Anglican Church-what's up?
-
Several priests/parish workers left the Anglican church over the last year.
Even former leaders eg Bishop Tay does not worship in St Andrew's any longer but is somewhere else in non-Anglican setting.
what is happening? -
is it?
-
can elaborate? I hope you have some basis when you said that.
-
And so what if he left the Anglican Church?
-
The Anglican issue is quite old already..........Anglican Church is a fussion between state and the Church...which many preachers and ministers feel so strongly about negatively.......
In my opinion, as stated in the Word of God, the Church is not to be governed by the state, state affairs belong to the state, church affairs belong to the church...........many ministers way back in the 1700's and 1800's called the Dissenters disagreed of the State having control over the Church.
Many in the state are not Christians and do not know about the Bible and if there are problems and issues in the Church who will arbitrate.....the Church or the state?
many ministers cannot accept this and leave.
\ -
not veryOriginally posted by Ironside:The Anglican issue is quite old already..........Anglican Church is a fussion between state and the Church...which many preachers and ministers feel so strongly about negatively.......
In my opinion, as stated in the Word of God, the Church is not to be governed by the state, state affairs belong to the state, church affairs belong to the church...........many ministers way back in the 1700's and 1800's called the Dissenters disagreed of the State having control over the Church.
Many in the state are not Christians and do not know about the Bible and if there are problems and issues in the Church who will arbitrate.....the Church or the state?
many ministers cannot accept this and leave.
You forgot the Anglicans belong to the Church of England..so, in this aspect, its like saying the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family may turn non Christian in the future?
Provided they can change the law on Protestant-only kingship in England and not provoking the rest of the countrymen?
Also, in the first place, is the state heavily involved in COE affairs? -
???? What are you saying??Originally posted by laurence82:not very
You forgot the Anglicans belong to the Church of England..so, in this aspect, its like saying the Queen and the rest of the Royal Family may turn non Christian in the future?
Provided they can change the law on Protestant-only kingship in England and not provoking the rest of the countrymen?
Also, in the first place, is the state heavily involved in COE affairs?
1) The royal family never runs the government, they are only symbols of English monarchy......the parliament runs the state not the royal family.
"The rest of the royal family may turn non Christian"............why are they Christians in the first place?
2) What's this changing of laws..........of Protestant dominion......know that not all protestants are Christians. We are talking here of the State having a say on church affairs.
3) Degree of involvement of the state is not the cardinal issue of many ministers leaving the Church [i'm talking of ministers leaving the Church way back in the 1800's here ok?] it's the involvement of the state no matter how little or how enormous the involvement is the issue. -
Moses Tay left?I don't think so leh..
-
Apparently, did you know that the Queen is very deeply involved in, and i dont mean autocratically, in Bills passed by Parliaments? Not only do they require her approval, she also hold discussions with the Prime Minister regarding each and every Bill. In a way, she is more involved in the running of the government than most people think.Originally posted by Ironside:???? What are you saying??
1) The royal family never runs the government, they are only symbols of English monarchy......the parliament runs the state not the royal family.
"The rest of the royal family may turn non Christian"............why are they Christians in the first place?
2) What's this changing of laws..........of Protestant dominion......know that not all protestants are Christians. We are talking here of the State having a say on church affairs.
3) Degree of involvement of the state is not the cardinal issue of many ministers leaving the Church [i'm talking of ministers leaving the Church way back in the 1800's here ok?] it's the involvement of the state no matter how little or how enormous the involvement is the issue.
The Queen being Head of the Church of England is not a Christian? Then what is she, a pagan, a Satanic witch? And her family a Voodoo Club?
Did you also know that no English king or queen can ever be a Catholic if they ever want to ascend the throne? Its passed by law tho, after the struggles between Protestants and Catholics from the time of Tudor Catholic Queen Mary to the Stuart Protestants William of Orange and Mary II.
Catholic Emancipation come long after that, but then thats not the point.
So the Church stil pledge the allegiance to the Queen, who also has a part in government, and its unlikely she will turn non Protestant or Catholic that will go against the Church of England. Thats what i am saying.
For your last point, hopefully i am not wrong, the Archibishop of Canterbury and his bishops do sit in the House of Lords.....and House of Lords being a part of the Parliament.... -
So maybe they can do like the Vatican City, which is a country by itself, They have their law. And the Italian govt cannot do anything to them.Originally posted by Ironside:The Anglican issue is quite old already..........Anglican Church is a fussion between state and the Church...which many preachers and ministers feel so strongly about negatively.......
