Sounds like a big back pack. Like you say chemistry is important. I’m an old guy and some people I just don’t have time for, but the dynamics you’re talking about is complicated. The church I go to presently is The Wine Press, they have branched out with two others and morphed into a thing called Sola Union. It’s up here in Canada. BC and Alberta. Thanks for your work, and just for the record I enjoy your off the chain rants about what you are up to, helps me pray when I think of you and your crew. Shalom
We have no national ambitions. We don’t have presiding ministers. We don’t have the range of confessions they have, and we don’t allow paedocommunion. Etc etc. Our focus is much narrower, leaning heavily into leadership development with an eye toward church planting and revitalization.
While I'm not there for my voice to matter, I would hope you'd also accept the 1644 LBC. The big difference is that the 1689 is when they put church membership in. This was because in the 1600s the government who was paying preachers made churches prove up a membership, that's when the tradition of church membership started. It's sad to see the forcing of a tradition that has no biblical basis. Note, I'm fine with mailing lists and being organized, but we're all under the new covenant and when I attend a church I'm under the authority of the elders already.
Sounds like a big back pack. Like you say chemistry is important. I’m an old guy and some people I just don’t have time for, but the dynamics you’re talking about is complicated. The church I go to presently is The Wine Press, they have branched out with two others and morphed into a thing called Sola Union. It’s up here in Canada. BC and Alberta. Thanks for your work, and just for the record I enjoy your off the chain rants about what you are up to, helps me pray when I think of you and your crew. Shalom
Thanks for this Michael. How is what you’re doing different from being apart of the CREC?
We have no national ambitions. We don’t have presiding ministers. We don’t have the range of confessions they have, and we don’t allow paedocommunion. Etc etc. Our focus is much narrower, leaning heavily into leadership development with an eye toward church planting and revitalization.
While I'm not there for my voice to matter, I would hope you'd also accept the 1644 LBC. The big difference is that the 1689 is when they put church membership in. This was because in the 1600s the government who was paying preachers made churches prove up a membership, that's when the tradition of church membership started. It's sad to see the forcing of a tradition that has no biblical basis. Note, I'm fine with mailing lists and being organized, but we're all under the new covenant and when I attend a church I'm under the authority of the elders already.
People are welcome to start their own if they like. We have to draw a line and that’s the line we’ve drawn.