Does Doctrine matter?

[mact]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick

[mont974x4]

all who teach better understand the the standard they are held too. Likewise, those being taught better keep the teacher in check.

[WesWoodell]

I thought doctrine was like democracy. Whatever most people think should be right is what is right.

After all if something is impopular, or if the Bible commands something I don't like, or if the Bible teaches something I don't fully understand it can't be correct can it? Let's vote on it, shall we.

:P

[jad123]

I thought doctrine was like democracy. Whatever most people think should be right is what is right.

After all if something is impopular, or if the Bible commands something I don't like, or if the Bible teaches something I don't fully understand it can't be correct can it? Let's vote on it, shall we.

:P

Does not matter if it is correct. There is bound to be a church out there that has the same beleifs and if not CREATE ONE!!!! :)

[whateveristrue]

Yes, Doctrine does matter. Without it... you can take a passage of scripture and interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean, instead of what God intended it to mean. You might as well start your own cult.

[mact]

Yes, Doctrine does matter. Without it... you can take a passage of scripture and interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean, instead of what God intended it to mean. You might as well start your own cult.
I am glad to see so many people speak up and agree. I actually thought there would be... and I am sure it will come... more of the opposite view.

[ROGER459]

(2Timothy 4:3-4) For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
(2Ti 4:4) And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

WHY ELSE, would someone believe some of this STUFF, that is posted on the BOARD, that is NOT EVEN IN THE BIBLE? ? ?

Thanks, Roger459

[threeinone]

Yes, Doctrine does matter. Without it... you can take a passage of scripture and interpret it to mean whatever you want it to mean, instead of what God intended it to mean. You might as well start your own cult.

I have a bit of a problem with that. How can we mere humans know what God, someone so far superior to us, know for absolute sure exactly what He intended something to mean? How does every person read and understand exactly the same thing. We are all created unique, so unique and then expected to see something exactly the same as everybody else? I just have a bit of a problem with that.

[mont974x4]

I have a bit of a problem with that. How can we mere humans know what God, someone so far superior to us, know for absolute sure exactly what He intended something to mean? How does every person read and understand exactly the same thing. We are all created unique, so unique and then expected to see something exactly the same as everybody else? I just have a bit of a problem with that.

The Bible tells us that Holy Spirit will guide us to the truth. Yes, there are still some mysteries and some discussion on things that aren't cut and dry.

Key is to not get hung up on things that aren't cut and dry and focus on things we all can and should agree on.

[salida]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick
Let me put it this way - if its not biblical its worthless. Intellectually, the Bible has overwhelming evidence that supports it - and to ignore its doctrine is like ignoring and saying the sun or moon doesn't exist. Or its not a sun its a flower. I a great read is Examine the Evidence my Muncaster (was an athiest but now a christian). Lee Strobel is great too. Plus, abiding by it - is more a spiritual decision regardless of its evidence.

[CooL_Genesis]

In all reality, the Bible should be our only doctrine if everyone that claims they believe what it teaches. We should all be of the same spirit after we are born again into the body of Christ. The Holy Spirit will reveal the scriptures and they shouldn't be all that different in view to everyone if each person earnestly searches His guidance.

This is primarily why I've never understood why there are denominations in the Church. For me, a denomination, of any sort, denotes a division. Why must man place their "stamp of approval" on scripture? If it's infallible, inerrant, the Word of the Almighty Living God... why not believe it for what it says and let the Holy Spirit be the ONLY guide for truth?

I go to a Babtist church... but I don't claim to be a Babtist... I claim to be a believer and follower of our Lord Jesus Christ. I try daily to pick up my cross and folow Him in whatever way I may. This means learning some painful lessons about myself and my sins, but hey... it's worth it. I'm going to spend an eternity praising His beautiful name in Heaven! HALLELUAH!

Praised be the Lord, God Almighty!

