|
|
|
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/21/2009 7:02:45 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 660
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
As far as I can see, what needs to take place first before we attempt to resolve questions of doctrine (what we believe) is to resolve the position of our heart (how we believe); there is no chance for the Church to be one without this provision.
What I recently discovered is that how we believe is at least as important as what we believe. It si the how we believe that brings Truth to light and life.
The steady divisiveness, not diversity, of the Church since its the end of persecution and the start of acceptance by ancient Rome is abudant evidence that little or no attention has been paid to how we are to believe. Belief has an end. Do you know what it is?
Please share your heart and, if necessary, your mind on this notion.
Yours in Christ,
Aagapist
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/21/2009 7:39:17 PM
|
|
|
john_mark
Posts: 870
Joined: 7/20/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: agapist
As far as I can see, what needs to take place first before we attempt to resolve questions of doctrine (what we believe) is to resolve the position of our heart (how we believe); there is no chance for the Church to be one without this provision.
What I recently discovered is that how we believe is at least as important as what we believe. It si the how we believe that brings Truth to light and life.
The steady divisiveness, not diversity, of the Church since its the end of persecution and the start of acceptance by ancient Rome is abudant evidence that little or no attention has been paid to how we are to believe. Belief has an end. Do you know what it is?
Please share your heart and, if necessary, your mind on this notion.
Yours in Christ,
Aagapist
didnt the divisiveness of the church start long before constitine? do we not see evidence of it with the apostles even while Jesus was with them, ie arguing who was going to sit at His right hand? did not paul fight against the judizers through out his ministry?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/21/2009 7:54:03 PM
|
|
|
gzusfrk
Posts: 27
Joined: 5/19/2009
Status: offline
|
Hewbrews 4:12 "For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edge sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and morrow,and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart". there for when you read the Word it will reveal to you what it says according to your heart. since we know not whats in a mans heart,we should treat them as tho they are saved. With love and respect. We are to grow as we learn from the word,we are not all grown yet some are still babes some others closer to the lord,the important part is we pick up the cross and walk. And dont stop.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/21/2009 9:55:55 PM
|
|
|
LCannon
Posts: 1120
Joined: 2/22/2007
From: Lebanon, OR
Status: online
|
Resolve:
1. Never argue(rarely)especially with or in the company of the unrepentant.
2. Always simply state my reasons tempered by supporting scripture in a nonthreatening and civil manner.
3. I'm not responsible for the other party's reaction; they will do what they will anyway.
It's not a contest on my part or a 'last word' victory.
_____________________________
'I will never leave you nor forsake you.' (Joshua 1:5)
''Let the very worst thing come to pass[and]even there,
especially there; His hand will hold.' -Elisabeth Elliot-
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/21/2009 11:52:48 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1709
Status: offline
|
The first thing to be clear about is that if all Christians have made the written Word of God the ultimate and final authority in all doctrinal matters, and if all Christians are led and taught by the Holy Spirit (as they ought to be) then there should be no doctrinal differences.
Doctrinal disputes have arisen because man-made traditions or teachings have been introduced into the churches. If we love Christ (who is the Truth) as we ought to then we must also love the truth revealed in His Word, and present it clearly with the Scriptures to support it. If we love others as we ought to, then we must remember that God will have all men not only to be saved, but "to come unto the knowledge of the truth". There can be no spiritual unity apart from God's truth.
We must also keep in mind that all Christians are in a spiritual battle in which Satan and his evil spirits sow their lies and thereby create dissension. It would be naive to think that this battle will somehow stop if we wish for it to stop. All false teaching ultimately comes from Satan (Gen. 3:1-5), and the adversary is busy every day.
As to the best and only way to settle doctrinal disputes, we must compare Scripture with Scripture and set aside all other man-made ideas, no matter how plausible they sound.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/22/2009 1:33:42 AM
|
|
|
Epistemological
Posts: 25
Joined: 6/14/2009
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
The first thing to be clear about is that if all Christians have made the written Word of God the ultimate and final authority in all doctrinal matters, and if all Christians are led and taught by the Holy Spirit (as they ought to be) then there should be no doctrinal differences.
