Is your Pastor giving biblical instruction, indoctrination or propaganda?

[Ethan1942]

"New York Judge Sol Wachtler said in 1985, 'If a district attorney wanted, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.'

Grand juries are the prosecutor’s babies. They decide who gets picked, what evidence gets presented, and what gets left out. There’s no judge, no defense attorney, and generally a defendant only testifies in rare circumstances — his story is so air tight that there’s no down side in putting him in." https://abovethelaw.com/2016/02/criminally-yours-indicting-a-ham-sandwich/

Isn't this what most of us have done, listen to one viewpoint from the pulpit, year after year? The Merriam-Webster has an interesting paragraph on propaganda:

"Propaganda is today most often used in reference to political statements, but the word comes to our language through its use in a religious context. The Congregatio de propaganda fide (“Congregation for propagating the faith”) was an organization established in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV as a means of furthering Catholic missionary activity. The word propaganda is from the ablative singular feminine of propogandus, which is the gerundive of the Latin propagare, meaning “to propagate.” The first use of the word propaganda (without the rest of the Latin title) in English was in reference to this Catholic organization. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that it began to be used as a term denoting ideas or information that are of questionable accuracy as a means of advancing a cause."

Shouldn't we consider the wisdom of the Proverbs?

"The one who first states a case seems right, until the other comes and cross-examines." (Prov 18:17, NRSV)

How do we "cross-examine" our Pastor? We can read commentaries online from other denominations and consider the arguments made, how the Scriptures are brought to bear on particular points of doctrine. Often the importance of Proverbs 18:17 is seen clearly.

"I did not listen to the voice of my teachers or incline my ear to my instructors. Now I am at the point of utter ruin in the public assembly.” (Prov 5:13-14, NRSV)

It is clear that the words "teachers" and "instructors" are plural so we can compare and cross-examine across sectarian lines.

The 14th Edition of the Handbook of Denominations in the US, copyright 2018, lists over 200 distinct Christian denominations that are 'alive and well' today. Do all of them teach biblical "truth"? I narrowed my cross-examination sources to the major denominations that were here at the founding of our country, the USA, which God has blessed so much. It would be advisable to avoid the groups that began appearing in the 1800s and later.

 

[Dino246]

"New York Judge Sol Wachtler said in 1985, 'If a district attorney wanted, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.'

Grand juries are the prosecutor’s babies. They decide who gets picked, what evidence gets presented, and what gets left out. There’s no judge, no defense attorney, and generally a defendant only testifies in rare circumstances — his story is so air tight that there’s no down side in putting him in." https://abovethelaw.com/2016/02/criminally-yours-indicting-a-ham-sandwich/

Isn't this what most of us have done, listen to one viewpoint from the pulpit, year after year? The Merriam-Webster has an interesting paragraph on propaganda:

"Propaganda is today most often used in reference to political statements, but the word comes to our language through its use in a religious context. The Congregatio de propaganda fide (“Congregation for propagating the faith”) was an organization established in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV as a means of furthering Catholic missionary activity. The word propaganda is from the ablative singular feminine of propogandus, which is the gerundive of the Latin propagare, meaning “to propagate.” The first use of the word propaganda (without the rest of the Latin title) in English was in reference to this Catholic organization. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that it began to be used as a term denoting ideas or information that are of questionable accuracy as a means of advancing a cause."

Shouldn't we consider the wisdom of the Proverbs?

"The one who first states a case seems right, until the other comes and cross-examines." (Prov 18:17, NRSV)

How do we "cross-examine" our Pastor? We can read commentaries online from other denominations and consider the arguments made, how the Scriptures are brought to bear on particular points of doctrine. Often the importance of Proverbs 18:17 is seen clearly.

"I did not listen to the voice of my teachers or incline my ear to my instructors. Now I am at the point of utter ruin in the public assembly.” (Prov 5:13-14, NRSV)

It is clear that the words "teachers" and "instructors" are plural so we can compare and cross-examine across sectarian lines.

