“For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of light. It is no great thing therefore if his ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.” (2Co 11:13-15 ASV)
Where do false teachings originate? Are they not from "false apostles", "deceitful workers"? Then the deluded followers step up into the pulpits and preach the doctrines of these devils they have followed. Notice by listening and reading after these, how these men under delusion follow personalities and various Bible colleges and institutes, rather than the explicit statements of Scripture.
“And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block unto me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.” (Mt 16:22-23 ASV)
To be speaking the lies of Satan, does not mean one is conscious of it. Peter was speaking "the things of men", man's reasonings, man's traditions, man's surmisings. Such vain teachings are then turned into doctrine by those who have been duped, putting it forth for others to follow.
“In writing this much, brethren, with special reference to Apollos and myself, I have done so for your sakes, in order to teach you by our example what those words mean, which say, "Nothing beyond what is written!" *—*so that you may cease to take sides in boastful rivalry, for one teacher against another.” (1Co 4:6 Wey)
Paul shows here how the sects and divisions come into the church from various teachers. It develops from departing from the explicit, clear statements of God's word and adding man's assumptions, inferences, man-focused reasonings.
“On seeing him, Peter asked Jesus, "And, Master, what about him?" "If I desire him to remain till I come," replied Jesus, "what concern is that of yours? You, yourself, must follow me." Hence the report spread among the brethren that that disciple would never die. Yet Jesus did not say, "He is not to die," but, "If I desire him to remain till I come, what concern is that of yours?"” (Joh 21:21-23 Wey)
It is interesting that John gives us an example of this error here in John 21:21-23 and it is here an error concerning prophecy. Even to this day there are men of God who think they know what Jesus meant as to a prophetic timetable, but they must go beyond the simple and explicit words of Jesus to so surmise. Albert Barnes in his NT Notes shows the various views on the statement:
"Till I come. Some have supposed this to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem; others to the day of judgment; others to signify that he would not die a violent death; but the plain meaning is, "If I will that he should not die at all, it is nothing to thee." In this way the apostles evidently understood it, and hence raised a report that he would not die."
In this day we have a heresy being taught that God has two distinct peoples, two families: national Israel and the church. This is arrived at in the same manner, "reading into" rather than "reading out of" the word of God just as the disciples did as recorded in John 21:21-23. Then these heretics teach that the Old Covenant sacrifices are brought back in a future 1000 year reign of Christ from a throne in Jerusalem in blasphemy against the record: Heb.7:27; 9:26; 10:26. I state that these are "heretics" since it came into the church in recent centuries, not being the historic understanding of the church or based upon explicit statement of Scripture.
The more dangerous teaching may be the distortion of being "born again" in John chapter 3. In spite of John 1:12,13 showing that the new birth is solely of God's will, and in 3:8 it is a mysterious act of the Holy Spirit; these false teachers turn the statement of John 3:16 into a command, making it the way to be born again. To these false teachers, John 3:16 reads thus:
'For God so loved very human who ever lived that he gave his only begotten son so that any person who will exercise their will to believe at some point in time (whether they continue in Jesus' teachings or not) is by this one time act of their will, thereby born again and shall never perish but have everlasting life.' Oddly, these think this human act of the will cannot be changed thereby losing their chosen salvation. How odd, salvation is gained by human merit (his righteous act of believing) but can't be lost by his human demerit (his stopping his believing).
The verse John 3:16 is a statement of fact, NOT a command. A command to believe is such as in, 1 Jn 3:23. The term world means other peoples, tongues, nations, etc; not just the Jews, since Jesus is speaking to a proud Jew: a "Pharisee" v1, a "ruler of the Jews" v1, "a master of Israel" v10. See John's idea of "world" in Rev. 5:9, and Paul's description of what the "world" means in Rom. 11:11,12.
REMEMBER: The new birth is like the wind, invisible and a mystery, John 3:8. So, if the new birth is invisible or not seen, what is the new birth's relationship to "faith"?
“Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen.” (Heb 11:1 ASV)
It is the "conviction of things not seen", the new birth. It is the "proof" (Williams), the "certainty" (Philips), "the sign" (BBE), "the evidence" (KJV). Faith is NOT the cause of the new birth! Being born again is a sovereign act of the Holy Spirit and "faith" is its proof, its evidence, its certainty. It is not some act of faith at one point in time back in the past, but an existing, living faith day by day!
I have used the term "heresy", Strong's #139, as found in Gal. 5:20 and 2 Pet. 2:1. I find the "The 1911 Classic Encyclopedia" very interesting on this term:
"HERESY, the English equivalent of the Greek word aipEVCs which is used in the Septuagint for "free choice," in later classical literature for a philosophical school or sect as "chosen" by those who belong to it, in Philo for religion, in Josephus for a religious party (the Sadducees, the Pharisees and the Essenes). It is in this last sense that the term is used in the New Testament, usually with an implicit censure of the factious spirit to which such divisions are due. The term is applied article of the Christian faith,"due to the introduction of" foreign elements "and resulting in a perversion of Christianity, and an amalgamation with it of ideas discordant with its nature (Fisher's History of Christian Doctrine, p. 9). http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Heresy
It is a point not to be missed that "heresy" is a "free choice". How sad man has made up his own religion of "free choice/will" and labeled it as Christianity!
