# THe UMC church and Science



## Martin (May 30, 2011)

Can Christians embrace faith and science? - UMC.org

It’s time for people of faith to accept evolution - UMC.org


----------



## Reformed Thomist (May 30, 2011)

_In the beginning, God created order out of chaos. Every branch of science starts with the hypothesis that the universe is lawful and orderly. So why is there so much chaos in the minds of so many about how the world was formed?_

Oy vey...


----------



## ReformedChapin (May 30, 2011)

Not surprised UMC has been going to sheol for a while now. 

Sorry about your denom.


----------



## Bill The Baptist (May 30, 2011)

I realize that there are many godly people within the UMC, but at some point you have to make a stand and refuse to be associated with the people who run the UMC. That means finding a new church, and that is a difficult thing, but sadly sometimes neccesary.


----------



## Theoretical (May 30, 2011)

Check your PM, Eric.


----------



## Martin (May 30, 2011)

Scott, I replied to your PM. Let me know if you did not get it. My sent box didn't show anything so I am not sure if it went or not.

These articles were very disheartening to me. Anyone with advice on what I should do, please feel free to share it. I am prayerfully trying to decide and seeking the Lord on what to do.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (May 30, 2011)

Eric said:


> These articles were very disheartening to me. Anyone with advice on what I should do, please feel free to share it.



Is there something that would prevent you from going to a different church?


----------



## FenderPriest (May 30, 2011)

Eric, I don't know what your history is with the UMC, but mine was rather, intense. I think my family's been Methodist since the early days of Wesley and Whitefield, so when I exited (while in the process of ordination), it was kinda messy. I probably didn't do the best job, but I explained to my parents that they had raised me to value God's Word, and from my own convictions about its teaching, I was compelled to go elsewhere. That way the tone was at least attempted to be set as an appreciation for faithfulness, but unfortunate and real disagreement. Then I went to the local Reformed Baptist church in Auburn, AL, and eventually landed in Sovereign Grace Ministries. The _way_ you leave is just as important as where you leave to and why.


----------



## Martin (May 30, 2011)

My history in the Methodist Church is that I was raised Methodist from an infant. I have also attended the same church from infancy. The people in it have seen me grow from an infant and we have grown together, etc.... They are very dear to me. Its a small rural church and near about everyone in it is related so its hard to part from that. That being said, being enlightened to the doctrines of grace, being a closet Calvinist with people who believe different is starting to be a heavy burden on me. I feel I need to be somewhere that is reverent, the word of God is top authority, and where I can grow spiritually, etc... Also, I am soon to be married and if God blesses us, we will have a family too. I understand my duty as the head of my household and the spiritual care of my wife and children so i have to go with my convictions, even if that means parting company and going to another church.


----------



## Pilgrim (May 31, 2011)

The UMC and science? Bow at the altar of whatever "science" is saying today and cast aside the Bible.

I think in the 1800's Methodists were the largest denomination in the USA. They've been on a continual downgrade since they started emphasizing seminary education around the turn of the 20th century, when German higher criticism and modernism held sway. 

I was raised in the UMC. Even though I was raised in the "Bible Belt" it was a rather liberal First UMC in which we were told from the pulpit there was no literal hell, etc. And that was almost 30 years ago. I don't think I was ever taught much about the Bible there. In confirmation from what I recall we were taught some basic facts, but it's possible there may have been much error mixed in as well. I was confirmed and sprinkled in the UMC. I think that I probably learned more in about a year in the PCA (when I was about 6) than from age 7-18 in the UMC. But they still sang many of the old hymns, as many mainline churches continue to do today. So you basically have orthodoxy sung and heresy preached, to one degree or another. But I didn't understand what the words really meant until much later.

I know we have a few folks here who are Reformed and have decided to stay in the UMC because there is an opportunity to do some good. In my experience, the UMC doesn't mind if a man is an evangelical so long as he's in some small or at best medium sized church. Unlike most, I've seen these men be kept at the same church for many years instead of being shipped out elsewhere every few years as is the norm, as if the virus has to be quarantined! There are evidently still many Bible-believing Christians in the UMC, especially it seems in more rural areas in the South and perhaps elsewhere. But the hierarchy is shot through with heresy and apostasy and it's been that way for decades. I will say that I don't follow the UMC that closely, but I haven't heard or seen any indication of that changing. While the conservatives appear to have kept the denomination from going quite as far as the PCUSA, ECUSA, UCC, etc, it appears to me that at this point they are doing good to keep open homosexuals out of the pulpit. The battle to keep soul destroying heresy out of the pulpit was lost years ago. 