Doctrinal disputes have arisen because man-made traditions or teachings have been introduced into the churches. If we love Christ (who is the Truth) as we ought to then we must also love the truth revealed in His Word, and present it clearly with the Scriptures to support it. If we love others as we ought to, then we must remember that God will have all men not only to be saved, but "to come unto the knowledge of the truth". There can be no spiritual unity apart from God's truth.
We must also keep in mind that all Christians are in a spiritual battle in which Satan and his evil spirits sow their lies and thereby create dissension. It would be naive to think that this battle will somehow stop if we wish for it to stop. All false teaching ultimately comes from Satan (Gen. 3:1-5), and the adversary is busy every day.
As to the best and only way to settle doctrinal disputes, we must compare Scripture with Scripture and set aside all other man-made ideas, no matter how plausible they sound.
I think the best way to settle doctrinal differences is to have a calm, reasonable discussion which respects the beliefs of both parties, determine to the best of your ability if the other person is more interested in learning or in poking holes in whatever you say, try to find what common ground you can, and then simply state your belief in the most matter-of-fact way you can while referencing their own views as little as possible; just give your own views and the reasons behind them for as long as you can tell the other person that
quote:
they are headed into the Great Apostasy prophesied for the last days before God's judgments begin.
because they belong to a denomination
quote:
where evil is called good and good evil, and bitter is called sweet and sweet bitter.
and
quote:
They have hewed themselves broken cisterns that hold no water.
I submit to the wiser authority.
_____________________________
"I know, Lord, why You utter no answer. You are Yourself the answer. Before Your face all questions die away; what other answers would suffice?" - C.S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/22/2009 9:04:56 AM
|
|
|
URForgiven
Posts: 521
Joined: 3/22/2008
Status: offline
|
There will never be unity, the oneness of mind and purpose that Christ beseeched us to be, until the many parts of the body of Christ recognize themselves not as individuals, and not as members of an organization, but as parts of a living organism.
The divisiveness is caused by clinging to our differences and building walls around them which we then call "church". Walls that keep vital parts of the body separate from each other, and make the body useless to the head, who is Jesus Christ.
We have tuned ourselves to each other, instead of to Christ. As a result, instead of harmony, we have discord. One says, "I follow Calvin,", another says, "I follow Arminius," another says, "I follow Wesley," another says, "I follow my Pope". The list is endless. Man following men, instead of being led by Christ.
It is not what we believe, it is not how we believe, it is in Whom we believe. Each of us must work out our own salvation. The same Christ that was available to these men, is available to each of us. It is only as we individually offer ourselves to Him, that we are then used corporately of Him for that which we were created to be.
Peace
_____________________________
"Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit,
are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?" Galatians 3:3
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/22/2009 1:19:04 PM
|
|
|
agapist
Posts: 660
Joined: 6/13/2009
Status: offline
|
Interesting comments. Thank you.
Of course I am aware that differences existed before Constantine, but what happened with Constantine is that the message of Christ, by its very acceptance into the mainstream, took on features of "the world," becoming primarily a religion, a system of belief, and secondarily a community of believers, a spirit of interaction.
It was taken out of the homes and put into churches. It was no longer a faith that everyday was faced with life and death, true demonstrations of the heart, but one that had an image to protect and promote, matters for the mind.
There are many more changes that occurred, and with each one the opportunity of dissension gained in dimensions. This graudal formalization of belief meant disputes were formalized. Divisiveness got a name, like Calvin or Luther and that drew adherents, abettign separation.
In a word, the problem was it became a religion, which is another topic for another time.
It is in how we believe in Christ--being open and receptive each moment, living by inspiration--and not what we believe--hold with our knowledge and judgment, living by motivation--where truth is found.
"To come into union with the wisdom of God the soul has to embrace not-knowing, rather than knowledge." John of the Cross
We can rephrase the above and simply say, "Turn, and become as a little child."
The Bible is a children's book; every chapter and verse, jot and tittle shouts one thing: "Grow down!" Only through those eyes of a little child does the reality of Christ unfold.
The only sure grasp of truth we have is in the little child's open hand.
It is not that no one knows God BETTER than the little child; it is that no one knows God BUT the little child.
The only true knowledge we can have of God is love; what information, beliefs, and judgments we accumulate and hold ABOUT Christ can only limit what is infinite mystery and cause us to stumble along the way.
It is not in the nature of belief in God to hold onto those beliefs: these beliefs are simply a bridge to our appointment with truth: fully opening the heart to the work of God, TO BE as Christ.
