren't. I just decided to not make a long exhaustive definition of what I find bible believing to mean, because it would have been long and I doubt any one would have wanted to read it!

Sean · « **Reply #36 on:** May 10, 2009, 12:59:11 PM »

Quote

Did you read the above posts?

Yes, and I'm not sure how that matters. I was wondering if he was serious or if he was just saying it because of the comments about Mormonism.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #37 on:** May 10, 2009, 01:27:23 PM »

You guys should be more conscientious to the Christians on these boards who don't believe in the bible to the nth degree.

Rrulez · « **Reply #38 on:** May 10, 2009, 01:56:53 PM »

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 10, 2009, 01:27:23 PM

You guys should be more conscientious to the Christians on these boards who don't believe in the bible to the nth degree.

What is a nth?

Sean · « **Reply #39 on:** May 10, 2009, 02:19:27 PM »

"nth" is a mathematical term.

Quote from: Colin Michael on May 10, 2009, 01:27:23 PM

You guys should be more conscientious to the Christians on these boards who don't believe in the bible to the nth degree.

I find it hard to be a Christian without believing the Bible. Also, just because somebody says, "I'm a Christian." doesn't mean they really are.

Rrulez · « **Reply #40 on:** May 10, 2009, 02:24:23 PM »

Quote from: Sean on May 10, 2009, 02:19:27 PM

"nth" is a mathematical term.
Quote from: Colin Michael on May 10, 2009, 01:27:23 PM
You guys should be more conscientious to the Christians on these boards who don't believe in the bible to the nth degree.
I find it hard to be a Christian without believing the Bible. Also, just because somebody says, "I'm a Christian." doesn't mean they really are.

'Twas what I thought

. Also, you can't be a Christian if you don't believe in the Bible, unless you are a [edited by R.O.S.E.S].

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #41 on:** May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM »

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM

Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

DaClock · « **Reply #42 on:** May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM »

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM

Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

Colin Michael · « **Reply #43 on:** May 10, 2009, 04:12:00 PM »

I personally like tradition based faiths over Bible based faiths; they make more historical sense [to me].

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #44 on:** May 10, 2009, 04:49:08 PM »

Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

That has nothing to do with any sort of "tradition" in my comment. FWIW, Sola Scriptura is one of those doctrines that Cameron doesn't like.

DaClock · « **Reply #45 on:** May 10, 2009, 04:57:10 PM »

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 04:49:08 PM

Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM
Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

That has nothing to do with any sort of "tradition" in my comment. FWIW, Sola Scriptura is one of those doctrines that Cameron doesn't like.

You're right, my mistake. I was just thinking that sola scriptura sounds a lot like the 100% bible, 0% tradition/doctrine that Cameron mentioned. However, they are defined differently.

Colin Michael · « **Reply #46 on:** May 10, 2009, 05:05:52 PM »

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 04:49:08 PM

Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM
Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

That has nothing to do with any sort of "tradition" in my comment. FWIW, Sola Scriptura is one of those doctrines that Cameron doesn't like.

How can he say 100% based on the Bible and not like Sola Scriptura?

Alex_Olijar · « **Reply #47 on:** May 10, 2009, 06:19:30 PM »

Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 04:57:10 PM

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM
Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

That has nothing to do with any sort of "tradition" in my comment. FWIW, Sola Scriptura is one of those doctrines that Cameron doesn't like.

You're right, my mistake. I was just thinking that sola scriptura sounds a lot like the 100% bible, 0% tradition/doctrine that Cameron mentioned. However, they are defined differently.

Ok if you want to go that way.

Do you believe in the tradition that Jesus is God's Son? No, because then you wouldn't be 0% tradition. Face it, even if you say "bible-believing" your still in large amounts of traditional beleifs.

The Spy · « **Reply #48 on:** May 10, 2009, 06:33:05 PM »

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 06:19:30 PM

Ok if you want to go that way.

Do you believe in the tradition that Jesus is God's Son? No, because then you wouldn't be 0% tradition. Face it, even if you say "bible-believing" your still in large amounts of traditional beleifs.

Maybe I am missing your point entirely, but it sounded to me like you just made the following argument:
Do you believe that Jesus is God's Son? If you do believe that, then you are following tradition.

I would like to add that this is a Scriptural belief, rather than traditional. Unless you mean that the Bible is a tradition in of itself, your argument naturally contradicts itself. (I mean nothing personal, but I just thought I would point that out.)

I am also non-denominational, and I personally have a hard time agreeing with non-scriptural traditions. Furthermore, since everyone is free to express their opinion, that is where I stand. I do not hold people that I disagree with in contempt over this matter, and feel obligated to say so.

DaClock · « **Reply #49 on:** May 10, 2009, 08:26:11 PM »

Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 06:19:30 PM

Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 04:57:10 PM
Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 04:49:08 PM
Quote from: DaClock on May 10, 2009, 03:51:56 PM
Quote from: Janissary on May 10, 2009, 03:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cameron the Conqueror on May 08, 2009, 05:55:44 PM
Non-denominational here. 100% based on the Bible, not doctrines or tradition.

Lol Wow what a shot at denominations, especially Catholics and Lutherans. Man, whoever said tradition was bad?

Sola Scriptura?

That has nothing to do with any sort of "tradition" in my comment. FWIW, Sola Scriptura is one of those doctrines that Cameron doesn't like.

You're right, my mistake. I was just thinking that sola scriptura sounds a lot like the 100% bible, 0% tradition/doctrine that Cameron mentioned. However, they are defined differently.

Ok if you want to go that way.

Do you believe in the tradition that Jesus is God's Son? No, because then you wouldn't be 0% tradition. Face it, even if you say "bible-believing" your still in large amounts of traditional beleifs.

I was giving up and saying I agreed with you, how did that stimulate more conversation?

News:

Author Topic: christian denominations (Read 17071 times)

SoulSaver

Rrulez

Rrulez

SoulSaver

Rrulez

Rrulez

Rrulez

Rrulez