Where do false teachings originate? Are they not from "false apostles", "deceitful workers"? Then the deluded followers step up into the pulpits and preach the doctrines of these devils they have followed. Notice by listening and reading after these, how these men under delusion follow personalities and various Bible colleges and institutes, rather than the explicit statements of Scripture.
“And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block unto me: for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.” (Mt 16:22-23 ASV)
To be speaking the lies of Satan, does not mean one is conscious of it. Peter was speaking "the things of men", man's reasonings, man's traditions, man's surmisings. Such vain teachings are then turned into doctrine by those who have been duped, putting it forth for others to follow.
“In writing this much, brethren, with special reference to Apollos and myself, I have done so for your sakes, in order to teach you by our example what those words mean, which say, "Nothing beyond what is written!" *—*so that you may cease to take sides in boastful rivalry, for one teacher against another.” (1Co 4:6 Wey)
Paul shows here how the sects and divisions come into the church from various teachers. It develops from departing from the explicit, clear statements of God's word and adding man's assumptions, inferences, man-focused reasonings.
“On seeing him, Peter asked Jesus, "And, Master, what about him?" "If I desire him to remain till I come," replied Jesus, "what concern is that of yours? You, yourself, must follow me." Hence the report spread among the brethren that that disciple would never die. Yet Jesus did not say, "He is not to die," but, "If I desire him to remain till I come, what concern is that of yours?"” (Joh 21:21-23 Wey)
It is interesting that John gives us an example of this error here in John 21:21-23 and it is here an error concerning prophecy. Even to this day there are men of God who think they know what Jesus meant as to a prophetic timetable, but they must go beyond the simple and explicit words of Jesus to so surmise. Albert Barnes in his NT Notes shows the various views on the statement:
"Till I come. Some have supposed this to refer to the destruction of Jerusalem; others to the day of judgment; others to signify that he would not die a violent death; but the plain meaning is, "If I will that he should not die at all, it is nothing to thee." In this way the apostles evidently understood it, and hence raised a report that he would not die."
In this day we have a heresy being taught that God has two distinct peoples, two families: national Israel and the church. This is arrived at in the same manner, "reading into" rather than "reading out of" the word of God just as the disciples did as recorded in John 21:21-23. Then these heretics teach that the Old Covenant sacrifices are brought back in a future 1000 year reign of Christ from a throne in Jerusalem in blasphemy against the record: Heb.7:27; 9:26; 10:26. I state that these are "heretics" since it came into the church in recent centuries, not being the historic understanding of the church or based upon explicit statement of Scripture.
The more dangerous teaching may be the distortion of being "born again" in John chapter 3. In spite of John 1:12,13 showing that the new birth is solely of God's will, and in 3:8 it is a mysterious act of the Holy Spirit; these false teachers turn the statement of John 3:16 into a command, making it the way to be born again. To these false teachers, John 3:16 reads thus:
'For God so loved very human who ever lived that he gave his only begotten son so that any person who will exercise their will to believe at some point in time (whether they continue in Jesus' teachings or not) is by this one time act of their will, thereby born again and shall never perish but have everlasting life.' Oddly, these think this human act of the will cannot be changed thereby losing their chosen salvation. How odd, salvation is gained by human merit (his righteous act of believing) but can't be lost by his human demerit (his stopping his believing).
The verse John 3:16 is a statement of fact, NOT a command. A command to believe is such as in, 1 Jn 3:23. The term world means other peoples, tongues, nations, etc; not just the Jews, since Jesus is speaking to a proud Jew: a "Pharisee" v1, a "ruler of the Jews" v1, "a master of Israel" v10. See John's idea of "world" in Rev. 5:9, and Paul's description of what the "world" means in Rom. 11:11,12.
REMEMBER: The new birth is like the wind, invisible and a mystery, John 3:8. So, if the new birth is invisible or not seen, what is the new birth's relationship to "faith"?
“Now faith is assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen.” (Heb 11:1 ASV)
It is the "conviction of things not seen", the new birth. It is the "proof" (Williams), the "certainty" (Philips), "the sign" (BBE), "the evidence" (KJV). Faith is NOT the cause of the new birth! Being born again is a sovereign act of the Holy Spirit and "faith" is its proof, its evidence, its certainty. It is not some act of faith at one point in time back in the past, but an existing, living faith day by day!
I have used the term "heresy", Strong's #139, as found in Gal. 5:20 and 2 Pet. 2:1. I find the "The 1911 Classic Encyclopedia" very interesting on this term:
"HERESY, the English equivalent of the Greek word aipEVCs which is used in the Septuagint for "free choice," in later classical literature for a philosophical school or sect as "chosen" by those who belong to it, in Philo for religion, in Josephus for a religious party (the Sadducees, the Pharisees and the Essenes). It is in this last sense that the term is used in the New Testament, usually with an implicit censure of the factious spirit to which such divisions are due. The term is applied article of the Christian faith,"due to the introduction of" foreign elements "and resulting in a perversion of Christianity, and an amalgamation with it of ideas discordant with its nature (Fisher's History of Christian Doctrine, p. 9). http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Heresy
It is a point not to be missed that "heresy" is a "free choice". How sad man has made up his own religion of "free choice/will" and labeled it as Christianity!
