POLL - backgrounds
Paul A Dean
brought up a Christian?
I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
be wrong.
So the question is for the Christians here:
Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Some people I've asked this have said no, only later to reveal that
their parents have always been church-goers, but that they don't
consider them to be Christians - an attitude which amazes me. So,
even if you've had a conversion experience, the answer is still yes,
for the purpose of the poll, if your family were practicing Christians
as you grew up.
The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
thankyou for listening,
--
Paul
Chris Manvell
In a message dated Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Paul A Dean wrote...
>Some people I've asked this have said no, only later to reveal that
>their parents have always been church-goers, but that they don't
>consider them to be Christians - an attitude which amazes me. So, even
>if you've had a conversion experience, the answer is still yes, for the
>purpose of the poll, if your family were practicing Christians as you
>grew up.
Nothing to do with your survey as I am not considered a Christian, but I
remember, way back in the mists of time, "when we were very young", that
one of the reasons I gave up on Christianity was because of the
hypocrisy I saw in those who professed to be Christian. I just thought,
"If this is what being Christian is about, I'm out."
Although I continued, rather begrudgingly, to believe that there was
"something in it", I never went to church again and today I still have a
healthy suspicion (often justified) of anyone who sits "up front" in the
Kirk, and of some of its ministers. Having said that, I HAVE met people
who I DO consider to follow the teachings of Christ to the best of their
ability, but they are usually the quiet ones, working away in the
background, often un-noticed.
All the best,
Chris
--
Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Fax.:+44+(0)870 056 8081
Baha'i Faith Pages from Skye: http://www.breacais.demon.co.uk/
"We testify that when He (Christ) came into the world, He shed the
splendour of His glory upon all created things. Through His power, born
of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the
sinner sanctified." [Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, XXXVI]
Phil Saunders
news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
No I wasn't.
Neither my parents nor my grandparents nor my stepfather nor anybody we knew
were Christians afaict.
You are correct Jesus is great.
Of my friends that converted after I did none afaik had churchgoing parents.
Phil
Arkady
never been a spiritual one - let alone what one would term Christian. The
most christian thing ever to happen in our family was my mother pinning up
Max Ehrmann's "Desiderata", and my grandparents giving me a beautiful
illustrated Children's Bible which I have since passed down to my eldest
daughter. (It's my youngest daughter's 8th birthday today, and I am giving
her her own copy!) Of my two sisters, one is a professed atheist and the
other is converting to Islam. My brother is agnostic. I have probably been
more influenced by my ex-husband's mother, who is Serb Orthodox.
The only person in my family to be a regular churchgoer is my paternal
grandmother, whose little stone cottage is directly opposite the church. But
I see her so rarely that her faith has never really factored much in our
daily lives - though maybe once my own thoughts on faith are more defined, I
may well write to her and ask her about her faith.
My mother was actually baptised RC, but although she attended Confirmation,
she has not set foot in a church since (following the death of her own
parents, she was adopted by her then-aunt and uncle, and one of the
prerequisites for the adoption going ahead was that she be baptised and
Confirmed RC).
With regards to churchgoers not being considered Christian, why does this
attitude amaze you? There are a great many people who go to church simply
because it is expected of them, but who otherwise do not lead Christian
lives. Merely attending a church does not make you Christian; belief does.
I'm afraid I can't really comment on the Christian subculture as you refer
to it, as I am not part of a regular congregation - those occasions I have
attended Mass have been principally at Westminster Cathedral or St.Albans
Cathedral on visits.
Possibly not that helpful an answer....
--
Regards,
Arkady
@>->--
http://www.arkady.org.uk/
http://www.sanguinary.org.uk
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25/12/02
kevin heath
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
and funerals. Does that count as church going?
--
God Bless
Kevin Heath
http://www.wildlifenews.co.uk
Paul A Dean
> "Paul A Dean" <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
> >
> > So the question is for the Christians here:
> >
> > Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
> No I wasn't.
You've mentioned in the past various issues that you've had with local
congregations. Do you think that was due to not being comfortable
with the culture of the congregation (what I called its sub-culture) ?
Or not?
> You are correct Jesus is great.
--
Paul
"You're improving! It's entirely due to my influence, of course.
You mustn't take any credit for it" - Dr. Who
Paul A Dean
> Nothing to do with your survey as I am not considered a Christian,
> but I remember, way back in the mists of time, "when we were very
> young", that one of the reasons I gave up on Christianity was
> because of the hypocrisy I saw in those who professed to be
> Christian. I just thought, "If this is what being Christian is
> about, I'm out."
I remember a similar feeling when I first became a Christian. It was
a case of "I may know God and Christ as my saviour, but if I call
myself a Christian I'll be associated with *those* people!" I've
never gotten over that initial discomfort with the Christian
subculture.
> Although I continued, rather begrudgingly, to believe that there was
> "something in it", I never went to church again and today I still
> have a healthy suspicion (often justified) of anyone who sits "up
> front" in the Kirk, and of some of its ministers. Having said that,
> I HAVE met people who I DO consider to follow the teachings of
> Christ to the best of their ability, but they are usually the quiet
> ones, working away in the background, often un-noticed.
I don't know what sort of hypocrisy you mean, but I think it's worth
remembering that having a high ideal and pathetically failing to reach
that ideal is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is when someone claims to
already be that ideal.
--
Paul
paul saunders-priem
Chris Manvell <ch...@manvell.org.uk> wrote in message
news:5FnRd0A7...@breacais.demon.co.uk...
>
> Nothing to do with your survey as I am not considered a Christian, but I
> remember, way back in the mists of time, "when we were very young", that
> one of the reasons I gave up on Christianity was because of the
> hypocrisy I saw in those who professed to be Christian. I just thought,
> "If this is what being Christian is about, I'm out."
That's right true religious people in any World Religion are known by their
"fruit" i.e. how little difference there is between what they are expected
to do based on the Word of God they believe in and the actual thought ,
speech and acts they manifest . Increasingly this standard is what non
religious and religious folk are judging religious people by : their
"fruit".
> Having said that, I HAVE met people
> who I DO consider to follow the teachings of Christ to the best of their
> ability, but they are usually the quiet ones, working away in the
> background, often un-noticed.
That's right and we have many Christian friends past and present who are
just like that . One thing I did notice , they did not believe that Jesus
was exclusively true and said that other World Religions like Islam and
Hinduism had some truth in them and the Founders of those World Religions
were at least in part right . This view is also shared by the Catholic
Church as well in the document Nostra Aetate. This is a Catholic Church
doctrine no less :-)
> Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Fax.:+44+(0)870 056 8081
> Baha'i Faith Pages from Skye: http://www.breacais.demon.co.uk/
> "We testify that when He (Christ) came into the world, He shed the
> splendour of His glory upon all created things. Through His power, born
> of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the
> sinner sanctified." [Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, XXXVI]
Thanks Chris, the more I read that passage my love for Jesus grows even
deeper . He has truly Returned . Thank you Jesus .
Warmest regards,
Paul Saunders Priem
www.bahai.org
Paul A Dean
> With regards to churchgoers not being considered Christian, why does
> this attitude amaze you? There are a great many people who go to
> church simply because it is expected of them, but who otherwise do
> not lead Christian lives. Merely attending a church does not make
> you Christian; belief does.
In the abstract, it's safe to assume that not all church-goers are
Christians. But if you claim that particular individuals aren't
Christians despite their claims to the contrary, then you'd better
have good solid reasons such as blatant apostasy, otherwise it's a
sign of a very ungenerous spirit, especially when those individuals
are your parents who have apparently successfully passed on their
faith to all their children.
> I'm afraid I can't really comment on the Christian subculture as you
> refer to it, as I am not part of a regular congregation - those
> occasions I have attended Mass have been principally at Westminster
> Cathedral or St.Albans Cathedral on visits.
May I ask why you're not part of a regular congregation?
God bless,
--
Paul
Paul A Dean
It doesn't count for the purposes of the poll. Coming in from
outside, then, have you any comments on the existence of a Christian
sub-culture?
> http://www.wildlifenews.co.uk
If you just put a valid doctype in the first line of the .stm file then it will be displayed properly by all W3C compliant browsers.
i.e
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
If you have a lot of .stm files, then just write a script. For example
find . -name \*.stm | xargs perl -npi.bak -e 's#<html>#<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC \"-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN\" \"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd\"><html>#go'
for a one liner, if you'll excuse its length. Cut and paste it into a
shell in the root directory of all your .stm files.
--
Paul
David Aldred
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes
>
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
'involved', but they did not attend church with any regularity or
consistency until I was in my late teens and already myself involved in
the Church without them.
That's a kind of 'yes and no' answer, I think.......
--
------------------ -------------------------
|\avid Aldred / Da...@familyaldred.org.uk \ Nottingham, England
|/ --------------------------------
Paul A Dean
> In message <m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk>, Paul A Dean
> <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes
> >
> >Were you brought up within a Christian family?
> >
> My parents were baptised Christians, and had at one time been fairly
> 'involved', but they did not attend church with any regularity or
> consistency until I was in my late teens and already myself involved
> in the Church without them.
>
> That's a kind of 'yes and no' answer, I think.......
Thanks.
--
Paul
Chris Manvell
>remembering that having a high ideal and pathetically failing to reach
>that ideal is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is when someone claims to
>already be that ideal.
