What's Wrong With Ecumenism?

[JoeMo]

I'm feeling a little masochistic tonight - so I'm gonna initiate a reason for some of you to "give it to me"...

 

That's wrong with ecumenism?  How many of the things that divide us as denominations is really "salvational"?  I grant that there are some universal "salvational" truths for believers:

1. Jesus is Lord and Savior; and the Father is the God and Creator of all that is seen and unseen.

2. By His sacrifice on the cross, Jesus has made salvation available to all who have ever lived.

3. It is solely by grace that we are saved and freed from the slavery and penalty of sin.

 

There are also "personal" salvational truths.  For me, honoring the Sabbath is one, for example.  But I find it difficult to heap judgement and condemnation on those who disagree with me - mostly cuz most of them don't find Sunday-keeping as a universal salvational issue either.

 

But are many things that divide us as denominations truly be justification for acrimonious division? For instance:

1. Investigative Judgement (starting in 1844)

2. Day for a year

3.Unclean meats

4. Eternal life

5. Eternal hellfire

6. Spiritual gifts (e.g., prophecy, miracles, discernment, tongues)

 

When end-time persecution comes, are we going to divide along denominational lines, or will the "real" body of Christ (regardless of denomination) unite on our common points to fight the AntiChrist?  If we as Adventists believe that Jesus has other flocks, shouldn't we cooperate with them to bring about the Kingdom rather than squabble about non-salvational differences?  Why not "practice" unity now rather than trying to achieve it in a time of extreme duress?

 

I lean towards the charismatic; and what I have expressed above 

[Lauralea]

I believe there will be many in Heaven from different denominations both Protestant and Catholic. In the last days before Jesus comes again Satan will work great signs and lying wonders. If for example we believe the dead are currently conscious and can speak to us we can be deceived. All will have opportunity to understand and accept- or reject- the true Sabbath before Jesus comes. So doctrine will matter more and more at the end of time, not less and less. Of course, being a Christian means much more than doctrine, it means having a transformative faith relationship with our Lord and Saviour Jesus.

[JoeMo]

If the Spirit is indeed poured out on all men in the latter rain as described in Joel and Acts, won't that Spirit bring us into all truth before the end (John 16:13)?  Paul's comments in 1 Corinthians 1:11-17 could well apply to the divisions in Christianity today.  When the noxious brown substance hits the fan in the end times, I think we will all be looking for strength in unity rather than weakness in division.  Someone really important once said that a house divided against itself cannot stand.

 

The last sentence in my previous post should have read, "I lean towards the charismatic; and what I have expressed above is the general belief of most charismatics I have met."

[Lauralea]

Yes the Spirit will lead many sincere Christians into the truth however it is a choice just as some of the Pharisees eventually became believers but many did not because they hardened their hearts against the Spirit. A house divided cannot stand I agree but we are not all presently in the same house. We cannot unite with all who profess Christ but rather dwell on points we have in common and as we have opportunity present new truth to them. Eventually other sincere believers will come to understand the Sabbath and other key truths. It can be important now as well for them because if they for example think its fine to go see a medium to hear what their Uncle Harry says about something and follow the lead of demons they can be led into darkness.

[Sojourner]

Personally Joe I don't see any problem with Ecumenicism and never have. I am openly opposed to Christian Denominations that break away from one another to form new denominations and I feel that a real sign of Christianity is when these groups find their way back to one another. 

 

Relationships between the Salvation Army and the Seventh-day Adventist Church seem to work well in an ecumenical format as evidenced by the several meetings the leaderships have had with one another. Ellen White had plenty of good things to say about the Christian work of the Salvation Army - http://www.salvationarmy.org/ihq/news/DECC69C7CA80943080257003002CA5BC

 

Perhaps the question that I would raise is the purpose of the ecumenicism? I am all for the SDA jumping into local evangelism with other local churches for a Franklin Graham crusade for example and I feel that we could do more to promote Franklin Graham on our own media networks for this cause. 

 

On the other hand I do think that there is an onus and responsibility on other Christian groups to show the hand of friendship to the SDA instead of treating the denomination like its some type of cult as has been the case with a number of groups over the years. My friend who is a Pentecostal minister was invited to a local prayer meeting organised by local pastors in the area and the Presbyterian minister walked out when the SDA minister arrived for example. I feel that this area needs to be addressed also. 

