New Creation Church - Church of Cheap Grace?
-
so how can we claim that the bible alone is sufficient when back then the bible was not fully compiled?Originally posted by vince69:this is my personal understanding
2 Thess is written during the time when the Bible is not fully compiled yet, so I can only deduced that the word 'letter' is not refering to the Bible.
so this is my interpretation
'letters' refers to the letters (aka mails) written by Paul and the other apostles.
'word of mouth' refers to thos preaching/teaching sessions (aka sermons) given by Paul and the other apostles (most of them recorded in the Bible), don't think its refering to oral traditions here.
cheers, God bless
erm, isn't the apostles using their mouths to preach, a form of oral tradition? -
in blue .. issit true?Originally posted by M©+square:Confirm. They are 'brother relationship'
This two churches agree to disagree, but the senior pastor of both church were very close to one another.
FCBCians....agree?
-
1. like they said, when bible wasn't compiled, the letters and preaching by the apostles were used as authority. The important points are all covered in the bible.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:so how can we claim that the bible alone is sufficient when back then the bible was not fully compiled?
erm, isn't the apostles using their mouths to preach, a form of oral tradition?
2. you wouldn't count anything as oral tradition if they are recorded down as well. -
oral tradition never goes beyond what is written [in the Bible].
what the apostles taught in word is always congruent with what they wrote.
1Co 4:6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, “Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.
What was taught in word was put into writing as directed by the Holy Spirit. -
How close i don't know.Originally posted by Icemoon:in blue .. issit true?
But both Khong and Kong did mentioned about their meetings and fellowship in their respective services before. -
Its not "were" close to each other. They ARE STILL close to each other.Originally posted by M©+square:How close i don't know.
But both Khong and Kong did mentioned about their meetings and fellowship in their respective services before. -
I think they share the organization for FOP right?Originally posted by babyys:Its not "were" close to each other. They ARE STILL close to each other. -
Am not sure bout NCC. However CHC had the covering of Rev Cannon James Wong of the Anglican diocese and was invited to chair the FOP for last year.
-
actually if I not wrong, CHC is involved in FOP for most (if not all) of the few years.Originally posted by babyys:Am not sure bout NCC. However CHC had the covering of Rev Cannon James Wong of the Anglican diocese and was invited to chair the FOP for last year.
last time I went for FOP(many years ago), its was a join effort between FCBC and CHC (that's before Sun Ho goes to US for her singing career, her worship leading was very good) -
Grace is what God does for us.
-
Originally posted by Ironside:
it's odd that you have used this argument when your protestant forefathers chose not to.
oral tradition never goes beyond what is written [in the Bible].
what the apostles taught in word is always congruent with what they wrote.
1Co 4:6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, [b]“Do not go beyond what is written.” Then you will not take pride in one man over against another.
What was taught in word was put into writing as directed by the Holy Spirit.
[/b]
If Paul is using this verse to advocate scripture alone, he would have been advocating one of four principles, which are inconsistent with the rest of his theology:
(1) Accept as authoritative only the Old Testament writings;
(2) accept as authoritative only the Old Testament writings and the New Testament writings penned as of the date Paul wrote 1 Corinthians (circa A.D. 56);
(3) accept as authoritative orally transmitted doctrine only until it has been reduced to writing (scripture) and only while the apostles are alive, then disregard all oral tradition and adhere only to what is written; or
(4) accept as authoritative only doctrine that has been reduced to writing.
Needless to say nobody will say that option 1 is acceptable. We cannot accept option two either, for this would mean all New Testament books written after the year 56 would not qualify under the 1 Corinthians 4:6 guideline. Hence, John's Gospel, Acts, Romans, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon, Titus, 1 & 2 Timothy, Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2, & 3 John, Jude, and Revelation would all have to be jettisoned as non-authoritative.
