DT, I was agnostic for years. When I became an Atheist, it was like being born again - for want of a better word. I always felt uncomfortable with agnosticism, but never knew why. Now I know - I didn't believe in God! Whatever path you choose, good luck, and welcome. I hope you find what you are looking for, and I hope these boards help a little - they have certainly helped me.

*interesting*

You both might want to explore the terms 'strong atheism' and 'weak atheism' in relation to your squabble, there.

DT, I'm sorry I forgot about this thread.  I meant to come in and ask you how I might better inform you about Christianity so that you can evaluate it to your standards.

I admire your willingness to explore everything before rendering a judgement.  I wish that feeling was more pervasive in our society.  So, if you have questions to pose for me, I'd be glad to answer them as well as I can, and of course other Christians might jump in, too.

Alright, given the hypothetical.

Your first question is a good one. It is quite a challenge.  First I would say that the denomination must embrace the critical elements of historic, orthodox Christianity.  Essentially, what that means is the acceptance of the three ecumenical creeds and the documents affirmed as authoratitive for the Christian community in the councils of the fourth century.   The three creeds in question are the Apostle's Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed.  Some object to the Athanasian, but its really just a one doctrine creed, that doctrine being the doctrine of the Trinity.  So, you can just take that.

Despite all the wrangling and dissension in the larger Christian community, what I said above applies to just about 99% of all people who take the name of 'Christian' throughout history.  It is a vast area of agreement.  Yet certain groups that want to be called Christians do not stand on that foundation:  the Mormons, the Jehovah Witnesses, the 'Jesus Only' Pentecostals being three big examples.

Clearly, moving beyond the criteria above, there are wide areas of disagreements on plenty of other important matters in the Christian community.  These are suggestions that I would offer to help narrow down your options:

A.  The denomination will not ask you to suspend critical thinking to embrace some or all of their distinctive teachings.
B.  The denomination will appropriately take into account the fall of man.
C.  The denomination will gladly stand on normal methods of interpretation of the Scriptures- and other areas of inquiry for that matter.  No special, ad hoc methodologies.  That is to say, the denomination will respect our need for a sound epistemology.

Now, I could probably go on and add a few, but this sums it up.  There are two things i need to say.  1.  I do not know of a single denomination which satisfactorily does A-C above on every matter.  Its disappointing, but that seems to be the reality.  2.  The Christian scriptures maintain that Christ cannot be divided.  These divisions are annoying, but personal effort must be exerted not to feel overwhelmed by those divisions.

I can offer a couple of broad strokes that can eliminate some options.  

I'm afraid that the Roman Catholic church fails on A amd C.  However, they comprehend #2 above.

That moves us quickly to the Protestant section of the field of possibilities.

The Fundamentalists (I'm talking about the REAL Fundamentalists) fail on A and C and in many cases, #2.

Pentecostals, for all their passion, also tend to fail on A and C  "The Spirit moves me to tell you to give me $1,000 bucks...."  But for all their failings, I admire their fervor.  But it is no surprise that the 'Jesus Only' movement arose from their ranks.

The Unitarians.  hehehhe ahhhhh the Unitarians.  You might actually get lucky and find a Unitarian congregation that will affirm the creeds and the accepted Christian Scriptures.  You might find some that definately embrace A, or at least say they do.  C... not usually, and B is out the window.  Its not nice to tell people they are sinners, so the Unitarians don't, but Jesus said he came to heal the sick, so I guess if none of us are 'sick' as the Unitarians wish to tell us (so as to not hurt our feelings) then Jesus didn't come for any of us.

This leaves quite a few options on the table.  I personally haven't been satisfed by any denomination.  When you find the perfect denomination, let me know, so I can join.  

When you find the perfect denomination, let me know, so I can join.  

Ah, but then it wouldn't be perfect anymore.

That really isn't meant as a slam SNJ.  It has taken me 9 years of looking for the perfect church to realize that as long as flawed humans are part of the church, it won't be perfect.

DT, I walked away from Jesus because of this very issue.

I started out in an Evangelical Free type church.  After 6 years, I switched to a Pentecostal.  In both churches I saw a lot of "do as I say, not as I do."  I used that as an excuse to write off the whole thing.  It was this website that brought me back to the very simple truth - Jesus lives.

Too many times, people look at the alleged division in the church and write it off because it appears, on the surface, that God can't possibly be there.  But, as SNJ said, 99% of churches do believe that Jesus lives.

Romans 10:9-10 sum up what is important.  "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.  For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

That's it.  It really is that simple.  People try to complicate the snot out of it and make it more than that, but that's people - not God.