[Gerr]

Would you please define what "ecumenism" is as you understand it?  Would it also include NOT preaching certain unpopular Biblical truths? If a certain doctrine is not "salvational", is it therefore unimportant?

[JoeMo]

Ecumenism is more of a process than a goal.  Ecumenism to me is the principle or process of promoting and seeking unity among Christian denominations.  I say "Christian" because - for example - Muslims don't believe Jesus is the Son of God or a Savior.  That minimizes the common ground on which to cooperate.  Taking it to Adventism, why do we need a denominational difference between SDAs and "Reformed" SDAs? Does one believe that the other lacks sufficient "truth" for salvation?

 

Sojourner mentioned the responsibility of other denominations to reach out to SDAs. I agree.  Ecumenism is a 2-way street.

 

dgrimm says

"our job  as true followers of GOD  is to  teach  people  these truths so they  can make a better choice  for  salvation". 

 

Put the shoe on the other foot.  Are there not truths we can also learn from other religions so we can make a better choice for salvation?  Like I said above - ecumenism is a 2-way street.

 

I was speaking to a brother today about this at church.  He said something I found to be profound.  "Salvation is easy - believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved.  Denominational (club) membership is a step up.  There are rules specific to the club which you must follow to remain a member in good standing.  You want to be a leader in your club - here are some more rules to add to your list."  That made some sense to me.  A relationship with Christ is one thing; a relationship with a church is another.  While one enhances the other, one doesn't depend on the other.  One can be a staunch member of a denomination without having a relationship with Christ; and vice-versa.

[LifeHiscost]

JOEMO

 

it  GOD' TRUTH is in the  bible   then that is were  we  learn  what we  need  for  salvation

 

that is  why  we need to  learn  from  GOD'S  WORD the bible

 

dgrimm60

If one is aware of doctrine based on anything less than the Word, would it have been any different before Jesus' first coming, in sharing pagan temple worship along with the worship of Jehovah, as some were punished for by our Father.. I've heard that the principle of a little leaven leavening the whole lump is still alive and well and will cost many lives before the final battle started in the heavenly courts.

 

34And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD: he did according to all that his father Uzziah had done. 35Howbeit the high places were not removed: the people sacrificed and burned incense still in the high places. He built the higher gate of the house of the LORD. 36Now the rest of the acts of Jotham, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? 37 In those days the Lord began to send against Judah Rezin the King of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remailah....2 Kings 15

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Gerr]

 

 

Put the shoe on the other foot.  Are there not truths we can also learn from other religions so we can make a better choice for salvation?  Like I said above - ecumenism is a 2-way street.

 

 

We have ALREADY done that!  After the Great Disappointment of 1844, our pioneers examined the doctrines popularly taught among Christians in their day.  They were bitterly stung and disappointed because of the popular notion that the earth was the sanctuary that Jesus was coming to cleanse.  That prompted  them to compare every doctrine with Scripture.  From the Baptists, they accepted baptism by immersion.  From the Lutherans, justification by faith.  From the Methodists, sanctified living and, I believe, also church structure.  The Sabbath from the 7th-day Baptists, etc. etc.  In their search for truth, they discovered OTHER truths such as the state of the dead, the heavenly sanctuary, and healthful living. The problem with the other Christian churches is that when their pioneers died, they became frozen theologically.  They refused to go farther. Not only that, some have abandoned truths they used to believe and are now cuddling up to Mama.  And of course, the RCC is completely set in concrete.  That is what prompted the Reformation. They set up a creed that could not be changed.  That is quite a contrast to the SDAC.  The Adventist Church is not also known as a Movement for nothing.  We may have a set of fundamental beliefs, but they are not set in stone.  We are willing to modify them as more light is revealed.  This was also true among the other Protestant in their formative years, but that spirit died with their founders.

 

So, can you give us an example of a Biblical truth taught by some other denomination that we aught to adopt?  

[Gerr]

Ecumenism is more of a process than a goal.  Ecumenism to me is the principle or process of promoting and seeking unity among Christian denominations.  I say "Christian" because - for example - Muslims don't believe Jesus is the Son of God or a Savior.  That minimizes the common ground on which to cooperate.  Taking it to Adventism, why do we need a denominational difference between SDAs and "Reformed" SDAs? Does one believe that the other lacks sufficient "truth" for salvation?

