The Test(s) of Fellowship

[Paul from Antioch]

I've heard this term used down through my 55+ years as a Baptist, but I've never really seen actually are ]THE Tests of Fellowship clearly defined so as to determine what precisely they are among ALL saved people, nor what precisely they aren't. Is there such a definitive list of these "TESTS"?? OTOH, is this phrase merely subject to one's "private interpretation(s)? If it's the latter, are they some collection(s) of dogmas passed down throughout ALL generations since the NT have ceased? (See Rev. 22:18-19.) I've heard some Baptists dogmatically state that, e.g., THE KJVO came down right along side of Rev 22!!! and, OTOH the next speaker said that last speaker is full of ......!! I've understood that if a doctrine "Comes from the HS, "END of DIScussION!!!" etc., & I'm sure that most BB'ers probably have as well. SO....."Is we IS, or IS we AIN'T" Christ-honoring comments ARE welcomed, but anything else.....I'll leave up to our BB Aministrators.

 

[Salty]

The Test of Faith

I would say the answer is similar to that of a contract - "A meeting of the minds"

For example - You might agree with Pastor Jones that you do not believe in selling things in the church.
Now Pastor Jones agrees with you BUT you had a Mother- Daughter dinner at church and charged each
person $5 for the catered meal. To him - that was "selling" something.
And then Pastor Smith will not fellowship with Pastor Jones because he even considered fellowshiping
with you because you charge for a meeting at your church.

Or it could be like our fellowship of pastors in our city. Currently we have two Baptist, (1 ABC & 1 SBC) and 4 Pentecostals.
We mainly meet for prayer once a month - we dont worry that much about doctrines we disagree - ie speaking in tounges - eternal security, ect.
Rather we are more concerned about reaching our City for Christ - with the gospel.
Also we agree that we do not want to fellowship with the ecumenical group of pastors.

 

[canadyjd]

In my mind, a test of fellowship requires discernment into what is essential doctrine. I understand that is not as easy as it sounds.

Most essential doctrines center around the person and work of Jesus. His eternal existence and nature as God is essential. Salvation by grace, not works. Inspiration and authority of scripture.

I believe in Christian liberty and everyone being convinced in their own mind.

Beyond that, I suppose I would just have to hear a person out and then decide.

peace to you

 

[Salty]

In my mind, a test of fellowship requires discernment into what is essential doctrine. I understand that is not as easy as it sounds. ...

Absolutely correct BUT what one person considers essential - another may not.

 

[canadyjd]

Absolutely correct BUT what one person considers essential - another may not.

Exactly. Discernment must be a gift of God. May we all be granted abundance of discernment.

peace to you

 

[Yeshua1]

Absolutely correct BUT what one person considers essential - another may not.

agreed, but as long as the other person has the trinity, Jesus died on the Cross for sin atonement, and was raised again, is my brother or sister!

 

[37818]

Many Christian forums use the Nicene Creed.

I am against it, even though I am a Trinitarian, believe in the full deity and full humanity and Eternal Sonship of our Lord Jesus Christ. I do not agree with some key parts of that Creed as it is unBiblical I would not be considered an orthodox Christian by that Creed.

 

[Paul from Antioch]

I'm not sure who was that wrote the following, but IMHO, I think this is the right way to view matters: "In ESSENTIALS (The Trinity, Salvation by Grace, etc.) UNITY, in NON-ESSTENTIALs DIVERSITY, and in ALL THINGS, HUMILITY."

 

[Salty]

I'm not sure who was that wrote the following, but IMHO, I think this is the right way to view matters: "In ESSENTIALS (The Trinity, Salvation by Grace, etc.) UNITY, in NON-ESSTENTIALs DIVERSITY, and in ALL THINGS, HUMILITY."

That is a great saying - BUT different groups see different Essentials.
For example as a Baptist - we do not believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation
But the Church of Christ does - thus Baptism is an essential.

 

[Paul from Antioch]

That is a great saying - BUT different groups see different Essentials.
For example as a Baptist - we do not believe that Baptism is necessary for salvation
But the Church of Christ does - thus Baptism is an essential.

You're not suggesting that a Baptist church should seek to have a pastor who is a staunchly C of C are you?
And here's another issue that seemed to be a very divisive one back in the last century: Secondary separation: i.e., a church that had a neo-evangelical head pastor should not only be "disfellowshipped" by all other churches, but should be publicly "Called out" by other churches. I've been told that essentially this was the position of Bob Jones University back then. It appears that BJU no longer adheres to such a policy, but did so back in the 1950s - 1960s. I'd like to read what you BB'ers think about such a stanch as this.

 

[Salty]

You're not suggesting that a Baptist church should seek to have a pastor who is a staunchly C of C are you? ....

Of course NOT!

What I am saying is that a Baptist may not fellowship with a COC because they believe that Baptism is essential to salvation
and that a COC may not fellowship with a Baptist because we dd not consider baptism as essential to salvation.

 

[Paul from Antioch]

Of course NOT!

What I am saying is that a Baptist may not fellowship with a COC because they believe that Baptism is essential to salvation
and that a COC may not fellowship with a Baptist because we dd not consider baptism as essential to salvation.