-Genesis

[threeinone]

Let me put it this way - if its not biblical its worthless. Intellectually, the Bible has overwhelming evidence that supports it - and to ignore its doctrine is like ignoring and saying the sun or moon doesn't exist. Or its not a sun its a flower. I a great read is Examine the Evidence my Muncaster (was an athiest but now a christian). Lee Strobel is great too. Plus, abiding by it - is more a spiritual decision regardless of its evidence.

In a time of great desperation, God carried me, was my only true confidante, was the only who knew all about me, was the one who pulled me through and I got to trust Him implicitly......and on. Is my knowledge of God not in the bible worthless?

[Nse007]

As Luther said "Doctrine is Heaven"

[threeinone]

As Luther said "Doctrine is Heaven"

Strange.......I thought God was Heaven.....I am travelling to Him and that is where I am headed.

[mont974x4]

In a time of great desperation, God carried me, was my only true confidante, was the only who knew all about me, was the one who pulled me through and I got to trust Him implicitly......and on. Is my knowledge of God not in the bible worthless?

It is absolutely not worthless, my dear sister. The Bible talks about being able to see God in His creation (sorry can't remember the verse, maybe someone else can help me out). I get great peace and feel very close to Him when I spend time in the mountains. I see Him everywhere. I learn of Him from those quiet times in prayer.

[bod44]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick
Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.

[mact]

It is absolutely not worthless, my dear sister. The Bible talks about being able to see God in His creation (sorry can't remember the verse, maybe someone else can help me out). I get great peace and feel very close to Him when I spend time in the mountains. I see Him everywhere. I learn of Him from those quiet times in prayer.

Rom 1:19-21 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. (20) For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (21) For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

[mact]

It is absolutely not worthless, my dear sister. The Bible talks about being able to see God in His creation (sorry can't remember the verse, maybe someone else can help me out). I get great peace and feel very close to Him when I spend time in the mountains. I see Him everywhere. I learn of Him from those quiet times in prayer.

In a time of great desperation, God carried me, was my only true confidante, was the only who knew all about me, was the one who pulled me through and I got to trust Him implicitly......and on. Is my knowledge of God not in the bible worthless?

Not useless, but if what you think is from God ever contradicts anything in the Bible.... it did not come from God. The Bible calls us to test spirits.

In Him
Rick

[threeinone]

Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.

Maybe I prefer another doctrine bod

You can't decide for everybody. The idea is for everybody to have a good doctrine for following Jesus and we are united in the ultimate goal being God, all following Jesus in our own way and united in our goal but not robots just following what is set in front of us - that would be - well if that was what God wanted, He would have just made us robots. We've got to learn to make it with our brains and hearts.

[whateveristrue]

There are things that the Bible tells us, and there are things the Bible is not telling us. We are Christians because we want to believe in the TRUTH, right?... not just what works for us...

[mact]

Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.
I would disagree, Paul said ALL scripture is God breathed... if I had to pick one book or partial book it would be Jesus' words of the sermon on the mount. The first and second century churchs used that as the foundation of thier fellowship/church.
rick

[bod44]

I would disagree, Paul said ALL scripture is God breathed... if I had to pick one book or partial book it would be Jesus' words of the sermon on the mount. The first and second century churchs used that as the foundation of thier fellowship/church.
rick
sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

[BamaLady53]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick
Amen!

[Amisk]

Originally Posted by bod44
"Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as Christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as Paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.Quote "

The word doctrine means "something taught as a principle (a basic) of religion, law, policy, or main stay of learning."

In the medical field then, is it important the doctrines or principles that your doctor learnt in medical school? Is it important what we learnt in school?

Without doctrine in the Christian religion we have no knowledge on which to base our claim to Christianity. We have no sound teaching from scripture then we remain weak in our understanding. We are merely a leave blowing in the wind.

Many good verses have been quoted here to warn us that doctrine is important. Here are a couple more: 2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Tit 1:9 - Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

Tit 2:1 - But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:"

As for as the Christian doctrine goes, if we miss the doctrine of Salvation then we have missed Heaven. Every man must be sure of his doctrines on Salvation and Holiness in his daily walk. If there is no sound doctrine in our church then it is time to seek one in which there is sound doctrine. When the doctrines of a church doesn't line up with scripture then we are walking in dangerous territory. So we need to be cautious when it comes to our doctrines. Demand scripture from pastors, authors, and anyone else bring doctrine to our attention that we have not seen before in scripture, and it is our duty to make sure that such scripture fits into the basic teaching of the rest of scripture. After all we are the one who will suffer if we fall from the true gospel.