 

 

 

 

Unity based on what?  Would the RCC abandon the infallibility and primacy of the pope? Would the RCC accept liberty of conscience?  The worship of Mary and the saints?  Would the other Protestants abandon Sunday for the 7th-day Sabbath?  Would the Pentecostals abandon their gibberish glossolalia? Would they all accept the non-immortality of the soul?  Accept that the wicked do not burn ad infinitum?

 

Amos asked - Can two walk together except they be agreed?

[lazarus]

Let's talk about ecumenism after the 2015 GC session.

[Gerr]

Let's talk about ecumenism after the 2015 GC session.

What are you expecting to happen at the 2015 GC?

[Tom Wetmore]

... The problem with the other Christian churches is that when their pioneers died, they became frozen theologically.  They refused to go farther. Not only that, some have abandoned truths they used to believe and are now cuddling up to Mama.

 

You do realize that our pioneers, plus a couple more generations are also dead, don't you? Many see the Adventist Church as now at a similar developmental stage of a denomination either theologically frozen or in serious danger of being so already. The response we get just on these forums suggest a great deal of frozenness in theological thinking, or in other words an complete unwillingness to consider any examination of the foundations of our faith or even the possibility of new light on anything.Are you satisfied that there is nothing new to learn?

And of course, the RCC is completely set in concrete.  That is what prompted the Reformation. They set up a creed that could not be changed.  That is quite a contrast to the SDAC.  The Adventist Church is not also known as a Movement for nothing.  We may have a set of fundamental beliefs, but they are not set in stone.  We are willing to modify them as more light is revealed.  This was also true among the other Protestant in their formative years, but that spirit died with their founders.

Note carefully the degree of skepticism with the FB beliefs updates. Significant resistance. Many perceive that the Adventist Church is becoming more set in concrete, unwilling to change or progress. Think of WO. At the local level, try changing the order of service and see how open to change many of our people are.

[Gerr]

 

You do realize that our pioneers, plus a couple more generations are also dead, don't you? Many see the Adventist Church as now at a similar developmental stage of a denomination either theologically frozen or in serious danger of being so already. The response we get just on these forums suggest a great deal of frozenness in theological thinking, or in other words an complete unwillingness to consider any examination of the foundations of our faith or even the possibility of new light on anything.Are you satisfied that there is nothing new to learn?

Note carefully the degree of skepticism with the FB beliefs updates. Significant resistance. Many perceive that the Adventist Church is becoming more set in concrete, unwilling to change or progress. Think of WO. At the local level, try changing the order of service and see how open to change many of our people are.

When it comes to WO, I have no problem with it.  Since Scripture does not have a mandate or crystal clear theological reason for or against, then let us allow the GC in session to speak if we really believe it to be the voice of God on earth.

 

But what are the other changes that some are advocating to change?  That there is NO sanctuary in heaven?  No Investigative judgment?  

[Tom Wetmore]

Many are simply unwilling to even look at those topics with an open mind, a willingness to learn more, or to refine our thinking on them. Think about many of the hot topics here. How often is there a response that reflects a genuine willingness to re-examine old truths or even think about new ideas. The answers to questions are most often a rote recital of that which gave rise to the question to begin with. And then accusations of weak faith and doubt and apostasy for even asking the questions or especially trying to think outside of the box.

[JoeMo]

Gerry says:

"So, can you give us an example of a Biblical truth taught by some other denomination that we aught to adopt? "

 

I could give several; but doing so would only turn this topic into a theological debate which I am not willing to undertake.  Plus, it's just my personal opinion based on my personal study.  I do not have the position or authority to tell an entire denomination what to believe or not believe.

 

With that disclaimer, I think we could learn plenty from Charismatics about being inclusive rather than exclusive.  I think we could learn plenty aboutalternative  feasible end-time scenarios from others.  I think we could learn from other denominations about the problems of having a "Prophet".

 

I have my doubts about certain SDA doctrines (formal or cultural) like the day-for-a-year principle, the investigative judgement, the importance of works in securing our salvation, the role of the RCC and Papacy in the end times, and the historicist view of Daniel and Revelation.   If you are interested in perusing my views on these topics see previous posts in other threads.