To realize that you are "the light of the world" is perfect humility.
To realize that "as he was, so are you in the world" is perfect humility.
Humility is not in thinking, "God is great, I am small" or "God is everything, I am nothing"; there is stll too much vanity in that but it is a wise insight into the state of the Carnal mind, which is not who you are.
Who you are is the image and likeness of God.
Humility is not the realiztion of our smallness in a lowly comparison to God but the realization of our oneness in loving companionship with God.
The primary characteristic or root of the Carnal Mind is its taste for the "forbidden fruit": the knowledge of good and evil. This is what put us under The Law. The Old Testament teaches us the error of relying on this judgment. This is the basis of us and them, of all comparisons and polarities.
Love alone authenticates Scripture, and there is no theology or doctrine, standard or tenet that holds the love of God. We do not act on our beliefs; beliefs lead us to God so He may act through us. That is the end of belief and of the Bible: to become of One Spirit with God.
To love with all your heart is to burn up, totally consume, all that is "I" and "mine." The father doeth the works.
What is the nature of the little child?
The little child is the true character of the soul, and that is summed up in one word: TRUST (knowledge, belief, and judgment are nowhere on the list). The little child is the final stage of growth into whom God meant us to be: a unique expression of his image and likeness
The little child takes no thought for its life; that is wholly in the hands of the father.
If we can say that taking a breath is based on the belief that the element of oxygen is necessary for sustaining life, then that is how we are to "believe" in The Father.
Fully open to how you are to believe in whom you are to believe and all conflict and struggle will end.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/22/2009 6:20:02 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: agapist
What I recently discovered is that how we believe is at least as important as what we believe.
This is truly the key. How we believe is as much in word and deed as it is in what we call the heart. A good example of biblical belief that I have heard is the difference between two bridge builders. One believes the bridge is sound by showing diagrams and test results. The other shows he truly believes by personally driving a truck across the bridge. If we believe something we make it part of our daily lives. If we are unwilling to act on something we really do not believe it.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/22/2009 7:37:15 PM
|
|
|
Tantum_Ergo
Posts: 109
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine?
This is what the written Word of God has to say:
quote:
But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Matt. 18:15-17
_____________________________
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 3:24:39 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tantum_Ergo
quote:
What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine?
This is what the written Word of God has to say:
quote:
But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. Matt. 18:15-17
It is interesting that you apply this passage to doctrine. I thought this was more a matter of one's actions toward another and doctrinal differences. I could probably see this procedure used with regard heretical doctrine. However, to use it for simple doctinal differences and things that are not mentioned directly in the Scriptures.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 8:20:18 AM
|
|
|
Tantum_Ergo
Posts: 109
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
It is interesting that you apply this passage to doctrine. I thought this was more a matter of one's actions toward another and doctrinal differences. I could probably see this procedure used with regard heretical doctrine. However, to use it for simple doctinal differences and things that are not mentioned directly in the Scriptures.
I see your point about Matt 18 speaking specifically about 'offenses' against a brother but with the Church being the "pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15) why wouldn't the Church decide doctrinal differences? Look at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 where we see the Church deciding matters of doctrine.
God bless you
_____________________________
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 11:29:38 AM
|
|
|
Benoni2
Posts: 357
Joined: 5/20/2009
Status: offline
|
There is a deep and awesome and profound truth but men make the same mistake as Adam and are repeating Adam's mistake; they found themselve naked
Adam and Eve were both…NAKED! God made, man stands out unique…stark naked…which means devoid of true wisdom and knowledge, with his inner nature revealed, opened up, exhibited, and made bare.
THE FLESH UNCOVERED AND EXPOSED! In the typology of scripture "the flesh" is the name by which the Holy Spirit designates our outer life of soul and body, our earthly and carnal human nature, literally speaking of that nature which is earthly minded, with its lusts and self-centeredness, its ego and I-will which are in rebellion to the spirit. Thus, the flesh is not the outward, visible man of meat, muscle, and bones, but the nature of the soulical and bodily man.
What does man do? He covered himself with fig leaves. (the first religious act) in other words man not God covered him.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 11:54:29 AM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tantum_Ergo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
It is interesting that you apply this passage to doctrine. I thought this was more a matter of one's actions toward another and doctrinal differences. I could probably see this procedure used with regard heretical doctrine. However, to use it for simple doctinal differences and things that are not mentioned directly in the Scriptures.
