I've been looking for a non-denominational, or basically any, Christian Church in my city. There's absolutely none...

I've been looking for a non-denominational, or basically any, Christian Church in my city. There's absolutely none, it's dominated by either Catholics, Mormons, or Adventists.

All the Christian Churches I've looked for have horrible music and rock bands instead of hymns, and are a mix of evangelical/pentecostal singing and praise. It's absolutely terrible to the point that I'd rather be a Catholic despite of believing exclusively in the Bible.

I have no idea what to do and I'm completely empty spiritually.

Attached: society.PNG (505x589, 683.65K)

Other urls found in this thread:

catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/oral-tradition-in-the-new-testament
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/sola.htm

start your own congregation

Begome Catholic

Non-denom churches are unbiblical and makes no sense historically.

Attached: PiccXU2TW.jpg (427x557, 108.87K)

Begome Traditional Anglican (ACNA)

You could always join the one true church that was founded by Jesus himself on Saint Peter and not a on a book with God on it's throne rather than a pope.

Attached: orthodox apu.png (600x600, 81.88K)

The solas are entirely unjustifiable in light of Church history and tradition. That said I forget what it's like being a normie Catholic without a TLM to go to, making the distinction between the churches blurred.

If you are strictly biblical, you wouldnt be strictly biblical, as the bible not only doesnt support sola scriptura, but instead explicitly supports tradition

sola gratia is good

Have you looked into arguments against believing in the Bible exclusively? Or at least consider the consequences of Sola Scriptura with any one having the ability to reinterpret a verse a different way 100s of years down the line and start a new denom? Also, even scripture verses that support tradition and oral tradition passed down by the Apostles and their disciples?

Can I get some verses that suggest this?

1 Cor.11:1-2
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

1 Thess. 2:13
For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

2Thess.2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

2Tim.2:2
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

2 Thess. 3:14
“If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed”

Rom. 16:17
“Take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them”


The Bible says in 2 Tim. 3:17 that the man of God is "perfect, furnished to every good work." As we noted above, this verse means only that the man of God is fully supplied with Scripture; it is not a guarantee that he automatically knows how to interpret it properly. This verse at most argues only for the material sufficiency of Scripture, a position which is held by some Catholic thinkers today.

"Material sufficiency" would mean that the Bible in some way contains all the truths that are necessary for the believer to know; in other words, the "materials" would thus be all present or at least implied. "Formal sufficiency," on the other hand, would mean that the Bible would not only contain all the truths that are necessary, but that it would also present those truths in a perfectly clear and complete and readily understandable fashion. In other words, these truths would be in a useable form," and consequently there would be no need for Sacred Tradition to clarify and complete them or for an infallible teaching authority to interpret them correctly or "rightly divide" God’s word.

(sources)
catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/oral-tradition-in-the-new-testament
catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/sola.htm

Maybe you should try to be like the first christians instead of folowing the sola scriptura nonsense.

Hi OP, Prot here. Let’s look at your options, which seem to be either:

(Non denom)
- Extremely worldly Christianity
- A 5-15 minute reading and sermon on why you should give money to the church, every week
- music with theologically flawed doctorine, may or may not have produced saints
- doctrrine based on whatever the pastor “feels” about a verse
- No pope, but extremely worldly pastor and Mia Fields being held up as the same royal esteem as the pope

(Catholic)
- traditional Christianity
- music with acurate doctrine, hyms that have produced thousand of saints
- a 5-15 minute reading from one of the gospel books, every week
- a sermon done ovee the oversight of Bishops/ a large body, which may indicate some biblicly inaccurate teachings (mariology/intercession) that you already know to a oid
- a pope that most of your church doesn’t like or listen to

(Mornon)
- Christ denying heresy

It looks like Carholicism is your best bet. Don’t worry about the rediculous cannons that were imposed - most Catholics don’t even follow then

(checked)
This

The Bible didn't even exist back when the Apostles were preaching the Gospel. OP, do you really think God wouldn't want His people to be unified under one banner led by one man on earth? You have to remember that Christianity is just an extension of Old Testament Israel. Israel needed Moses and his successors just like how we need St. Peter and his successors today.

If you are a protestant who wants decent liturgy, look into anglicanism or lutheranism.

Attached: 3b55069e.jpg (1046x915, 117.17K)

sheesh!

We really do live in a society.

This. I honestly cant believe how brainwashed these protestants are that they see pentecostals as somehow more worthy of being called christian than one of the 2 churches who has a legitimate claim to being founded by Iesus himself

Attached: 1552521533878.jpg (1060x1060, 434K)

Non-denom churches are all evangelical/pentecostal, dude. Unless you have a different understanding of non-denominational.

If you want protestantism with tradition, you can go to a lutheran, anglican, methodist church. If you want traditional without a liturgy then probably reformed/presbyterian churches. But all of these essentially carry a denominational bias with them. The loosest is probably Anglican. Anglican beliefs are hard to really pin down. They can go from low church reformed to the point of appearing more traditional than most Catholic churches these days.

Can women become priest? Birth control a sin?

What is a "non denom"-church? It sounds like some kind of turbo-protestant "build-your-own-church" heresy. Is it?

Attached: 0a183d27314fa502f4a6c09f619f897f.jpg (236x147, 8.27K)

That's exactly what it is. They're just baptists who dont believe in having church structure

gg/Xq2uYaa

7190 suicide youtube stream in 20 minutes gg/Xq2uYaa

Convert to Catholicism op

...

...

Unless you're doing some sort of crypto troll/bait, what were you honestly expecting?