The 14th Edition of the Handbook of Denominations in the US, copyright 2018, lists over 200 distinct Christian denominations that are 'alive and well' today. Do all of them teach biblical "truth"? I narrowed my cross-examination sources to the major denominations that were here at the founding of our country, the USA, which God has blessed so much. It would be advisable to avoid the groups that began appearing in the 1800s and later.

Generally I agree with your post. I take issue with your closing sentence, because you lump together the 19th-century cults with genuinely Christian movements that have begun more recently.

 

[Ethan1942]

Generally I agree with your post. I take issue with your closing sentence, because you lump together the 19th-century cults with genuinely Christian movements that have begun more recently.

Is a movement is genuinely Christian, would you not find it in the historic creeds, confessions, catechisms and various other documents of the church down through history. What do you mean by a genuine Christian movement that began more recently?

"Beloved, while eagerly preparing to write to you about the salvation we share, I find it necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints." (Jude 1:3, NRSV)

 

[Nehemiah6]

Is a movement is genuinely Christian, would you not find it in the historic creeds, confessions, catechisms and various other documents of the church down through history.

Not necessarily. All the denominations which came out of the Reformation decided to adopt theological liberalism. Thus there was a battle between the Bible-believing Christians and the Bible-rejecting people in the early 20th century.

 

[1ambassador]

Not necessarily. All the denominations which came out of the Reformation decided to adopt theological liberalism. Thus there was a battle between the Bible-believing Christians and the Bible-rejecting people in the early 20th century.

That is somewhat my observation, pertaining to the revival of Church Truth in early 1800 AD in Ireland, which I found was in fact a recovery from the Reformation of 1500 AD, when the RC religion was exposed for tyranny and bondage of religious souls (by Martin Luther and other saints with him); and various religious denominations then began to organize everywhere. The revival movement in early 1800 AD, began to meet on the ground of Bible-only and the 'priesthood' of all saints, rather than a hierarchy of hired preachers with some innovations to please the various assemblies. It seems to me to be more of what we find now even in the Epistles as to what Church Truth is intended to be for our present time; but "to each his own choice" as the saying goes! There is a large variety of denominated sects to choose for each one who seeks a worship place.

 

[Dino246]

Is a movement is genuinely Christian, would you not find it in the historic creeds, confessions, catechisms and various other documents of the church down through history. What do you mean by a genuine Christian movement that began more recently?

One might not find the movement in the early historical records, though one should find the doctrine espoused by the movement.

 

[Ethan1942]

One might not find the movement in the early historical records, though one should find the doctrine espoused by the movement.

I'm not sure what you had in mind, Dino, but I had reference to the 'regulative principle of worship' as described in the Presbyterian and early Baptist confessions. My view is as follows.

God told Moses, concerning the Old Covenant: "You must diligently observe everything that I command you; do not add to it or take anything from it." (Deut 12:32, NRSV). Moses then prophesied and directed people of God about the prophet to come and he wrote: "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you shall heed such a prophet." (Deut 18:15, NRSV). Then this prophet, Jesus said: "...teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you." Matt 28:20. Has the power of the church of God benefitted from all of man's additions to the commands of Christ?

Sunday Schools developed in Britain in the late 18th century and came to America in the 19th century. They were schools to teach reading, writing and arithmetic; even though, like even public schools in years past, the Bible was included as text. So, the original Sunday School was like the Christian schools of today formed to avoid leftist propaganda in the government schools. But, the idea of a Sunday School for Bible instruction then developed where women began to have say in the church, instead of being led by the men, and the biblical teaching came from the Pastor who was male as the NT commands. Families were not separated into groups in centuries past and they heard preaching and instruction from the pulpit as a family unit.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/2008/august/when-did-sunday-schools-start.html

