What's Wrong With Ecumenism?

[Kevin H]

I see two different ways of interpreting ecumenism, one which I am in full agreement with, the other makes me highly uncomfortable.

 

The one way that I support is realizing that the Holy Spirit and Satan are working with everyone. We are all making choices that either develops in us our sinful nature [which I understand as a disposition to think we are for ourselves by making less of the outside world.] or towards our deepest desire: To love the world as Jesus has loved it, to be like and with him. Different groups have different amounts of light, and the light gives us advantages and help, however someone who is taking better advantage of the light they have than what I have may have a better relationship with God than I do, and I'd want to support their love for God even if it is different from my understanding. Be willing to discuss our differences in understanding and if we can benefit to be allowed to grow, but to also be willing to agree to disagree. We should have listening love. We should be willing to help out with say the Salvation Army or with soup kitchens etc. We should be supportive as hospital or military chaplains are. A oneness of being true to our faith, but being supportive of others.

 

I consider my religion as the worshiper of the creator God who is creator and who is both inside and outside of time and space. My brothers and sisters in the faith are anyone who is reaching out to this God in one way or another. I believe that this God has been revealed through the pages of the Bible. Thus I am second a Bible student and a brother and sister of any Christian, Jew or Muslim who is studying the Bible to learn more about God. I believe that the most we have revealed about God is when God came to earth as Jesus, and I love the truths of the Great Controversy and what I have written elsewhere about hell fire. I love it that I get to live in a time where we get to investigate the Bible such as never before! In 1838 Edward Robinson began to explore the holy land rediscovering Biblical geography. From this the science of Archaeology grew and both the rediscovery of the history and culture of the ancient world as well as many writings so that we have a better understanding as to what the words in the Bible mean. As these discoveries were starting to be spread and studied Jesus was able to open a whole new aspect of ministry for us that we celebrate with 1844, the Sabbatical (and I think but don't remember for sure, the Jubilee) that deals with these discoveries.

 

Listening love and maintaining a oneness of being faithful to what you understand yet respect where others are in their spiritual growth is an ecumenism I can fully support. I respect the work of Felix Lorenz in how he was a faithful Seventh-day Adventist who spent his retirement years pastoring a Disciples of Christ/United Church of Christ who otherwise would have needed to close due to not being able to afford a pastor. I respect how Mrs. White grew into someone who became a very popular preacher in different Sunday keeping churches, and when she was invited to these she did not preach the mark of the beast, but on the beauty of Jesus, Jesus' love for them and the health message. I respect how when I was at Andrews, the man who was the president of the Israeli Mission had returned to Andrews for his doctorate. As the Benton Harbor Synagogue was between Rabbis, they asked him to preach for them on Sabbath, and how he was asked to carry on a little longer until the new Rabbi was settled.

 

Another form of  ecumenism that I am uncomfortable with is where faiths compromise for sake of unity. There have been stories (and I don't know how much is hype or taken out of context) of some church unity groups having pagan worship services and all other kinds of strange stories. However, even not going to that extreme, I am uncomfortable with how some fundamentalist/dispensationalists are so willing to call others "Cults" and to want you to believe like they do or they will not extend the hand of fellowship. I am uncomfortable with a McGospel I'm seeing growing that sees salvation as saying the magic words and giving a history lesson about Jesus, then push the platform of the Republican party as the only way to salvation.

 

I believe that God worked with Vatican II. Granted it did not go far enough and I'd love to see a continuation of it. But it is a wonderful start. Many will be in heaven because of it. And it's interesting to see how God worked. Sorry Adventists traditionalists, but the Papacy did not receive a deadly wound in 1798 (some Protestants expected that arrest to be the deadly wound and we are built on their studies so we say it, however there are problems with that point, and one was that despite being in prison the Pope other wise carried on as normal, he soon died and it was back to business as usual and some of the most powerful popes in history were in the 1800s. ) One point that was developed in the 1800s was papal infallibility. If it was not for this being developed Pope John would have been called a heretic and Vatican 2 quickly dissolved. Anyway, as one pope died the church was not really sure who they wanted the next pope to be, so to give them some more time they picked an old man dying of cancer who they saw as too old and weak to be able to do anything. But get a man who is open to God's spirit and don't let little problems such as age, dying of cancer, and Satan trying to strengthen the power of the papacy to get in the way! That pope was John XXIII.