Oh, I agree Paul, except that I think hypocrisy isn't so much about the
ideal as just claiming to be better than one knows one is, and not
trying to do anything about it. (In that respect I think I am a bit of
a hypocrite so shouldn't be so judgmental.) As I see it, the whole
point of life is in the striving to achieve the best one can, even it
the goal is much higher. But I really meant "hypocrisy" - but remember,
I was young and probably didn't have the full picture, it was just that
I knew what some of these people were up to.
Andy McMullon
Paul A Dean <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> expounded:
> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes.
I was baptised as an infant, brought up as a Christian, went to a
Christian school and was confirmed at age 7.
I made Christian profession (whatever that really means) at the age of
15.
I have had a fresh overwhelming experience of the Spirit (some people
cal this a 'baptism in the Spirit') on several occasions.
So when did I become a Christian?
I think I'd say I was always a Christian but have found new ways of
expressing that committment as I have grown up....
I expect to make further committments to Christ in future years.
Chris Manvell
In a message dated Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Andy McMullon wrote...
>I was baptised as an infant, brought up as a Christian, went to a
>Christian school and was confirmed at age 7.
I was baptised when a baby (no-one asked my permission, BTW, and I
mildly resent it to this day), but confirmation was not offered until we
were well into our teens and even then the depth of knowledge required
was beyond what I was, by that time, prepared to put my mind to, so I am
surprised that confirmation could be given so early - what was required
of you?
(In passing, children of Baha'is are treated as Baha'i until the age of
15, after which the choice it up to them. There are no equivalents to
baptism or confirmation as such.)
Alan Zanker
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes - sort of. My mother was a fairly regular church-goer
(Congregational) until illness reduced her frequency of attendance. My
father was in a choir which performed at different free church chapels
(eg Messiah, Elijah etc) but wasn't a regular attender. However, my
mother said little and my father nothing about their faith - politics,
religion and sex were three subjects never to be discussed.
I was more influenced by my aunt and my grandparents who were
'stalwarts' of their small village independent chapel. It was there
rather than from my mother's church that I first sang and remembered
hymns, and heard and subsequently read the Bible.
>The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
>why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
>within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
>you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
I didn't answer 'no', but I'm curious as to what you mean by Christian
sub-culture.
Alan
Debbie
wrote:
>I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
My mother was a very lapsed and very anti-clerical RC because of an
event in her childhood which left her hurt and angry - but she never
gave up on God, although her agnosticism was often rather confused.
My father was an anti-church atheist, much given to reading oriental
philosophy in what I now believe was an undirected search for the
source of meaning in his life. But they baptised me as a baby, sent
me regularly to church (habit? custom? getting me out of the house
on Sunday mornings?), then to an RC convent school, then to two public
schools, both with a strong C of E ethos and witness. I was provided
with a beautiful Bible, and encouraged to read it. I believe that my
mother remained a christian throughout her life, although her
suspicion and fear of the church never left her.
I don't remember a time when I didn't consider myself christian, but I
always had to act as an apologist for my faith at home - both in
answer to my Dad's barbs about "God bothering" and my mother's
mistrust of clergy and church teaching and an ignorance born of fear.
This helped me to learn to examine critically my own beliefs from a
relatively early age.
At school, I had the good fortune to be pastored and taught by a
saintly school chaplain who encouraged me to explore my own
relationship with God without losing sight of the church. Mr Ainger
was learned, patient and wise, and I owe him much.
My father became a Quaker after I left home, and has found peace,
meaning and purpose in a doctrine-free form of christianity. As far
as I can tell, this had nothing whatever to do with my Mum, who was
even more cagey about the Quakers than the established churches, or
me, who had explored quakerism and found it too intellectual and
sterile for my own temperament.
So the short answer is, yes, I was brought up as a christian, by a
christian mother and an atheist father who subsequently found faith
himself. But what I consider the most formative years of my
developing religious life were guided by my school chaplain.
--
Debbie
Urban Theology Unit, Sheffield
Views expressed in this email are my own and are not
necessarily those of the University of Sheffield or UTU.
Keith
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
I was baptised as an infant (everyone was, in those days) but never taken to
Church or taught to pray. Primary school included some very saintly teachers
who first got across to me the teachings of Christ.
I was confirmed (at school) aged 14, still never having been to Church.
I continued to take communion in the school chapel on irregular occasions.
Then I learned to drive, and went to the local Church to see my girl friend (now
wife of 35 years) who sang in the choir. It grew from there.
I don't know when I "became" a Christian - it was a gradual process. That
process has never stopped.
I think there's a false perception of Church - those outside seem to look upon
it as "the people who think they are holy". That engenders accusations of
hypocrisy and worse. Surely it should be seen as "the people who realise they
are imperfect and need God's love and forgiveness", and "the place where others
can come and seek this love and forgiveness".
Keith
Ian Collier
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes.
--
---- Ian Collier : i...@comlab.ox.ac.uk : WWW page below
------ http://users.comlab.ox.ac.uk/ian.collier/imc.shtml
Robert Marshall
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
Was 'taken to church' by parents who rarely attended
>
> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the
> reason why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I
> find within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer
> no, would you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
>
I think I've been too long in the sub-culture to not be able to
comments too helpfully..
R
--
He is our homeliest home and endless dwelling - Julian of Norwich
Tony Gillam
> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
I grew up in the immediate post war period (The Luftwaffe converted our
church into motorway foundations). As a young child we moved to prefab
housing outside Portsmouth which at that time had no local churches
although various sunday schiools were run in local schools. Later
regular attendance remained a problem as my father, a policeman, worked
shifts. Regular church attendance did not become feature until I was
about 10 but has been ever since apart from a period in my mid twenties
when I moved house a few times and never really settled anywhere.
--
Tony Gillam
tony....@lineone.net
http://www.bookourvilla.co.uk/spain
Sun, sand and sangria
Matthew Vernon
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes-ish; my parents went to church from time to time, but more because
they thought it was the done thing. So yes for the purposes of your
survey, but no otherwise, I think.
Matthew
--
"My sheep hear my voice. I know them, and they follow me. I give them
eternal life, and they will never perish. No-one will snatch them out
of my hand". John 10 27-28
http://www.pick.ucam.org/
Pam Seeker
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes. Baptised at 27 days old, attended church, Sunday-school and church day
school in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Father a lapsed Roman
Catholic cum atheist. Taught that Roman Catholics were the pawns of Satan
but my Italian-born paternal grandmother was clearly the person in my life
who was in love with Christ and had "the personal commitment to Jesus" that
all the Protestants just talked about. Went to a Jesuit university to study
Political Science and ended up studying Theology instead because it was
there that I got an inkling of that love for the first time.
> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
> why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
> within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
> you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
I suspect that there are many different Christian sub-cultures. I suspect
that the bottom-line is that it's about group dynamics and that one find a
congregation that isn't too dysfunctional, where one can grow, where people
will put up one's foibles as one puts up with theirs and where everyone thus
learns - sometimes painfully - what displaying the "fruits of the Spirit" is
all about. Where one tries to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.
Blessings,
Pam
Michael J Davis
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes
>So the question is for the Christians here:
>
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes, I was. Of more interest is that my mother was sent to a convent by
non-practising (and afaicat non-believing at the time) parents because
they wanted to give her a 'good education'. (Actually, since she was
sent to boarding school at the age of five, I have severe doubts about
the purity of their motivation!)
She became a Catholic at the age of thirteen to be more like her friends
(I'm not suggesting she didn't believe).
She met my father, who was brought up in a pretty godless family. As a
result he looked at Catholicism and was convinced by the authority. He
became a Catholic before they married.
As a result, I was baptised at the age of 1 month and one day, and
brought up a Catholic.
The most testing time was in going to a minor public school (aged 11-15)
where I had to give my peers an explanation of my beliefs. It caused me
to think much more deeply than going to an RC school would have done.
Although I been though a period of serious doubts, I have generally
stuck with it and, thank God, married a Christian.
Mike
--
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><
Pete Broadbent
>> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
>> brought up a Christian?
>>
>> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
>> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
>> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
>> be wrong.
>>
>> So the question is for the Christians here:
>>
>> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Nope. My Dad was an RC who lapsed during (perhaps because of) the war. I was
brought up by caring, non-religious parents, and taught no religion. My
parents believed that it was right that I should choose for myself. I became
a Christian in my teens. I've always found church culture bizarre and alien,
and wouldn't go to church out of choice. However, I do have a job that
rather necessitates that I attend...
--
Pete Broadbent
Jon Courthold
news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
I was brought up in a Christian family. Initially Baptist, then independent
evangelical free churches and open brethren. I remember praying a specific
prayer of commitment at the age of about 4 or 5 - I can remember the event
and the place (it was alone at home) though not the date. The family
culture was such that this was how one became a Christian - by making a
personal decision. But in many ways my 'conversion' was more of a process
of deepening understanding, awareness, belief and experience - this is
probably a process that is still ongoing in many ways. I was baptised by
full emersion at the age of about 16 (can't remember the exact date although
I'm sure my parents would).
The Christian sub-culture, as I experienced it in my formative years (and
have only recently started to realise in any meaningful way), was very
insular, ignorant, naive and condemning of those outwith the sub-culture.
