Which denoms are Christian enough for the Other Christian Denominations forum?

I included Byzantine. Am I mistaken? I'm going on what I've been told in the past, which is they don't use idols, they pray the Lord's prayer with the rosary instead of praying to Mary, and other differences that put together make a big difference by putting them more in line with the Bible than the RCC.
So...what's the truth on that?
Gina

 

Agreed "like a baptist"???!!!

Do you mean a missionary Baptist? A Southern Baptist? An Independent Baptist? A Seventh-day Baptist? Do you mean "Free will Baptist"??

Do you "realize" how close a Seventh-day Free-Will Baptist is to other Seventh-day groups that are Trinitarian and insist on believer's Baptism by immersion? Hmmm - Messianic Jews come to mind.

What do you mean when you say "agree on EVERYTHING like a Baptist"????

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hey I got almost a dozen votes to include me -- Be careful, I am starting to feel "special".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Re-posting my strain at a gnat swallow a camel post about rejecting Christ's disciples on this board -

I can't believe this is not "noticed".

In Christ,

Bob

 

I find it noteworthy that 74% want to ban for not being Trinitarian but only 48% want to ban the Ethiopian Orthodox; IIRC they are Monophysite and therefore deny the Trinity. Or am I getting them mixed up with someone else?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Mea culpa, I'd forgotten that. But doesn't denying orthodox Christology affect one's view of the Trinity overall? (I realise we're getting into the realms on ontological speculation here, but who cares?)

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

How about Unitarians?

 

Not for me

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

Absolutely NOT!

 

What I'd like to know is why this forum was changed from 'Other Religions' to 'Other Christian Denominations'; surely the former designation would have made Mioque's OP a moot point. If it was done because people were afraid that the 'Others' would entice people away from the Truth, then I find that rather sad, as it makes two, IMO, flawed statements:-

1. That our faith is not sufficiently robust to stand up to scrutiny, debate and challenge from other faiths

2. That we don't want to witness to people of other faiths on the BB (never mind about Mormons and JWs, what about Muslims etc?)

It seems to be much more narrow and, may I say, poorer forum, and seems to have degenerated into Catholic-bashing, to a greater or lesser extent

Yours in Christ

Matt

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

What I want to know is what people have against Anglicans? 82% want them banned!

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

BOTH the Catholics AND the JWs have "Their own group of TRANSLATORS" that translate FROM The Hebrew and Greek TO English.

The modern "trick" today is to call that "Their OWN Bible" but that is misleading.

MORMONS "really" have THEIR OWN Bible in the form of the book of Mormon and they market it that way. But they also have the normal OT and NT with the same 66 books that we have.

The point remains - JWs accept the same 66 books that the rest of us accept and when they come knocking on your door - it is going to be a Bible study based on those 66 books - NOT from THEIR translation but from yours. NASB/KJV/NKJV etc. They will have THEIR favored translation NWT - that nobody else is going to use because we don't want JW translators translating for us -- but frankly the KJV was done by all-church-of-england scholars (They had their OWN translators) and the doctrinal views of the Church of England were NOT "pristine" in my opinion.

So the argument about "Their own translators" being gimmicked as "their own Bible" is hollow.

My question remains.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Now that we have dealt with the problem of not liking one group of translators as well as another group... (and not calling THAT "their OWN Bible")

The Question

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BobRyan:
It is easy to understand why many see praying to the dead, degrading scripture below tradition, making altars to Mary, calling her queen of heaven - co-redemptrix and "all powerful like Christ", denying Christ the creator's role in Creation, claiming the power to forgive sins and authoring the greatest christian slaughters in history during the dark ages ... etc - would all be within the bounds of a Christian group (as some votes show).

What is hard to understand is why a Bible-only group like the JWs would be accepted as Christian if they are not Trinitarian (just as the Disciples were not trinitarian before the Cross) Surely that difference is much worse than the crimes against Christianity and humanity of the previous group.

Why accept them?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Christ,

Bob

 

Mormons and JWs are in no way Christian. I don't think Roman Catholicism should be included either. Many worship angels and the like. Unitarians are not Christian either.

Lutherans, Methodists are Christian, though I do not agree with the act of infant baptism. About the presence of Christ in communion: some Lutherans do not believe Christ is presence. I was told by a Lutheran pastor once that they believed it is more symbolic than anything and that it was not literal. He then went on to state that Christ died once and that having the bread and wine turn into the blood and body is like Christ's sacrafice was not sufficient and final. I don't know about the rest of the Lutherans, that just what an LCMS pastor told me.

In Christ,

Brooks