What would qualify as being heretical doctrines?

[Yeshua1]

I believe it should be confronted within the context of the church (If previously in fellowship, this should be broken; members should be cautioned and doctrines addressed, etc.). I don't believe it is up to us to confront the apostate church itself. My reasoning is that they are outside the church.

I see the church of Rome/Sda/Mormons/JW as examples all of churches that claim to be christian and within the fold, and yet their own teachings and doctrines are not within the pale of Orthodoxy, and so when being set up as being acceptable , just another christian viewpoint, needs to be addressed!

 

[JonC]

I understand this thinking.

Yet, is the church not to warn even the strangers?

For example, a family moves into the area and sees the plush advertising and all the wonderful and exciting adventures for the children advertised with all manner of good works for both the members and the outreach to the community in which entice the family to become involved.

Are this family not to be warned of the dangers and the doctrinal issues? Should not doctrinally sound churches bond together working together to show the true underbidding evil of the denial of Scriptures involved by that church?

Or are that family left to find out for themselves.

Now, "us" in your statement may be as individual members confronting individual members of another congregation or even attempting to individually protest that assembly without the support of their own assembly. In that view I would agree.

But, I do think that churches are responsible when an associating church grouping (be it IFB, GARB, SBC, NBC, ...) presents that which is not Scriptural as Scriptural.

For example: No SBC, IFB, GARB, NBC... church should remain in fellowship with a church that denies the Scriptures by allowing women to speak in a worship service. Yet, this is becoming a matter of preference and not doctrine. Other issues such as modernism, life style, immorality, ... are becoming less divisive in attempts to be ecumenical. Such should not be left without some response from the believing assemblies. How are we as a church to judge angels if we have no standard in which is well practiced among us and coming from us as an assembly.

Baptist used to stand for something.

Now, it is as if folks take Baptist as just another grouping.

I see your point. The reason I hesitate to say that one role of the church is to warn (I'm taking it to warn the world) against worldly (false) doctrine is that I believe this undermines the primary role of the church to the world. I think that we warn by example (by presenting ourselves sanctified and holy) but beyond that we simply stick to the gospel.

The part where I may agree with you regards other churches with whom we have a common relationship (an active relationship). Here we can warn and if the warning is disregarded discontinue that relationship.

I'm not saying I'm right and you're wrong, but that's the direction I'm leaning.

 

[agedman]

Back in the earliest church, The Way was a distinction that was the difference.

Now the current church climate seems to present a way without distinction and the difference is to be minimized.

When did the church move away from The Way to start allowing just anything that sounded good and presentably ear tickling?

Personally, I recall that Timothy being instructed by Paul:

8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. 9But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes’s and Jambres’s folly was also. (2 Timothy 3)
​

BUT, the church no longer is so pure that such as this that present "folly" are not "obvious to all" but are chased after as having the "word of knowledge."

Why is it that the church is so afraid of purity?

Is it because the membership is scared their own sin will be exposed?

Do they not remember that the very Lord that saved them knows all about them?

Folks are just ashamed of what is pure, wholesome, virtuous, and right.

Most would get by with a cheater and a liar if such presented a good "you will feel good about yourself when you leave here" talk.

Sad, but what more can be expected from folks that do not know the Lord.

 

[Yeshua1]

Back in the earliest church, The Way was a distinction that was the difference.

Now the current church climate seems to present a way without distinction and the difference is to be minimized.

When did the church move away from The Way to start allowing just anything that sounded good and presentably ear tickling?

Personally, I recall that Timothy being instructed by Paul:

8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of depraved mind, rejected in regard to the faith. 9But they will not make further progress; for their folly will be obvious to all, just as Jannes’s and Jambres’s folly was also. (2 Timothy 3)
​

BUT, the church no longer is so pure that such as this that present "folly" are not "obvious to all" but are chased after as having the "word of knowledge."

Why is it that the church is so afraid of purity?

Is it because the membership is scared their own sin will be exposed?

