What is a cult

[atpollard]

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.

Come on ... is saying 'many people disagree with the same things that I disagree with' really the same as saying that 'I have not discovered an interpretation that no Christian has seen in 2000 years of studying the word of God.'

A great many published authors agree that Mormonism is false. Scientologists believe that Mormonism is false. That does not mean that all of those authors believe that Scientology is true. You are quick to tell EVERYONE that you do not believe in Calvinism, but you are just as quick to deny being an Arminian and you are guarded at stating what you do believe. That leaves most people knowing more about what you are not, than what you are ...

[... except argumentative. EVERYONE knows that you and I are both naturally argumentative. ]

 

[atpollard]

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.

I deleted it because you asked the question of someone else and it was a mistake for me to respond to it.
(so I am not pursuing that conversation further).

 

[Van]

Come on ... is saying 'many people disagree with the same things that I disagree with' really the same as saying that 'I have not discovered an interpretation that no Christian has seen in 2000 years of studying the word of God.'

A great many published authors agree that Mormonism is false. Scientologists believe that Mormonism is false. That does not mean that all of those authors believe that Scientology is true. You are quick to tell EVERYONE that you do not believe in Calvinism, but you are just as quick to deny being an Arminian and you are guarded at stating what you do believe. That leaves most people knowing more about what you are not, than what you are ...

[... except argumentative. EVERYONE knows that you and I are both naturally argumentative. ]

Yet another false assertion, for I have painstakenly supported all my views from scripture.

Here is a recent post: Doctrinal View

 

[atpollard]

Yet another false assertion, for I have painstakenly supported all my views from scripture.

Here is a recent post: Doctrinal View

Seeing how you responded to attempts at conversation THERE, I will just say "Goodby" and end our conversation, here.
Time to cut my losses and find something edifying.

 

[Mikey]

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.

Okay, lets read through your church's confession.

Creed = Confession = Statement of Faith = "What we Believe"

 

[Yeshua1]

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

Would you be included your own theology expressed here at times in that also?

 

[Mikey]

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.

You are arguing against how confessions are used and the content of theological doctrines of individual confessions rather than the concept of confessions. There are many confessions that exist, and many with doctrine you and I would disagree with. But you yourself have admitted that your church has a confession, which you helped write.

It is contradictory to be against confessions when you yourself use a confession.

 

[Yeshua1]

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.

Jesus was and is the ONLY Son of God as being very God by His nature, none else can claim that!

 

[atpollard]

Jesus was and is the ONLY Son of God as being very God by His nature, none else can claim that!

I agree, but you are "shouting at the wind" ... nothing useful will come from pursuing it. (I considered creating a topic to discuss it, but quickly saw from the scripture where the arguments would lead. Nobody wins and Christ is definitely not glorified.)

Walk away and start a topic about something positive that you feel passionate about. I was thinking about exploring scripture for the theme that God is looking for JUST ONE SPECIFIC PERSON! Think about the woman at the well. Jesus went out of his way to arrange to be alone at that place to change the life of just one specific person. Jesus did not set out to win the Samaritan Nation, the Apostles went to Samaria with the gospel after Jesus was ascended. Think about the Demoniac across the lake where Jesus crossed a lake, healed one man, and then got back in the boat and sailed across the lake to where he started.

Wouldn't that be better than arguing over who is a "son of God" with Van?

 

[Yeshua1]

You are arguing against how confessions are used and the content of theological doctrines of individual confessions rather than the concept of confessions. There are many confessions that exist, and many with doctrine you and I would disagree with. But you yourself have admitted that your church has a confession, which you helped write.

It is contradictory to be against confessions when you yourself use a confession.

Would not any and all statement of beliefs contain a measure of error, as none of us are living Apostles?

 

[Van]

Okay, lets read through your church's confession.
Creed = Confession = Statement of Faith = "What we Believe"

Sir, you have shown yourself to be some sort of non-answering machine.

The "top down" denominations require affiliated churches to agree with their "confession or creed."

Important Protestant confessions include the Lutheran Schmalkald Articles (1537), Formula of Concord (1577), and Book of Concord (1580); the Reformed Helvetic Confessions (1536, 1566), Gallican Confession (1559), Belgic Confession (1561), Heidelberg Catechism (1563), and Canons of Dort (1619); the Presbyterian Westminster Confession (1648); and the Anglican Thirty-nine Articles (1571).

 

[Van]

Would you be included your own theology expressed here at times in that also?

Does Y1 think bogus unbiblical doctrine is ok if repeats it as often as he can?

 

[Van]

You are arguing against how confessions are used and the content of theological doctrines of individual confessions rather than the concept of confessions. There are many confessions that exist, and many with doctrine you and I would disagree with. But you yourself have admitted that your church has a confession, which you helped write.

It is contradictory to be against confessions when you yourself use a confession.

Liberals redefine words to pour false doctrine into the subject. Now a local church "What we believe" statement is a Confession.
I kid you not...

 

[Yeshua1]

Does Y1 think bogus unbiblical doctrine is ok if repeats it as often as he can?

You seem to hold to that!

 

[Van]

Jesus was and is the ONLY Son of God as being very God by His nature, none else can claim that!

So Adam was not a son of God. Got it. Born anew believers are not "sons of God." Got it...
How can Y1 be wrong nearly all the time?

 

[Van]

You seem to hold to that!

You seem to make up false charges and post them non-stop. Where is the quote.
How can Y1 be wrong almost all the time?

 

[Mikey]

Sir, you have shown yourself to be some sort of non-answering machine.

The "top down" denominations require affiliated churches to agree with their "confession or creed."

Really how so? You are changing to topic of the conversation, from are confessions bad in of themselves to the issue with how confessions are used. I have not had a clear answer to my posts, if you agree or disagree with what i've stated. Do you agree with my statement that Creeds = Confessions = Statements of Faith = "What we believe".? if you agree that there is nothing wrong with a confession in of themselves then we can more on to the topic of the issues in how confession are used/viewed.

Without going into the various church poliety, as im do not know enough about all the specifics, however in general i see no real difference in a denominational wide confession and a individual church confession. As you stated before, if a person doesnt agree

Liberals redefine words to pour false doctrine into the subject. Now a local church "What we believe" statement is a Confession.
I kid you not...

Are you accusing me of being a Liberal? Can you explain how how "what we believe" is not a Confession?

 

[Mikey]

Sir, you have shown yourself to be some sort of non-answering machine.

The "top down" denominations require affiliated churches to agree with their "confession or creed."

i don't see anything particularly wrong with having a denominational wide statement of belief. As you said if someone disagrees then they can go to a different church. The church chooses to be part of the denomination and can choose to leave.

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.

 

[Mikey]

Would not any and all statement of beliefs contain a measure of error, as none of us are living Apostles?

Yes, thats why confessions should not be used as a lense which to study Scripture. Or "venerated" and viewed as something more than it is. Sadly this seems to happen with some people, who adopt a confession for the purpose of being "confessional".

 

[Mikey]

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

what is your definition of a cult?