 Posted Sunday, October 07, 2007 7:58 PM
|
|
|
|
[font=System][size=7][/size][/font]
I left C.S. in 2003, and I have accepted Jesus Christ as personal Savior---the greatest and most joyous of all commitments.
May I make one sincere comment about my life in the evangelical churches (I've tried several) that bothers me? I don't mean to be harsh or judgmental, but I have already become tired of the worship style. The preaching is great, but the praise bands and "7-11" worship songs just don't do much for me. It seems like entertainment instead of church. If I hear that "Better is one day in your court" song one more time.......! Some of the music leaders think they're amateur rock stars, and the whole scene just doesn't seem reverent or worshipful. It seems like an entertainment-based "dumbing down" of a church service. The words and music are so repetitious, almost like pop love songs. When you've spent many years attending the quiet, formal C.S. services, it's a bit hard for me to get "into" clapping along, raising my hands into the air, and joining in one loud song after another. On the other hand, when the excellent sermons begin, I'm very interested and moved.
I tried another more "dignified" church for a while (Presbyterian). The music was great, but the sermon was watered down and non-biblical. I visited the local Episcopal Church, but I found it too ritualistic for me. I haven't found the right place yet. Maybe I'm just too hard to please.
What suggestions have other former C.S. people about a period of adjustment to a completely different style of worship? By the way, I was raised with rock music, and I like it. Just not in church.
|
|
|
Posted Sunday, October 07, 2007 8:46 PM
|
|
|
|
Anonymous October 7, 2007 @ 10:58:47 PM,
The preaching is great, but the praise bands and "7-11" worship songs just don't do much for me.
Music is an important element to worship. It was a basis by which I selected churches since leaving CS. I found the CS music style easy, dignified, and familiar. Many of my generation wanted, however, to see an update to the CS Hymnal to include different musical styles and were Larry Gross fans.
I tried another more "dignified" church for a while (Presbyterian). The music was great, but the sermon was watered down and non-biblical.
What flavor Presbyterian church did you attend? Most people are not aware there are at least nine different Presbyterian denominations. I certainly did not know that coming out of CS. I joined the big, liberal one - PCUSA. Over the years I was part of that church I came to realize how watered-down and unbiblical the teachings were. Even as an ex-CSist, I found I had a deeper understanding of the Bible than most of the lifelong Presbyterians. The kicker was the night that my pastor told me in regard to an issue facing General Assembly that "Scripture is irrelevant".
It took quite some more experimenting and searching, but I now belong to a Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) church. The PCA was formed when its founders found that the larger church was moving away from its Biblical teachings.
I wish there had been some sort of checklist that I could have used to decide on a church to join, but I think I also needed to experience what else was out there. As a result of a lot of mistakes (including sticking with CS), I now understand that there are meaningful differences in denominations and what they are.
Many people (including me for much of my life since leaving CS) take a approach of deciding on a church based on geography, where their friends go, the size of the church (for example, big so they be anonymous), availability of social programs, etc. Statements of faith, historical doctrine, and quality of the preaching are often afterthoughts.
I was burned by so many churches before I found my current church that I gave up looking for almost three years. Moving to the buckle of the Bible Belt, I falsely believed that finding a good church would be a piece of cake. I've ended up in one I had been taught was a dissident church. Before even attending a service, I read everything I could find regarding their history and doctrine including the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms (with Scriptural proof texts) and the Book of Church Order.
The epilogue is that I joined the PCUSA because that's where my grandparents attended. I knew that my grandmother's father had been a Presbyterian minister and found a certain comfort in the family tradition. I was quite disappointed when I found how thin the teachings were there. Flash forward at least ten years from my leaving the PCUSA and now. Doing some genealogy work, I found my great-grandfather's church was in a city to which I was going on a business trip. The church is an independent church, but visiting it I discovered that its Pastors are members of the PCA presbytery and teach according to the PCA perspective. I've done further research and found that I think my great grandfather would be very comfortable in the PCA.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Monday, October 08, 2007 6:14 AM
|
|
|
|
| Anonymous, My church has both solid biblical teaching and worship-enhancing music, so I encourage you to keep searcing until you find church that meets both these criteria. My church uses both contemporary worship songs and a traditional hymnal, and we have bongo drums for some songs but not a band -- it makes for a nice mix. Some of the biblically sound churches in my area offer both "contemporary" and "traditional" services, with the former having bands and the latter using the traditional hymns. People attend church the hour that fits their worship style. I attend a Baptist church that's a member of the GARBC (General Association of Regular Baptist Churches). GARBC churches are independent (the "association" relates to agreement on certain doctrinal issues) and I suspect they offer a variety of music styles. I suggest checking into a GARBC church is there's one in your area. You can do a search on on the GARBC web site. From what I have seen, Missouri Synod Lutheran churches tend to offer good biblical teaching. I suspect you would find some more traditional music in many of these churches.
