Differences between protestant denominations?
-
Charismatic is NOT a denomination but a style of worship (style is used very loosely).Originally posted by ben1xy:oo i have a question. i've seen a lot of christian grps emerging. they call themselves new age christians. wad does it actually mean?
Pentacostal, on the other hand, is a recognised denomination with at least 30 years of history.
New age churches considers themselves as non-denomination. FCBC for example, in spite of having the word Baptist in their name is not Baptist in practice. It is true that it is extremely likely that a new age church is charismatic in nature. I am also not sure if such churches are comfortable in calling themselves as New Age Churches because it conjures up the image of new age philosophies (which has occultic origin).
It is very likely that mainstream churches are very uncomfortable with the doctrines and theology of the big 3 mega churches. I have heard sermons and read articles with veiled references to the deviant practices of these 3. -
Maybe you could say modern christians?? They are modernising christiantiy? I don't think this belongs to the mainstream. The mainstream perhaps are making themselve more relevant though.Originally posted by ben1xy:i have no idea. thats y i'm asking. they introduce themselves as new age Christians. i was hoping maybe u guys would know -
i visit WEFC (woodlands evangelical free church) on quite a number of occasions. is that also counted a non-donominational church? and when u mention non-denomination .. it refers to christians that are not from the traditional denominations like Methodist, Anglican, etc?Originally posted by Chin Eng:New age churches considers themselves as non-denomination.
sorry, i am quite ignorant in these aspects -
maybe.Originally posted by askxyz:Maybe you could say modern christians?? They are modernising christiantiy? I don't think this belongs to the mainstream. The mainstream perhaps are making themselve more relevant though.
i feel uncomfortable though. why new age? shouldn't the Word be enduring? hmm.. maybe it's due to my Catholic background... juz dun seem right -
I don't know this church. Sounds very much like a non-denominational church.Originally posted by ben1xy:i visit WEFC (woodlands evangelical free church) on quite a number of occasions. is that also counted a non-donominational church? and when u mention non-denomination .. it refers to christians that are not from the traditional denominations like Methodist, Anglican, etc?
sorry, i am quite ignorant in these aspects
Most of the larger church groups are either form under an umbrella organisation, eg The Methodist Church of Singapore where there are offices of higher authority. I'd count the Anglicans in this as well. I am not familiar as to how Bible-Presbyterians (BPs), Presbyterians (which is somewhat different from the BPs), Brethen, and Pentacostals are organised, but I do believe that there are higher councils beyond the local pastor.
Independent (non denominational) churches may be formed because of some pastors (or church leaders) disagreement with their original church or it can be formed because of some leader's vision (of the supernatural kind).
The problem with independent churches is that, in a way, most of them boh cheng hu. The spiritual leader usually runs the show and may be accountable to no one, just look at CHC.... -
hahaa .. yah .. CHC is THE epitome. i'm in 2 minds abt CHC though... i mean at least they r evangelising. on the other.. i still have my reservations.Originally posted by Chin Eng:The problem with independent churches is that, in a way, most of them boh cheng hu. The spiritual leader usually runs the show and may be accountable to no one, just look at CHC.... -
You're quite right...Originally posted by ben1xy:while waiting for Macross (he is much better at this) .. i'll give u my take. the turning of bread to the Body of Christ is something Sacred and Mystical and its not something that a normal person can fathom.
thats my take .. dun think its very accurate.. wait for macross ba
I refer to the Encyclical of Pope Paul VI on the Holy Eucharist, dated September 3, 1965:
Paragraph 4. "At the Last Supper, on the night when He was betrayed, our Savior instituted the Eucharistic Sacrifice of His Body and Blood. He did this in order to perpetuate the Sacrifice of the Cross throughout the centuries until He should come again, and so to entrust to His beloved Spouse, the Church, a memorial of His Death and Resurrection: a sacrament of love, a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a paschal banquet in which Christ is eaten, the mind is filled with grace, and a pledge of future glory is given to us.''
Relying on Revelation, Not Reason
16. And so we must approach this mystery in particular with humility and reverence, not relying on human reasoning, which ought to hold its peace, but rather adhering firmly to divine Revelation.
17. St. John Chrysostom who, as you know, dealt with the Mystery of the Eucharist in such eloquent language and with such insight born of devotion, had these most fitting words to offer on one occasion when he was instructing his faithful about this mystery: "Let us submit to God in all things and not contradict Him, even if what He says seems to contradict our reason and intellect; let His word prevail over our reason and intellect. Let us act in this way with regard to the Eucharistic mysteries, and not limit our attention just to what can be perceived by the senses, but instead hold fast to His words. For His word cannot deceive." (5)
18. The scholastic Doctors made similar statements on more than one occasion. As St. Thomas says, the fact that the true body and the true blood of Christ are present in this Sacrament "cannot be apprehended by the senses but only by faith, which rests upon divine authority. This is why Cyril comments upon the words, This is my body which is delivered up for you, in Luke 22, 19, in this way: Do not doubt that this is true; instead accept the words of the Savior in faith; for since He is truth, He cannot tell a lie." (6)
19. Hence the Christian people often follow the lead of St. Thomas and sing the words: "Sight, touch and taste in Thee are each deceived; The ear alone most safely is believed. I believe all the Son of God has spoken; Than truth's own word, there is no truer token."