I see your point about Matt 18 speaking specifically about 'offenses' against a brother but with the Church being the "pillar and bulwark of the truth" (1 Tim 3:15) why wouldn't the Church decide doctrinal differences? Look at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 where we see the Church deciding matters of doctrine.
God bless you
Yes, but if we are following the Shema(Deut. 6) this should happen naturally. To cut off discussion based on an authoritarian decision seems a little papal to me and counter to the spirit of the Shema.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 3:03:16 PM
|
|
|
Tantum_Ergo
Posts: 109
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Yes, but if we are following the Shema(Deut. 6) this should happen naturally. To cut off discussion based on an authoritarian decision seems a little papal to me and counter to the spirit of the Shema.
Bluethread,
I am sorry you feel that way. All I offered were Scriptural verses. If you will forgive the insult, I find your reference to anything Papal rather presumptuous. Did the discussion on circumcision continued in the Church after the "authoritarian" decision in Acts 15? Or was it settled there? Is the Church the "Pillar and Bulwark of the Truth" or is it not? Does Matt. 18 tells us to, "tell it to the church" or does it not? This has nothing to do with the Papacy, I am just quoting Scripture.
God bless you
_____________________________
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 4:15:06 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tantum_Ergo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Yes, but if we are following the Shema(Deut. 6) this should happen naturally. To cut off discussion based on an authoritarian decision seems a little papal to me and counter to the spirit of the Shema.
Bluethread,
I am sorry you feel that way. All I offered were Scriptural verses. If you will forgive the insult, I find your reference to anything Papal rather presumptuous. Did the discussion on circumcision continued in the Church after the "authoritarian" decision in Acts 15? Or was it settled there? Is the Church the "Pillar and Bulwark of the Truth" or is it not? Does Matt. 18 tells us to, "tell it to the church" or does it not? This has nothing to do with the Papacy, I am just quoting Scripture.
God bless you
I am not offended. I am using papal as an adjective. What occured in Acts 15 was not the result of one person being offended by another, but grew out of the natural discussion process that occurs on Shabbat. When an issue becomes so contentious that it causes division, then one would look outside the immediate gathering for direction.
The problem with appealing to the Jerusalem council to support an authoritarian resolution to a problem is a form of determining who "sits in the seat of Moshe'". One is just replacing "the apostles" for Moshe'. This is what makes it a papal argument. This is the exact argument that the pope uses to assert his right to be final arbitor.
Controversy over "the seat of Moshe'" has raged for millenia. The Pharasees and Sadducees were at odds over this in Yeshua's time. My view is that Yeshua sits in the seat of Moshe' and it is not clear who is the heir to the Apostles. Therefore, each man is the priest of his own household. Doctrinal differences are best resolved by respectfully discussing these matters, agreeing to disagree at times and doing what is necessary to protect those over whom one has been given authority.
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 7:07:36 PM
|
|
|
Tantum_Ergo
Posts: 109
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
I am not offended. I am using papal as an adjective. What occured in Acts 15 was not the result of one person being offended by another, but grew out of the natural discussion process that occurs on Shabbat. When an issue becomes so contentious that it causes division, then one would look outside the immediate gathering for direction.
The problem with appealing to the Jerusalem council to support an authoritarian resolution to a problem is a form of determining who "sits in the seat of Moshe'". One is just replacing "the apostles" for Moshe'. This is what makes it a papal argument. This is the exact argument that the pope uses to assert his right to be final arbitor.
Controversy over "the seat of Moshe'" has raged for millenia. The Pharasees and Sadducees were at odds over this in Yeshua's time. My view is that Yeshua sits in the seat of Moshe' and it is not clear who is the heir to the Apostles. Therefore, each man is the priest of his own household. Doctrinal differences are best resolved by respectfully discussing these matters, agreeing to disagree at times and doing what is necessary to protect those over whom one has been given authority.
Bluethread,
I can respect your position. Again; all I offered were Scriptural verses. We are going to have to, "agree to disagree" 
God bless you
_____________________________
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 7:59:17 PM
|
|
|
Tantum_Ergo
Posts: 109
Joined: 12/20/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bluethread
Good! I was afraid you were going to force me to convene an inquisition on this matter. 