There were no arguments about what sort of music in the Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist churches in America for centuries, because music was not considered suitable for Christian worship. Unaccompanied vocal music was the norm for centuries, until about the 10th or 12th century in the western liturgical churches began to use the organ.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/h...-churches-start-using-instrumental-music.html

What about the numerous revival services held in so many churches in our day? That began in the mid-1800s and Finney had a large part in that. "Until 1865, the churches in North America tended, more instinctively than we do today, to seek an outpouring of revival from God to awaken his people from spiritual lethargy."
https://www.christianity.com/church...1801-1900/era-of-the-evangelist-11630566.html

About those "altar calls", those were popularized by the heretic Charles G. Finney. "The altar call gained popularity in the 1830s with the preaching of Charles G. Finney. Finney rejected Calvinistic teaching that human nature was irreparably depraved; he believed only men's wills, not their natures, needed to be converted. His "new measures," then, set out to make regeneration as easy as possible."
https://www.christianitytoday.com/h...d-custom-of-conducting-altar-calls-begin.html

It's interesting that in centuries past, some men of God taught that the office of evangelist was temporary for the apostolic age as stated in Matthew Poole on Eph. 4:11 "Evangelists; these were likewise extraordinary officers, for the most part chosen by the apostles, as their companions and assistants in preaching the word, and planting churches in the several places where they travelled. Such were Timothy, Titus, Apollos, Silas, &c."

In the 19th century you had the SDA (Millerites) and the Dispensationalists (Darby & Scofield) appear with their convoluted prophecy schemes. Today those false doctrines have consumed much of the church world. When the mainline churches went liberal, scholarly men of God led the movement to return to the fundamentals of the faith and the faithful began to pull out and have teachings in line with the historic confessions of the church, forming churches such as the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Sadly, very soon the Scofield Reference Bible began to infect this movement with heresy and we end up with fundamentalism.

Then today we have the Pentecostals and Charismatics who have returned to Roman Catholic teachings and have rejected cessationism: "Writing in 1918, Benjamin Warfield, a Presbyterian theologian, reasserted the view that the gifts ceased with the death of the last of the apostles, arguing that only the apostles could confer the gifts upon other Christians. With the advent of Pentecostalism, the focus of this doctrine moved away from Catholicism and towards claims of the emergence of spiritual gifts within Protestant groups."
https://handwiki.org/wiki/Religion:Cessationism_versus_continuationism

That is an excellent book by B.B.Warfield and it can be read online: https://www.monergism.com/counterfeit-miracles-ebook

 

[Dirtman]

"New York Judge Sol Wachtler said in 1985, 'If a district attorney wanted, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.'

Grand juries are the prosecutor’s babies. They decide who gets picked, what evidence gets presented, and what gets left out. There’s no judge, no defense attorney, and generally a defendant only testifies in rare circumstances — his story is so air tight that there’s no down side in putting him in." https://abovethelaw.com/2016/02/criminally-yours-indicting-a-ham-sandwich/

Isn't this what most of us have done, listen to one viewpoint from the pulpit, year after year? The Merriam-Webster has an interesting paragraph on propaganda:

"Propaganda is today most often used in reference to political statements, but the word comes to our language through its use in a religious context. The Congregatio de propaganda fide (“Congregation for propagating the faith”) was an organization established in 1622 by Pope Gregory XV as a means of furthering Catholic missionary activity. The word propaganda is from the ablative singular feminine of propogandus, which is the gerundive of the Latin propagare, meaning “to propagate.” The first use of the word propaganda (without the rest of the Latin title) in English was in reference to this Catholic organization. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that it began to be used as a term denoting ideas or information that are of questionable accuracy as a means of advancing a cause."

Shouldn't we consider the wisdom of the Proverbs?

"The one who first states a case seems right, until the other comes and cross-examines." (Prov 18:17, NRSV)

How do we "cross-examine" our Pastor? We can read commentaries online from other denominations and consider the arguments made, how the Scriptures are brought to bear on particular points of doctrine. Often the importance of Proverbs 18:17 is seen clearly.

