Is there a problem with this statement?

CalvinandHodges · #1 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 02:01 AM

Hi:

Came accross this while surfing the web:

Quote:

Evangelical Church of Fairport is located in a suburb of Rochester, NY. We are a small, self-governed, independent assembly of believers with no denominational ties. Nor do we function under the auspices of any outside ecclesiastical authority.

This statement does not seem Biblical in nature - what do you think?

Grace,

-CH

blhowes · #2 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalvinandHodges

Quote:

Evangelical Church of Fairport is located in a suburb of Rochester, NY. We are a small, self-governed, independent assembly of believers with no denominational ties. Nor do we function under the auspices of any outside ecclesiastical authority.

This statement does not seem Biblical in nature - what do you think?

The shorthand version..."We're baptistic" - which is Biblical, right?

reformedman · #3 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blhowes

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalvinandHodges

Quote:

Evangelical Church of Fairport is located in a suburb of Rochester, NY. We are a small, self-governed, independent assembly of believers with no denominational ties. Nor do we function under the auspices of any outside ecclesiastical authority.

This statement does not seem Biblical in nature - what do you think?

The shorthand version..."We're baptistic" - which is Biblical, right?

How you developed that is amazing.

-peace

LockTheDeadbolt · #4 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalvinandHodges

Hi:

Came accross this while surfing the web:

Quote:

Evangelical Church of Fairport is located in a suburb of Rochester, NY. We are a small, self-governed, independent assembly of believers with no denominational ties. Nor do we function under the auspices of any outside ecclesiastical authority.

This statement does not seem Biblical in nature - what do you think?

Grace,

-CH

It's definitely a cult... the Baptist cult. They're spreading all over the world, sacrificing unbaptized children to Calvin and Spurgeon. Al Mohler's the current Grand High Puba, and we listen to whatever he says with glassy stares, and he makes us do his bidding.

Timothy William · #5 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 08:58 AM

The church I am attending has a policy near identical to this. The problem is that when you disagree with the leadership of the church on an issue, they eventually say "this is the way that it is, you can accept that or you can leave" and there is no way to appeal or take the matter further. I'm not sure it is a biblical situation.

Pergamum · #6 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 09:16 AM

Timothy:
No, if the congregation retains many powers, then the leadership cannot say put up or shut up. It appears that the elders led in the NT by consent of the congregation. SO, even those churches that practice eldership do not rightly practice elder RULE, but are elder LED even as the congregation consents to the most major matters of faith and of community life. A multiple elder-led congregationalism appears to be in line with what I read in the NT.

beej6 · #7 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 09:57 AM

This is actually the main reason why my former church (where I was saved) joined a denomination - to protect the congregation should there ever be changes for the worse in the Session. The situation where there is no church "court of appeal" above one's elders is not Biblical, though it may be more implicit than explicit.

CalvinandHodges · #8 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:04 AM

Greetings:

I was unaware that they were baptistic in nature - their statement concerning baptism does not mention it at all:

Quote:

We believe that Jesus Christ instituted and directly commanded the perpetual practice of only two official sacraments for the modern Church to obey and employ as specific testimonies of his person and work: The Lord's Supper, and Water Baptism. Concerning the Lord's Supper, we deny the doctrine of transubstantiation. Concerning Water Baptism, we affirm it to be that outward sign of the inward work of regeneration.

Blessings,

-CH

shackleton · #9 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:37 AM

I sounds like a non-denominational church that is not under any governing body and handles all matters within the confines of their church.

victorbravo · #10 (**permalink**) 10-01-2007, 10:40 AM

Isn't it basic, old-fashioned, Congregationalism? Of course a Presbyterian would find fault with it, but it isn't anything particularly new.

ruel · #11 (**permalink**) 10-18-2007, 04:07 AM

Self-government and independence of the local church on the one hand, and accountability and fellowship in relation to a larger body of churches (denomination) on the other hand are not in tension with each other. As far as my opinion is concern, both of them are affirmed.

Iconoclast · #12 (**permalink**) 10-18-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CalvinandHodges

Greetings:

I was unaware that they were baptistic in nature - their statement concerning baptism does not mention it at all:

Quote:

We believe that Jesus Christ instituted and directly commanded the perpetual practice of only two official sacraments for the modern Church to obey and employ as specific testimonies of his person and work: The Lord's Supper, and Water Baptism. Concerning the Lord's Supper, we deny the doctrine of transubstantiation. Concerning Water Baptism, we affirm it to be that outward sign of the inward work of regeneration.

Blessings,

-CH

It says here in the quote you offered that water baptism is an outward sign of the inward work of regeneration. Why do you say it does not mention it at all?