|
|
|
Posted Monday, October 08, 2007 10:51 AM
|
|
|
|
I also left CS in 2003. My husband and I joined a Methodist church shortly thereafter. The services were traditional, and it was nice that I recognized a lot of the hymns we sang (although the lyrics were not the same!) After a couple of years, we moved, and now we are members of another Methodist church and we usually go to the contemporary service. I have visited a lot of Methodist churches and they can range from super prim-and-proper with traditional liturgies, robes, etc. to extremely casual (we went to one church where there was a coffee bar, rock music, and everyone wore jeans).
I just want to encourage you to keep looking. There is a church family waiting to open their arms and welcome you. I will pray that you will find a loving, Bible-teaching church that has a worship atmosphere that you feel comfortable in.
Regards,
Courtney
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, October 09, 2007 8:42 PM
|
|
|
|
I so agree with your comments. The replies have been great so far. I just wanted to add that you may want to search different churches within the various denominations. I have been in two PCUSA churches, and they have been very different. The one in which I currently worship definitely (sadly) fits the 'watered down sermon' description, but the last one was anything but. And I have belonged to a Methodist church that was completely different under two different, consecutive pastors!
While searching for a new church after our latest move, I visited a large church which had been recommended to me but just could not do the rock band thing, although I, too, like rock music. I knew it was not going to bring me to a point of being worshipful. So what I have done is find a church that is the closest to what feels right to me and that makes a point of reaching out to the community in evangelizing and mission work. And I 'feed' myself through personal Bible Study, formal Bible Study at a different church in my community, written works by various authors, and online sermons by preachers who seem right on target to me.
Also, if you are in a smaller community, like I now am, your options may be more limited. I have given myself permission, to an extent, to chart my own course in learning. After leaving CS, I decided I would never again follow blindly! Ultimately, if I had nothing but the Bible I would have all I really needed.
|
|
|
Posted Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:48 AM
|
|
|
|
Here's what I do and would do:
Go later to the service, by attending the sermon part only. I found the traditional operatic organ playing style music in most CS churches too boring, but the CS bible lesson is easy and good to study, understand, and practice. The CS bible committee has done a great job in improving the lessons--probably to reach youthful thinkers.
In general, I find the message that CS and "Word of Faith" envangelists teach is very similar. Even, how they heal. The music played at one Roman Catholic church I attend is very similar to the CS hymns but the words are changed. In general, I like to attend all religious institutions, whether it's a synagogue, a revival meeting, or a CS church. They all have something to offer. I don't think any of the religions have all the truth to give, that's why I attend them all and like it.
What's really wild is how so many churches are getting back to healing. Healing is a part of primitive christianity which CS emphasizes. I sometimes wonder whether the posters on this forum are part of the medical/health care industry, otherwise, their use of prayerful healing would be more successful.
Greg W.
|
|
|
Posted Friday, October 19, 2007 10:54 AM
|
|
|
|
....What's really wild is how so many churches are getting back to healing. Healing is a part of primitive christianity which CS emphasizes. I sometimes wonder whether the posters on this forum are part of the medical/health care industry, otherwise, their use of prayerful healing would be more successful.
Greg:
Just to let you know, I am not currently part of the medical/health care industry, although I have worked for hospitals in the past (in a non-clinical area). Unlike those in CS, I found no evidence at that time that faith and medicine cannot work in harmony. To the contrary-they worked very well together. I saw many instances where treatment and prayer produced tremendous results. The idea that practicing one with the other at the same time will cancel out healing is one of the greatest falsehoods ever brought forth by Mary Baker Eddy.
