What brings unity among brethren?

[JonC]

I am confused by your statement could you elaborate ?

Yes. My comment was that beyond what is stated in Scripture we need to "agree to disagree". Paul taught a "Christian liberty" with doctrines that abide outside of Scripture. This is seen not only with the Galatians and Corinthians but with Paul himself when he separated his own comments recorded in Scripture from being God "breathed".

To clarify, I am a Baptist and affirm the teaching of "Christian liberty" as presented by Paul in those passages. When scripture is silent about an issue where Christians disagree then they need to "agree to disagree". We test doctrine against the Bible, not tradition or the writings of other men.

We guard against cults not by inventing tradition (like the Pharisees and the RCC) but by turning to Scripture itself. If we stick to Scripture then Mormonism is wrong. When we go to tradition then Mormonism is just another opinion. We have to stick with God's Word, not man's.

 

[Forever Settled]

Paul taught a "Christian liberty" with doctrines that abide outside of Scripture.

Thank you that clearifies it somewhat.. What doctrine do us Baptist teach that is outside Scripture ?

I have scriptural support for my doctrine.....and most Baptists have scriptural support for their doctrine.

We have liberty in things like the color of the carpet......and what kind of vehicle to drive......just a couple silly examples .

 

[JonC]

Thank you that clearifies it somewhat.. What doctrine do us Baptist teach that is outside Scripture ?

I have scriptural support for my doctrine.....and most Baptists have scriptural support for their doctrine.

We have liberty in things like the color of the carpet......and what kind of vehicle to drive......just a couple silly examples .

One doctrine, apparently, is that "Christian liberty" has to deal with things like the color of carpet .

When Paul spoke of this liberty it was not with such personal things. Paul's own belief was that the unmarried should remain unmarried. But he specified that this was his belief and not a command from God. And again, with regard to eating and drinking (food and drink sacrificed to idols) - Paul explained that the idol itself was powerless and it was simply food and drink. But those who could drink and eat with a good conscious are not to force their understanding on those who believe it would be participating in that idolatry. With the Galatians there were Christians who believed that the Gentiles should follow the Jewish customs derived from Scripture. The Counsel, however, acknowledged that differences in doctrine and practice did not mean disunity. They permitted these differences (God permitted these differences as the conclusion is "God breathed" scripture).

I am glad you have Scripture for your doctrine. I hope you also have doctrine for scripture. We should all have Scripture that supports our belief, interpretation, and theory. But we should also know what is fundamental and these things should actually be in Scripture.

As an example, I can support not purchasing a lottery ticket on Scripture. But I can also support the freedom to purchase a lottery ticket depending on one's situation. I can support the freedom of women to wear pants by Scripture. But I can also support the idea women should not wear pants by Scripture. The same is true of drinking alcohol, smoking cigars, watching secular movies, women wearing open toed shoes, women having short hair, men wearing head coverings in church, etc.

I care less about what you can support by scripture than I do about what scripture actually says. That is the difference that some people do not understand. Some would divide over women having short hair. Some over men not wearing suits. Some over allowing a divorced man to be deacon. Some over not allowing a divorced man to be a deacon. We attend to these differences IN THE CONGREGATION - not with other believers. Who are you to judge the servant of Another? The question was rhetorical. You are not. Scripture is the standard, not Christians, their interpretations, or their traditions.

Does that help to clarify?

 

[Forever Settled]

Does that help to clarify?

Yes . Thank you. We differ greatly.

 

[Logos1560]

To clarify, I am a Baptist and affirm the teaching of "Christian liberty" as presented by Paul in those passages. When scripture is silent about an issue where Christians disagree then they need to "agree to disagree". We test doctrine against the Bible, not tradition or the writings of other men.

We have to stick with God's Word, not man's.

One example of where some Baptists may try to teach a tradition or preference of men would be in the area of Bible translations as can be sometimes seen in the separate forum for discussion on this matter.

Romans 14:5
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

 

[Heretic Hunter]

The fact of scripture is plain. There is a "Christian liberty" concerning issues not commanded in scripture.

As you are posting in the baptist section of a baptist board it is appropriate to take baptist distinctives as a presupposition. This "Christian liberty" is a historic baptist distinctive.

The reason your argument about cults is a strawman argument is that such cults depart from the gospel. Unless you are claiming Mormons hold the gospel of Christ as true then your argument is false. It is a strawman argument because I told you I am speaking of extra-biblical doctrine and the gospel is not "extra-biblical" ("extra-biblical" means that it is not actually in the bible).

None of the passages you have provided refute my claims that we cannot enforce tradition over Scripture. God's Word is our authority. NOT a "pope", not tradition, not men. The Bible.