For example, I was brought up with the near certain knowledge that there
were few (if any) 'real' Christians in the Anglican church and fewer still
in the Roman Catholic church. I have now grown up a little (perhaps a lot)
and attend an Anglican church myself and enjoy fellowship with many other
varieties of Christian within this uk.r.c and elsewhere.
I guess growing up with the church thing (with all it's funny little ways)
means that one never has the 'getting used to it' experience of a new
Christian who has never been brought up in a church-going family. The
closest I can imagine to the experience of a new Christian coming to terms
with the Christian sub-culture is my experience of learning a new
sub-culture when I joined an Anglican church after 35 years in the
non-conformist evangelical tradition.
I agree with Pam's point that there are many Christian sub-cultures - as
many as there are Christian gatherings. Each sub-culture will have points
of similarity and departure but all will be different to secular or
other-religion sub-cultures - and in that sense any new Christian will have
some adjusting to do.
Regards,
Jon
Regards,
Jon
Ken Down
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> wrote:
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes.
God bless,
Kendall K. Down
--
__ __ __ __ __
| \ | / __ / __ | |\ | / __ |__ All the latest archaeological news
|__/ | \__/ \__/ | | \| \__/ __| from the Middle East with David Down
================================= and "Digging Up The Past"
Web site: www.argonet.co.uk/education/diggings
e-mail: digg...@argonet.co.uk
Kim Tame
news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
No. In that my parents never went to church. However, my mum believed in
God, and thought it was important that we were all (4 of us) sent to Sunday
School - we were all dedicated in a baptist church.
> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
> why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
> within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
> you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
Which one? We've moved around the country a bit, and encountered several.
The sub-culture I felt most uncomfortable with featured middle-class values,
exalted the family above everything, non-working mothers, non-ministering
women, non-critical faith, frowned upon reading anything that wasn't 'holy
spirit inspired'(conservative evangelical, of course!), frowned upon any
music that wasn't Christian. And music considered not Christian often
included traditional hymns, or choir music, or anything RC, along with most
rock and pop. Asking a question could be answered with, 'are you a
Christian?'. Not voting for TBW likewise. And there I was, working class,
feminist, reading John Spong... someone called me a heretic once, but he was
joking. I think.
I feel much more comfortable now to be in a broader church, and don't feel
as if I am in a sub-culture. There is certainly no pressure to conform to
any particular mould.
Kim
Gareth McCaughan
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
>
> So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
No. I was brought up within an ex-Christian family.
They were (at least in the early stages) quite recently
ex-Christian.
> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
> why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
> within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
> you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
No, I wouldn't :-). Would you like to be a bit more specific?
--
Gareth McCaughan Gareth.M...@pobox.com
.sig under construc
Andy McMullon
Chris Manvell <ch...@manvell.org.uk> expounded:
> Hi Andy.
>
> In a message dated Sun, 29 Dec 2002, Andy McMullon wrote...
> >I was baptised as an infant, brought up as a Christian, went to a
> >Christian school and was confirmed at age 7.
>
> I was baptised when a baby (no-one asked my permission, BTW, and I
> mildly resent it to this day), but confirmation was not offered until we
> were well into our teens and even then the depth of knowledge required
> was beyond what I was, by that time, prepared to put my mind to, so I am
> surprised that confirmation could be given so early - what was required
> of you?
Only, IIRC, my desire and willingness to be filled with the Holy
Spirit - any great depth of knowledge was/is not necessary in this
particular denomination. Mind you, speaking personally, I now think
that Confirmation really only make sense as the adult counterpart to
infant baptism.
> (In passing, children of Baha'is are treated as Baha'i until the age of
> 15, after which the choice it up to them. There are no equivalents to
> baptism or confirmation as such.)
In most Christian denominations children of Christians are treated as
Christian until their years of discretion, after which the choice is
up to them - and that is essentially what infant baptism and
confirmation are all about.
Mitch B
>So the question is for the Christians here:
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Paul, I'm sorry but, despite reading my way though the various responses
to this, I can't figure out what you are asking. Do you mean that
o the family were regular church-goers
o we got sent to a church school
o we were sent to Sunday school
or could it just be that we were raised within a family where love
reigned supreme -- which holds true for all sorts of families.
IOW, I don't understand what you mean by "a Christian family"
Forgive me, but I don't see how anybody can sensibly answer until we
know what *you* mean by the question.
--
Mitch
Arkady
>
>God bless,
>--
>Paul
Several reasons; firstly, I only just made the step of declaring, at least
to myself and to my friends,that I was renouncing Paganism (after 15 years
as a Witch) a few months ago. Whilst I am content to have found a belief in
God, I am having difficulties concerning belief in Christ - in particular
the established Church. Secondly, there are so many denominations that it is
incredibly confusing to one newly converted. And thirdly, I have yet to find
a congregation and church with whom I feel comfortable. There seem to be an
awful lot of pointless rules, restrictions and ceremonies involved that seem
to have very little to do with the Scriptures, and I cannot help but feel
that any God unwilling to accept me purely for who I am rather than how I
dress and how I choose to live my life is not really one worth following.
Just about every Christian list I've joined however seems to take great
delight in telling me how sinful i am because I dress a certain way, or
because I'm divorced, or because I live with my boyfriend and don't intend
to get married. These things should not matter; only that one has faith.
I also have problems in dealing with a very large group of strangers; I'm
not actually agrophobic per se, but I do get very uneasy if forced to spend
an extended length of time in such a situation. Mass in a Cathedral is one
thing - it takes place in a wide open, airy space. But the small confines of
a typical parish church would be too claustrophobic for me.
--
Regards,
Arkady
@>->--
http://www.arkady.org.uk/
http://www.sanguinary.org.uk
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25/12/02
Sun Kitten
> > Were you brought up within a Christian family?
> I was brought up in a Christian family. Initially Baptist, then independent
> evangelical free churches and open brethren. I remember praying a specific
> prayer of commitment at the age of about 4 or 5 - I can remember the event
> and the place (it was alone at home) though not the date. The family
> culture was such that this was how one became a Christian - by making a
> personal decision. But in many ways my 'conversion' was more of a process
> of deepening understanding, awareness, belief and experience - this is
> probably a process that is still ongoing in many ways. I was baptised by
> full emersion at the age of about 16 (can't remember the exact date although
> I'm sure my parents would).
That's scarily similar to my experience, although I remember 'praying the
prayer' and then telling my mother the day after that I didn't feel any
different' (it was after reading Treasures of the Snow, FWIW. I was 4). I
was also brought up going to church with my parents although when I
expressed a desire to change churches they were quite happy to let me do
so.
My husband Serge (who doesn't post any more 'cause his posts don't make it
through and he likes reading crypto newsgroups :) was brought up in
Communist Russia to the age of 9. His mother was and still is very
dismissive of religion in general. He became a Christian a while ago,
shortly before we got engaged, during or just after our Finals.
We go to the same church now. He said, when I asked him, that the
Christian sub-culture did not influence his choice (he was surrounded by
close Christian friends for most of university life - this is conservative
university CU culture), rather, he simply didn't get how we could do what
we did and why. When he understood, there wasn't a problem any more.
I got his permission to post this :)
HTH
Morag
--
'Remember the rules. One dance only.'
- http://www.toothycat.net/strip.html
Chris Manvell
>> mildly resent it to this day), but confirmation was not offered until we
>> were well into our teens and even then the depth of knowledge required
>> was beyond what I was, by that time, prepared to put my mind to, so I am
>> surprised that confirmation could be given so early - what was required
>> of you?
>
>Only, IIRC, my desire and willingness to be filled with the Holy
>Spirit - any great depth of knowledge was/is not necessary in this
>particular denomination. Mind you, speaking personally, I now think
>that Confirmation really only make sense as the adult counterpart to
>infant baptism.
>
>> (In passing, children of Baha'is are treated as Baha'i until the age of
>> 15, after which the choice it up to them. There are no equivalents to
>> baptism or confirmation as such.)
>
>In most Christian denominations children of Christians are treated as
>Christian until their years of discretion, after which the choice is
>up to them - and that is essentially what infant baptism and
>confirmation are all about.
Thanks Andy. I can see now where you are coming from. There is no
equivalent to baptism in the Baha'i Faith, and the equivalent to
confirmation appears to be the simple declaration of faith after the age
of 15, no ceremony, no ritual, etc.
In a way I wish now that I had gone along with confirmation as that
would have been a conscious act of my own volition. However,
circumstances have changed and I am happy where I am.
Paul A Dean
> On 29 Dec 2002 08:50:54 +0000, Paul A Dean enlightened us all with:
>
> >So the question is for the Christians here:
>
> >Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
> Paul, I'm sorry but, despite reading my way though the various responses
> to this, I can't figure out what you are asking. Do you mean that
>
> o the family were regular church-goers
> o we got sent to a church school
> o we were sent to Sunday school
Any of the above, really, particularly 1 and 3.
> or could it just be that we were raised within a family where love
> reigned supreme -- which holds true for all sorts of families.
>
> IOW, I don't understand what you mean by "a Christian family"
What I'm interested in is the "church culture". I'm interested to see
how adults find that culture depending upon what they grew up familiar
with. Forgive me if it was phrased badly! There I go being obtuse again!