The best analogy I can think of is siblings.  They'll beat each other up and bicker and trying to make the other look bad all in the name of trying to earn their parent's favor - not realizing that they already have it.

While I agree with SNJ that the Jehovah's Witnesses aren't generally part of the 99%, they too serve a purpose in all of this.  They were the ones who first told me that Jesus forgives sin.  I wouldn't be a Christian today without their willingness to come to my house and tell me that.

The diversity in the Christian world really is a good thing.  That's how I see it now - not so much as division as diversity.  In the same way that some people like classical music while others like rock, some people like formal services while others like dancing and clapping and yelling.  Some people want rules while others want freedom.

I know for a fact that if, in the beginning of my walk with God, the only church available to me had been a Pentecostal speaking-in-tongues shouting "Hallelujah," I would have walked out the door declaring them all nuts.  Conversely, I also would have shied away from a fiercely intellectual church as at that point.  I didn't want to wrestle with the tough issues at that time.  I didn't know enough to know what the tough issues were.  Today I do know and I do want to wrestle with them.

I am grateful that there are various churches available.  As I grow and change, there is a church out there to meet me where I'm at.  Each church has its own "thing" that it stands on.  As various "things" grow or fade in importance to me, I have "experts" in that "thing" to turn to who can teach me.  I am becoming a well-rounded balanced Christian as a result of the diverse teachers I have had along the way.

Quote

When you find the perfect denomination, let me know, so I can join.  

Ah, but then it wouldn't be perfect anymore.

That really isn't meant as a slam SNJ.  It has taken me 9 years of looking for the perfect church to realize that as long as flawed humans are part of the church, it won't be perfect.

I think Johnny was trying to imply that there is no such thing as a perfect denomination, actually.

DT, I walked away from Jesus because of this very issue.

I started out in an Evangelical Free type church.  After 6 years, I switched to a Pentecostal.  In both churches I saw a lot of "do as I say, not as I do."  I used that as an excuse to write off the whole thing.  It was this website that brought me back to the very simple truth - Jesus lives.

Which, I think, is the right frame of mind for a Christian to take. Nevertheless, one must still consider what views to accept and what views to reject, no?

Too many times, people look at the alleged division in the church and write it off because it appears, on the surface, that God can't possibly be there.  But, as SNJ said, 99% of churches do believe that Jesus lives.

I've never written off Christianity because of its divisions! I know there've been divisions since Paul's time... didn't he chastise some Christians in one of his epistles for claiming allegiance to certain people, i.e. "I'm with Paul, I'm with Peter," etc.? It seems the Bible has its say in the matter of denominations. That's why I didn't stop at "Which denomination should I accept?" I said, "Which denomination, or school of thought, if any..." which means I'm not just considering denominations, but schools of thought (viewpoints themselves, unattached to denomination), and I include "if any" to imply that I might not accept any of them, at least not in their entirety.

Romans 10:9-10 sum up what is important.  "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.  For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation."

That's it.  It really is that simple.  People try to complicate the snot out of it and make it more than that, but that's people - not God.

That would be people. This is a point I agree on, even though I'm not Christian (yet).

The best analogy I can think of is siblings.  They'll beat each other up and bicker and trying to make the other look bad all in the name of trying to earn their parent's favor - not realizing that they already have it.

Good analogy.

While I agree with SNJ that the Jehovah's Witnesses aren't generally part of the 99%, they too serve a purpose in all of this.  They were the ones who first told me that Jesus forgives sin.  I wouldn't be a Christian today without their willingness to come to my house and tell me that.

So a cult helped you along? That'd be a good example of God using the bad (i.e. unreasonable religious cult-people) to lead someone to the good (i.e. His real religion). That's something I accepted as possible way back in my Protestant days...

DT --

On the translation issue, my take is that different translations have different strengths and weaknesses.

...Which is something I took into account when I added the possible plural to "translation(s)."

Some try to capture the essential thought in a readable manner (NIV), others go for a more literalistic word for word translation (NAS).  There is a variety out there, and one should be prepared to consult multiple translations to try to get a good idea of what the passage may be saying.  Also, good translations will offer footnote variations in wording among the early manuscripts (the variation among early manuscripts is quite small in the scheme of things, however).  Ultimately, the question is the meaning of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek, as the case may be.

Agreed.

Translations to stay away from are those that appear to be influenced by a particular denomination's agenda: the Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation that carries the marks of such an influence.

 

Definitely. I didn't need anyone to tell me THAT.  

A translation that is wedded to a particular denomination is suspect and vice versa (i.e. a denomination that is wedded to a particular translation).

In other words, stay away from the KJV-onlyists!