Do they not remember that the very Lord that saved them knows all about them?

Folks are just ashamed of what is pure, wholesome, virtuous, and right.

Most would get by with a cheater and a liar if such presented a good "you will feel good about yourself when you leave here" talk.

Sad, but what more can be expected from folks that do not know the Lord.

Would Jesus and Paul and the other Apostles see as being a fellow Christian church a group that was teaching another Gospel message?
NOT speaking to the individuals in those churches, but to the teaching/doctrine associated with those groups?

 

[agedman]

Would Jesus and Paul and the other Apostles see as being a fellow Christian church a group that was teaching another Gospel message?
NOT speaking to the individuals in those churches, but to the teaching/doctrine associated with those groups?

I would think that there may be two types of assemblies that teach “another gospel.”

One would be that which is completely separated by traditions or other writing held favorably such as is part of the SDA, Mormons, RCC, JW and even evidenced in some Anglican, Episcopal, Curch of Christ groups in which a portion of the gospel is modified in some manner.

The other is the typical Hillsong, charismatic association, in which gradually the fleshly is feed and the Spirit is ignored. Such will find the Lord outside, not permitted entry, and the folks don’t even know how desperately wrong that which they have embraced.


It is that last group that is leading many Baptist churches into a n evil in which most actively choose to refuse recognition and refute.

 

[JonC]

I see the church of Rome/Sda/Mormons/JW as examples all of churches that claim to be christian and within the fold, and yet their own teachings and doctrines are not within the pale of Orthodoxy, and so when being set up as being acceptable , just another christian viewpoint, needs to be addressed!

I do not believe they are churches and that this distinction needs to be taught to our churches - not to the world. If we don't take them into our fold and try to discipline/correct them as if they were one of us then perhaps this distinction would be made plain.

To put it another way - if we have to tell people we are different then what's the point?

 

[Yeshua1]

I would think that there may be two types of assemblies that teach “another gospel.”

One would be that which is completely separated by traditions or other writing held favorably such as is part of the SDA, Mormons, RCC, JW and even evidenced in some Anglican, Episcopal, Curch of Christ groups in which a portion of the gospel is modified in some manner.

The other is the typical Hillsong, charismatic association, in which gradually the fleshly is feed and the Spirit is ignored. Such will find the Lord outside, not permitted entry, and the folks don’t even know how desperately wrong that which they have embraced.


It is that last group that is leading many Baptist churches into a n evil in which most actively choose to refuse recognition and refute.

yes, as they would be labeled such as "Full Gospel, Charasmatic baptists."
My problem is when we rightly see that Mormons and JW are churches claiming to be fellow Christians churches, but are not, and yet refuse to acknowledge Sda and Rome as being such also!

 

[Yeshua1]

The big problem is that some have treated them as if they were all just another branch of the Christian church, with their little distinctness!

 

[FollowTheWay]

Council of Trent: Canons on Justification. | CARM.org

Think Baptists would disagree with Rome on this all important issue!

Exactly what is your issue with the description of justification from the Council of Trent? Would you characterize this kind of justification as being "Lordship Salvation" as opposed to salvation by faith alone through grace alone? Is it the latter which you claim all Baptist churches adhere to?

 

[agedman]

yes, as they would be labeled such as "Full Gospel, Charasmatic baptists."
My problem is when we rightly see that Mormons and JW are churches claiming to be fellow Christians churches, but are not, and yet refuse to acknowledge Sda and Rome as being such also!

I think you have written a basic truth.

 

[JonC]

yes, as they would be labeled such as "Full Gospel, Charasmatic baptists."
My problem is when we rightly see that Mormons and JW are churches claiming to be fellow Christians churches, but are not, and yet refuse to acknowledge Sda and Rome as being such also!

I think the issue is not necessarily one of acknowledgment but rather one of conclusion.