Well before you do that just keep in mind how well the first one went over.
God bless you
_____________________________
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions." G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/23/2009 8:16:42 PM
|
|
|
Covaan_Meshuga
Posts: 3185
Joined: 6/8/2005
From: being knit together in my mother's womb
Status: offline
|
I wonder if you could define doctrine as specifically used in this thread, agapist. Thank you!
_____________________________
While in prayer or praise, I am only as devoted to G-d as I am in my most private moments.
Abiyah, if you had known them as G-d knows them, you would have answered them differently.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/24/2009 12:37:09 AM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 839
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
The best way to settle arguements....yea right I dont think Ive settled a single one!!!!
But I do come at doctrine in one way, one way only. I stick with a specific hermeneutic style. I exegete as best I can from that method of hermeneutic.
exegesis is gathering the proper meaning from the grammar of the text and the history in which it is set.
But once you have properly exegeted a passage...well what does it mean to us? That is where hermeneutics comes in and helps to determine a biblically consistent interpretation of the scripture youve just exegeted.
example..and a very quick and loose one.
Jhn 4.
Jesus meets a woman at a well.
What happened? Did Jesus meet a woman he liked? Did he meet a woman he knew? Was Jesus planning to meet this woman? Did Jesus want to get away from this woman? Did the woman know Jesus? Did the woman plan on meeting Jesus?
As you can see a great deal of avenues can be taken from just one phrase. Now, if you presume to understand the phrase without its context or without its historical background you can create a doctrine or a story about Jesus that has completely no bearing upon the truth of the situation or the intent of the author in telling us "Jesus meets a woman at a well".
Once you go to work on proper exegesis and determine just what kind of meeting Jesus and this woman had you can begin to speak from a proper context and be reasonably sure of the intention of the author on some level.
Hermeneutics or the science of interpreting scripture can be a loaded gun. A hermeneutical method carries its own presuppositions with it. Does your hermeneutic carry the presupposition that Jesus is the central message in all of scripture? Does your hermeneutic carry the presupposition that the scripture are divinely inspired? Does it carry whats called plenary inspiration? From these platforms grammar and history are used in the light of the knowledge that all that is before him is the inerrant and sacred word of God. So, the words are allowed to speak for themselves and the history and context speak for themselves and from this propositions are made, principles are determined, laws are set forth, prophecies are heard and we look for them in fulfillment through Jesus Christ.
It takes as much of the Spirit of God to understand the scripture as it did to write the scriptures. We count upon the truth of the scripture to self-reveal its own mysteries and its own prophecies. We look at the scripture to validate itself because God has no higher authority than himself and he can bear witness without the need of other witnesses.
Now that I laid the ground work...Ill say this. As it concerns determining doctrine brother to brother.
The scripture will always be clear on its most important truths
The doctrines which are most debated are usually most ambiguous within scripture.
The scripture reveals the interpretation of itself within its own pages.
If a common method of hermeneutics can be agreed upon and a common belief in the inerrancy and inspiration of scripture can be had then the majority of important doctrines will not be contested between born again Spirit indwelt believers. But if a common hermeneutic is not agreed upon, if the manner in which scripture is going to be interpreted has as many methods of interpetation as there are people, a wide variety of interpretations will occur and most of then will be only partially correct. At worst, you will have mish mash of interpretations that have no connection to grammar or context and the interpretation will be an eisogesis where the presuppostions and self-interests of the human are plastered over the actual meanings.
Some will argue....ahhh thats why we need a pope. LOL...no we dont need a pope, we only need a unified effort to understand the scripture and seek to know the God of scripture and what that God is saying to us.
But thats a very dangerous thing. God is the good news and the bad news all rolled into one.
Truth is dangerous and hearing it so that it can be known and lovingly obeyed is only for those who's life has been indwelt by the Spirit of God.