After I was converted later on in my 20's, I knew I needed to get into a Bible-believing church. I basically did that within the week! With every dollar you put into the plate in the UMC, a portion is going to support apostasy, abortion and other abominations. As are all the other mainlines, they are yoked together with the apostate WCC and NCC as well. On that basis, I don't see how a convinced Arminian evangelical who holds the Bible in high regard could stay, much less a Reformed believer. 

When I left, there was some disappointment on the part of my parents, but it was probably moreso misunderstanding over my newfound evangelical views, Calvinist or not than it was disappointment in my leaving that church. I can understand and appreciate the difficulty others may have who have a much more emotional attachment to the church of their childhood and who have parents (even evangelical ones) who consider leaving to be unthinkable. 

Yet, let God be true and every man a liar. 



> Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing


----------



## VictorBravo (May 31, 2011)

One thing that strikes me is that they are way behind the times--trying to jump on a train that has already derailed.

It's as if they are finally officially embracing modernism (the idea that synchretic empiricism leads to truth) at a time when postmodernism is completely undermining the foundations of modernism. What are they to do when they discover that combining science and faith in this fashion is oh so 20th century?


----------



## Martin (May 31, 2011)

I do feel that I need to leave the denomination. I am praying about where I need to go though. Advice would be appreciated on this. I live in a rural area but I only live about 5 miles from town so there are a lot of options for me. Here are my options: There are many Southern Baptist Churches, there is a PCA church in town, and there is a Southern Baptist Church that is apart of the Founders Ministry that is about 30 miles away. I bring up the Southern Baptist Churches because I am having issues with baptism. I have never come to a full acceptance of paedo-baptism so I am still studying and praying for conviction on one of them. This is an issue that I have been over and over and over with for a while now. Again, please feel free to advise me. Thank You.


----------



## MLCOPE2 (May 31, 2011)

Eric said:


> I have never come to a full acceptance of paedo-baptism so I am still studying and praying for conviction on one of them.



Are you referring to the UMC's mis-understanding of infant baptism or the reformed doctrine of covenant baptism?


----------



## Martin (May 31, 2011)

MLCOPE2 said:


> Eric said:
> 
> 
> > I have never come to a full acceptance of paedo-baptism so I am still studying and praying for conviction on one of them.
> ...


 
I mean any form of infant baptism. I am having trouble accepting it. I am still studying both forms of baptism though.


----------



## Whitefield (May 31, 2011)

MLCOPE2 said:


> Are you referring to the UMC's mis-understanding of infant baptism or the reformed doctrine of covenant baptism?



Could you elaborate on what you mean by "mis-understanding"?


----------



## MLCOPE2 (May 31, 2011)

Whitefield said:


> Could you elaborate on what you mean by "mis-understanding"?



Methodists believe that baptism (even infant baptism) conveys a form of prevenient grace upon the child thereby removing the stain of original sin and enabling them to be more open to accepting the gospel. While I believe that baptism conveys grace and that covenant children are in a much better position to hear and receive the gospel I do not believe that it conveys _*that*_ type of grace. Instead I believe that covenant baptism is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant under the current dispensation of the church in which children of believers are brought into the covenant community and are given the blessings and promises that follow with that.

---------- Post added at 08:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:12 PM ----------




Eric said:


> I mean any form of infant baptism. I am having trouble accepting it.



It is a topic which requires much study and prayer. You must be careful though to differentiate between the different "views" on infant (covenant) baptism. To the Lutheran it means one thing, to the Methodist another, and to the Reformed something quite different as well. I encourage you to continue studying the issue diligently Brother.

---------- Post added at 08:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:14 PM ----------

Sorry to take the OP off topic. We can start another thread to discuss the various denominational nuances of infant baptism if you so wish. I for one would enjoy it.


----------



## Whitefield (May 31, 2011)

MLCOPE2 said:


> Methodists believe that baptism (even infant baptism) conveys a form of prevenient grace upon the child thereby removing the stain of original sin and enabling them to be more open to accepting the gospel.