In my opinion, as stated in the Word of God, the Church is not to be governed by the state, state affairs belong to the state, church affairs belong to the church...........many ministers way back in the 1700's and 1800's called the Dissenters disagreed of the State having control over the Church.
Many in the state are not Christians and do not know about the Bible and if there are problems and issues in the Church who will arbitrate.....the Church or the state?
many ministers cannot accept this and leave.
\ -
Ok...point well taken.............that's why the ministers of the 1800's left the church......they all believe that the church and the state should be separate...that's their opinion and that's what i relayed here.............so what's the fuss?Originally posted by laurence82:Apparently, did you know that the Queen is very deeply involved in, and i dont mean autocratically, in Bills passed by Parliaments? Not only do they require her approval, she also hold discussions with the Prime Minister regarding each and every Bill. In a way, she is more involved in the running of the government than most people think.
The Queen being Head of the Church of England is not a Christian? Then what is she, a pagan, a Satanic witch? And her family a Voodoo Club?
Did you also know that no English king or queen can ever be a Catholic if they ever want to ascend the throne? Its passed by law tho, after the struggles between Protestants and Catholics from the time of Tudor Catholic Queen Mary to the Stuart Protestants William of Orange and Mary II.
Catholic Emancipation come long after that, but then thats not the point.
So the Church stil pledge the allegiance to the Queen, who also has a part in government, and its unlikely she will turn non Protestant or Catholic that will go against the Church of England. Thats what i am saying.
For your last point, hopefully i am not wrong, the Archibishop of Canterbury and his bishops do sit in the House of Lords.....and House of Lords being a part of the Parliament.... -
Becos u say many in the state arent Christians, when its the state itself that made it compulsory that no only the king and queen must be christian, they must be protestants
i am not an anglican, neither are we there in uk to see whats going on
so what the reason so many pastors leacing the anglican lot? -
There is a world of difference between professing Christians and Christians.
Not all protestants are Christians and certainly not all who claim to be Christians are really Christians........not even all preachers of Christianity are really Christians...
Not even all who read the Bible daily and pray daily are Christians......
actually that's what i mean my friend.....
-
Not really. The Italians will probably send their troops in just like Napoleon did, if their nationalism resurfaces.Originally posted by Honeybunz:So maybe they can do like the Vatican City, which is a country by itself, They have their law. And the Italian govt cannot do anything to them. -
look, i dont wanna question whether the queen and her government officials are faithful christians, but u got to look from their point of view, they are still the government of a state, they are not just looking at the interest of christians, but of all interest groups..Originally posted by Ironside:There is a world of difference between professing Christians and Christians.
Not all protestants are Christians and certainly not all who claim to be Christians are really Christians........not even all preachers of Christianity are really Christians...
Not even all who read the Bible daily and pray daily are Christians......
actually that's what i mean my friend.....
besides, being a secular government, they cannot do stuff solely from a church point of view...hence, the question is not whether they are christians or professing christians, but doing things in perspectives... -
hmm.. i got kinda lost.Originally posted by Ironside:There is a world of difference between professing Christians and Christians.
Not all protestants are Christians and certainly not all who claim to be Christians are really Christians........not even all preachers of Christianity are really Christians...
Not even all who read the Bible daily and pray daily are Christians......
actually that's what i mean my friend.....
so who exactly then is a Christian? -
those who have been truly regenerated by the Holy Spirit? Those whose names written in Book of Life, I suppose?Originally posted by ben1xy:hmm.. i got kinda lost.
so who exactly then is a Christian? -
in a Christian context.. wouldn't that be anyone who has accepted Jesus in their life?Originally posted by Icemoon:those who have been truly regenerated by the Holy Spirit? Those whose names written in Book of Life, I suppose?
i'm juz curious.. not quite sure how it goes in a Christian context -
So salvation is defined from a human-centric perspective? Or should it be God-centric since God is sovereign?Originally posted by ben1xy:in a Christian context.. wouldn't that be anyone who has accepted Jesus in their life?
-
definately the latter. what i am curious is the Christian view on this.Originally posted by Icemoon:So salvation is defined from a human-centric perspective? Or should it be God-centric since God is sovereign? -
All men are predestined .. just like Jesus did not choose to be crucified.Originally posted by ben1xy:definately the latter. what i am curious is the Christian view on this.
PS: the above is the reformed position. -
It is so possible to have accurate knowledge about Mt. Everest just because one has read a lot of books about it, it's terrain, it's climate, it's steepness, it's topography and etc. While it's one thing to have actually gone personally to Mt. Everest.Originally posted by ben1xy:hmm.. i got kinda lost.
so who exactly then is a Christian?