John
< Message edited by Gloryandgrace -- 6/24/2009 12:44:08 AM >
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/24/2009 4:10:57 PM
|
|
|
freeholder
Posts: 109
Joined: 2/15/2008
Status: offline
|
Ezra, I wish it were true that agreeing on the word and guidance of the HS would make us ALL agree. Didn't even work in Acts. Ask James and the council and Paul and Peter. I believe our diversity is with purpose. Each church sect seems to be keeping certain truths. SBC shows us that there is a definite plan in everything, a design. Calvary Chapel shows us that tongues can be a cohesive force and that different beliefs can still flourish in a denomination and be allowed to leave with grace. Other pentecostals show us the power of the tongue used as the Bible intends. Some denominations exist as a warning not to get carried away with either a gift, the power of personality or antiquated notions passed off as doctrine. It is true that the Bible is our guide and should be used to DETERMINE if the Holy Spirit may be leading us. (Anyone prophesying MUST BE 100% accurate, which would have stopped a lot of cults dead in their tracks if applied.) Another rule is to follow the Biblical teaching TO its CONCLUSION. And eye for an eye falls well short of Love one another yet many folks here would only read the first part and ignore the second. I've been there myself so I'm not criticizing, merely noting the truth. I've also been in a congregation where Col was read to mean that we should keep the Jewish holidays instead of treat them as shadows of our Lord's coming. An application of common sense is also required. NOw, this doesn't mean I don't agree with you, only that it takes LOVE for one another and the inherent RESPECT of that love to make it work as it dod for the Apostles.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/24/2009 4:35:36 PM
|
|
|
Bluethread
Posts: 2927
Joined: 11/8/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: freeholder
I've also been in a congregation where Col was read to mean that we should keep the Jewish holidays instead of treat them as shadows of our Lord's coming. An application of common sense is also required.
Isn't saying that those who believe in living Torah observant lives are not using common sense antithetical to your point. If it were not for us many would no absolutely nothing about the feasts. Also, as you say,
quote:
(Anyone prophesying MUST BE 100% accurate, which would have stopped a lot of cults dead in their tracks if applied.)
Is this not something that we contribute to the conversation. I hate to be all "rainbow coalition" about this, but when one brings up the "Can't we all just get along?" argument, one needs to be careful about excluding people.
< Message edited by Bluethread -- 6/24/2009 5:53:48 PM >
_____________________________
"Show me wherein I have errored and I will hold my tongue." Iyov(Job)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: What is the best way to settle questions of doctrine? - 6/25/2009 1:17:30 AM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1709
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: freeholder
Ezra, I wish it were true that agreeing on the word and guidance of the HS would make us ALL agree. Didn't even work in Acts. Ask James and the council and Paul and Peter.
freeholder:
What do you mean by "Didn't even work in Acts"? As I read and study Acts 15, I see the unity of the Spirit and unanimity of doctrine. The apostles, and elders, and the WHOLE CHURCH agreed to the guidance of the Holy Spirit that Gentile believers were exempt from the Law of Moses other than in a few specifics (which were mostly already revealed to Noah, and therefore to the human race) (Acts 15:29 cf. Gen. 9:4). This shows that when Christians study the Scriptures in the Spirit under the leading of the Holy Spirit, comparing Scripture with Scripture, they do come to agreement.
quote:
I believe our diversity is with purpose. Each church sect seems to be keeping certain truths. SBC shows us that there is a definite plan in everything, a design. Calvary Chapel shows us that tongues can be a cohesive force and that different beliefs can still flourish in a denomination and be allowed to leave with grace. Other pentecostals show us the power of the tongue used as the Bible intends. Some denominations exist as a warning not to get carried away with either a gift, the power of personality or antiquated notions passed off as doctrine.
Unless you can show us from Scripture that this is indeed what God planned, I believe we must hold to the truth (Eph.4:4-6) that "There is
one Body, and
one Spirit, even as ye are called in
one hope of your calling;
one Lord,
one faith,
one baptism,
one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all".
Notice "ONE FAITH" which speaks of one corpus of doctrinal truth i.e. "the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). And Jude says that we are to earnestly contend for this faith. This is perfectly logical since everthing else is one. Denominations have destroyed this oneness.
quote:
it takes LOVE for one another and the inherent RESPECT of that love to make it work as it did for the Apostles.
Agreed. And at the same time love means that Scripture is used not only for doctrine, but for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). Christ says, as many as I love I rebuke and chasten (Rev. 3:19), therefore when Christians promote false doctrine they must be rebuked in love also (Rev. chapters 2 and 3).
< Message edited by Ezra -- 6/25/2009 1:27:46 AM >
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