[AlHannah]

Yes, I agree that sound doctrine is very important in establishing and keeping our faith.

However, there are certain doctrines that are paramount for salvation i.e. the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and that He is our Lord and Saviour and is the Son of God and is God.

But any denominational differences on doctrine ... well like St Paul said, we only see through a dark glass ....

I don't think God holds a clipboard in heaven, and hands out an examination of what you know about Him. Maybe once we get to heaven, well yes, not maybe... we will know the fulness of His glory and the 'correct' doctrine. In the meantime it is good to fine tune our doctrines .. but not dogmatically saying this is the only way ... when Jesus Himself has made the gospel simple.

What I think is important is that you know WHAT you believe and WHY you believe, that you would not doubt Jesus Christ as Lord. Knowing the doctrines to support those questions encourage faith and edification.

[rosiecotton]

I have a bit of a problem with that. How can we mere humans know what God, someone so far superior to us, know for absolute sure exactly what He intended something to mean? How does every person read and understand exactly the same thing. We are all created unique, so unique and then expected to see something exactly the same as everybody else? I just have a bit of a problem with that.

I know what you're saying!
You might enjoy the book Velvet Elvis, by Rob Bell. He talks about this, and has some very good points. It's a very good book! Here is one excerpt from it. At the beginning of the book, he is talking about jumping on the trampoline with his son. He relates the trampoline to the Christian faith.

"Which leads to a really obvious observation: A trampoline only works if you take your feet off the firm, stable ground and jump into the air and let the trampoline propel you upward. Talking about trampolines isn't jumping; it's talking. Two vastly different things. And so we jump and we invite others to jump with us, to live the way of Jesus and see what happens. You don't have to know anything about the springs to pursue living 'the way.'
In brickworld, the focus often becomes getting people to believe the right things so they can be 'in'. There is often a list of however many doctrines, and the goal is to get people to intellectually assent to these things being true. Once we believe the right things, then we're in. And once we're in, the goal often becomes learning how to get others in with us. I know this is harsh, but in many settings it is true. It is possible in these settings to be in, and to believe all of the correct things, and even to be effective at getting others in, and yet our hearts can remain unaffected. It's possible to believe all the right things and be miserable. It's possible to believe all the right doctinres and not live as Jesus teaches us to live. This is why I am so passionate about the trampoline. I want to invite people to actually live this way so the life Jesus offers gradually becomes their life. It becomes less and less about talking, and more and more about the experience we are actually having.
And what is the point, while we're at it, of a trampoline?"

Honestly, lately when I hear the word doctrine, I cringe. It's become such a huge issue in our church. It's become the main focus of things in our church...like they have to make sure everyone believes exactly the same thing and if they don't, well we have to change their minds!! I understand that churches have to have a doctrine they stand by, but to have it be the main focus is wrong. And just because someone in the church doesn't totally agree with everything that church teaches doesn't make them less saved.
I know we need to search for the truth. When I read the Bible I pray, I ask God to reveal to me what He wants me to understand. But I still may disagree with the person sitting right beside me reading the same passage. Does that mean one of us isn't listening to the Holy Spirit correctly or what? I don't know.
All I know is I can only do my best and listen to God as best I can and follow what He wants me to do. If I'm wrong, hopefully I'll be able to hear Him tell me what's right!

