A place to snark and vent about CoC doctrine and/or our experiences in the CoC. This is a place for SUPPORT and AGREEMENT only, not a place to tell someone their experience and feelings are wrong, or why we disagree with them.
klp wrote:I want to think Paul would say to stop fighting over this frequency aspect. If you do it this way then fine but do not judge another who does it another way since that arguing over frequency is robbing the whole thing of it's meaning.
Good point. Given the abhorrence with which Paul approached the concept of 'division' in general, I imagine that this would have been his approach to nearly all of these modern-day COC 'issues.'
klp wrote:If one does not share this POV about one valid pattern only then there is no point in arguing about specifics like instrumental music or LS or baptism. The underlying prerogative is what is at issue, not the specifics. There should be no puzzlement over how and why the CofC acts and decides as it does..it all derives from this concept.
I think you've hit squarely on the head the reason why the COC has so few connections to other denominations. In general, they are not part of any ecumenical effort whatsoever. As far as I know, other denominations don't rely on pattern theology to the extent that the COC does. Sure, everyone studies the history of the church and takes cues, to some degree, from what the early Christians did. But the COC is the only denomination that I'm aware of that enforces the so-called pattern of the NT (and to some extent, the early Christians in the post-NT era) as though it were the only way.
klp wrote:If one does not share this POV about one valid pattern only then there is no point in arguing about specifics like instrumental music or LS or baptism. The underlying prerogative is what is at issue, not the specifics. There should be no puzzlement over how and why the CofC acts and decides as it does..it all derives from this concept.
I think you've hit squarely on the head the reason why the COC has so few connections to other denominations. In general, they are not part of any ecumenical effort whatsoever. As far as I know, other denominations don't rely on pattern theology to the extent that the COC does. Sure, everyone studies the history of the church and takes cues, to some degree, from what the early Christians did. But the COC is the only denomination that I'm aware of that enforces the so-called pattern of the NT (and to some extent, the early Christians in the post-NT era) as though it were the only way.
Lev
Sorry, my use of "prerogative" was incorrect...I should have said perspective. (not quite a malapropism but we can argue that later)
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
I often drive past billboards with ads for a local COC. (Where do they get the money for that sort of advertising?) The signs say "Building toward eternity, step by step, brick by brick."
Moogy
NI COC for over 30 years, but out for over 40 years now
Mostly Methodist for about 30 years.
Left the UMC in 2019 based on their decision to condemn LGBT+ persons and to discipline Pastors who perform same-sex marriages
Moogy wrote:I often drive past billboards with ads for a local COC. (Where do they get the money for that sort of advertising?) The signs say "Building toward eternity, step by step, brick by brick."
Where do they find the "BCV" for these advertisements?
Moogy wrote:I often drive past billboards with ads for a local COC. (Where do they get the money for that sort of advertising?) The signs say "Building toward eternity, step by step, brick by brick."
Where do they find the "BCV" for these advertisements?
The church treasury of course just don't use it to help children in children's homes.
It's "pick and choose" theology. They use principles that are not mentioned in the NT. They say you can't do something unless the NT says you can. Where is this principle mentioned in the NT? It's not. So they speak where the bible doesn't, and this violates their own teaching of speak where the bible speaks and remain silent where the bible is silent.
The coC is more defined by what they don't do than what they do. In effect, they are trying to avoid hell more than seek heaven. I call it defensive theology. All of us know that if we try not to fail (at anything) then we actually empower fear & failure more than defeat it. It's also a biblical principle: Job 3:25 "For the thing which I fear cometh upon me, And that which I am afraid of cometh unto me."
Fear, guily and shame are the words that define how the coC approaches their Christianity. They see these qualities as virtuous and that using fear, guilt and shame on a person will make the Christian obedient, as if God does not care how obedience is carried out, as long as we obey. It's so spiritually dysfunctional it would be funny if not so sad. It is a true principle that fear cannot exist in the presence of the Spirit/spirit. Romans 8:15, "The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." Yet the coC continually extolls the virtues of fear, guilt and shame.
Phil wrote:It's "pick and choose" theology. They use principles that are not mentioned in the NT. They say you can't do something unless the NT says you can. Where is this principle mentioned in the NT? It's not. So they speak where the bible doesn't, and this violates their own teaching of speak where the bible speaks and remain silent where the bible is silent.
It's been said here before but deserves repeating: nowhere in the bible is the bible itself authorized.
Phil wrote:It's "pick and choose" theology. They use principles that are not mentioned in the NT. They say you can't do something unless the NT says you can. Where is this principle mentioned in the NT? It's not. So they speak where the bible doesn't, and this violates their own teaching of speak where the bible speaks and remain silent where the bible is silent.
The coC is more defined by what they don't do than what they do. In effect, they are trying to avoid hell more than seek heaven. I call it defensive theology. All of us know that if we try not to fail (at anything) then we actually empower fear & failure more than defeat it. It's also a biblical principle: Job 3:25 "For the thing which I fear cometh upon me, And that which I am afraid of cometh unto me."
Fear, guily and shame are the words that define how the coC approaches their Christianity. They see these qualities as virtuous and that using fear, guilt and shame on a person will make the Christian obedient, as if God does not care how obedience is carried out, as long as we obey. It's so spiritually dysfunctional it would be funny if not so sad. It is a true principle that fear cannot exist in the presence of the Spirit/spirit. Romans 8:15, "The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, "Abba, Father." Yet the coC continually extolls the virtues of fear, guilt and shame.
Really sad!
"Pick and choose" is a good term for C o C teachings. It decided what it wants to believe, then picked/chose Bible verses to prove the points. The verses were taken completely out of context and made into a sacred rule book which all MUST follow.