 

But here you see my understanding of ecumenism in how I support Vatican 2, yet I don't become a Vatican 2 Catholic, and even respect the anti-Vatican 2 Catholics who are doing their best to want to follow God according to the dictates of their conscience. To respect this and support this and to encourage even more growth. This is true ecumenism. We need to support this but avoid Satan's counterfeit.

[CoAspen]

Is the glass half empty or half full....is always the question.

Maybe if people focused on what is right vs the constant what is wrong......we would have less of the side stepping questions to the spiritual life.

Much fear I still see.

[carey]

Never ask "What's wrong with ecumenism" before you read Matthew 1:17 "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations."

 

This is the least frequent of Bible verse to be quoted ever.

 

However the "problem with God" --that we literally need to ask God is:....Why only Israel, dear God? Why not Arab, Asian or African to be listed in Matthew 1:17? Hhmmm...There must be something wrong with our Living God to show HIs exclusivism, favoritism to Israel, right?

 

But wait a minute, let me share this quotation and make your own judgement if this is all about exclusivism:

"In a special sense, Seventh-day Adventists have been set in the world as watchmen and light bearers. To them has been entrusted the last warning for a perishing world. On them is shining wonderful light from the Word of God. They have been given a work of the most solemn import— the proclamation of the first, second and third angels’ messages. There is no other work of so great importance. They are to allow nothing else to absorb their attention"—9T 19.

[JoeMo]

carey,

I don't know what your quote of Matt. 1:17 has to do with ecumenism; but I understand your question about Israel being the chosen people.  IMO God designated them as "the chosen people" to demonstrate to the world the blessings that would be available to those who followed the God of Israel.  By being "grafted into the same vine " as Paul would say, all could become the children of God.  They failed miserably.  The mantle of "chosen people" then fell to the apostolic Christian church; which eventually devolved in the the state religion of Roman Catholicism over the course of a few centuries.  They failed miserably.  In due time, the mantle fell to the Protestant Revolution.  Over the centuries, they also focused on earthly power rather than Holy Spirit power; and failed miserably.  According to carey's quote, that mantle eventually passed to SDA's.  Are we doing any better than our predecessors? From my perspective, no.

 

It will take the interdenominational body of Christ as a group of "true believers" - not members of a "true denomination" - to demonstrate to the world the goodness and power of God's grace.  Denominational competition for the title of "World's Only True Religion" won't get us anywhere.

[LifeHiscost]

 

It will take the interdenominational body of Christ as a group of "true believers" - not members of a "true denomination" - to demonstrate to the world the goodness and power of God's grace.  Denominational competition for the title of "World's Only True Religion" won't get us anywhere.

That follows the reasoning now in progress worldwide for one world government, with religious overtones at the head that will eventually morph into one world religion with Sunday as its' mark of authority, the antithesis of the Truth, and already historically tried and failed. No reason to see any different results in the future.

 

"If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.".....John 8

 

6Jesus said to him, "I am the ......truth, and..... no one comes to the Father but through Me. ....John 14

 

God is Love! Jesus saves! 

[carey]

"Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?" Amos 3:3

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

"Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?" Amos 3:3

 

does that text not refer to the relationship between God and man?

[Gerr]

 

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?

I think someone has already mentioned that the Millerites came from the many different Christians denominations of their day.  Those churches would not listen to what they had to say.  They were kicked out/disfellowshiped.  They had no choice but to form another organization.  And when they did that, they examined and re-examined the "truths" that the various churches held.  All the doctrines that they could not sustain with Scripture, they jettisoned.  So why would we want to go back and comb over the trash all over again when we have the word of God in our own hands?

[Lauralea]

I have known people who were from other denominations who were very kind and loving, and I think this is something we (I) need, not because we need to transplant it out of someplace else, but something we need ourselves. I agree we ought to go to the churches and give health programs- I plan on going to a Baptist church this January and do just that.  I also like the little book "Sharing Together" by Mark Finley about how to reach out to and have meaningful dialog with individuals with other beliefs without offending them, but without compromising our conscientious convictions or blurring our theology. There are areas such as Righteousness by Faith where some Adventist theologians feel we could learn from some in other denominations, even though they may not be aware of other things. Dialog can be meaningful. The late George Vandeman shared that there is a very prominent Protestant evangelist who is convicted on the Sabbath and does not do regular work then but only sermon preparation. While we should be willing to listen about some things, like dialog about the health message, care about their lives, and the testimony of how the Lord has helped them, we need to be aware there is a lot we cannot have in common with them.