--
Paul
Paul A Dean
> Paul A Dean wrote:
>
> > The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the
> > reason why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture
> > I find within sunday worship congregations, so for those who
> > answer no, would you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
>
> No, I wouldn't :-). Would you like to be a bit more specific?
I'm badly tempted to say "no, I wouldn't", but I'll restrain myself. :)
Some people feel decidedly uncomfortable with "church culture", by
which I mean the various behaviour patterns and common attitudes that
typify a Christian community. Over the years have you had occasion to
think on this? Have you felt uncomfortable by it?
For example, as each Christian naturally holds other Christians up as
models for themselves, these patterns and attitudes are encouraged and
eventually mistaken for holiness itself, leading to the covering up of
true holiness under culture. That, briefly put, was one of the things
that occured to me. I'm interested especially in what other people
think who were not brought up in a church culture.
note; obviously I'm not talking about those behaviour patterns and
common attitudes which are reasonably necessitated by the bible. I'm
talking about everything from a particular way of talking/praying to
extrabiblical moral notions held in common.
I'm probably still being too obtuse, but I am trying :)
--
Paul
Mitch B
>Mitch B <mitch...@mid.ydns.org> writes:
>> o the family were regular church-goers
>> o we got sent to a church school
>> o we were sent to Sunday school
>Any of the above, really, particularly 1 and 3.
1) No
3) Yes -- but I got thrown out within a month for asking 'inappropriate'
questions [IOW I asked 'Why" once too often :-) ] -- and then my
brother got thrown out just 'cos I was his sister.
>> or could it just be that we were raised within a family where love
>> reigned supreme -- which holds true for all sorts of families.
>> IOW, I don't understand what you mean by "a Christian family"
>What I'm interested in is the "church culture". I'm interested to see
>how adults find that culture depending upon what they grew up familiar
>with.
Well, my mother grew up in a vehemently anti-Catholic family and that
attitude (which never left her) must have impacted upon my brother and
myself somewhere along the way.
Certainly my grandmother, to her dying day, never forgave me for having
'turned' -- especially as I did so as a single person, if you see what I
mean. Tw'as only much later that I discovered that my grandmother's
sister -- the eldest of the family -- not only 'turned', but also
joined the Carmelites. That made my grandmother (b 1890) the eldest
daughter of a largish family, with all the responsibilities that
entailed: she blamed the RCC for evermore.
HTH
--
Mitch
Debbie
wrote:
>What I'm interested in is the "church culture". I'm interested to see
>how adults find that culture depending upon what they grew up familiar
>with. Forgive me if it was phrased badly! There I go being obtuse again!
Apart from the obvious caveats and riders about there being numerous
"church cultures", I think there is also an element of changing times,
changing cultures. Mainstream Anglican culture when I was growing up
was very different from mainstream Anglican culture today. The same
is even more true for pre-Vat 2 Roman Catholicism, I think.
It's hard to pinpoint one specific difference over time, but I'd
hazard a guess that in most churches, there is a stronger element of
critical self-awareness. The congregations/ communities/ whatever
(as opposed to the clergy/ ministers/ whatever) are asking "what are
we doing and why?" in ways that I don't think happened in the 60s &
70s when I was growing up. And I think there is more factionalism -
or perhaps it's because churches that would not have even acknowledged
one another then now encounter one another and so the differences are
higher on the agenda.
The church cultures I grew up in (Expatriate Anglican, Roman Catholic,
Anglo-Catholic and Anglican Evangelical) were different from one
another - the first was as conservatively, overtly *BRITISH* as the
expat community it served, and I suspect remains so. God's role in
it all was to be the archetypal Englishman, decent, respectable and
understated in a plummy-voiced sort of way. Other expat
congregations I've encountered since have had very similar attitudes.
I used to be rather sniffy and progressive about it all, but I've come
to the conclusion that people who for some reason feel separated from
their cultural roots often look for roots in their faith community,
and having found something, they are very fearful of anything that
feels as if it may disturb the roots again. I discussed this with a
couple of acquaintances (one sikh, the other muslim) and both
confirmed that their faith community in the UK was far more culturally
Indian/ Pakistani, and theologically more conservative than faith
communities in their countries of origin.
The RC culture I encountered was culturally pre-Vat 2, although it was
in the years immediately afterwards. So much latin, exclusion of
laity and conservatism. I've come across similar in a very small
Italian community in East Anglia, and there's still an undercurrent of
the same conservatism in our local church which has a number of RC
immigrants from Europe and India. It's way different from my
experience of most contemporary British RC churches.
Anglo Catholicism/ boarding school was another combination which bred
conservative thinking and conventional (and often uncomprehending)
observance. There were very few adults involved in chapel - teaching
and boarding house staff were there to keep order, not to express
belief! The chaplain managed to cut through that for individual
students, but he was battling the school staff all the time in terms
of preaching and practice. For example, he strongly urged
confirmation candidates to seriously consider whether they were ready
to be confirmed, whilst the boarding house staff considered it
compulsory to be confirmed in the third year. When I refused to be
confirmed at that age, I was punished by the housemistress! The
chaplain was delighted :-)
Anglican evangelical/ boarding school was a better mix, actually -
chapel attendance wasn't compulsory and staff were as involved as
students, so there was a dynamism that made for a much more vibrant
christian culture. I was jolly uncomfortable with the "we're all
saved and everyone else is likely to burn in hellfire" confidence
which both chapel and the school CU expressed overtly, though - I
think youthful enthusiasm went a bit wild sometimes. I eventually
took refuge in the Cathedral where we went for communion on Sundays,
which was a better place for my temperament and doubts!
I don't think any of these really resemble any mainstream church
cultures now. Part of that may be that the majority of younger
people involved in the church were not brought up with the cultural
heritage of the church running through their veins. The bible
stories, hymns and prayers that have been part of my religious
language since I could talk are just not part of the cultural baggage
of most people now. There are good and bad consequences of this: on
the negative side, I sometimes think that a whole swathe of our
cultural heritage has been lost - older converts never really absorb
it in the same way that kids who were raised on it do - much like a
second language. But on the plus side, people who discover all this
stuff for themselves don't take it for granted the way my generation
often does. So "bible study" is more likely to be about discovering
and exploring than revisiting.
Richard Emblem
<pete.br...@btinternet.com> writes:
>I've always found church culture bizarre and alien,
>and wouldn't go to church out of choice. However, I do have a job that
>rather necessitates that I attend...
ROTFL
--
Richard Emblem
How good and pleasant it is
when God's people live in unity.
(Psalm 133:1)
_______________________
Richard Emblem
>I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
>brought up a Christian?
>
>I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
>atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
>Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
>be wrong.
>
>So the question is for the Christians here:
>
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
>
>Some people I've asked this have said no, only later to reveal that
>their parents have always been church-goers, but that they don't
>consider them to be Christians - an attitude which amazes me. So,
>even if you've had a conversion experience, the answer is still yes,
>for the purpose of the poll, if your family were practicing Christians
>as you grew up.
>
>The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
>why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
>within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
>you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
Christian father, agnostic/atheist mother, regular churchgoing, christian
schools.
Baptised as infant, confirmed as teenager, baptised in the Holy Spirit as
adult.
On "christian sub-culture" I would say that it varies from church to church
even within denominations.
Richard Emblem
<ark...@arkady.org.uk> writes:
>Several reasons; firstly, I only just made the step of declaring, at least
>to myself and to my friends,that I was renouncing Paganism (after 15 years
>as a Witch) a few months ago. Whilst I am content to have found a belief in
>God, I am having difficulties concerning belief in Christ - in particular
>the established Church. Secondly, there are so many denominations that it is
>incredibly confusing to one newly converted. And thirdly, I have yet to find
>a congregation and church with whom I feel comfortable. There seem to be an
>awful lot of pointless rules, restrictions and ceremonies involved that seem
>to have very little to do with the Scriptures, and I cannot help but feel
>that any God unwilling to accept me purely for who I am rather than how I
>dress and how I choose to live my life is not really one worth following.
>Just about every Christian list I've joined however seems to take great
>delight in telling me how sinful i am because I dress a certain way, or
>because I'm divorced, or because I live with my boyfriend and don't intend
>to get married. These things should not matter; only that one has faith.
Ignore them all, you've got the right basic idea.
>I also have problems in dealing with a very large group of strangers; I'm
>not actually agrophobic per se, but I do get very uneasy if forced to spend
>an extended length of time in such a situation. Mass in a Cathedral is one
>thing - it takes place in a wide open, airy space. But the small confines of
>a typical parish church would be too claustrophobic for me.
Stick with it and God bless you.
David Anderson
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
My parents go to church (CofE) at Christmas and Easter, went to church
semi-regularly before I started going to school, and I went to a CofE
primary school and a secondary school with regular semi-religious
assemblies.
David Anderson
David Anderson
> models for themselves, these patterns and attitudes are encouraged and
> eventually mistaken for holiness itself, leading to the covering up of
> true holiness under culture. That, briefly put, was one of the things
> that occured to me. I'm interested especially in what other people
> think who were not brought up in a church culture.