Let both of them talk about Mt. Everest and you will find the distinct, description of the one who has actually gone there. The one who has gone there describes it differently than the one who just read it in books. There is a world of difference between knowing about salvation and knowing salvation. there is a mountain of difference between head knowledge and experiential knowledge.
Head knowledge stops just there in the head while experiential knowledge involves the totality of the sinner, primarily his will.
it is so possible to know about pertinent verses in the Bible about how to be saved and give an orthodox "how-to" about salvation, but himself outside the pale of salvation. Not all who pray the modern practice of 'sinners prayer' are saved.
Only those who have trusted alone in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation is saved and therefore a real Christian. There are pastors and church workers who later on realized that they are not yet saved during their stint as a pastor of a church when they got really saved.
How do we know that we are saved? 1) Have i seen my utter sinfulness and helplessness regarding righteousness and salvation? if Yes, then
2) do you find the work of Christ alone in the cross of Calvary as the only work sufficient to fill that utter lack of righteousness?
Do you find His work alone all-sufficient for salvation nothing and no one else?
Are you trusting in that one finished work alone?
If you have prayed the 'sinner's prayer', are you trusting in the prayer you made to Christ or are you trusting in Christ alone for salvation?
If your answer is 'yes' to the latter question and the rest of the questions in number two, then you are saved.
Praise God!!!!!! -
Originally posted by Ironside:It is so possible to have accurate knowledge about Mt. Everest just because one has read a lot of books about it, it's terrain, it's climate, it's steepness, it's topography and etc. While it's one thing to have actually gone personally to Mt. Everest.
Let both of them talk about Mt. Everest and you will find the distinct, description of the one who has actually gone there. The one who has gone there describes it differently than the one who just read it in books. there is a mountain of difference between head knowledge and experiential knowledge.
Head knowledge stops just there in the head while experiential knowledge involves the totality of the sinner, primarily his will.
it is so possible to know about pertinent verses in the Bible about how to be saved and give an orthodox "how-to" about salvation, but himself outside the pale of salvation. Not all who pray the modern practice of 'sinners prayer' are saved.
Only those who have trusted alone in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation is saved and therefore a real Christian. There are a number pastors, according to thier own testimonies, realized that they are not yet saved during their stint as a pastor of a church when they got really saved.
How do we know that we are saved? 1) Have i seen my utter sinfulness and helplessness regarding righteousness and salvation? if Yes, then
2) do you find the work of Christ alone in the cross of Calvary as the only work sufficient to fill that utter lack of righteousness?
Do you find His work alone all-sufficient for salvation nothing and no one else?
Are you trusting in that one finished work alone?
If you have prayed the 'sinner's prayer', are you trusting in the prayer you made to Christ or are you trusting in Christ alone for salvation?
If your answer is 'yes' to the latter question and the rest of the questions in number two, then you are saved. You are a real Christian.
Praise God!!!!!! -
where is bishop tay?
With the Brethen church? -
Originally posted by Ironside:It is so possible to have accurate knowledge about Mt. Everest just because one has read a lot of books about it, it's terrain, it's climate, it's steepness, it's topography and etc. While it's one thing to have actually gone personally to Mt. Everest.
Let both of them talk about Mt. Everest and you will find the distinct, description of the one who has actually gone there. The one who has gone there describes it differently than the one who just read it in books. There is a world of difference between knowing about salvation and knowing salvation. there is a mountain of difference between head knowledge and experiential knowledge.
Head knowledge stops just there in the head while experiential knowledge involves the totality of the sinner, primarily his will.
it is so possible to know about pertinent verses in the Bible about how to be saved and give an orthodox "how-to" about salvation, but himself outside the pale of salvation. Not all who pray the modern practice of 'sinners prayer' are saved.
Only those who have trusted alone in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation is saved and therefore a real Christian. There are pastors and church workers who later on realized that they are not yet saved during their stint as a pastor of a church when they got really saved.
How do we know that we are saved? 1) Have i seen my utter sinfulness and helplessness regarding righteousness and salvation? if Yes, then
2) do you find the work of Christ alone in the cross of Calvary as the only work sufficient to fill that utter lack of righteousness?
Do you find His work alone all-sufficient for salvation nothing and no one else?
Are you trusting in that one finished work alone?
If you have prayed the 'sinner's prayer', are you trusting in the prayer you made to Christ or are you trusting in Christ alone for salvation?
If your answer is 'yes' to the latter question and the rest of the questions in number two, then you are saved.
Praise God!!!!!!
ksm.