We cannot forget the Sabbath to do secular things with them on that day. We cannot participate in worship that prays to dead people, or privately go with them to those who claim to talk to the dead (not a part of Protestant worship, but still a common belief.) We cannot endorse cheap grace- "He may be living crazy now, but at least he was saved." Not to judge others, but assuming once saved always saved is a hazardous path.

We have a message of Christ living in us and giving us His power before His soon second coming. Those who do not believe in a literal second coming, or who believe the dead are already in Heaven, will not see this this way. While I believe in being personally tactful, we don't want to sit on the platform and tacitly endorse that someone's dear departed is now in Heaven looking down on us.

So I think we need the lovingness, the being willing to reach out, the being willing to speak and sharing the health message and general devotional themes in their churches. In the past I have been blessed by some general devotional programs, but that is changing into a whole new subject recently with the problem of many churches following meditation themes borrowed from Eastern religion.

[Sojourner]

I think someone has already mentioned that the Millerites came from the many different Christians denominations of their day.  Those churches would not listen to what they had to say.  They were kicked out/disfellowshiped.  They had no choice but to form another organization.  And when they did that, they examined and re-examined the "truths" that the various churches held.  All the doctrines that they could not sustain with Scripture, they jettisoned.  So why would we want to go back and comb over the trash all over again when we have the word of God in our own hands?

Hi Gerry, If you Google Asuza Street Revival, this is considered to be the birth of Pentecostal Worship and theology, this occurred in 1906 and went through to around 1915, long after the millerites had ended. When was it that the SDA met with Pentecostals to "comb over" anything? 

[Tom Wetmore]

I think someone has already mentioned that the Millerites came from the many different Christians denominations of their day.  Those churches would not listen to what they had to say.  They were kicked out/disfellowshiped.  They had no choice but to form another organization.  And when they did that, they examined and re-examined the "truths" that the various churches held.  All the doctrines that they could not sustain with Scripture, they jettisoned.  So why would we want to go back and comb over the trash all over again when we have the word of God in our own hands?

That isn't really the whole story regarding our history. Yes, some of that perhaps happened. But many others departed willingly and on good terms. Actually the Millerites fragmented and dispersed after the Great disappointment. Some returned to their old churches, some banded together to form other groups. And even those who remained a part of the Millerites that became known as Advent believers continued to interact with their own churches and other churches. But the Millerites didn't as a whole simply regroup and reorganize. As for "no choice but to form another organization", that is also not really the case either. You do realize it was nearly 20 years after the Great Disappointment of the Millerites that a growing segment of Advent believers finally got together as the Adventist denomination and actually formed a new organization in 1863. But even then there actually was very strong resistence to forming a new and separate denominational organization.

You also mistakenly make it sound like that this group of rejects and outcasts from other denominations started all over as a new denomination completely fresh in discovering Truth without any reference to their old doctrines and beliefs. The truth is that they all came bringing those, some of which were not in dispute, others which were restudied and refined. And a few new beliefs and doctrines emerged among Adventists. But much of what we have, including our worship forms, structure, and doctrines are common to various other denominations as a result. As has been said many times before, we have far more in common than we have that is distinctly different.

And even after the Adventist denomination was organized, the early Adventists continued to interact with other denominations, meeting with them and preaching in those churches. Ellen White herself was a much sought after speaker by other denominations and often preached in their services on Sunday. I just read an acount from one of her letters from 1891 where she was telling of a large non-Adventist meeting that she and a number of other Adventist leaders were attending. In her letter she made positve reference to a well known, at the time, woman preacher from another denomination that was speaking. And EGW was encouraging others to come to that meeting.

I think EGW was more ecumenically minded than many assume. In addition to the above, she encourages Adventists to work "shoulder to shoulder" with those of other churches in activities for the common good, such as the temperance movement and other welfare ministries. She also encouraged our pastors to fellowship with and pray with the pastors of other churches. She also spoke of pastors of other denominations positively, referring to them as fellow shepherds of the flock of Christian believers. She also encouraged coming together with other beleivers on "common ground" which seems to be a basic ecumenical idea.

[CoAspen]

I often wonder why we continue to 'misunderstand' EGW. It seems our study habits of her writings are severely limited to the small picture rather than the larger picture.

[Don777]

Regarding ecumenism... According to the real ecumenists: Roman Catholic, United Church of Canada, Anglicans high and low... it doesn't work on the doctrinal level...but, it works none-the-less...This is why we have ministerial associations... Ministers can come together for a meal and to plan; perhaps an Easter or Christmas event... And, then they can return safely to their own confines before the fur starts to fly...

