"plead the blood"

[Yeshua1]

Can you give me an example from the last couple centuries where God has intervened in a doctrinal dispute and decided what was heretical, along with deciding what are the essentials of the faith?

When, where and how did this happen?

we have the complete and finished revelation from God to us, the scriptures, and they alone can and do determine what Theology is heresy or not!

 

[Walpole]

we have the complete and finished revelation from God to us, the scriptures, and they alone can and do determine what Theology is heresy or not!

Using my previous example of two conflicting and contradictory doctrines between Lutheranism and the Southern Baptist, where does the Scripture determine which of these is heresy and which is not? Here again is my example:

Lutheran doctrine: "This is the simplest way to put it: the power, effect, benefit, fruit, and purpose of baptism is that it saves. For no one is baptized in order to become a prince, but as the words say, ‘to be saved.’ To be saved, as everyone knows, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death and the devil, to enter into Christ’s kingdom, and to live with him forever." (Martin Luther, Large Catechism)


Southern Baptist doctrine: "Baptism doesn't make you a believer - it shows that you already believe. Baptism does not "save" you, only your faith in Christ does that. Baptism is like a wedding ring - it's the outward symbol of the commitment you make in your heart." (SBC, How to Become a Christian, Baptism)


---> Where does the Scripture decide which is heretical and which is not?

 

[Yeshua1]

Using my previous example of two conflicting and contradictory doctrines between Lutheranism and the Southern Baptist, where does the Scripture determine which of these is heresy and which is not? Here again is my example:

Lutheran doctrine: "This is the simplest way to put it: the power, effect, benefit, fruit, and purpose of baptism is that it saves. For no one is baptized in order to become a prince, but as the words say, ‘to be saved.’ To be saved, as everyone knows, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death and the devil, to enter into Christ’s kingdom, and to live with him forever." (Martin Luther, Large Catechism)


Southern Baptist doctrine: "Baptism doesn't make you a believer - it shows that you already believe. Baptism does not "save" you, only your faith in Christ does that. Baptism is like a wedding ring - it's the outward symbol of the commitment you make in your heart." (SBC, How to Become a Christian, Baptism)


---> Where does the Scripture decide which is heretical and which is not?

water baptism does not save us, so the Sbc would be the biblical position, while the Lutheran position, while wrong, would not be heresy, but roman catholic baptismal regenration would be!

 

[Walpole]

water baptism does not save us, so the Sbc would be the biblical position, while the Lutheran position, while wrong, would not be heresy, but roman catholic baptismal regenration would be!

Now I'm really confused...

1 Peter 3:21 ---> "...and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

---> Do you have a verse that says St. Peter is wrong and that water baptism does not actually save you?

 

[Yeshua1]

Now I'm really confused...

1 Peter 3:21 ---> "...and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

---> Do you have a verse that says St. Peter is wrong and that water baptism does not actually save you?

Yes, Jesus and all of his Apostles state that we are saved by grace alone thru faith alone!

 

[Walpole]

Yes, Jesus and all of his Apostles state that we are saved by grace alone thru faith alone!

But St. Peter says baptism saves you. (1 Peter 3:21) Do you have a verse whereby someone corrects him?

You said God, then the Scripture, decides what is heretical and what are essentials of the faith. If you can't provide evidence with the first example I have introduced, I am wondering if you need to reassess your assertion.

 

[ntchristian]

Actually, heresy applies towards those who deny essentials of the faith, and hagin and Copeland do just that! They have a different Jesus and a different Gospel!

Then that definition would also apply to those who believe in penal substitution. So, I guess that makes you a heretic, huh?

 

[ntchristian]

Who decides what are the essentials of the faith? Who decides?

Two of the largest denominations in the United States are the Southern Baptists and Lutherans. Yet each of these condemns the other's position on the most basic of Christian essentials, that of baptism. Here are these denomination's positions on baptism:

Lutheran doctrine: "This is the simplest way to put it: the power, effect, benefit, fruit, and purpose of baptism is that it saves. For no one is baptized in order to become a prince, but as the words say, ‘to be saved.’ To be saved, as everyone knows, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death and the devil, to enter into Christ’s kingdom, and to live with him forever." (Martin Luther, Large Catechism)


Southern Baptist doctrine: "Baptism doesn't make you a believer - it shows that you already believe. Baptism does not "save" you, only your faith in Christ does that. Baptism is like a wedding ring - it's the outward symbol of the commitment you make in your heart." (SBC, How to Become a Christian, Baptism)


---> How do you know which one is heretical? Who decides?