I remember Moody Bible Institute and their small book "Cults Exposed". My father had a copy (from their correspondence course material). The last chapter was dedicated to SDA. It explained that at one time Moody Institute considered SDA a cult, but as SDA doctrine has been examined at greater length they now consider them a Christian denomination with extreme views (I don't know what their opinion is today, this was a publication from about 35 years ago).

And then we have those who did consider SDA a cult until Ben Carson emerged as a Christian option.

Personally, I don't have an opinion. I believe them to be legalistic and to hold serious error, but I don't know enough about their doctrine to conclude they are not Christian.

 

[agedman]

In this thread, there came a question about the Seventh Day Adventists beliefs. Because I consider them both extreme and endorsing a heretical view, I thought it good that the BB folks be able to see two accounts of their statements.

5 things the Seventh Day Adventists Believe: taken from
5 Beliefs That Set Seventh-Day Adventists Apart From Other Protestant Christians

1. Ellen White Theories: Ellen White is recognized by the Seventh-day Adventist church as having received the gift of prophecy as outlined in Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12. SDA sees the written works by Ellen White as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction."

2. Resurrection: SDA believes when a person dies, they remain unconscious until they are resurrected. Eternal life is a gift which God only grants to those who have accepted the sacrifice of Christ on their behalf. By an act of mercy on the part of God, the wicked will be destroyed by fire. Thus, Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that a person goes to heaven for an eternal reward or to hell for never-ending torture immediately upon death.


3. Investigative judgment: SDA believe in salvation by faith in Christ alone. Good works are seen as evidence of that faith. The investigative or pre-advent judgment, which takes place in heaven before the return of Jesus, reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Jesus and will have a part in the first resurrection and who among the living are abiding in Christ and are ready for translation. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus.

4. The Second Coming: SDA believes that the second coming of Christ is near and believers should be ready for it at all times. When Christ does come, the righteous Christians who had previously died will be resurrected at that time and taken to heaven. For the following 1,000 years, only Satan and his fallen angels will be living on earth. A second resurrection will occur at the end of that period. At that time Satan and his evil angels, as well as the wicked, will be destroyed. The righteous will then return to a cleansed earth, and establish the New Jerusalem.

5. Lifestyle: When it comes to lifestyle, Seventh-day Adventists hold the belief that the human body is the temple of God and thus should be cared for properly. Because of this, Adventists abstain from harmful substances like alcohol and tobacco, and maintain a vegetarian diet. Abortion is acceptable only when a woman's life is in danger, and in cases where a pregnancy poses a serious moral dilemma.


Here is the online doctrinal statement:
https://www.adventist.org/fileadmin...rticles/official-statements/28Beliefs-Web.pdf

Why I consider them heretical in one view is their contention of annihilation for the unsaved. They do not consider the lack of fire is eternal death, but that place of annihilation because only in God is eternal life. Therefore the unsaved are annihilated. Same belief as the Mormons have in this matter if I recall correctly.

 

[JonC]

In this thread, there came a question about the Seventh Day Adventists beliefs. Because I consider them both extreme and endorsing a heretical view, I thought it good that the BB folks be able to see two accounts of their statements.

5 things the Seventh Day Adventists Believe: taken from
5 Beliefs That Set Seventh-Day Adventists Apart From Other Protestant Christians

1. Ellen White Theories: Ellen White is recognized by the Seventh-day Adventist church as having received the gift of prophecy as outlined in Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12. SDA sees the written works by Ellen White as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction."

2. Resurrection: SDA believes when a person dies, they remain unconscious until they are resurrected. Eternal life is a gift which God only grants to those who have accepted the sacrifice of Christ on their behalf. By an act of mercy on the part of God, the wicked will be destroyed by fire. Thus, Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that a person goes to heaven for an eternal reward or to hell for never-ending torture immediately upon death.


3. Investigative judgment: SDA believe in salvation by faith in Christ alone. Good works are seen as evidence of that faith. The investigative or pre-advent judgment, which takes place in heaven before the return of Jesus, reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Jesus and will have a part in the first resurrection and who among the living are abiding in Christ and are ready for translation. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus.

4. The Second Coming: SDA believes that the second coming of Christ is near and believers should be ready for it at all times. When Christ does come, the righteous Christians who had previously died will be resurrected at that time and taken to heaven. For the following 1,000 years, only Satan and his fallen angels will be living on earth. A second resurrection will occur at the end of that period. At that time Satan and his evil angels, as well as the wicked, will be destroyed. The righteous will then return to a cleansed earth, and establish the New Jerusalem.

5. Lifestyle: When it comes to lifestyle, Seventh-day Adventists hold the belief that the human body is the temple of God and thus should be cared for properly. Because of this, Adventists abstain from harmful substances like alcohol and tobacco, and maintain a vegetarian diet. Abortion is acceptable only when a woman's life is in danger, and in cases where a pregnancy poses a serious moral dilemma.


Here is the online doctrinal statement:
https://www.adventist.org/fileadmin...rticles/official-statements/28Beliefs-Web.pdf

Why I consider them heretical in one view is their contention of annihilation for the unsaved. They do not consider the lack of fire is eternal death, but that place of annihilation because only in God is eternal life. Therefore the unsaved are annihilated. Same belief as the Mormons have in this matter if I recall correctly.

I believe that several of their ideas are false doctrines (my primary objection would be the continuation of prophesy as if it were Scripture....if I am understanding correctly, that is).

But I am not sure that the belief in continued prophesy itself separates the faith from Christian belief. Some here have argued that men like John Gill were God's tools for discerning proper interpretations and therefore beyond question. This is not far from the SDA opinion of White.

And while I disagree with the doctrine of annihilation, I'm also not sure it is enough to separate the group from being a Christian denomination. Many of us (myself included) appreciate the writings of C.S. Lewis, and while we disagree with some of his ideas we consider him a Christian author. Yet he also held such views of Hell.

I know I'm being lazy in asking instead of researching myself, but what do they believe in regards the gospel?

 

[agedman]

I believe that several of their ideas are false doctrines (my primary objection would be the continuation of prophesy as if it were Scripture....if I am understanding correctly, that is).

But I am not sure that the belief in continued prophesy itself separates the faith from Christian belief. Some here have argued that men like John Gill were God's tools for discerning proper interpretations and therefore beyond question. This is not far from the SDA opinion of White.

And while I disagree with the doctrine of annihilation, I'm also not sure it is enough to separate the group from being a Christian denomination. Many of us (myself included) appreciate the writings of C.S. Lewis, and while we disagree with some of his ideas we consider him a Christian author. Yet he also held such views of Hell.

I know I'm being lazy in asking instead of researching myself, but what do they believe in regards the gospel?

From what I have read, when it come to the statement of salvation and eternity of the redeemed, they fall within the Baptist thinking.

Also, they are strong that belief is reflected in Christian conduct and living - no intoxicants, no abortions with a qualifier, no smoking, ...

 

[Yeshua1]

Exactly what is your issue with the description of justification from the Council of Trent? Would you characterize this kind of justification as being "Lordship Salvation" as opposed to salvation by faith alone through grace alone? Is it the latter which you claim all Baptist churches adhere to?

I would call it apostasy, as the Roman Church declared as being wrong the very Gospel that alone can save!
Its not Lordship salvation, its salvation coming thru sacraments. and one merits/earning the favor of God!

 

[Yeshua1]

I think the issue is not necessarily one of acknowledgment but rather one of conclusion.

I remember Moody Bible Institute and their small book "Cults Exposed". My father had a copy (from their correspondence course material). The last chapter was dedicated to SDA. It explained that at one time Moody Institute considered SDA a cult, but as SDA doctrine has been examined at greater length they now consider them a Christian denomination with extreme views (I don't know what their opinion is today, this was a publication from about 35 years ago).

And then we have those who did consider SDA a cult until Ben Carson emerged as a Christian option.

Personally, I don't have an opinion. I believe them to be legalistic and to hold serious error, but I don't know enough about their doctrine to conclude they are not Christian.