I have never heard infant baptism and prevenient grace tied together in the UMC. Some within the UMC might say it is, but with a little thought they will have to disconnect them because holding to that position would destroy the universalism of prevenient grace they must hold to so dearly in their Arminianism. The Wesleyan/Arminian teaching on prevenient grace is that it is a universal grace, and not limited to nor conveyed through baptism.


----------



## MLCOPE2 (May 31, 2011)

Here is an excerpt from "By Water and the Spirit: A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism" which I understand to be the "official" position paper for the UMC on baptism.



> Within the Methodist tradition, baptism has long been a subject of much concern, even controversy. John Wesley retained the sacramental theology which he received from his Anglican heritage. He taught that in baptism a child was cleansed of the guilt of original sin, initiated into the covenant with God, admitted into the church, made an heir of the divine kingdom, and spiritually born anew. He said that while baptism was neither essential to nor sufficient for salvation, it was the "ordinary means" that God designated for applying the benefits of the work of Christ in human lives.



I was involved with a UMC for a few years of my life and that is the very same type of explanation I was given by the Pastor and elders of the church I was attending. I also understand that not all UMC churches hold to identical understandings on this issue and while I don't entirely disagree with them on every point of their understanding of baptism, I do believe that it _*is*_ a mis-understanding. If I am wrong in this I am always open to correction.


----------



## Whitefield (May 31, 2011)

MLCOPE2 said:


> Here is an excerpt from "By Water and the Spirit: A United Methodist Understanding of Baptism" which I understand to be the "official" position paper for the UMC on baptism.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
The section you quote is from the opening paragraphs which provide a historical prelude to what is said in the body of the position paper. I do not defend all that is contained in it, but if you continue on in the paper to the analysis of UMC views on baptism you will find paragraphs such as these:



> The Baptismal Covenant. In both the Old and New Testaments, God enters into covenant relationship with God's people. A covenant involves promises and responsibilities of both parties; it is instituted through a special ceremony and expressed by a distinguishing sign. By covenant God constituted a servant community of the people of Israel, promising to be their God and giving them the Law to make clear how they were to live. The circumcision of male infants is the sign of this covenant (Genesis 17:1-14; Exodus 24:1-12). In the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God fulfilled the prophecy of a new covenant and called forth the church as a servant community (Jeremiah 31:31-34; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). The baptism of infants and adults, both male and female, is the sign of this covenant.
> 
> Therefore, United Methodists identify our ritual for baptism as "The Services of the Baptismal Covenant" (The United Methodist Hymnal, pages 32-54). In baptism the church declares that it is bound in covenant to God; through baptism new persons are initiated into that covenant. The covenant connects God, the community of faith, and the person being baptized; all three are essential to the fulfillment of the baptismal covenant. The faithful grace of God initiates the covenant relationship and enables the community and the person to respond with faith.



and a little farther down:



> The claim that baptism is unrepeatable rests on the steadfast faithfulness of God. God's initiative establishes the covenant of grace into which we are incorporated in baptism. By misusing our God-given freedom, we may live in neglect or defiance of that covenant, but we cannot destroy God's love for us. When we repent and return to God, the covenant does not need to be remade, because God has always remained faithful to it. What is needed is renewal of our commitment and reaffirmation of our side of the covenant.



As you can see there is a serious attempt within the UMC to rediscover and restore an understanding of covenant in baptism. Whether it is accepted, or even can be accepted, given the errors on free-will and grace within the UMC, is yet to seen.


----------



## MLCOPE2 (May 31, 2011)

Like I posted above, I agree with much that is stated, however you cannot remove the elements of prevenient grace throughout the entire document. Let me also preface anything hereafter with what I understand "prevenient" grace to be.



> The United Methodist Book of Discipline (2004) defines prevenient grace as "...the divine love that surrounds all humanity *and precedes any and all of our conscious impulses.* This grace prompts our first wish to please God, our first glimmer of understanding concerning God's will, and our 'first slight transient conviction' of having sinned against God. God's grace also awakens in us an earnest longing for deliverance from sin and death and moves us toward repentance and faith."