It depends upon which branch of the church you're in. I'm moderately
familiar with three different subcultures: middle-of-the-road Anglican,
liberal Anglo-Catholic, and evangelical. Middle-of-the-road Anglican
doesn't seem to me to have many particular quirks of culture (apart from
being middle class and white mostly). That's because we're normal and do
things the only reasonable way. :)
I'm much more aware of the sort of church culture that (I think) you're
talking about in an evangelical setting - the really just prayer is one
obvious example.
Anglo-Catholics have a rather obvious subculture, but it's more obviously a
group thing rather than a holiness thing. Anglo-Catholics are notoriously
slightly camp and gossipy: my general experience of them is that this
stereotype is to some extent true - possibly because they spread the
stereotype around themselves and then play up to it. Liberal
Anglo-Catholics, at least, have a sense of humour about it.
(I identify myself to some extent as a liberal Anglo-Catholic: I find it
hard to identify fully, partly because I'm not altogether taken with the
subculture, and partly because I'm not ordained and have no intention of
becoming so.)
David Anderson
David Anderson
> [expatriate Anglicans being conservative] I discussed this with a
> couple of acquaintances (one sikh, the other muslim) and both
> confirmed that their faith community in the UK was far more culturally
> Indian/ Pakistani, and theologically more conservative than faith
> communities in their countries of origin.
I was at a lecture on Christian-Islamic relations where the lecturer told us
that the Nigerian Muslim community is much less conservative culturally than
the Pakistani-Bangladeshi communities. (The lecturer said that Yasmin
Alibhai-Brown who writes a column for the Independent was a not untypical
example of the Nigerian community.) From the news, Nigerian Muslims in
Nigeria seem rather more conservative, though the impression may not be
accurate.
David Anderson
Arkady
any list in a long time! :-)
Mark Goodge
typed:
>
>Several reasons; firstly, I only just made the step of declaring, at least
>to myself and to my friends,that I was renouncing Paganism (after 15 years
>as a Witch) a few months ago. Whilst I am content to have found a belief in
>God, I am having difficulties concerning belief in Christ - in particular
>the established Church. Secondly, there are so many denominations that it is
>incredibly confusing to one newly converted. And thirdly, I have yet to find
>a congregation and church with whom I feel comfortable.
Given your comments here:
> There seem to be an
>awful lot of pointless rules, restrictions and ceremonies involved that seem
>to have very little to do with the Scriptures,
...and here:
>I also have problems in dealing with a very large group of strangers; I'm
>not actually agrophobic per se, but I do get very uneasy if forced to spend
>an extended length of time in such a situation. Mass in a Cathedral is one
>thing - it takes place in a wide open, airy space. But the small confines of
>a typical parish church would be too claustrophobic for me.
I'd suggest that you might find a large charismatic/pentecostal church
more to your liking than CofE or Catholic. You may find that there are
fewer "rules, restrictions and ceremonies" that are hard to
understand, while many charismatic or pentecostal churches are big
enough for you to sit anonymously at the back. I seem to recall from
one of your other articles that you live in London; if so, then try
Kensington Temple[1] one Sunday - I think you'll be pleasantly
surprised.
[1] More info, including service times and locations, at
http://www.kt.org/
Mark
--
http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
"A pocket full of mumbles, such are promises"
Tony Bryer
> I'm wondering how predominant it is for a Christian to have been
> brought up a Christian?
>
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common,
> since Christ is so great, but looking around I think that
> assumption might be wrong.
>
>
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Biologically, no. But I was sent to Sunday School from the age of
six and the people at my church (I've been at the same one for 42
years) have always been my second family, always there to support
and encourage me.
--
Tony Bryer
Genie
news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
> I've always assumed that Christians who have converted from
> atheist/agnostic families and environments are fairly common, since
> Christ is so great, but looking around I think that assumption might
> be wrong.
> Were you brought up within a Christian family?
My parents attended a Baptist church until I was about five, then switched
to a St Luke's church in Watford (I'm not sure what denomination it is - I
didn't realise there were such things as denominations back then. I only
know Beechen Grove is a Baptist church beause I drove past it last week). We
went sporadically for about three years and I attended the sunday school
along with my sisters. Throughout I never got the impression that they went
because they they wanted to - rather because they were expected to. We
stopped going suddenly when the service time was put forward to 9am. I have
always taken that to mean that she was going for appearance's sake rather
than anything else. After that, it was pretty much the typical
atheist/agnostic family in that no-one really spoke of anything religion
related at all.
I'm not sure whether for the purposes of your poll that would be 'yes' or
'no' as to whether my family were/are atheistic. Until the age of 8 the
answer would be 'vaguely yes' as we physically wandered in the door of a
church building once a month or so in order to have a nice singsong and
laugh at the man in front of us waving his arms around. However apart from
that it would be 'no' as no-one every thought about it or mentioned it.
Christmas was a time for pretending Santa existed, stuffing ourselves with
turkey and attending the carol concert because I was in the choir.
Since becoming Christian I've been met with ridicule from my family, all
apart from my Mum who says that she belives in something but isn't sure what
it is - so "if it makes me happy" she's supportive. I'd prefer the ridicule
than an attitude like that - I'm Christian because Jesus loves me and I love
him, not because going to church makes me happy.
>
> Some people I've asked this have said no, only later to reveal that
> their parents have always been church-goers, but that they don't
> consider them to be Christians - an attitude which amazes me. So,
> even if you've had a conversion experience, the answer is still yes,
> for the purpose of the poll, if your family were practicing Christians
> as you grew up.
>
> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the reason
> why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture I find
> within sunday worship congregations, so for those who answer no, would
> you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
>
Pam Seeker
> In article <auneec$soq$1...@helle.btinternet.com>, "Pete Broadbent"
> <pete.br...@btinternet.com> writes:
>
>> I've always found church culture bizarre and alien,
>> and wouldn't go to church out of choice. However, I do have a job
>> that rather necessitates that I attend...
>
> ROTFL
...but rather comforting to those of us who often feel like round pegs in
square holes. I'd always imagined senior church people to be the consummate
diplomats who felt comfortable almost anywhere.
Pam Seeker
> What I'm interested in is the "church culture". I'm interested to see
> how adults find that culture depending upon what they grew up familiar
> with. Forgive me if it was phrased badly! There I go being obtuse
> again!
Just got to this part of the thread. As I said in my other post, different
churches have different sub-cultures.
The sub-culture that I could not tolerate in my former church was the
subculture where people were constantly scrutinising one to make sure one
had the "right" theology and that one was a "real Christian". It seemed to
me that the people who were viewed as "real Christians" never said anything
substantial about their theology at all (so noone knew what their beliefs
were) but they were resolutely loud and extravert and could therefore be
deemed to be a "real Christian" because of their obvious "enthusiasm"
(loudness?) for God.
The sub-culture that I do not like in my current church, but which I can
live with, is the middle-class insistence that everything be done
"properly". In fact, I think "proper" and "properly" are probably the two
words which typify the attitude that I would rather live without. Of
course, "proper" is subjective and we don't really agree on what "proper"
hymns are or the "proper" way to do the church social or the "proper" way
for the choir to enter the church on Sunday morning. Sigh.
Blessings,
Pam
Pam Seeker
> The church cultures I grew up in (Expatriate Anglican, Roman Catholic,
> Anglo-Catholic and Anglican Evangelical) were different from one
> another - the first was as conservatively, overtly *BRITISH* as the
> expat community it served, and I suspect remains so. God's role in
> it all was to be the archetypal Englishman, decent, respectable and
> understated in a plummy-voiced sort of way.
<s> I lived in a non-English speaking European city for awhile and the
"English-speaking church" was very much this congregation. Not being an
archetypal Englishwoman, nor plummy-voiced, I didn't last very long there.
janet
Ken Down
> Secondly, there are so many denominations that it is incredibly confusing
> to one newly converted.
Despite what most denominations think, you need to get away from the idea
that there is one denomination out there which has exclusive possession of
all truth. All denominations have good features, all have bad. All emphasise
some aspect of truth, all ignore some other aspect of truth.
The *real* difference between most denominations is their approach to
worship, so it is just a matter of finding a church where you feel
comfortable - a cathedral, if that is your thing, or a small chapel with
half a dozen comfortable old people if you prefer.
Later on will be time enough to start worrying about the doctrines and then,
possibly, changing denomination to match what you then believe to be true.
God bless,
Kendall K. Down
--
__ __ __ __ __
| \ | / __ / __ | |\ | / __ |__ All the latest archaeological news
|__/ | \__/ \__/ | | \| \__/ __| from the Middle East with David Down
================================= and "Digging Up The Past"
Web site: www.argonet.co.uk/education/diggings
e-mail: digg...@argonet.co.uk
Andy McMullon
"Pam Seeker" <seek...@yahoo.co.uk> expounded:
I rather think there are more of us round pegs around than people
realize. Why don't we do something about church culture so that we
fit in a bit more. Maybe it will then attract a few more
misfits......
Pam Seeker
> I rather think there are more of us round pegs around than people
> realize. Why don't we do something about church culture so that we
> fit in a bit more. Maybe it will then attract a few more
> misfits......
My thoughts, exactly. <g>
Alec Brady
wrote:
>Were you brought up within a Christian family?