"I did not listen to the voice of my teachers or incline my ear to my instructors. Now I am at the point of utter ruin in the public assembly.” (Prov 5:13-14, NRSV)

It is clear that the words "teachers" and "instructors" are plural so we can compare and cross-examine across sectarian lines.

The 14th Edition of the Handbook of Denominations in the US, copyright 2018, lists over 200 distinct Christian denominations that are 'alive and well' today. Do all of them teach biblical "truth"? I narrowed my cross-examination sources to the major denominations that were here at the founding of our country, the USA, which God has blessed so much. It would be advisable to avoid the groups that began appearing in the 1800s and later.

No, it's not the case for me. I started out baptist, moves on to methodist and non-denominational and Calvary Chapel, went back to baptist, and have never Lutheran. I became Lutheran while studying church history. I was in a mentorship to become a Baptist pastor. I have all my adult life listened to a Presbyterian teacher named R. C. Sproul. And listen to a different one today named Ryan Reeves. He is one of the Church historians I was learning from that lead me to Lutheran, though he is Presbyterian.
I do agree with you on one point. Its generally wise to avoid the cults born in the 18th and 19th and 20th century.
I did not bother with the Romanists or the Eastern Orthodox, much further than to find that the level of iconism that they participate in is idolatry.
There is a Moravian church but it's very extremely few in America and they have gotten away from their roots. They no longer resemble Jan Huss or John Wycliffe and their teaching.
So in short, no, I have not been as you have described.

 

[JaumeJ]

There are so many denominations under the umbrella title of Christian.
Have all considered that they use the Bible as their reference yet do not agree upon doctrine?
I believe the Bible is absolutely correct and true when one is led by the Holy Spirit.
I believe Jesus Yeshua when He says when we believe we become children of Abraham.

Is it possible all the denominations have grown to form the great apostasy which began i the days of Paul?

Personally I have been given to believe that all named denominations have allowed deceit to creep into their teachings yet there are many who believe Jesus Yeshua, and they wonder why all seemjs not quite right.

There is so much to meditate upon in this regard. My satisfaction has been fulfilled. Any who wish may inform me as to what thdy have been given in this regard to understand. May all in Jesus Yeshua be settled and always at peace because of His Word, amen.

 

[Dino246]

Sunday Schools developed in Britain in the late 18th century and came to America in the 19th century. They were schools to teach reading, writing and arithmetic; even though, like even public schools in years past, the Bible was included as text. So, the original Sunday School was like the Christian schools of today formed to avoid leftist propaganda in the government schools. But, the idea of a Sunday School for Bible instruction then developed where women began to have say in the church, instead of being led by the men, and the biblical teaching came from the Pastor who was male as the NT commands. Families were not separated into groups in centuries past and they heard preaching and instruction from the pulpit as a family unit.

The NT does not explicitly teach that the church be led by men (though this is a common misreading from English translations), and certainly does not command that the pastor be a male. As for women "having a say", the only statement hinting they shouldn't is in 1 Corinthians 14, which is very likely a quotation from a letter sent to Paul, not his own words.

If you have children, you will understand the value in age-appropriate instruction in church. There is nothing unbiblical about it.

 

[Dino246]

There were no arguments about what sort of music in the Presbyterian, Methodist and Baptist churches in America for centuries, because music was not considered suitable for Christian worship. Unaccompanied vocal music was the norm for centuries, until about the 10th or 12th century in the western liturgical churches began to use the organ.

There is certainly nothing unbiblical about using music in a worship setting, and the use of instruments is neither affirmed nor proscribed in the NT. I reject the "Church of Christ" model where everything must be specifically affirmed for it to have any place in church. Such a view would leave us without electricity, running water, glass windows, and anything other than live fire for heat in the winter.