(emphasis mine)

Therefore I understand the UMC's teaching on "prevenient" grace to be an enabling grace that allows the sinner to then "choose" to place their faith in Christ. (Once again, I'm open to correction on this)

Furthermore, this explanation is also given on the UMC's official website under the section of the Overview of Baptism:



> Why Baptize Babies?
> From the earliest times, children and infants were baptized and included in the church. As scriptural authority for this ancient tradition, some scholars cite Jesus’ words, “Let the little children come to me…for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs” (Mark 10:14). However, a more consistent argument is that baptism, as a means of grace, signifies God’s initiative in the process of salvation. *John Wesley preached “prevenient grace,” the grace that works in our lives before we are aware of it, bringing us to faith. The baptism of children and their inclusion in the church before they can respond with their own confirmation of faith is a vivid and compelling witness to prevenient grace.*


(emphasis mine)

Here is another example as well from the above article:



> United Methodists believe that these sign-acts are special means of grace. The ritual action of a sacrament does not merely point to God's presence in the world, but also participates in it and becomes a vehicle for conveying that reality. God's presence in the sacraments is real, but it must be accepted by human faith if it is to transform human lives. The sacraments do not convey grace either magically or irrevocably, but they are powerful channels through which God has chosen to make grace available to us. Wesley identified baptism as the initiatory sacrament by which we enter into the covenant with God and are admitted as members of Christ's church.



I understand the author here again to be pointing to a "grace that goes before" that is signified in the baptism of an infant. I don't find this in agreement with the reformed understanding of covenant baptism. Although it mimics it in several ways, it is very distinct and should be understood as different from the historical reformed position.

(Thanks for the dialogue again, brother!)


----------



## Whitefield (May 31, 2011)

MLCOPE2 said:


> Like I posted above, I agree with much that is stated, however you cannot remove the elements of prevenient grace throughout the entire document. Let me also preface anything hereafter with what I understand "prevenient" grace to be.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I think we have reached the point of driving over the same ground. I would emphasize that the document you quoted, "By Water and the Spirit" argues that Wesley's view on baptism is no longer the UMC's view on baptism. So, to quote what Wesley thought about baptism does not prove QED what UMCs think about baptism. And I would contend that UMCs do not think baptism is the vehicle of prevenient grace, but is a result of prevenient grace already applied.

So, having driven over the ground once more, I guess we just agree to disagree. It has been enjoyable to engage in a civil discussion with you. Thank you.


----------



## Martin (May 31, 2011)

Maybe some advice on studying baptism and advice on what should I do about switching denominations.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 1, 2011)

Reading the linked articles here should help you chew on this issue for a while. 

Monergism :: Baptism 

You might also try contacting some of the pastors of the churches you've found on the internet. 

I probably live less than 2 hours away from you. However, I'm not very familiar with the churches up your way. (Is the church on the Founders list you mention in Liberty? By "town" are you referring to McComb?) I have some Calvinistic Baptist friends on the MS Gulf Coast that may know more. Not every Calvinistic Baptist church is on the Founders list for one reason or another.


----------



## Cup Of Java (Jun 1, 2011)

I have been disappointed in this decision, I may have to rethink my position on UMC.


----------



## Martin (Jun 1, 2011)

Pilgrim said:


> I probably live less than 2 hours away from you. However, I'm not very familiar with the churches up your way. (Is the church on the Founders list you mention in Liberty? By "town" are you referring to McComb?) I have some Calvinistic Baptist friends on the MS Gulf Coast that may know more. Not every Calvinistic Baptist church is on the Founders list for one reason or another.



The Founders Ministry church is the one in Liberty, New Salem Baptist Church. Yes by town I am referring to Mccomb. I am looking for any Calvinist Baptist churches in my county (Pike) or would consider any in the neighboring counties ( Lincoln or Amite) if they are somewhat close to me. If your friends know of anything up this way that would be great. I am also considering the PCA church in town as well but I want to know all of my options. Thanks.


----------



## Pilgrim (Jun 1, 2011)

Eric said:


> Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > I probably live less than 2 hours away from you. However, I'm not very familiar with the churches up your way. (Is the church on the Founders list you mention in Liberty? By "town" are you referring to McComb?) I have some Calvinistic Baptist friends on the MS Gulf Coast that may know more. Not every Calvinistic Baptist church is on the Founders list for one reason or another.
> ...




I will see if I can turn up anything.


----------