Option three fails because in order for sola scriptura to be a "biblical" doctrine there must be, by definition, at least one Bible verse which says Scripture is sufficient, or that oral Tradition is to be ignored once Scripture has supplanted it, or that Scripture is superior to oral Tradition. But there are no such verses; and as we'll see, 1 Corinthians 4:6 is no exception.
Option four is likewise untenable because it contradicts Paul's express command in to "Stand fast and hold firm to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours" (2 Thess. 2:15). Thus, for 1 Corinthians 4:6 to support the theory of sola scriptura, Paul would be contradicting what he wrote in 2 Thess 2:15.
Furthermore, If Paul had been promulgating sola scriptura in 1 Corinthians 4 he would have been in conflict with the practice of the rest of the apostles. Most of the apostles never wrote a single line of Scripture; instead they transmitted the deposit of faith orally. Did their oral teachings carry any less weight of authority than the written teachings of Paul or Peter or John?
So the thing for you to consider is that if most of the apostles did not write any scriptures, how did they teach? Obviously by Oral Tradition! -
Yup! Generally the worship team are dynamic. Very Hillsongs style.Originally posted by vince69:actually if I not wrong, CHC is involved in FOP for most (if not all) of the few years.
last time I went for FOP(many years ago), its was a join effort between FCBC and CHC (that's before Sun Ho goes to US for her singing career, her worship leading was very good) -
you all worship Jesus or worship the worship band?
NCC's book 'heath and the holy communion' is plain heresy and false doctrine. no apologies given. -
It's CCC style.Originally posted by babyys:Yup! Generally the worship team are dynamic. Very Hillsongs style. -
-
err... don't think giving credits where credits are due is equal to worshiping themOriginally posted by NT2:you all worship Jesus or worship the worship band?
NCC's book 'heath and the holy communion' is plain heresy and false doctrine. no apologies given.
-
CCC as in Central Christian Church?Originally posted by M©+square:It's CCC style. -
Did i ever mention in the post that i "worship" the band????Originally posted by NT2:you all worship Jesus or worship the worship band?
NCC's book 'heath and the holy communion' is plain heresy and false doctrine. no apologies given.
I really think your vocab is limited duh!
-
r u deranged or have you forgotten to take your medicine???Originally posted by M©+square:It's CCC style.
so r saying that churches who have bands (musical instruments), worship team, lightings r CCC Style??? -
what is CCC style?Originally posted by babyys:r u deranged or have you forgotten to take your medicine???
so r saying that churches who have bands (musical instruments), worship team, lightings r CCC Style??? -
Maybe its the conservatives versus the liberal ones?Originally posted by babyys:r u deranged or have you forgotten to take your medicine???
so r saying that churches who have bands (musical instruments), worship team, lightings r CCC Style???
I rem when i was in ACJC, a Methodist school, the VP did voiced out against it, but none of the church pastors or CF chaps do anything to change it
So for what i know, SAJC, ACJC and I think even CJC have this stle of worship -
NT2 can explain more on it..Originally posted by NT2: -
har...but it is good not someone shouting during the scv and his own staft have to praise him so wow so-and-so very humble .then pin point out certian small church bad mouth abt him and the church.rather than clear the misunderstanding and going over to help them...Originally posted by M©+square:Confirm. They are 'brother relationship'
This two churches agree to disagree, but the senior pastor of both church were very close to one another.
FCBCians....agree? -
did read that christ is our consellor and adovacte....WHO sit at the right hand side of GOD.So when you reach heaven so are you going to juifity...or keep on saying i am under grace...do you think you enter the heaven door.Originally posted by vince69:err.... justify what? 
imagine ,if one day or fine by a mata for jaywalking which you didn't do it...and u engage a lawyer to defence you..do u tell the lawyer that or i am under grace,i have faith ,i call your name and i engage you know...
Think wat the lawyer will do.. -
more likely Calvary Charismatic Church...Originally posted by vince69:CCC as in Central Christian Church?