Featured What would make you change your opinion?

No. How would someone determine that a dream was from God?
I have incredibly vivid dreams. I would (almost) never attribute one to God.

I doubt it. Who can determine the origin of a supernatural event? How can you tell if it is from God or from Satan? Or just sleight of hand? Or an illusion? I'd have to be extremely sure it was of God, the Holy Spirit bearing witness with my spirit.

In order of preference:

A statement from the Bible. An effective argument from scripture. Deductive logical argument based on scriptural truths.
There would probably be a half dozen other factors before I would even get down the list of diminishing importance to dreams and/or so-called supernatural events and even then the amount of weightiness I would apply to that factor would be miniscule.

 

The illumination of the Holy Spirit Himself!

 

I am happy in my denomination.I researched many after being saved. I have family history of Methodist,Presbyterian and Roman Catholic and ruled those out fairly quickly. Heretical teaching/actions would cause me to leave. If it doesn’t click biblically- count me out.

 

I have changed my mind on issues of doctrine, all in response to scriptural evidence.

 

And that is why you are a Baptist!

 

My answer would have to begin by clarifying that I don't follow denominations or choose sides according to the shingle hanging over the door. Early in my walk I was drawn to and started to hang with Baptist because of their adherence, in general, to the Bible being the final authority. In fact, many if not most Baptist will tell you that they are not a denomination. That said, I've visited Baptist churches that had no chance on me returning for a second visit. Further, when it comes down to it, when someone does ask I'm likely to tell them that my church has no walls and that when it comes to denominations I walk like the Bereans...

P.S. this sounds good to me:

 

The more I read God's word over the years, and the more my thinking on subjects has changed because of it, the more I found that I could not belong to most of the denominations that there are, currently. In the beginning, as a new believer, I saw myself as being, basically, "Evangelical" ( think, "Evangelical Free", or non-denominational )...after that, the more I read, the more I became convinced that certain things they held to, like a lack of serious separation from the world and its ways, was in error.

My lack of studies during the '80's and '90's didn't help anything, but I went as far as staying Independent Baptist for the first 25 years after I was converted.


No, a dream wouldn't have done it, because I learned again, early on, not to trust such things, but to trust His word alone for authority.
While I've had a few supernatural events that I won't go into, those did not change my course; except to make me realize that the spiritual realm isn't anything to take lightly.


At the end of the day, coming to understand doctrines from God's word are what made me switch to where I am now... from being "Evangelical", to "Independent, Fundamental Baptist", to "Sovereign Grace Baptist" ( similar to "Reformed Baptist", old line "Missionary Baptist", "Primitive Baptist" and "Particular Baptist" depending on how far back you go ).

In reality I don't subscribe to denominations, because I don't see them existing in God's word.
But I do see false teachers and false teachings proliferating at a tremendous rate in these last days, and I figure that is where the denominational separation has been coming from for many hundreds of years now.





May God bless you.

 

I think it's best that I don't.
What I've learned from them is that they are and were intended for me alone...and sharing them with others only seems to sidetrack attention away from the real focus:


Jesus Christ the Son of the living God.

 

If it bothers your conscience to put your money in the offering plate, run..........

 

Realizing an undeniable truth.

 

You have had an interesting treek there in your progress with God, as I have also, as was first AOG, then Evangelical Free, to Baptist, to now a Reformed Baptist!

 

Hello Lucian,
I don't believe in denominations. I belong to a church which, I believe, observes the teachings of the Bible which include the baptism of believers only and salvation by grace through faith alone. Someone would have to show me from the Bible where those beliefs are wrong to make me change.

 

The only thing that will ever change my mind about any theological position is a superior argument from the Bible.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

 

They’d have to convince me that either of these systematics are valuable or helpful in my Christian life.

Both sides have some rather large hurdles to overcome.

First, they’ll have to overcome the fact that they are fruit of the poisonous tree.

One side has John Calvin who was an unrepentant murderer who ascribed his murders to the will of God. Then they have the Synod of Dort which was basically a pre-war religious conference which resulted in the deaths of far more.

The other side has Armenius who was a former Calvinist - not really positive in my opinion. Armenius basically came up with a systemaic theology because his conscience couldn’t live with the Calvinist beliefs. But since Calvanists at the time were murdery, he did his best to write his theology to try not to offend the Calvinists too much. So, the Armenian’s theology basically stated “We can’t believe what you do, but please don’t murder us! We aren’t that different!”

I believe any theology during the time period of Calvin and Armenius is suspect to say the least.

I won’t deny that God can cause edible fruit to grow from a poisonous tree. But those presenting the fruit from the poisonous tree will have to do better than simply denying that the poisonous tree exists which is what they tend to do.

So, they will need to act like it’s a much bigger sell that they think it is. In addition, they need to realize this is not a decision with only two options.

They will need to not act like the poisonous tree. That means not declaring people to be heretics in one form or another. Or continually having dialog with the other side as if you must convince them and get their approval like they were your parents. In short, stop acting like Calvin and Armenius.

The second big hurdle is that they must present a living theology.

They must both show that their theology or practice of their theology actually helps Christians and the Christian communities. At the moment, historical evidence, both in the past and near the present, has shown that these theologies split religious communities and cause physical harm to the Christians.

They need to convince people - not by trying to poke holes in another’s faith, but by demonstrating the benefits of their theology either in explaining the Bible or living a Christian life.

The theology must succeed under it’s own weight. It can’t succeed by stepping on the heads of others. Niether theology should ever be focused on attacking the other. The presentationn of the theology should not be an attack on a theology or the defense against a theology. Attacking or defending should not take up a majority of the theology’s time.

In many ways, I consider these to be theologies of conflict rather than theologies of soteriology. Present your theology. If someone doesn’t choose it, move on.

The third big hurdle is that these theologies are not a natural theologies.

No one has independently come up with either the five points of Armenianism or the five points of Calvinism through independent study of the Bible and faith in Jesus. Most have to be taught through a church, a seminary, youtube, a book other than the Bible, or even worse - a group designed to evangelize the theology.

Believer’s Baptism is a natural theology. Numerous people have adopted it through the study of the Bible alone and despite great hardship to themselves.

 

Someone could claim to be God and at the snap of a finger kill everyone on earth and then bring them back to life again.
They can manipulate all things and be shown to be absolutely omnipotent and with a complete omniscient knowledge of all things.

It would hold no sway. Love, Kindness and Compassion is the highest priority.

 

The Holy Spirit revealing to me in the scriptures that my viewpoint was wrong!

 

This is the role debate brings for me. When people challenge my views with scripture & I have to investigate their claims in scripture, I always learn something. Often just seeing something from another perspective serves to expand my perspective. I frequently adopt portions of arguments that I had never considered before... even from people who I believe to be ultimately wrong about their overall arguments.

As far as denominations, I don’t trust anyone or any organizations which derive the whole of their income from ministry. I’ve worked for too many ministries to believe that any of them don’t compromise truth for dollars from time to time. As long as you go to any church or denomination with that in mind you can be part of many imperfect denominations. As long as a denomination believes in the supremacy and inerrancy of scripture, there is enough agreement for me to stand with them. None of them have everything right... and neither do I. Just look at the 7 churches in Revelation... all had things they did right & things they did wrong. So the question becomes not what your denomination can give you, but what does God want you to accomplish for Him through your involvement in a specific community of believers to which he has attached you.