Those who feel that Jesus Christ came (as recorded in the New Testament) to demonstrate healing on this earth as the centerpiece of his purpose have completely missed the message of the Gospel(whether CS or non-CS). His message is that we are sinners in need of repentance, and if we do so and believe in him (the incarnated Son of God who is the only non sinner who ever lived in the flesh on earth), we will find eternal life in Heaven with Him and the Father. Jesus performed miracles (including healing) to bring persons to this point where they might be saved, not as a end in itself.
Furthermore, there are numerous verses in Scripture which substantiate the view that physical healing in mortal life is not guaranteed in the atonement and that it is not always God's will to heal. The apostle Paul couldn't heal Timothy's stomach problem (1 Timothy 5:23) nor could he heal Trophimus at Miletus (2 Timothy 4:20) or Epaphroditus (Philippians 3:25-27). Paul spoke of "a bodily illness" he had (Galatians 4:13-15). He also suffered a "thorn in the flesh" which God allowed him to retain (2 Corinthians 12:7-9). God certainly allowed Job to go through a time of physical suffering (Job 1--2).
In none of these cases is it stated that the sickness was caused by sin or unbelief. Nor did Paul or any of the others act as if they thought their healing was guaranteed in the atonement. They accepted their situations and trusted in God's grace for sustenance. It is noteworthy that on one occasion Jesus indicated that sickness could be for the glory of God (John 11:4).
Finally, there are numerous verses in Scripture which reveal that our physical bodies are continuously running down and suffering various ailments. Our present bodies are said to be perishable and weak (1 Corinthians 15:42-44). Paul said "our outer man is decaying" (2 Corinthians 4:16). Death and disease will be a part of the human condition until that time when we receive resurrection bodies that are immune to such frailties (1 Corinthians 15:51-55).
Am I saying we shouldn't pray for healing? No, not at all. I'm just saying that after we've asked for healing, we need to submit to God's sovereign will. He may have a purpose in allowing our illness.
In the end, also, we will all die a physical death. Mary Baker Eddy herself proved that.
In Christ,
John
|
|
|
Posted Friday, October 19, 2007 1:09 PM
|
|
|
|
| Greg, John has hit upon the true purpose of Christ's healings. Jesus tells us in John 9:3 of a man who was blind from birth for cause- "so the works of God might be displayed in him." So, God allowed blindness to fall upon this man just so God could heal him later? If the sole purpose of Jesus' ministry was healing, wouldn't it be entirely disingenuous for Him to have made him blind in the first place? It's only when we accept that Jesus' real ministry was to bring His children to believe in Him that we understand that blindness was this man's cross to bear for the glory of Jesus Christ to be made more evident. What was the point of Jesus' oft-repeated statement: "your faith has made you well"? You're saying it is the "made you well," while Biblical context highlights "your faith." And it's not faith in general that insinuated in these verses, but faith in the person of Jesus Christ. These people were not "demonstrating" some general faith in God when Jesus happened upon them; in every case Jesus makes this statement after such persons had forcefully came to Him. In spite of many obstacles, they forced themselves upon His Person & these actions were a "demonstration" of a saving faith in Jesus. This is the meaning of Matt. 11:12 & Luke 16:16 & this is what brings the true healing- the healing of the enmity between God & man. Indeed, Jesus often speaks past the lesser issue of a man's physical healing as He directly addresses the true need- spiritual healing. "And behold, some people brought to Him a paralytic, lying on a bed. And when Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, 'Take heart, my son; your sins are forgiven.'" Matt. 9:2 zoarean
|
|
|
Posted Sunday, October 21, 2007 10:07 AM
|
|
|
|
| Regarding what churches attended after "leaving CS" I have enjoyed over the years - Unity, Church of Religious Science (not Scientology!) and United Methodist, not Free Methodist. I found those ones closest to CS, but more open minded, more animated. CS churches were hard to focus - if you didn't "get" the lesson, then it was hard to follow in church. Iremember counting down till it was the last section! Some MBE quotes were just hard to understand. When I started looking for another church after graduating from Prin I had never been to one where there was a pastor - someone actually talking in normal everyday language and laughing and smiling. Also having some socialization after the service was nice. CS churches don't really do this - you say a few words then everyone leaves. It's too bad - as friendships could form with a social/coffee hour after the service. When like-minded people are gathered why not take advantage of it and have some mingling?
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, October 23, 2007 1:30 PM
|
|
|
|
To: Anonymous:
Just be happy that you are out of the cult. Just pray, read the bible, and join with your brothers and sisters in love. Jesus will do the rest for you.
|
|
|
|