[Kountzer]

Thank goodness this is just a message board

[Kountzer]

As i understand it, adventism, or the millerite movement was very ecumenical at the start.  William Miller went around preaching his newly discovered message to all the various churches from different denominations.  So the Lord, through Miller shared this message with all the main stream churches.  Many of Miller's converts were members of these other denominations.  These converts did not leave those deminational churches, rather they were kicked out.  That is exactly what happened to Ellen White and her parents.  The Methodist church they belonged to in Portland Maine, voted to have them removed.  Anyway, ecumenism has been tried before.

[Sojourner]

 

So, can you give us an example of a Biblical truth taught by some other denomination that we aught to adopt?

1, You mentioned the Millerite movement and the early SDA founders. I would be interested to know what forms of Ecumenicism have ever been held between the SDA and the Assemblies of God / Church of the Four Square Gospel in relation to their teachings and beliefs on Glossalia and Spiritual Gifts in general? I think the SDA and the AOG C4SG have something to share with one another in relation to the operation of the gift of prophecy, healing, toungues, along with how each group views the relationship between the book of Daniel and the Revelation. Could it be that SDA's might benefit from addressing the fact that by their own admission and opposition of a creed that there is a role for the use of the modern gift of prophecy as practiced by the AOG-CFSG post Ellen White?

2, Have we ever sat down with the Apostolic Church and discussed the role of Apostles in the modern church as practiced in Apostolic church circles. Do we need to learn anything about the laying on of hands in dedication of our church leaders? Is it scriptural to remove those offices and to replace them with President, Vice President, Board Member, Secretary and so forth?

3, Could we learn anything from the Pentecostal Church of God re their support for the modern nation of Israel, the Jewish people and the city of Jerusalem? I know our theology around the religion of Judaism is generally regarded to be replacement theology, yet is there anything for us to learn about the role of the geographical area in prophecy post the ressurection of Christ?

[Kountzer]

i don't know of any doctrine from any other church that this church should adopt.  None.  i agree with the fundamental beliefs.  If there is new light out there I am not expecting it to come from this message board, or from another church.  

[JoeMo]

Kountzer - Isn't that kind of an elitist attitude?  It almost sounds like you think SDAs are the only people worthy of eternal life; since no one else has the truth but us.

[Gerr]

Many are simply unwilling to even look at those topics with an open mind, a willingness to learn more, or to refine our thinking on them. Think about many of the hot topics here. How often is there a response that reflects a genuine willingness to re-examine old truths or even think about new ideas. The answers to questions are most often a rote recital of that which gave rise to the question to begin with. And then accusations of weak faith and doubt and apostasy for even asking the questions or especially trying to think outside of the box.

I for one have no problem with examining and re-examining everything we believe.  The more we scrutinise truth, the better it shines.  We don't want another disappointment because of an erroneous doctrine.  I see God as a God of openness.  That is why He has an investigative judgment and a Great White Throne Judgment.  He lays it all out in the open why He has let all the wars and tragedies and miseries on this planet happen when  He had/has the power to end it all, and show for all the universe to see why a sinner like me should be in paradise while someone who might be, for all appearances, a much better person than I should be in hell.  If there is any church/denomination that has a more exalted view about the character of God than our church, I would like to see it.  And I am not saying  this out of pride or arrogance.

[CoAspen]

Kountzer - Isn't that kind of an elitist attitude?  It almost sounds like you think SDAs are the only people worthy of eternal life; since no one else has the truth but us.

 

Maybe it was TIC!!

[lazarus]

What are you expecting to happen at the 2015 GC?

We will need to have some ecumenism in the church whichever way the vote goes. We actually need some now.

[Kountzer]

The seventh day sabbath is a sign of allegiance to the creator God.  Sunday worship is a sign of allegiance to Rome.  There is no biblical evidence for sunday worship.   The RCC knows this.  Most sunday keeping churches know this as well.  With that in mind I don't see how new light can be expected to come from churches that openly cast their allegiance to the anti christ.  

 

If there is new light to be found it will be come from the word of God, the bible, thru prayer and study and guidance by the Holy Spirit.  It will not come thru unity with other churches that are in rebellion against God.

 

You can be sure also that the main emphasis of the ecumenical movement is a return to full allegiance to the RCC.  That is the main reason the ecumenical movement exists.  That is the only real reason it is around.