What about the numerous revival services held in so many churches in our day? That began in the mid-1800s and Finney had a large part in that. "Until 1865, the churches in North America tended, more instinctively than we do today, to seek an outpouring of revival from God to awaken his people from spiritual lethargy."

About those "altar calls", those were popularized by the heretic Charles G. Finney. "The altar call gained popularity in the 1830s with the preaching of Charles G. Finney. Finney rejected Calvinistic teaching that human nature was irreparably depraved; he believed only men's wills, not their natures, needed to be converted. His "new measures," then, set out to make regeneration as easy as possible."

If a person is given a specific invitation, he or she may respond. The means by which one comes to the point of responding need not be debated here. I also do not hold to the folly that humans can't think for themselves prior to salvation, as many Calvinists present total depravity.

It's interesting that in centuries past, some men of God taught that the office of evangelist was temporary for the apostolic age as stated in Matthew Poole on Eph. 4:11 "Evangelists; these were likewise extraordinary officers, for the most part chosen by the apostles, as their companions and assistants in preaching the word, and planting churches in the several places where they travelled. Such were Timothy, Titus, Apollos, Silas, &c."

The NT does not teach that the office of evangelist was temporary.

In the 19th century you had the SDA (Millerites) and the Dispensationalists (Darby & Scofield) appear with their convoluted prophecy schemes. Today those false doctrines have consumed much of the church world. When the mainline churches went liberal, scholarly men of God led the movement to return to the fundamentals of the faith and the faithful began to pull out and have teachings in line with the historic confessions of the church, forming churches such as the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Sadly, very soon the Scofield Reference Bible began to infect this movement with heresy and we end up with fundamentalism.

No argument on dispen-"sen"-sationalism.

Then today we have the Pentecostals and Charismatics who have returned to Roman Catholic teachings and have rejected cessationism: "Writing in 1918, Benjamin Warfield, a Presbyterian theologian, reasserted the view that the gifts ceased with the death of the last of the apostles, arguing that only the apostles could confer the gifts upon other Christians. With the advent of Pentecostalism, the focus of this doctrine moved away from Catholicism and towards claims of the emergence of spiritual gifts within Protestant groups."

I've seen and experienced too many genuine manifestations of the Holy Spirit in person to ever be convinced that cessationism is valid. The Holy Spirit is the one who confers the gifts, as demonstrated in Acts 10.

 

[Ethan1942]

There is certainly nothing unbiblical about using music in a worship setting, and the use of instruments is neither affirmed nor proscribed in the NT. I reject the "Church of Christ" model where everything must be specifically affirmed for it to have any place in church. Such a view would leave us without electricity, running water, glass windows, and anything other than live fire for heat in the winter.


If a person is given a specific invitation, he or she may respond. The means by which one comes to the point of responding need not be debated here. I also do not hold to the folly that humans can't think for themselves prior to salvation, as many Calvinists present total depravity.


The NT does not teach that the office of evangelist was temporary.


No argument on dispen-"sen"-sationalism.


I've seen and experienced too many genuine manifestations of the Holy Spirit in person to ever be convinced that cessationism is valid. The Holy Spirit is the one who confers the gifts, as demonstrated in Acts 10.

Dino, I'll just reply to your statement about electricity and that is a common misunderstanding of the regulative principle of worship. I'll quote from the Westminster Confession of Faith and underline where such things as lighting, AC, etc. come in.

"6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men. (2 Tim. 3:15–17, Gal. 1:8–9, 2 Thess. 2:2) Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: (John 6:45, 1 Cor 2:9–12) and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. (1 Cor. 11:13–14, 1 Cor. 14:26, 40)"

 

[Snacks]

In 2008, I attended a congregation for a few weeks. The “sermons” were basically nothing more than obama campaign speeches. So much so I was surprised the pastor didn’t say during Communion, the body of obama, broken for you.

 

[oyster67]

Is your Pastor giving biblical instruction, indoctrination or propaganda?

None of the above. He talks about trucks and guns and tractors for two hours.
(not really, but I have seen many that do.)

My local church people, being Mennonites, overfocus on some traditions and rituals, but they seem to be very sound on core doctrine. To their credit, they stay far, far away from political propaganda.

"New York Judge Sol Wachtler said in 1985, 'If a district attorney wanted, a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.'

Not much faith in his own system. He should join us and anticipate the coming system. We understand that we are but sojourners here and citizens of a higher country. We bow down to neither Buddha, Baal, nor Caesars (neither past nor present.)

Grand juries are the prosecutor’s babies. They decide who gets picked, what evidence gets presented, and what gets left out. There’s no judge, no defense attorney, and generally a defendant only testifies in rare circumstances — his story is so air tight that there’s no down side in putting him in.

Justice won't be done till Jesus gets back. We should expect nothing more than the knucklehead system that was in place when they cried "crucify Him."

Isn't this what most of us have done, listen to one viewpoint from the pulpit, year after year?

Perhaps most of us, but not all of us.

 

[gb9]

In 2008, I attended a congregation for a few weeks. The “sermons” were basically nothing more than obama campaign speeches. So much so I was surprised the pastor didn’t say during Communion, the body of obama, broken for you.

i actually left a church about 10 years ago for the opposite-

the pastor declared a fasting and praying time period for obama to lose the 2012 election .

now, when a Christian pastor is doing that hoping that a morman be president, it was time to go...

 

[Nehemiah6]

The NT does not explicitly teach that the church be led by men (though this is a common misreading from English translations), and certainly does not command that the pastor be a male.

Now you are simply contradicting Scripture and allowing your own bias to come through. The Bible makes it crystal clear that spiritual leadership within the churches is exclusively for men. Even the Catholic and Orthodox churches saw this a long time a ago.

Getting back to what many (not all) pastors are doing today, they are simply ignoring their actual ministries, and deviating from their responsibilities. It all goes back to the fact that the majority of churches have departed from the NT pattern.

 

[ruthmorganlovesyou]

"The one who first states a case seems right, until the other comes and cross-examines." (Prov 18:17, NRSV)

I feel like the truth and reality of God is so wide and full that human minds can't quite grasp it all. (I don't mean different religions! Just different Christianities.) So that's why we form denominations-- because we as individuals and cultures grab on to the parts that "make sense," and some things get lost, or under-emphasized, or forgotten in the process.

So each person should have a church family, of course. But this is why it's so important to read other Christian thoughts and theologies from varying traditions. We ought to practice discernment so we don't get too confused or too far afield (so to speak) but it really is good to approach God and learn about God from different Christian perspectives.

 

[Snacks]

i actually left a church about 10 years ago for the opposite-

the pastor declared a fasting and praying time period for obama to lose the 2012 election .

now, when a Christian pastor is doing that hoping that a morman be president, it was time to go...

I respect your decision for sure. Maybe the pastor was simply choosing a Mormon over a Muslim. JK. Lol.

 

[Dino246]

Dino, I'll just reply to your statement about electricity and that is a common misunderstanding of the regulative principle of worship. I'll quote from the Westminster Confession of Faith and underline where such things as lighting, AC, etc. come in.

"6. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit or traditions of men. (2 Tim. 3:15–17, Gal. 1:8–9, 2 Thess. 2:2) Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: (John 6:45, 1 Cor 2:9–12) and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed. (1 Cor. 11:13–14, 1 Cor. 14:26, 40)"

In your mind, does congregational singing of praise with instrumental accompaniment falls into the category of things "added"?

 

[Ethan1942]

In your mind, does congregational singing of praise with instrumental accompaniment falls into the category of things "added"?

Musical instruments in the New Covenant assembly of Christ is definitely added. We are to go only by what we receive from Christ as commands to observe, not what David did in his additions to the OT worship.