False churches: I have new standards.

[Dave...]

I'm not sure what forum this topic best fits into..

I used to go by the old stand by, that is, if they have the essentials right, then the rest is just honest differences. But as the years go by I'm beginning to see how naive that way of thinking may be. The problem also arises in what to do with it.

I spent some years in a Pentecostal church. I didn't agree with their understanding of scripture, but as the stand by said, they had the essentials right, so no big deal, right? Paul's approach seems to be that if they reject the truth and hold onto lies, brush the dust from your feet and move on. "But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.". He told the church of Corinth that they were acting like children. Somehow, in this church that I was attending, all these rebukes became commands and good things. Basically what they did was recreate the mystery religions that had infiltrated the Church of Corinth way back then. I don't want to debate the doctrines. I've done it in the past and it doesn't do any good.

So, the problem at hand.

Just to put a number on it to make a point...

If a church has an 80% correct understanding of scripture. And all the essentials included. But the 20% that they have wrong, is 90% of their focus. And, I would almost go so far as to say that the 80% is only valuable to them because they mostly use it to advance the 20% that is false, is it a false church? They may not see it that way, but that's the way I seen it.

I remember a sermon that I was listening to by Alistair Begg. He was on a golf outing or something with other local pastors and one of them asked him, speaking of Alistair's church, "what's your "thing"? Apparently, every church should have a "thing". Alistair's response was classic. "Might Jesus be my thing?".

That's really all of it in a nut shell. When Jesus is only important to advance their "thing".

It seems to me that the true "honest differences" churches are usually well balanced in their teaching and Jesus is always their main focus. I avoid churches that have a "thing" for their main focus, because everything else is just used to advance their 'thing', including Jesus.

That's where I'm at.

Any thoughts?

Dave

 

[Bruce.Leiter]

For a dozen years, I stayed with a church that had the doctrines of the Bible correct but refused to reach out to the lost in their community in any meaningful way to present Jesus to them. The assumption was that everyone in our small town was a Christian. I knew that was untrue. I tried to offer a witnessing course to the church, but very few members were interested.

Finally, I began looking for another church that had a balanced, biblical view of reaching out to unbelievers in the community AND ministering to believers within the church. I found one that based their ministry on the Bible as they reach out and reach in.

 

[Free]

For a dozen years, I stayed with a church that had the doctrines of the Bible correct but refused to reach out to the lost in their community in any meaningful way to present Jesus to them. The assumption was that everyone in our small town was a Christian. I knew that was untrue. I tried to offer a witnessing course to the church, but very few members were interested.

Would that not suggest that they didn't have some doctrine(s) of the Bible correct? We act on what we believe to be true, so if a church refuses to act the way the Bible tells us to, then that, to me, suggests there is a serious error in belief somewhere.

 

[Free]

I'm not sure what forum this topic best fits into..

I used to go by the old stand by, that is, if they have the essentials right, then the rest is just honest differences. But as the years go by I'm beginning to see how naive that way of thinking may be. The problem also arises in what to do with it.

I spent some years in a Pentecostal church. I didn't agree with their understanding of scripture, but as the stand by said, they had the essentials right, so no big deal, right? Paul's approach seems to be that if they reject the truth and hold onto lies, brush the dust from your feet and move on. "But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.". He told the church of Corinth that they were acting like children. Somehow, in this church that I was attending, all these rebukes became commands and good things. Basically what they did was recreate the mystery religions that had infiltrated the Church of Corinth way back then. I don't want to debate the doctrines. I've done it in the past and it doesn't do any good.

So, the problem at hand.

Just to put a number on it to make a point...

If a church has an 80% correct understanding of scripture. And all the essentials included. But the 20% that they have wrong, is 90% of their focus. And, I would almost go so far as to say that the 80% is only valuable to them because they mostly use it to advance the 20% that is false, is it a false church? They may not see it that way, but that's the way I seen it.

Numbers get us into trouble, since we all "see in a mirror dimly" (1 Cor 13:12. ESV) and we should be careful to not think we know 100%. However, your point is well made. If a church doesn't teach the whole counsel of God or teaches it in a very unbalanced way, then that certainly is problematic.

I remember a sermon that I was listening to by Alistair Begg. He was on a golf outing or something with other local pastors and one of them asked him, speaking of Alistair's church, "what's your "thing"? Apparently, every church should have a "thing". Alistair's response was classic. "Might Jesus be my thing?".

That's really all of it in a nut shell. When Jesus is only important to advance their "thing".

It seems to me that the true "honest differences" churches are usually well balanced in their teaching and Jesus is always their main focus. I avoid churches that have a "thing" for their main focus, because everything else is just used to advance their 'thing', including Jesus.

That's where I'm at.

Any thoughts?

Dave

I agree with Begg. If a church is going to have a "thing," it should be Jesus. Unfortunately, too many have a thing and it isn't Jesus, which leaves many thinking they're Christians when they're not. Getting entertained in church all the way to hell.

 

[Dave...]

For what it's worth. To dive down a rabbit hole for a second...

I was thinking about this and reminded myself the standard that I use for radio pastors when I was first saved. The standard was simple. I don't need to agree with everything that they teach on the nonessentials, but I must be convinced that they love the truth. That served me well for radio. The two radio pastors that I listen to the most are Begg and Macarthur. I can't recall any major disagreements in anything. I did notice a silence when it comes to some of the Hades and OT saints beliefs that I have. I don't know that they necessarily disagreed, but it's more of holding back on something that they may not have been sure of, is my best guess. I respected that, and that spoke loudly to me. Maybe since I came to be comfortable with them as teachers over the years they touched on those doctrines and I missed it. I don't know.

The old sand by seems to be failing these days. I don't know. Thanks for the responses.

Dave