Just asking, but can one err to genuinely believe Baptism IS essential to salvation? IMHO, one cannot genuinely believe such and still be saved. 'What sayeth thee/'

 

[Paul from Antioch]

Just asking, but can one err to genuinely believe Baptism IS essential to salvation? IMHO, one cannot genuinely believe such and still be saved. 'What sayeth thee?" Please note that what I was asking about these so-called "Test(s) of Fellowship" only had reference to what Baptists (Both as a local church and/or an individual) claim to uphold.

 

[Salty]

CoC uses Acts 2:38 - Repent and be Baptized is the verse they claim that baptism is essential to be saved.

 

[JonC]

There are a handful of essentials. For example, one must profess the Braves as God's team, and obviously the Yankees as heretics. Other than that, I'd say a basic confession of faith (for fellowship), an adherence to the local church beliefs for guest preaching, etc.

 

[Salty]

There are a handful of essentials. For example, one must profess the Braves as God's team, and obviously the Yankees as heretics. Other than that, I'd say a basic confession of faith (for fellowship), an adherence to the local church beliefs for guest preaching, etc.

and dont forget - there must be a dinner on the grounds no less than quarterly -, Never allow a Methodist to preach in your church,
Never let the message go past noon - as the wives have their stoves set for 1230, Evening services must not start before 730 pm, during NFL season, and most important - arrive early for a good back pew.

 

[Paul from Antioch]

and dont forget - there must be a dinner on the grounds no less than quarterly -, Never allow a Methodist to preach in your church,
Never let the message go past noon - as the wives have their stoves set for 1230, Evening services must not start before 730 pm, during NFL season, and most important - arrive early for a good back pew.

I recall reading somewhere back in the last century this saying that, IMHO, pretty much outlines my particular reasoning about these so-called "Tests": In essentials, UNITY, in non-essentials, DIVERSITY, AND IN ALL THING, HUMILITY."...... OTOH, we still have to determine what both the "Essentials" & what one should consider the "Non-Essentials" In my 55+ years in God's family, I've come across some folks who rather adamentally proclaim that, "EVERYTHING that I consider ESSENTIAL is what I (#1) I determine & NOT anyone else. I ALONE have infinite & immutable wisdom, & you don't..so there!!" (OTOH, this kind of , shall we say, somewhat less than `110+% HUMBLE," always seem to be THE one who, most of the time, unsolicitly mind you) takes over EVERY single conversation we're having to DEMAND that he/she is judge, jury & executioner of ALL "Friendly" dialogues, and then proceed with vigor & enthusiasm to proclaim that his/her version of 'THE truth(s)" are & anyone who even as much dares to even think about thinking about ANY other concept is THEREFORE a her(him ?0 atic & thus must be taken before the firing squad for them to do their duty (as I'VE directed them to do, post haste & HENCE the end of any & ALL FURTHER disCUSSion(s)!! ..... Have ant of you folks ever come across these self-appointed know-it-alls?

 

[canadyjd]

Just asking, but can one err to genuinely believe Baptism IS essential to salvation? IMHO, one cannot genuinely believe such and still be saved. 'What sayeth thee/'

I wouldn’t declare someone unsaved over the issue of baptism. Paul gives what is of “first importance” in 1 Cor 15.

These are “Jesus died for our sins according to the scriptures”. Jesus was “buried and raised from the dead, according to the scripture”. And Jesus was “seen by more than 500 people” after the resurrection.

The phrase “according to the scriptures” includes all reference in OT to the coming Messiah.

We all go through a process of maturing in our faith, which includes a better understanding of doctrine.

I believe Holy Spirit guides believers into all truth. If we were given all the answers immediately at salvation, there would be no need for guidance.

peace to you

 

[Paul from Antioch]

I recall reading somewhere back in the last century this saying that, IMHO, pretty much outlines my particular reasoning about these so-called "Tests": In essentials, UNITY, in non-essentials, DIVERSITY, AND IN ALL THING, HUMILITY."...... OTOH, we still have to determine what both the "Essentials" & what one should consider the "Non-Essentials" In my 55+ years in God's family, I've come across some folks who rather adamentally proclaim that, "EVERYTHING that I consider ESSENTIAL is what I (#1) I determine & NOT anyone else. I ALONE have infinite & immutable wisdom, & you don't..so there!!" (OTOH, this kind of , shall we say, somewhat less than `110+% HUMBLE," always seem to be THE one who, most of the time, unsolicitly mind you) takes over EVERY single conversation we're having to DEMAND that he/she is judge, jury & executioner of ALL "Friendly" dialogues, and then proceed with vigor & enthusiasm to proclaim that his/her version of 'THE truth(s)" are & anyone who even as much dares to even think about thinking about ANY other concept is THEREFORE a her(him ?0 atic & thus must be taken before the firing squad for them to do their duty (as I'VE directed them to do, post haste & HENCE the end of any & ALL FURTHER disCUSSion(s)!! ..... Have any of you folks ever come across these self-appointed know-it-alls?

 

[OnlyaSinner]

I'm not sure who was that wrote the following, but IMHO, I think this is the right way to view matters: "In ESSENTIALS (The Trinity, Salvation by Grace, etc.) UNITY, in NON-ESSTENTIALs DIVERSITY, and in ALL THINGS, HUMILITY."

I've always heard that saying with "liberty" in place of "diversity" and "charity" (in the 1 Cor 13 sense) in place of "humility". I think liberty is the better choice of words but may switch to humility, as that is so scripturally important.