Yes
--
Alec
=======================
Felix facere voluissem, joculator fuissem
Michael J Davis
<digg...@argonet.co.uk> writes
>In article <aunrae$8nfd4$1...@ID-170796.news.dfncis.de>, "Arkady"
><ark...@arkady.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Secondly, there are so many denominations that it is incredibly confusing
>> to one newly converted.
>
>Despite what most denominations think, you need to get away from the idea
>that there is one denomination out there which has exclusive possession of
>all truth. All denominations have good features, all have bad. All emphasise
>some aspect of truth, all ignore some other aspect of truth.
>
>The *real* difference between most denominations is their approach to
>worship, so it is just a matter of finding a church where you feel
>comfortable - a cathedral, if that is your thing, or a small chapel with
>half a dozen comfortable old people if you prefer.
Ken, if I may correct you. The *real* difference between *local
churches* is their approach to worship. As far as I am concerned the
only thing I have not yet found in the RCC is a church that does snake
handling as worship. Mind you, once bitten, twice shy! :-)
>
>Later on will be time enough to start worrying about the doctrines and then,
>possibly, changing denomination to match what you then believe to be true.
I agree. Trust that God will lead you, and when you find yourself
somewhere, trust God that it is the right place for the moment.
Otherwise you will be looking at the rest of the congregation and not at
God.
Blessings & thanks for your sharing, Arkady.
Mike
--
Michael J Davis
http://www.trustsof.demon.co.uk
<><
For this is what the Lord has said to me,
"Go and post a Watchman and let
him report what he sees." Isa 21:6
<><
Gareth McCaughan
> Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.M...@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Paul A Dean wrote:
>>
>>> The reason I ask is that it occurs to me that this might be the
>>> reason why I don't feel comfortable with the Christian sub-culture
>>> I find within sunday worship congregations, so for those who
>>> answer no, would you care to comment on the Christian sub-culture?
>>
>> No, I wouldn't :-). Would you like to be a bit more specific?
>
> I'm badly tempted to say "no, I wouldn't", but I'll restrain myself. :)
>
> Some people feel decidedly uncomfortable with "church culture", by
> which I mean the various behaviour patterns and common attitudes that
> typify a Christian community. Over the years have you had occasion to
> think on this? Have you felt uncomfortable by it?
I haven't given a lot of thought to the matter, having been to some
extent within "church culture" since my teenage years. (Despite not
coming from a Christian family, I can remember no time when I definitely
wasn't a Christian. I don't really know how this came about.)
Most aspects of the church cultures I've been a part of haven't
particularly made me uncomfortable, though sometimes I've thought
them suboptimal.
> For example, as each Christian naturally holds other Christians up as
> models for themselves, these patterns and attitudes are encouraged and
> eventually mistaken for holiness itself, leading to the covering up of
> true holiness under culture. That, briefly put, was one of the things
> that occured to me. I'm interested especially in what other people
> think who were not brought up in a church culture.
I'm sure something like this happens. (I think it happens just as
much in non-church cultures.) I wouldn't be very confident in my
judgements about what particular patterns and attitudes are wrong,
though. It seems to me that Christians are, on the whole, too
bothered about "swearing" (by which I mean, using words whose
literal meanings are concerned with sex and other bodily functions,
for the purpose of expressing annoyance or as apparently-random
parts of colloquial expressions) and not bothered enough about
greed. I don't claim that these are the worst errors (in fact,
I bet they aren't); just the first one on each side that occurs
to me.
Customs grow up in all sorts of areas too. They're usually
harmless but rather arbitrary. A few that bug me a little
in the particular Christian culture I'm part of (they'll
doubtless be a bit different elsewhere):
- The assumption that "worship" equals "music" and happens
during the biggish meetings that happen once a week.
- The neglect of silence.
- The assumption that the other main meeting people should
go to is a weekly or fortnightly one dedicated to asking
each other questions about passages of the Bible from out
of a rather simplistic little book.
On the whole, although the "Christian culture" doesn't work
particularly well, it's quite impressive that it works as well
as it does. Gather together a few hundred[1] people with
nothing very much in common other than a shared religion
and some degree of commonality of outlook on that, and see
how well they get on. Could be worse. :-)
[1] Or whatever the appropriate number is for other "churches".
--
Gareth McCaughan Gareth.M...@pobox.com
.sig under construc
Paul A Dean
Yes - 18
Uncertain - 2
No - 8
Of the Nos, those expressing significant discomfort with church
culture - 4
Those are my interpretation of the results, and of course they don't
prove anything - it's just for interest.
--
Paul
Tony Bryer
wrote:
> I rather think there are more of us round pegs around than people
> realize. Why don't we do something about church culture so that
> we fit in a bit more. Maybe it will then attract a few more
> misfits......
Agreed, save that there is perhaps a tension between trying to make
adjustments and "to thy own self be true". I don't think that
William Hague wearing a baseball cap convinced one person that the
Conservatives were now hip and trendy, and I don't think that
changing the way we present ourselves as churches will fool anyone
if our heart is not in it. But that begs the question as to whether
what we do now is done because our heart is in it our because it's
the way we've always done things?
--
Tony Bryer
Tony Bryer
wrote:
> Despite what most denominations think, you need to get away from
> the idea that there is one denomination out there which has
> exclusive possession of all truth. All denominations have good
> features, all have bad. All emphasise some aspect of truth, all
> ignore some other aspect of truth.
How right you are. One of the positive things from the last 50
years is that I (as a URC member) am free to say that (a) I went to
a Anglican/RC/Pentecostal service last week/month/year; and (b) I
got good from it, and, in England anyway, I trust that this is just
as true in other denominations. When I hear (possibly apocryphal)
stories from NI about a Protestant minister being asked to resign
because he has wished his RC counterpart a happy new year or
somesuch I just fail to understand how anyone calling themselves
Christian could act in such a way.
One of the things I have tried to do in my own church (without
conspicuous success) is to encourage people to look beyond our
denominational boundaries to see what we might get from others. And
perhaps we have more to share with them than we sometimes realise.
--
Tony Bryer
Chris Manvell
>How right you are. One of the positive things from the last 50 years is
>that I (as a URC member) am free to say that (a) I went to a
>Anglican/RC/Pentecostal service last week/month/year; and (b) I got
>good from it, and, in England anyway, I trust that this is just as true
>in other denominations. When I hear (possibly apocryphal) stories from
>NI about a Protestant minister being asked to resign because he has
>wished his RC counterpart a happy new year or somesuch I just fail to
>understand how anyone calling themselves Christian could act in such a way.
An' don't forget the Free Church, and the Free Church Continuing and the
Free Church Something-or-other, and the other Free Church. Falling out
over Lord MacKay (remember that?), the abortive (and perjured) attacks
on Prof. MacLeod, etc., not to mention the ice cold response the
Episcopalian minister got from the other churches on Skye when he tried
to organise an interdenominational service for peace during One World
Week a couple of years back. Oh, and the hatred of Catholics by all
these churches. Yet all these people are sincere, honest Christians
(even the perjurers thought they were doing God's work for Him) many of
whom I would trust implicitly. It's so sad when you guys have such a
wonderful message of unity to work with.
With best wishes,
Chris
--
Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Fax.:+44+(0)870 056 8081
Baha'i Faith Pages from Skye: http://www.breacais.demon.co.uk/
"We testify that when He (Christ) came into the world, He shed the
splendour of His glory upon all created things. Through His power, born
of Almighty God, the eyes of the blind were opened, and the soul of the
sinner sanctified." [Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, XXXVI]
Tony Bryer
wrote:
> An' don't forget the Free Church, and the Free Church Continuing
> and the Free Church Something-or-other, and the other Free
> Church. Falling out over Lord MacKay (remember that?), the
> abortive (and perjured) attacks on Prof. MacLeod, etc., not to
> mention the ice cold response the Episcopalian minister got from
> the other churches on Skye when he tried to organise an
> interdenominational service for peace during One World Week a
> couple of years back.
Not for nothing did I say "in England". But you are right that it
is not just in NI where old prejudices still hold.
--
Tony Bryer
Michael J Davis
<to...@sda.co.uk> writes
>
>One of the things I have tried to do in my own church (without
>conspicuous success) is to encourage people to look beyond our
>denominational boundaries to see what we might get from others. And
>perhaps we have more to share with them than we sometimes realise.
>
on our provincial synod as an RC representative) I will say that is
something the URC as a whole, and many local churches, are pretty good
at.
The tragedy is that few church congregations say "what have we got to
share?", and too many wrongly say, "We don't need them!".
I hope to be at our URC Watchnight service tonight. (If not the party
beforehand..)
Blessings
Pam Seeker
Many people who were brought up Christian also expressed discomfort with
church culture. I'm not sure why this "doesn't count"? Because, to me, the
question is all about trying to deal with other members of the congregation
in a Christian context.
Chris Manvell
Ah, sorry; in Scotland we get a bit fed up with people using England for
the whole of the UK mainland. Should have realised you didn't mean
that.
All the best,
Chris (who is and English refugee)
Richard Emblem
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes:
Perhaps it proves that you can please half of the people all of the time.
--
Richard Emblem
How good and pleasant it is
when God's people live in unity.