Jon, you are missing the point. There are a great number of Baptist Churches that have embraced Seventh Day Adventists, Muslims, Buddhism (Yoga), and other like groups into their "worship"; becoming "Chrislam" and so forth. The same priniciple is applied to "Christian Gnosticism" just as it is to "Christian Buddhists". Please reconsider what I shared with you, as many have abandoned sound Biblical Doctrine. Others have even voted in great majority to have openly practicing homosexuals to be Pastors, Deacons, and Elders. This is the very definition of "turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." per Jude 1:4 Furthermore, it is clear evidence that they have been seduced by doctrines of devils, per the passages that I had outlined in my post: What brings unity among brethren?

I completely disagree with you, per your other post, that there is "extra-Biblical doctrine" outside of the Bible. It would be good for us to make a thread to do a study of 1Corinthians 10 so we can discuss the full context of the passage, and perhaps with prayer, come to a mutual full understanding of that passage.

 

[Heretic Hunter]

One example of where some Baptists may try to teach a tradition or preference of men would be in the area of Bible translations as can be sometimes seen in the separate forum for discussion on this matter.

Romans 14:5
One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Without getting into a debate on this thread about "Bible translations"; I want to invite you to discuss the key point that I wrote about in a previous post about how the Occult is using "Modern Translations" to purport doctrines of devils, including teaching "another Jesus" to deceive the masses, including millions of Baptists. This is the link to the post; followed with a snippet from that post for quick access to the S.D.A.'s antichrist website where they are using multiple "Modern Translations" for this very agenda:

What brings unity among brethren?

This is an antichrist quotation, taken from the website, denying the Deity of Jesus Christ by the wresting of the scriptures: "Confessing Millerite Adventists believe that Christ is a divine and infinite Being having the form of God, and all the essential qualities of God, and yet not exactly God in the fullest sense possible."

This is the link to the (Smoking Gun) website: A Commentary on Philippians 2:6 - The Seventh-day Millerite / Adventist / Shubertian Forum

 

[JonC]

Jon, you are missing the point. There are a great number of Baptist Churches that have embraced Seventh Day Adventists, Muslims, Buddhism (Yoga), and other like groups into their "worship"; becoming "Chrislam" and so forth. The same priniciple is applied to "Christian Gnosticism" just as it is to "Christian Buddhists". Please reconsider what I shared with you, as many have abandoned sound Biblical Doctrine. Others have even voted in great majority to have openly practicing homosexuals to be Pastors, Deacons, and Elders. This is the very definition of "turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." per Jude 1:4 Furthermore, it is clear evidence that they have been seduced by doctrines of devils, per the passages that I had outlined in my post: What brings unity among brethren?

I completely disagree with you, per your other post, that there is "extra-Biblical doctrine" outside of the Bible. It would be good for us to make a thread to do a study of 1Corinthians 10 so we can discuss the full context of the passage, and perhaps with prayer, come to a mutual full understanding of that passage.

I agree we cannot embrace those groups. My concern is Christian unity.

I do not believe Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, ect to be Christian (although the secular world does).

So when I think of Christian unity I think of "united in Christ". I understand Christian congregations separate in terms of doctrine but I believe the point of division (apart from this doctrinal disagreement) has to be Scripture. Anything else is dividing the Body of Christ over human foctrine and philosophy.

What do you believe are the extra-biblial doctrines that believers should divide from other believers over?

 

[JonC]

I completely disagree with you, per your other post, that there is "extra-Biblical doctrine" outside of the Bible. It would be good for us to make a thread to do a study of 1Corinthians 10 so we can discuss the full context of the passage, and perhaps with prayer, come to a mutual full understanding of that passage.

I am not sure why you disagree that there are doctrines taught or practices that are not in the Bible as it seems very obvious there are Some Christians reject instrumental music. Some only certain types of music. Some allow women to wear pants if modist. Some prohibit women from weatinf pants. Some just don't care about modisty as long as they come.

Some Tithe. Some don't. Some allow drinking in moderation. Some don't. Some call the pastor "pastor". Christians do allow extra-biblical doctrine to divide.

BUT my point is that we have to go to Scripture and not tradition. You will not change my mind on that point. But a discussion of 1 Cor 10 would be good.

 

[MB]

Does the bible teach doctrine is given to bring unity?
Or is doctrine to divide?
Some might suggest that when brothers are united in doctrine it is not doctrine that keeps them unified.
They might suggest these persons are held together by being dishonest, or untruthful in some kind of conspiracy
This might be a bit of a stretch
So is it doctrine or something else?

I believe Christ brought division and in His second coming will bring unity. There are far to many differences right now for Christian unity. Christ said;
Luk_12:51 Think ye that I am come to give peace in the earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
MB

 

[Heretic Hunter]

I agree we cannot embrace those groups. My concern is Christian unity.

