What is a cult

[Yeshua1]

So you don't have a doctrinal statement?

Yes, the scriptures primary, and the First Baptist Confession

 

[Yeshua1]

Is there a difference between Sects and Cults?

Normally I make a distinction between the two. A Sect would be a religious group which departs and teaches against the core Christian beliefs. eg. Mormons, Oneness Pentecostals. Whilst a Cult includes that but is also controlling and/or secretive, and separates their believers from society/family. eg. Jehovah Witnesses

Thoughts?

Sects sometimes refers to various groups with Christendom, while cults would always been outside!

 

[Yeshua1]

Would it be more accurate to say that you are against some ways which creed/confessions are viewed and/or used, rather than the creeds/confessions in of themselves?

If so then we might be in agreement.

Van against them, as they are Calvinist!

 

[Yeshua1]

I don't know why YOU are so against self study. Scripture tells us to study to show ourselves approved. Scripture says to test the spirits.

I helped write the "What we believe" statement for our church, many years ago. The purpose was to provide prospective members with our take on various doctrines. If someone held a differing view, they could look for another church more consistent with their understanding of scripture. It certainly was not intended to be a litmus test.

All of us here are into individuals studying, know, and applying the truths of the Bible ourselves, but do also see the need for a Confession of faith!

 

[Yeshua1]

I don't know why YOU are so against self study. Scripture tells us to study to show ourselves approved. Scripture says to test the spirits.

I helped write the "What we believe" statement for our church, many years ago. The purpose was to provide prospective members with our take on various doctrines. If someone held a differing view, they could look for another church more consistent with their understanding of scripture. It certainly was not intended to be a litmus test.

Van does not like the ones that teach Calvinist theology!

 

[Van]

Would it be more accurate to say that you are against some ways which creed/confessions are viewed and/or used, rather than the creeds/confessions in of themselves?

If so then we might be in agreement.

Any move toward accuracy is appreciated.

I am a Baptist, thus for autonomous church polity. The top down folks have creeds, confessions and the like which are imposed on affiliated local churches.

So why are you against developing through study your own view of Biblical doctrine. Why not test the spirits behind creeds and confessions written hundreds of year ago. In my experience, they do not stand up to study.

 

[Van]

All of us here are into individuals studying, know, and applying the truths of the Bible ourselves, but do also see the need for a Confession of faith!

I see no evidence for you not just parroting the views of others.

 

[Van]

Van does not like the ones that teach Calvinist theology!

I do not like bogus doctrine, whether Reformed or RCC or JW or....

 

[Sai]

Better bring Barry in on this


Joy unspeakable full of glory

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not like bogus doctrine, whether Reformed or RCC or JW or....

reformed not in that same category. right?

 

[Van]

reformed not in that same category. right?

Bogus doctrine is in the same category as other bogus doctrine. If it conflicts with God's word, it is bogus.

 

[Mikey]

Any move toward accuracy is appreciated.

I am a Baptist, thus for autonomous church polity. The top down folks have creeds, confessions and the like which are imposed on affiliated local churches.

So why are you against developing through study your own view of Biblical doctrine. Why not test the spirits behind creeds and confessions written hundreds of year ago. In my experience, they do not stand up to study.

There is no issue that a church writes their own Statement of Faith (SoF) however I see no reason why a church can't take an existing SoF if they agree with the position of the SoF. Why write the same SoF differently?

If another church agrees fully with your "What we believe" and cannot make improvement can they not adopt the same SoF?

 

[Van]

There is no issue that a church writes their own Statement of Faith (SoF) however I see no reason why a church can't take an existing SoF if they agree with the position of the SoF. Why write the same SoF differently?

If another church agrees fully with your "What we believe" and cannot make improvement can they not adopt the same SoF?

None of the above is what happens in "top down" affiliated" churches. Please address the issue.

 

[Mikey]

None of the above is what happens in "top down" affiliated" churches. Please address the issue.

We are not talking about church polity. Again this an issue of usage rather than confessions themselves. I'm arguing that Creed = Confession = Statement of Faith = "What we Believe". Thus there is nothing wrong with creeds/confessions. The issue comes from how they are used/viewed. Which seems like what you have the issue with too.

 

[atpollard]

I see no evidence for you not just parroting the views of others.

That's what happens when one reads the Bible and comes to the orthodox conclusion ... millions of Christians have believed what you believe before you were born and thousands have said it before you said it.

Only heretics read the scripture and see something that nobody else in the history of Christianity has ever seen before, expressing a completely new idea (and most of those "new ideas" are just variations on an old false idea like "JW: Jesus is really Michael the Archangel and not God" = Arianism reheated and served up as a "fresh" revelation).

 

[Van]

We are not talking about church polity. Again this an issue of usage rather than confessions themselves. I'm arguing that Creed = Confession = Statement of Faith = "What we Believe". Thus there is nothing wrong with creeds/confessions. The issue comes from how they are used/viewed. Which seems like what you have the issue with too.

Take any confession. Link to it. Lets see if it contains unbiblical bogus doctrine! I do not care if it is only used as wall paper, bogus doctrine is bogus doctrine.

 

[Van]

That's what happens when one reads the Bible and comes to the orthodox conclusion ... millions of Christians have believed what you believe before you were born and thousands have said it before you said it.

Only heretics read the scripture and see something that nobody else in the history of Christianity has ever seen before, expressing a completely new idea (and most of those "new ideas" are just variations on an old false idea like "JW: Jesus is really Michael the Archangel and not God" = Arianism reheated and served up as a "fresh" revelation).

I am not the one peddling reheated hogwash.

 

[atpollard]

I am not the one peddling reheated hogwash.

I never said (or even thought) that you were.
One might question whether you have discovered an interpretation that no Christian has seen in 2000 years (m.o.l.) of studying the word of God. Unfortunately, you are more articulate about what "Calvinists" believe and why it is false than you are clear about explaining your own personal beliefs. You tend to say what you DON'T believe (as in "I never claimed to believe that!")

 

[Van]

I never said (or even thought) that you were.
One might question whether you have discovered an interpretation that no Christian has seen in 2000 years (m.o.l.) of studying the word of God. Unfortunately, you are more articulate about what "Calvinists" believe and why it is false than you are clear about explaining your own personal beliefs. You tend to say what you DON'T believe (as in "I never claimed to believe that!")

All my views are shared with a great many published authors. Lots of people do not buy total spiritual inability, or Christ not dying for all mankind, or unconditional election, or irresistible grace.

 

[Van]

OUR BELIEFS


ABOUT JESUS CHRIST
Jesus Christ is the only Son of God. Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. Jesus lived a sinless human life and offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice for the sins of all people by dying on the cross. He rose from the dead after three days to demonstrate His power over sin and death. He ascended to Heaven's glory and will return again to earth to reign as King of kings and Lord of lords.

[Isaiah 9:6; I Corinthians 15:3-4]

Jesus is not the only "son of God." Adam was a "son of God." Also every born anew believer is a "son (child) of God.

Folks, we should study God's word and determine what we believe. We certainly need to look to others to help us, mentors, and study aids, but we need to study to show ourselves approved.