Exactly. Who decides? All denominations claim to base their beliefs either exclusively on the bible, or on bible and tradition, or bible, tradition, and experience. Even for those who claim to base their beliefs solely on the bible, there are wide differences in belief. So your question of 'who decides' is right to the point. That's why I say that the definition of who is a heretic depends on the one who is doing the defining.

 

[Iconoclast]

I understand it. I just don't excuse man-centered Christianity.

Pray a hedge of protection against's the attacks from RM.

 

[Yeshua1]

Then that definition would also apply to those who believe in penal substitution. So, I guess that makes you a heretic, huh?

No, as the Church historical as held to that view as being a prominent view, especially among both reformed and Baptist, while the doctrines taught by Copeland and the gang deny the scriptures!

 

[Yeshua1]

Exactly. Who decides? All denominations claim to base their beliefs either exclusively on the bible, or on bible and tradition, or bible, tradition, and experience. Even for those who claim to base their beliefs solely on the bible, there are wide differences in belief. So your question of 'who decides' is right to the point. That's why I say that the definition of who is a heretic depends on the one who is doing the defining.

The doctrines taught by WoF such as Copeland though are heresy, as they deny the biblical Jesus, and the true Gospel of His!

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Exactly. Who decides? All denominations claim to base their beliefs either exclusively on the bible, or on bible and tradition, or bible, tradition, and experience. Even for those who claim to base their beliefs solely on the bible, there are wide differences in belief. So your question of 'who decides' is right to the point. That's why I say that the definition of who is a heretic depends on the one who is doing the defining.

This is what Crabtownboy used to do. Keep things vague and nibble away the edges.

There is only one truth. Heresy is heresy.

Name some things real NT Christians believe that you think are heresy.

 

[Walpole]

Exactly. Who decides? All denominations claim to base their beliefs either exclusively on the bible, or on bible and tradition, or bible, tradition, and experience. Even for those who claim to base their beliefs solely on the bible, there are wide differences in belief. So your question of 'who decides' is right to the point. That's why I say that the definition of who is a heretic depends on the one who is doing the defining.

Without an organ, body or mechanism with authority to define and declare what is or is not the faith, Christianity becomes merely a subjective religion. Thus each individual adherent becomes his own determiner (and actual creator) of truth. He decides what is or is not the Christian faith for himself.

You can see this occurring almost in real-time in this very thread.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Yup. Already to the “one person’s truth is another person’s lie” baloney.

 

[Yeshua1]

Without an organ, body or mechanism with authority to define and declare what is or is not the faith, Christianity becomes merely a subjective religion. Thus each individual adherent becomes his own determiner (and actual creator) of truth. He decides what is or is not the Christian faith for himself.

You can see this occurring almost in real-time in this very thread.

We have the Holy Spirit and the scriptures, we do not need a "mother church"

 

[ntchristian]

No, as the Church historical as held to that view as being a prominent view, especially among both reformed and Baptist, while the doctrines taught by Copeland and the gang deny the scriptures!

Historical? Only since the Reformation.

 

[ntchristian]

This is what Crabtownboy used to do. Keep things vague and nibble away the edges.

There is only one truth. Heresy is heresy.

Name some things real NT Christians believe that you think are heresy.

Religious wars have been fought over Christians calling other Christians heretics. You sure you want to go there?

 

[ntchristian]

Without an organ, body or mechanism with authority to define and declare what is or is not the faith, Christianity becomes merely a subjective religion. Thus each individual adherent becomes his own determiner (and actual creator) of truth. He decides what is or is not the Christian faith for himself.

You can see this occurring almost in real-time in this very thread.

That is where I depart from you, friend, as I am a new convert to the Baptist principle of liberty of conscience. There is no such body, as you propose, that is free of doctrinal error, nor should there be any such body with authority to force its beliefs on anyone. That has been tried in the past with disastrous results. It is also contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Religious wars have been fought over Christians calling other Christians heretics. You sure you want to go there?

Are you refusing the challenge?

 

[Particular]

Without an organ, body or mechanism with authority to define and declare what is or is not the faith, Christianity becomes merely a subjective religion. Thus each individual adherent becomes his own determiner (and actual creator) of truth. He decides what is or is not the Christian faith for himself.

You can see this occurring almost in real-time in this very thread.

Where are indulgences taught in scripture so a person can buy their dead relatives out of purgatory?