I do not believe Mormons, Jehovah Witnesses, ect to be Christian (although the secular world does).

So when I think of Christian unity I think of "united in Christ". I understand Christian congregations separate in terms of doctrine but I believe the point of division (apart from this doctrinal disagreement) has to be Scripture. Anything else is dividing the Body of Christ over human foctrine and philosophy.

What do you believe are the extra-biblial doctrines that believers should divide from other believers over?

As I stated, there are no extra-Biblical doctrines outside of The Holy Bible. Furthermore, confusion is wrought by the use of that term.

As touching your clarified position, (thank you for doing that) when Churches embrace antichrist religions and/or idiologies, such as Yoga, we have responsiblity first to rebuke them with sound Biblical Doctrine from The Holy Bible, with the aim of of saving them as of by fire. But if they reject the words of God, we must be separate from them.

In the Churches, we to be unified with the mind of Christ. We know that there are also unlearned in the Church; a good example is inviting someone to Church that is not a Believer so that they can have the opportunity to hear the Gospel and be saved, and so forth. We also should acknowledge that there are varying levels of Christian maturity among Believers, for example, there are new born babes in Christ that have much to learn from reading and studying The Holy Bible, and there are many that are Believers, but have not follow through in their reading and studying, and so they lack understanding of passages and Books of the Bible. I share this to make the point that distinguishment is to be made between Believers and unbelievers, with the intent of making a crucial and very important point that we are to be on guard against false prophets and false teachers in the Church. If someone comes into the Church, for example, to preach "another jesus", or "another gospel", and ofcourse with the spirit of antichrist; we are to first rebuke them, then after the first or second admonishment, they are unrepentant, then we are to put them out of the Church. These are the very people that come in with damnable heresies, wresting the scriptures, even promoting the acceptance of other religions, or embracing open sin, and so forth, to cause cause division among the Brethren. AND they may even, and do call themselves "Baptists", such as the case with William Miller, who formed the "Millerites", as he was a false prophet wolf in sheep skins in the 1840's. There are many other examples, but we are to keep order in the Church, so that the Church is not led astray with false doctrine, as we see has happened today with so many, because of men that crept in unawares, to deceive and to mislead. They are identifyable, but for many years now, they have been allowed to flourish with their deceits. These men are Jezebel's servants / Satan's ministers, and it is time that we identify them for who they are. They are the Freemasons. In reality they are Satanists that practice divination / witchcraft and they have wrought a lot of confusion in all Denominations, not excluding the Southern Baptist Convention. They have long withstood genuine Believers while they, as workers of iniquity, have established strong holds in the Denominations. This is why we are seeing so much spiritual devastation with the statistics revealing that some 70% of professing Christians denying Jesus Christ as being the ONLY WAY. Have you examined the statistics? Are you aware of these enemies of Jesus Christ and His Church? They are the ones that have brought in the damnable heresies and have wrought the deception in the Churches.

 

[Salty]

Jon, you are missing the point. There are a great number of Baptist Churches that have embraced Seventh Day Adventists, Muslims, Buddhism (Yoga), and other like groups into their "worship"; b.

what valid source do you have to back this up?

 

[Heretic Hunter]

I am not sure why you disagree that there are doctrines taught or practices that are not in the Bible as it seems very obvious there are Some Christians reject instrumental music. Some only certain types of music. Some allow women to wear pants if modist. Some prohibit women from weatinf pants. Some just don't care about modisty as long as they come.

Some Tithe. Some don't. Some allow drinking in moderation. Some don't. Some call the pastor "pastor". Christians do allow extra-biblical doctrine to divide.

BUT my point is that we have to go to Scripture and not tradition. You will not change my mind on that point. But a discussion of 1 Cor 10 would be good.

At no time, have I ever suggested tradition over scripture. You will not find that in any of my posts. It would be good to have a study of 1Cor 10. Would you like to make a thread to open that passage up for study?

 

[Heretic Hunter]

what valid source do you have to back this up?

Salty, there are a wide variety of sources. I am going to share some examples ... On both Daystar and TBN, they have promoted the book and movie about the life of Desmond Doss, a Seventh Day Adventist, including, having the deceased man's Seventh Day Adventist family members on as guests to promote the movie; "Hacksaw Ridge".

Also, on TBN, the Seventh Day Adventists have two shows that run concurrently; one hosted by JohnBradshaw called "It Is Written"; the other is called Amazing Facts, hosted by Doug Batchelor.

Walter Martin, in his book, Kingdom of The Cults, had sadly embraced the Seventh Day Adventists as being "Christian".