[Athanasian Creed]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Jude 1:3 (b) (KJV) ... it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

We should also be as the Bereans in Acts 17 -

Acts 17:10-11 (KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Here the Bereans had a teacher who worked miracles and whose life modelled Christ's greater than any other man who lived then or has lived since YET they still searched the Scriptures to test Paul's words to see if they were biblical. How much more so should we today, with false doctrines and heretics abounding, do the same thing - whether it's something we hear from the pulpit, read on the internet or from a book!! ;)

Here are some quotes to ponder:

"It is obvious that Jesus and the Father are one in perfect love, but are they not also one in perfect doctrine? Certainly Jesus in not asking in this prayer that God's children be united in love regardless of doctrine! Without sound doctrine there can be no Christian unity. And without sound doctrine there can be no true Christian love either." (Source: Human Races, a message delivered at Indian Hills Community Church, Lincoln, Nebraska, Fall of 1984).

"Any of it [teaching] that is good is in the Word of God, and any that is not in the Word of God is not good. I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I'm awfully sorry, you don't bring any references with you'" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 67)
- A.W. Tozer

"To remain divided is sinful! Did not our Lord pray, that they may be one, even as we are one (Jn 17:22)? A chorus of ecumenical voices keep harping the unity tune. What they are saying is, “Christians of all doctrinal shades and beliefs must come together in one visible organization, regardless....Unite, unite!”
Such teaching is false, reckless and dangerous. Truth alone must determine our alignments. Truth comes before unity. Unity without truth is hazardous. Our Lord's prayer in John 17 must be read in its full context. Look at verse 17: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Only those sanctified through the Word can be one in Christ. To teach otherwise is to betray the Gospel."
- Charles H. Spurgeon, "The Essence of Separation"

"Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth."
- Basil of Caesarea



Ray :wave:

[rosiecotton]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Ray :wave:

But whose doctrine?

[jad123]

But whose doctrine?

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

[mact]

sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

I am in agreement then...
Let me suggest two books for you in your study. They have both been life changing for me.
http://www.amazon.com/Will-Real-Heretics-Please-Stand/dp/0924722002/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_b/102-6029140-8656928?ie=UTF8
and
http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Early-Christian-Beliefs/dp/1565633571/sr=1-1/qid=1158942475/ref=sr_1_1/102-6029140-8656928?ie=UTF8&s=books

In Him
Rick

[mact]

sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

Yes, I agree that sound doctrine is very important in establishing and keeping our faith.

However, there are certain doctrines that are paramount for salvation i.e. the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and that He is our Lord and Saviour and is the Son of God and is God.

But any denominational differences on doctrine ... well like St Paul said, we only see through a dark glass ....

I don't think God holds a clipboard in heaven, and hands out an examination of what you know about Him. Maybe once we get to heaven, well yes, not maybe... we will know the fulness of His glory and the 'correct' doctrine. In the meantime it is good to fine tune our doctrines .. but not dogmatically saying this is the only way ... when Jesus Himself has made the gospel simple.

What I think is important is that you know WHAT you believe and WHY you believe, that you would not doubt Jesus Christ as Lord. Knowing the doctrines to support those questions encourage faith and edification.

Yes, but look at what Paul was teaching Timothy when he made the comments about watching our doctrine in this scripture. We must not water down what was being said. A little false doctrine (aka a lie from satan) is like the yeast that works it's way through all the dough.
IN HIM
rick

[mact]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Jude 1:3 (b) (KJV) ... it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

We should also be as the Bereans in Acts 17 -

Acts 17:10-11 (KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Here the Bereans had a teacher who worked miracles and whose life modelled Christ's greater than any other man who lived then or has lived since YET they still searched the Scriptures to test Paul's words to see if they were biblical. How much more so should we today, with false doctrines and heretics abounding, do the same thing - whether it's something we hear from the pulpit, read on the internet or from a book!! ;)

Here are some quotes to ponder:

"It is obvious that Jesus and the Father are one in perfect love, but are they not also one in perfect doctrine? Certainly Jesus in not asking in this prayer that God's children be united in love regardless of doctrine! Without sound doctrine there can be no Christian unity. And without sound doctrine there can be no true Christian love either." (Source: Human Races, a message delivered at Indian Hills Community Church, Lincoln, Nebraska, Fall of 1984).

"Any of it [teaching] that is good is in the Word of God, and any that is not in the Word of God is not good. I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I'm awfully sorry, you don't bring any references with you'" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 67)
- A.W. