(April 19, 2012 at 12:52 am)Minimalist Wrote:Quote:What I am representing is biblical Christianity.
Arrogant bastard, aren't you? So you follow the bible and the other 33,000+ conglomerations of xtian fuckwits are all wrong because they don't agree with you?
This should be fun.
All Denominational Beliefs by definition are issued through a given church's hierarchy and not through the bible itself.
Meaning their is a pope, a Bishop, consul, or some sort of agreed upon leadership that determines "doctrinal/approved" beliefs and interpretations of the bible. Even if passages conflict with church doctrine, a church's doctrine always takes precedent, unless it is changed. (For instances priests getting married. The Catholic church maintains priests can not get married, yet there is scripture that says they can.)
Doctrines start with a principle and then are supported with a myriad of scriptures taken from various places in the bible from one degree or another.(In or out of context, put together whether or not the orginal writer intended to push a given point or not.) Or worse yet some denominations believe their church leaders are spiritual descendants of the Apostles or modern day Prophets themselves, and can amend the bible creating their version of christianity anyway they like.
Amending the bible is not biblical based Christianity.
Taking scripture out of context to create doctrine like the omni aspects of God, is not biblical based Christianity.
What I am trying (and many others) have tried to do is take the scripture and apply it as a whole. We speak where the bible speaks and we remain silent where the bible is silent. Meaning there is freedom where the bible is silent to allow one to worship as he see best to worship God, while trying to remain the confines of the few remaining "Thou shalt nots."