(Psalm 133:1)
_______________________
Richard Emblem
>An' don't forget the Free Church, and the Free Church Continuing and the
>Free Church Something-or-other, and the other Free Church. Falling out
>over Lord MacKay (remember that?), the abortive (and perjured) attacks
>on Prof. MacLeod, etc., not to mention the ice cold response the
>Episcopalian minister got from the other churches on Skye when he tried
>to organise an interdenominational service for peace during One World
>Week a couple of years back. Oh, and the hatred of Catholics by all
>these churches. Yet all these people are sincere, honest Christians
>(even the perjurers thought they were doing God's work for Him) many of
>whom I would trust implicitly. It's so sad when you guys have such a
>wonderful message of unity to work with.
Sad indeed, grrrooaan :-(
its good to hear that you can see it from outside Chris.
Richard Emblem
writes:
>One of the things I have tried to do in my own church (without
>conspicuous success) is to encourage people to look beyond our
>denominational boundaries to see what we might get from others.
me2 :-(
Paul A Dean
> Paul A Dean wrote:
> > Were you brought up in a church culture?
> > Yes - 18
> > Uncertain - 2
> > No - 8
> >
> > Of the Nos, those expressing significant discomfort with church
> > culture - 4
> >
> > Those are my interpretation of the results, and of course they
> > don't prove anything - it's just for interest.
>
> Many people who were brought up Christian also expressed discomfort
> with church culture. I'm not sure why this "doesn't count"?
Only because it wasn't a part of the poll, so people didn't always
say. If 9 of the 18 yes-people were significantly uncomfortable with
church culture, then that would be interesting; I think I assumed it
would be lower than 9.
> Because, to me, the question is all about trying to deal with other
> members of the congregation in a Christian context.
Interesting. To me it's about interacting with other members of the
Christian congregation in a _normal_ context. If, when we interact we
are doing so in a way in which we wouldn't with non-Christians, then
it is at that moment that a sub-culture is born.
--
Paul
Pam Seeker
>> Because, to me, the question is all about trying to deal with other
>> members of the congregation in a Christian context.
>
> Interesting. To me it's about interacting with other members of the
> Christian congregation in a _normal_ context. If, when we interact we
> are doing so in a way in which we wouldn't with non-Christians, then
> it is at that moment that a sub-culture is born.
Paul:
I suspect we're saying different things. What's a "normal context" in your
view and how would one behave in a "normal" way as opposed to a "Christian
subculture" way?
Blessings,
Pam
Ken Down
<mi...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Ken, if I may correct you. The *real* difference between *local
> churches* is their approach to worship. As far as I am concerned the
> only thing I have not yet found in the RCC is a church that does snake
> handling as worship. Mind you, once bitten, twice shy! :-)
There are certainly differences between local churches of the same
denomination, but denominational differences also count. As for snake
handling in the Roman Catholic church, they get up to some pretty weird
things in South America . . .
> I agree. Trust that God will lead you, and when you find yourself
> somewhere, trust God that it is the right place for the moment.
> Otherwise you will be looking at the rest of the congregation and not at
> God.
Amen.
Paul A Dean
Pam:
I wasn't completely precise in my original psot. Let me try now. A
culture is a set of commonly held behaviours and attitudes. We all
live in a culture connected to our nation; a sub-culture is a sub-set
of common behaviours and attitudes held by a group within that wider
culture.
There is a sub-culture for fans of star trek, a sub-culture of linux
advocates, and there is a sub-culture of Christians[0]. There is a
set of attitudes and behaviours which someone will have to adopt if
they are to join a sub-culture. So far, this is all by definiton.
In the case of the Christian sub-culture there is a level of
behaviours and attitudes held in common which will be acceptable to
all Christians - for example, the ten commandments and the attitude
that God is good. The problem comes when some of the behaviours and
attitudes of the Christian sub-culture are extraneous to the bible and
to revealed faith; in this case Christians will feel uncomfortable to
the point of exclusion when they don't hold those superfluous
characteristics.
So what I was trying to say by what you've quoted above is that the
goal is to minimise the church sub-culture so that a) people can be
included and b) the church will be relevant.
[0] I can't think why I chose those three examples. btw does anyone
know of a convention for linux advocating, Christian star trek fans?
:)
God bless,
--
Paul
Tim Rowe
<ma...@good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>I'd suggest that you might find a large charismatic/pentecostal church
>more to your liking than CofE or Catholic. You may find that there are
>fewer "rules, restrictions and ceremonies" that are hard to
>understand,
Or that there are just as many, but it's harder to find out what they
are :-)
You might also find "alternative worship" valuable. That's incredibly
diverse, so I can't give you much idea in advance of what you'll find,
but it tends not to be rule bound but more about giving lots of
possibilities that the individual can pick up or not, according to
what's helpful. There's a listing at
http://www.alt-worship.org/altg.html
For some reason they don't mention the group I'm involved with,
http://www.emmanuelcroydon.org.uk/biggerp.html
Tim Rowe
wrote:
>With regards to churchgoers not being considered Christian, why does this
>attitude amaze you? There are a great many people who go to church simply
>because it is expected of them, but who otherwise do not lead Christian
>lives. Merely attending a church does not make you Christian; belief does.
Belief does? Then Satan and the demons are Christian! Come to think
of it, they could probably qualify on the grounds of churchgoing,
too...
Pete Broadbent
> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:04:37 +0000, Mark Goodge
> <ma...@good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> I'd suggest that you might find a large charismatic/pentecostal
>> church more to your liking than CofE or Catholic. You may find that
>> there are fewer "rules, restrictions and ceremonies" that are hard to
>> understand,
>
> Or that there are just as many, but it's harder to find out what they
> are :-)
Or, indeed, that the charismatic sub-culture is even more "restricted code"
than the CofE!
--
Pete Broadbent
kevin heath
news:m2bs35k...@redeemed.org.uk...
> "kevin heath" <k.h...@ukonline.co.uk> writes:
>
> > "Paul A Dean" <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> wrote in message
> > news:m2smwhk...@redeemed.org.uk...
>
> It doesn't count for the purposes of the poll. Coming in from
> outside, then, have you any comments on the existence of a Christian
> sub-culture?
>
What concerns me is not the exsistance of a christian sub-culture but that
churches seem to be built on a basis of power rather than love. That's not
power as in the power of say the RC or CoE but the power that elders and
pastors and vicars etc think they should have over the lives of the
congregation. I used to work in local politics in my younger days and that
was child's play compareed to the politics and power games that go on in
most of the churches I've seen.
--
God Bless
Kevin Heath
http://www.wildlifenews.co.uk
Pam Seeker
> The problem comes when some of the behaviours and
> attitudes of the Christian sub-culture are extraneous to the bible and
> to revealed faith; in this case Christians will feel uncomfortable to
> the point of exclusion when they don't hold those superfluous
> characteristics.
>
> So what I was trying to say by what you've quoted above is that the
> goal is to minimise the church sub-culture so that a) people can be
> included and b) the church will be relevant.
Paul:
OK, what I meant originally by "Christian context" was behaving in a
*Christian* way rather than a *secular* way. For instance, holding the
value that if someone in the congregation is going through a rough time,
that it's part of Christian values (as I see it anyway) to be there for the
person and help them through. As opposed to say, some forms of secular
values which say "every person for themselves". I was not talking about the
sort of "church sub-culture" that says "we are always liturgical" or "we
never sing Graham Kendrick songs" or whatever.
I still think, however, that any group that forms in any context (work,
community service, recreation, church) is going to end up having "group
dynamics" and I don't see how you eliminate them. I take your point about
it, perhaps, being A Good Thing to try to be as biblical and Christian as
possible, but people will still disagree about what is genuinely biblical or
genuinely Christian. I think having an open attitude of goodwill toward
other people is more helpful.
Blessings,
Pam
Phil Saunders
news:3e12204e...@usenet.plus.net...
It depends on what is believed.
Phil
Arkady
Whilst at primary school, I struck up a friendship with a girl called Miriam
Sharp (wow, 20 years on and it's suddenly come back to me!!) whose blind
father was a preacher at a charismatic church that met each Sunday in the
assembly hall of the secondary school I attended a year later. Miriam and
her mother somehow persuaded my mother to let me spend Sundays with the
Sharps, which included attending the Sunday School and then the church
afterwards.
It TERRIFIED me!! All these weird people standing up, shouting out during
the sermon, singing hymns I'd never heard of - it was a very noisy affair.
I honestly do not feel I would be at all comfortable in a charismatic
church. :-/
This is odd; I'm finding memories coming back to me that I had forgotten...I
think my mother must have been a very subtle kind of Christian, because
although we didn't go to church or discuss the Bible, I DO remember that
there was a children's religious TV program on on Sunday mornings that
featured Dana, the singer. Of course, it may have been that this was the
ONLY children's program on on a Sunday morning and my mother was just after
a bit of peace and quiet whilst she did the ironing...!
--
Regards,
Arkady
@>->--
http://www.arkady.org.uk/
http://www.sanguinary.org.uk
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.434 / Virus Database: 243 - Release Date: 25/12/02
Pam Seeker
> What concerns me is not the exsistance of a christian sub-culture but
> that churches seem to be built on a basis of power rather than love.
> That's not power as in the power of say the RC or CoE but the power
> that elders and pastors and vicars etc think they should have over
> the lives of the congregation. I used to work in local politics in my
> younger days and that was child's play compareed to the politics and
> power games that go on in most of the churches I've seen.