They deny eternal life as being secured, as a beliver has no assurance, as God will do an Investigative Judgement after death, to see if kept the Sabbath and Ellen Whites teachings/doctrines
Sabbath day must be kept
Ellen White must be seen and regarded as inspired prophetess
They are true remnant church
Deny eternal hell
Saved by grace, but one must keep the law to continue it
Pretty clear in same boat as JW/Mormons, a biblical Cult!

 

[Yeshua1]

In this thread, there came a question about the Seventh Day Adventists beliefs. Because I consider them both extreme and endorsing a heretical view, I thought it good that the BB folks be able to see two accounts of their statements.

5 things the Seventh Day Adventists Believe: taken from
5 Beliefs That Set Seventh-Day Adventists Apart From Other Protestant Christians

1. Ellen White Theories: Ellen White is recognized by the Seventh-day Adventist church as having received the gift of prophecy as outlined in Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12. SDA sees the written works by Ellen White as "a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction."

2. Resurrection: SDA believes when a person dies, they remain unconscious until they are resurrected. Eternal life is a gift which God only grants to those who have accepted the sacrifice of Christ on their behalf. By an act of mercy on the part of God, the wicked will be destroyed by fire. Thus, Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that a person goes to heaven for an eternal reward or to hell for never-ending torture immediately upon death.


3. Investigative judgment: SDA believe in salvation by faith in Christ alone. Good works are seen as evidence of that faith. The investigative or pre-advent judgment, which takes place in heaven before the return of Jesus, reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Jesus and will have a part in the first resurrection and who among the living are abiding in Christ and are ready for translation. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in Jesus.

4. The Second Coming: SDA believes that the second coming of Christ is near and believers should be ready for it at all times. When Christ does come, the righteous Christians who had previously died will be resurrected at that time and taken to heaven. For the following 1,000 years, only Satan and his fallen angels will be living on earth. A second resurrection will occur at the end of that period. At that time Satan and his evil angels, as well as the wicked, will be destroyed. The righteous will then return to a cleansed earth, and establish the New Jerusalem.

5. Lifestyle: When it comes to lifestyle, Seventh-day Adventists hold the belief that the human body is the temple of God and thus should be cared for properly. Because of this, Adventists abstain from harmful substances like alcohol and tobacco, and maintain a vegetarian diet. Abortion is acceptable only when a woman's life is in danger, and in cases where a pregnancy poses a serious moral dilemma.


Here is the online doctrinal statement:
https://www.adventist.org/fileadmin...rticles/official-statements/28Beliefs-Web.pdf

Why I consider them heretical in one view is their contention of annihilation for the unsaved. They do not consider the lack of fire is eternal death, but that place of annihilation because only in God is eternal life. Therefore the unsaved are annihilated. Same belief as the Mormons have in this matter if I recall correctly.

Worse heresy would be the so called investigative judgement, Ellen White status as being inspired from God, and that the Sabbath must be kept, so a mixture of Grace/Law, another Gospel!

 

[Darrell C]

But, I wouldn't invite him to the BB.

Why not? We should be bringing the lost to the table. That they can experience the only enlightenment that can save.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

I would say that the errors of Pentecostalism is not rising up to the level of heresy though, as both Rome and Sda would teach/hold to different Gospel altogether!
John Calvin would not being infallible Apostle of the Lord, but his sotierology would be biblical and spot on!
And I would see Sda and Rome as being same church wise in same boat as the Mormons/Jw, as all of them claim to teach Jesus and the Gospel, but not as per the scriptures!

Just not interested in anything that is not supported by Scripture.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

NOT referring to the lost, but to those who claim Christianity, and yet pervert and deny the scriptures themselves!
Same Jesus thundered on the pharisees and scribes, and Paul took full on heretics in their midst, correct?

I will no longer respond to your posts unless you first address the point made and secondly, that you post Scripture to support the charges, assertions, and points you are trying to make.


God bless.