Ravi Zacharias embraced Mormons. Below is the full video of Ravi Zacharias' visit to the House of the Dead

A great number of Baptists, along with a great number of other Demoninations had supported both Mormon, Mitt Romney, and Seventh Day Adventist, Ben Carson for President of The United States; both on "Christian Television" and "Christian Radio". Archived clips are availble on the Internet.

Headlines can be found via archived News video footage and News Paper print on the Internet about these and the other issues that I mentioned. And it is a matter of fact that Freemasons have saturated our Southern Baptist Churches, and I can provide names of those that have served as President of the Southern Baptist Convention, as well as the first Baptist Semenary, of which are the cause of the effect of the leaven that we are witnessing today. The fight against Christianity is very real, and they are working right now to usurp final authority away from all Christian Nations around the word for the reign of the Antichrist, of which they call the "New World Order". The moment that happens will be the start of the Great Tribulation.

Myself and others, including Jan Markell, are convinced that we are very close to that becoming reality soon.

I am including a link and description of Jan Markell's Broadcast with Gary Kah, from a couple of weeks ago.

This is some data to help you and other Brothers to be brought up to speed. I have personally seen many of the Illuminati's secret works behind the scenes, and I have also seen, and can provide upon request, the building of the Supreme Court, detailed with Occult symbolism, in Israel, that was funded by the Rothschilds and there is also a plaque that has their name. They are the Synagogue of Satan and have a vested interest in Israel for that agenda.

Also, on December 10, 2018 the altar for the 3rd Temple was dedicated. It is only a matter of time when they will announce the rebuilding of the 3rd Temple in Jerusalem, which will be the announcement of the restoration of Jerusalem per Daniel 9:25-27

En Route to Global Occupation
January 26, 2019

Jan Markell spends the hour with Gary Kah who has been monitoring the “New World Order” for 30 years. This will be Antichrist’s kingdom outlined in the Bible. Who are the major players and how soon might their agenda appear? If it is on the horizon, how late is the hour?

En Route to Global Occupation | Understanding the Times with Jan Markell


**WATCH WITH CAUTION wearing the Full Armour of God (Eph 6:10-18); Ravi Zacharias does wrest the Scriptures with his antichrist agenda to unequally yoke with the False Prophet and uses Satanic hand gestures to curse the viewers to deceive the masses into embracing them; the sign of the Antichrist/666 which many have been deceived to believe to be the O'Kay sign, and the hand sign of the Devil's horns, of which many have been deceived to believe as meaning "I love you".

 

[JonC]

At no time, have I ever suggested tradition over scripture. You will not find that in any of my posts. It would be good to have a study of 1Cor 10. Would you like to make a thread to open that passage up for study?

I suggested we needed to agree to disagree about teachings that are not scripture. That is what I mean by "tradition". You objected to this.

I take it we were just talking past each other.

 

[Heretic Hunter]

I suggested we needed to agree to disagree about teachings that are not scripture. That is what I mean by "tradition". You objected to this.

I take it we were just talking past each other.

I understand what you are saying, but I do not "agree to disagree" when it comes to Biblical Doctrine. 2Tim 3:16-17 2Tim 4:1-5 Eph 6:10-18

 

[Yeshua1]

You think this will get someone in heaven ?

However Wesley made the following statement in his book The Works of the Reverend John Wesley:

“…And the virtue of this free gift the merits of Christ’s life and death are applied to us in baptism. “He gave himself for the Church that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word;” Eph. v, 25, 26; namely in baptism the ordinary instrument of our justification. Agreeably to this our Church prays in the baptismal office that the person to be baptized may be washed and sanctified by the Holy Ghost and being delivered from God’s wrath receive remission of sins and enjoy the everlasting benediction of his heavenly washing…”

Or this :

“.By water then as a means the water of baptism we are regenerated or born again “

Wesley believed in works and water salvation.

I would say that he, as many have been in the Church, confused as to how to view the rite of water Baptism, so wrong on that, but still would have had faith in the Lord Jesus to save Him!

 

[Yeshua1]

Then they have unity within their own fellowship. The reality is that Christians divide over doctrine. Ask an Arminian Free Will Baptist to cozy up to Reformed Covenantal Baptist theology and vice versa. There are times when our differences are a reason to break fellowship with each other. That is is why there are so many denominations.

Even in that type of scenario, the Lord Jesus still saves both of them, and the Holy Spirit still has given to them the unity in Christ!

 

[Yeshua1]

I suppose if we are talking about anecdotal one-offs, then OK. In general, doctrine causes Christians to separate into groups.

We can separate when we disagree over the Essential doctrines of the faith, but should not be over secondary ones!

 

[Yeshua1]

Oooooh....oooooh....ooooooh! I know the answer to this!

One of my favorite songs tells it like it is...Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

We sung that song a lot in my AOG days!