Speaking as someone who grew up in a fundamentalist church, I think that the
element of local "power-over" is probably (I almost said almost, but I think
I want to be more definite) inevitable in a group of people which sees the
whole practice of Christianity as a very narrow path of specific practice
and/or belief. If you've got The Right Way and you are 101% sure that you
do, you dare not "allow" others in your group to stray off the path.
One pastor in the denomination of my birth told me that he did not allow any
group for the purpose of prayer or bible study to gather without him
present, lest the church members lead each other into error and therefore
into hell. I do actually totally understand where he was coming from, but
that necessarily means he *must* behave as a "control freak" in order to
carry out his charge to his flock in a responsible manner.
What amazes me is the number of people who complain about the "power over"
phenemenon but who seem to categorically refuse to try a church which is
less controlling in nature. Or maybe it shouldn't amaze me because I did
the same for many years myself.
Michael J Davis
<seek...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>kevin heath wrote:
>
>Speaking as someone who grew up in a fundamentalist church, I think that the
>element of local "power-over" is probably (I almost said almost, but I think
>I want to be more definite) inevitable in a group of people which sees the
>whole practice of Christianity as a very narrow path of specific practice
>and/or belief. If you've got The Right Way and you are 101% sure that you
>do, you dare not "allow" others in your group to stray off the path.
>
>One pastor in the denomination of my birth told me that he did not allow any
>group for the purpose of prayer or bible study to gather without him
>present, lest the church members lead each other into error and therefore
>into hell. I do actually totally understand where he was coming from, but
>that necessarily means he *must* behave as a "control freak" in order to
>carry out his charge to his flock in a responsible manner.
>
>What amazes me is the number of people who complain about the "power over"
>phenemenon but who seem to categorically refuse to try a church which is
>less controlling in nature. Or maybe it shouldn't amaze me because I did
>the same for many years myself.
People just love to being told what to do. It's how so many Christian
Churches get away with it. Sadly.
The pastors job is to serve up the meat brought in by the Holy Spirit,
it's the people's job to digest it.
Robert Marshall
> I used to work in local politics in my younger days and that was
> child's play compareed to the politics and power games that go on in
> most of the churches I've seen.
>
Though if people are finding security (or seeking to find) in a whole
variety of emotional/personal needs within their local church, I don't
find it surprising that clinging tenaciously to what they've found has
worked for them particularly surprising. People (me?!) are often
prepared to do whatever it takes to keep that security in what helps
them
Yes that security ought to be in God but it's the difficulty of
separating where they have found God from where the wider body/the
future is moving
R
--
He is our homeliest home and endless dwelling - Julian of Norwich
Pam Seeker
> The pastors job is to serve up the meat brought in by the Holy Spirit,
> it's the people's job to digest it.
Mike:
Personally, I think it's the pastor's job to teach the congregation how to
serve up the meat, but then, I'm Protestant. <g>
Blessings,
Pam
Richard Emblem
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes:
>[0] I can't think why I chose those three examples. btw does anyone
>know of a convention for linux advocating, Christian star trek fans?
>:)
Uncle Bob?
Richard Emblem
<pete.br...@btinternet.com> writes:
Hands down if you want coffee? :-)
(apologies to Adrian Plass)
Paul A Dean
> In article <m2hectz...@redeemed.org.uk>, Paul A Dean
> <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes:
>
> >[0] I can't think why I chose those three examples. btw does anyone
> >know of a convention for linux advocating, Christian star trek fans?
> >:)
>
> Uncle Bob?
Uncle Bob is an entire convention?!?
--
Paul
"You're improving! It's entirely due to my influence, of course.
You mustn't take any credit for it" - Dr. Who
Keith
> The pastors job is to serve up the meat brought in by the Holy Spirit,
> it's the people's job to digest it.
Nice, but I don't think it quite fits my concept of pastor. I'd say the
pastor's job is to show people where the meat is, and where the knives and forks
are, and to help those who can't get to it easily.
Keith
Ken Down
<mi...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> The pastors job is to serve up the meat brought in by the Holy Spirit,
> it's the people's job to digest it.
Amen.
And to respond to something Pam said, I would positively encourage my
members to meet and study the Bible without me. If I can't trust the Holy
Spirit to guide them, what hope do I have?
Richard Emblem
<pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes:
>rem...@aol.com (Richard Emblem) writes:
>
>> In article <m2hectz...@redeemed.org.uk>, Paul A Dean
>> <pau...@redeemed.org.uk> writes:
>>
>> >[0] I can't think why I chose those three examples. btw does anyone
>> >know of a convention for linux advocating, Christian star trek fans?
>> >:)
>>
>> Uncle Bob?
>
>Uncle Bob is an entire convention?!?
I believe he's a biggish chap :-)
Pam
> In article <n2pUgPEn...@trustsof.demon.co.uk>, Michael J Davis
> <mi...@trustsof.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > The pastors job is to serve up the meat brought in by the Holy Spirit,
> > it's the people's job to digest it.
>
> Amen.
>
> And to respond to something Pam said, I would positively encourage my
> members to meet and study the Bible without me. If I can't trust the Holy
> Spirit to guide them, what hope do I have?
Ken:
Well, indeed. But I've never thought of you as a fundamentalist (I
*do* actually think there is a difference between being a
fundamentalist and someone who takes a literal reading of the bible).
Blessings,
Pam
Pam
Very well said indeed.
Tim Rowe
<philip....@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>It depends on what is believed.
Check James 2:19 again, and its context. belief doesn't count for
much on its own.
Mark Goodge
keyboard and typed:
>
>One pastor in the denomination of my birth told me that he did not allow any
>group for the purpose of prayer or bible study to gather without him
>present, lest the church members lead each other into error and therefore
>into hell. I do actually totally understand where he was coming from, but
>that necessarily means he *must* behave as a "control freak" in order to
>carry out his charge to his flock in a responsible manner.
This sounds to me more like an example of someone who was by nature a
control freak, and was simply using his theology to justify it. I've
seen that in a wide variety of churches, from conservative evangelical
through to "sea-level" CofE and among liberal churches as well. The
only thing that changes is that nature of what is controlled.
Mark
--
http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
"Life is bigger, it's bigger than you"
Michael J Davis
<kei...@spamcop.net> writes
Keith!!
Phil Saunders
Oh dear not another attempt at that one.
9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your
heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is
with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to
shame."
13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is
heard through the word of Christ.
6 And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would
no longer be grace.
But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not
be arrogant, but be afraid.
21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you
either.
22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those
who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness.
Otherwise, you also will be cut off.
23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God
is able to graft them in again.
The issue in James is what is believed and that true belief results in
action.
If faith is not enought then Jesus and Paul lied.
Phil
Vexen
news:20021229194104...@mb-ce.aol.com...
<snip>
>
> Ignore them all, you've got the right basic idea.
Agreed.
--
--
How can you look after others if you can't look after yourself?
Vexen Crabtree
http://www.vexen.co.uk
Gareth McCaughan
[Tim Rowe:]
>> Check James 2:19 again, and its context. belief doesn't count for
>> much on its own.
[Phil:]
> Oh dear not another attempt at that one.
>
> 9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your
> heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
> 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is
> with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
> 11 As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to
> shame."
This is about what we do as well as what we believe, but I agree
that it's relevant.
> 13 for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."
This one is about what we do, not what we believe. To admit that
Jesus is Lord is not the same as to "call on the name of the Lord",
which to my mind implies much more.
> 17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is
> heard through the word of Christ.
Is faith the same thing as belief?
> 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer by works; if it were, grace would
> no longer be grace.
This is about grace, not about belief. Are you assuming that "belief
doesn't count for much on its own" means "we are saved by works, not
by grace"?
> But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not
> be arrogant, but be afraid.
> 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you
> either.
> 22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those
> who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness.
> Otherwise, you also will be cut off.
> 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God
> is able to graft them in again.
Again: is faith the same thing as belief?
> The issue in James is what is believed and that true belief results in
> action.
>
> If faith is not enought then Jesus and Paul lied.
Where did Jesus say that faith is enough? Are you thinking of John 6?
(If so: it seems to me that there he's not saying "All God requires,
ever, is that you believe in me" but "What God is requiring of you
right now is that you believe in me".
--
Gareth McCaughan Gareth.M...@pobox.com
.sig under construc
Pam Seeker
I'm absolutely certain that "control freaks" exist in all sorts of churches.
But I also think that having a philosophy of "there is only one right way of
doing things and I have it" both attracts and breeds control freaks. I
acknowledge that there are also "liberals" who believe that they have the
One Right Liberal position and they are as dangerous as anyone else who
thinks they have the One Right view. I believe, however, that this tendency
exists more on the other side of the spectum, simply because that end of the
spectrum has a greater tendency to deny the validity of any or all
subjective experience as well as a greater tendency to deny the validity of
context in interpreting. I am open to being convinced that I am wrong.
(Please note that I used the word "tendency" and am trying *not* to say
"everyone is".)
Ken Down
seek...@hotmail.com (Pam) wrote:
> Well, indeed. But I've never thought of you as a fundamentalist (I
> *do* actually think there is a difference between being a
> fundamentalist and someone who takes a literal reading of the bible).
Thank you, Pam.