[hfsturges]

Joe Moe,

Thanks for your reasoned initial question. I would like to propose answers to  your list. I am a conservative SDA and believe in Ellen White as a messenger of God to the SDA church, so you know where I come from.  Your list:

Many things that divide us, are they necessary?

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)

[ucantblost]

God turned my theology concerning His 'modus operandi' upside down recently, What the Christ's death did was ''redeem the human race'', every single person, from the death sentence of sin. Thats the 'gospel' according to what God showed me over the past few years. And He used the Desire of Ages (mostly) to do it. God is NOT going to lose a single soul to eternal death. SDA's got this one a bit wrong. Still love the church tho.

 

david

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

God turned my theology concerning His 'modus operandi' upside down recently, What the Christ's death did was ''redeem the human race'', every single person, from the death sentence of sin. Thats the 'gospel' according to what God showed me over the past few years. And He used the Desire of Ages (mostly) to do it. God is NOT going to lose a single soul to eternal death. SDA's got this one a bit wrong. Still love the church tho.

 

david

 

that sounds eerily like the idea that Satan and his minions will be saved...

[LifeHiscost]

God turned my theology concerning His 'modus operandi' upside down recently, What the Christ's death did was ''redeem the human race'', every single person, from the death sentence of sin. Thats the 'gospel' according to what God showed me over the past few years. And He used the Desire of Ages (mostly) to do it. God is NOT going to lose a single soul to eternal death. SDA's got this one a bit wrong. Still love the church tho.

 

david

Evidently the ability to free choice is not included in your personal summation of those who refuse to follow  the instructions of the Holy One. All were included in the offer to receive Jesus as their substitute re: the penalty for lawlessness.

Not all choose to accept the free gift of Life.

 

1“At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

6“At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’

7“Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’

9“ ‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’

10“But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

11“Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’

12“But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’

13“Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour.

The Parable of the Bags of Gold

14“Again, it will be like a man going on a journey, who called his servants and entrusted his wealth to them. 15To one he gave five bags of gold, to another two bags, and to another one bag,^a each according to his ability. Then he went on his journey. 16The man who had received five bags of gold went at once and put his money to work and gained five bags more. 17So also, the one with two bags of gold gained two more. 18But the man who had received one bag went off, dug a hole in the ground and hid his master’s money.

19“After a long time the master of those servants returned and settled accounts with them. 20The man who had received five bags of gold brought the other five. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with five bags of gold. See, I have gained five more.’

21“His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’

22“The man with two bags of gold also came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘you entrusted me with two bags of gold; see, I have gained two more.’

23“His master replied, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant! You have been faithful with a few things; I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share your master’s happiness!’

24“Then the man who had received one bag of gold came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25So I was afraid and went out and hid your gold in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’

26“His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.

28“ ‘So take the bag of gold from him and give it to the one who has ten bags. 29For whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 30And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’....Matthew 25

 

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[Sojourner]

Here is the Advent Christian Church - the Millerites that rejected the message of the Seventh Day Baptist church into the Millerite movement and retained Sunday Worship - http://acgc.us/

[Tom Wetmore]

Interesting idea to consider, universalism...

While it seems, from my limited human perspective, highly unlikely that it will be the final reality of this earth's history, the question is not ours to determine. What if...

God did just that? Is it possible? Does God have the ability - power, authority, wisdom and grace to do just that? Does God have limitations in what he can do? Is my weak will stronger than God when it comes to redemption? Can an all wise God persuade even the most hardened sinner to accept salvation? Can he take the worst of humanity and recreate them in His own perfect image and erase all trace of evil from their soul and preserve what little redeemable bit is left? Can God create a rock so big even He cannot lift it?

I have to believe in a God who has no limitations in what He can do... And simply trust that He knows what is best. Even if it is to save the worst possible being. If that is possible there is reason to hope when all else seems absolutely hopeless and impossible from my tiny myopic human perception. I have a hard time seeing beyond the end of my nose. But what about God?

[Tom Wetmore]

In this life, as humans we have no "Delete" button, no system reset. We really don't get any do overs. But what about God? What is forgiveness from God's perspective? A delete? Resurrection? A system reset? Redemption? A chance to start afresh, a do over?

[Tom Wetmore]

What if death brings life?