20. And St. Bonaventure declares: "There is no difficulty over Christ's being present in the sacrament as in a sign; the great difficulty is in the fact that He is really in the sacrament, as He is in heaven. And so believing this is especially meritorious. " (7) -
Let us beware of the New Age. They are simply old traps with new names.Originally posted by Chin Eng:I am also not sure if such churches are comfortable in calling themselves as New Age Churches because it conjures up the image of new age philosophies (which has occultic origin).
It is very likely that mainstream churches are very uncomfortable with the doctrines and theology of the big 3 mega churches. I have heard sermons and read articles with veiled references to the deviant practices of these 3.
Care to forward some of those sermons? -
I am more worried by individuals than collective groupsOriginally posted by SingaporeMacross:Let us beware of the New Age. They are simply old traps with new names.
Care to forward some of those sermons? -
yar lar .. and I know you want to say there are some in this forum ..Originally posted by laurence82:I am more worried by individuals than collective groups
-
You can always download webcasts from the CHC website.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Let us beware of the New Age. They are simply old traps with new names.
Care to forward some of those sermons?
-
Originally posted by Icemoon:You can always download webcasts from the CHC website.
Who's the regular preacher these days?
-
Btw .. one can always listen to their audio sermon (http://www.chc.org.sg/english/online_sermon.cfm) .. they are in asx .. but with the right tools you can download it and listen in your mp3 player.
-
Rev. Kong.Originally posted by M©+square:
Who's the regular preacher these days?
See http://www.chc.org.sg/english/video.cfm#prev_week_sermon -
I think they are all evangelising... the problem is the MESSAGE. If the yardstick of every religious movement's teaching is their congregation, you only need to look at how these folks behave and you can conclude at the core of their mindset.Originally posted by ben1xy:hahaa .. yah .. CHC is THE epitome. i'm in 2 minds abt CHC though... i mean at least they r evangelising. on the other.. i still have my reservations. -
I personally have a handful of friends in CHC.Originally posted by Chin Eng:I think they are all evangelising... the problem is the MESSAGE. If the yardstick of every religious movement's teaching is their congregation, you only need to look at how these folks behave and you can conclude at the core of their mindset.
Just respect them as friends and refrain from discussing church issues.
Cheers -
so have I... some are colleagues too. They too cannot answer some of the confusion that their leadership may have created.Originally posted by M©+square:I personally have a handful of friends in CHC.
Just respect them as friends and refrain from discussing church issues.
Cheers -
hi Ben, got this from the church websiteOriginally posted by ben1xy:i visit WEFC (woodlands evangelical free church) on quite a number of occasions. is that also counted a non-donominational church? and when u mention non-denomination .. it refers to christians that are not from the traditional denominations like Methodist, Anglican, etc?
sorry, i am quite ignorant in these aspects
Is The Evangelical Free Church a Denomination?
That depends on what is meant by the word "denomination." If it is taken to mean a hierarchy that rules over local churches, the answer is, "no". If the word is taken to mean "denominators" that give cohesiveness to a movement, then we are a denomination. In reality, each Church is self-governing body that elects its own officers, raises its own budget, provides its own building, call its own pastor, and shapes its own program. These local Free Churches have in common certain purposes, principles, and practices that give them a basis for co-operation, and they recognize that there are certain things that they can do in concert which they could not accomplish on their own.
http://www.wefc.org.sg/www/about/efcs.html -
ahh! i've also visited Covenant EFC ... the one at Chua Chu Kang. thats why i was wondering. thks!Originally posted by OrneryBoy:hi Ben, got this from the church website
Is The Evangelical Free Church a Denomination?
That depends on what is meant by the word "denomination." If it is taken to mean a hierarchy that rules over local churches, the answer is, "no". If the word is taken to mean "denominators" that give cohesiveness to a movement, then we are a denomination. In reality, each Church is self-governing body that elects its own officers, raises its own budget, provides its own building, call its own pastor, and shapes its own program. These local Free Churches have in common certain purposes, principles, and practices that give them a basis for co-operation, and they recognize that there are certain things that they can do in concert which they could not accomplish on their own.
http://www.wefc.org.sg/www/about/efcs.html -
dont worrie, its not u...Originally posted by Icemoon:yar lar .. and I know you want to say there are some in this forum .. -
welcome..Originally posted by ben1xy:ahh! i've also visited Covenant EFC ... the one at Chua Chu Kang. thats why i was wondering. thks!