[Lauralea]

David It is true God can make it easier to be saved than to be lost, but it is still free choice. He will not have Heaven populated with robots, and an Adolf Hitler or Edi Amin or,, fill in the blank,,, would not make heaven a pleasant place for others. And what about the fallen angels that have already been banished from Heaven?

[CoAspen]

 

He will not have Heaven populated with robots, and an Adolf Hitler or Edi Amin or,, fill in the blank,,, would not make heaven a pleasant place for others.

??I thought those who are saved will be changed?? So I am not sure of your intent?

[Gerr]

That isn't really the whole story regarding our history. Yes, some of that perhaps happened. But many others departed willingly and on good terms. Actually the Millerites fragmented and dispersed after the Great disappointment. Some returned to their old churches, some banded together to form other groups. And even those who remained a part of the Millerites that became known as Advent believers continued to interact with their own churches and other churches. But the Millerites didn't as a whole simply regroup and reorganize. As for "no choice but to form another organization", that is also not really the case either. You do realize it was nearly 20 years after the Great Disappointment of the Millerites that a growing segment of Advent believers finally got together as the Adventist denomination and actually formed a new organization in 1863. But even then there actually was very strong resistence to forming a new and separate denominational organization.

You also mistakenly make it sound like that this group of rejects and outcasts from other denominations started all over as a new denomination completely fresh in discovering Truth without any reference to their old doctrines and beliefs. The truth is that they all came bringing those, some of which were not in dispute, others which were restudied and refined. And a few new beliefs and doctrines emerged among Adventists. But much of what we have, including our worship forms, structure, and doctrines are common to various other denominations as a result. As has been said many times before, we have far more in common than we have that is distinctly different.

And even after the Adventist denomination was organized, the early Adventists continued to interact with other denominations, meeting with them and preaching in those churches. Ellen White herself was a much sought after speaker by other denominations and often preached in their services on Sunday. I just read an acount from one of her letters from 1891 where she was telling of a large non-Adventist meeting that she and a number of other Adventist leaders were attending. In her letter she made positve reference to a well known, at the time, woman preacher from another denomination that was speaking. And EGW was encouraging others to come to that meeting.

I think EGW was more ecumenically minded than many assume. In addition to the above, she encourages Adventists to work "shoulder to shoulder" with those of other churches in activities for the common good, such as the temperance movement and other welfare ministries. She also encouraged our pastors to fellowship with and pray with the pastors of other churches. She also spoke of pastors of other denominations positively, referring to them as fellow shepherds of the flock of Christian believers. She also encouraged coming together with other beleivers on "common ground" which seems to be a basic ecumenical idea.

You should know by now that my post was a very abbreviated version of church history because I don't like writing or reading long-winded posts.  So thanks for providing a bit of detail.

 

Ecumenism means different things to different groups of people.  If by it, you mean it to be a pluralistic ecumenism of different churches based on mutual respect, freedom, and cooperation  when there is a convergence of common interests, our church has done that on matters such as temperance, religious liberty, community disaster relief, and horrors, economic interests like the Porter Hospital and Catholic Health Care System in Colorado.  For most Catholics, ecumenism means the return of the wayward Protestant churches back into Big Mama's bosom, which means accepting the primacy of the pope, and all their unbiblical teachings.  For the Orthodox Churches, it means acceptance of their claim that they are the true church.  For many Protestants, it means just having a few core beliefs with Jesus as the central figure and forget the other doctrines that are deemed too be divisive.  This is by no means an exhaustive list.  You claim that EGW was "more ecumenically minded than many assume", I would like for you to show that with the possible exception of the first I mentioned, that she would  entertain joining hands with other churches on the rest?  Would you yourself consider joining hands with them on the above terms save the first?  The message that I see prominent in EGW's writings comes from Rev 14 & 18, to wit - "COME OUT of her (Babylon) my people, lest you take part in her sins."  Why?  Because "Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place for demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, a haunt for every unclean bird, a haunt for every unclean and detestable beast." Rev 18:2 ESV.

 

Why would anyone want to join up with a Babylon like that?  Since the devil is a deceiver, there is no doubt that one will find a mixture of truth and error in Babylon, but why go to Babylon?  Why not just go to the Source?  The Word? For me personally, there is not enough lifetimes to even study the works of the great theologians of history, much less going over the teachings of each church claiming to have the truth.  Now, I'm aware she also says the greater part of God's people are still in the various Protestant churches.  But they are to be called out, not joined in.

[Gerr]

What if death brings life?

So, when the Bible says, "The wages of sin is death," it means life?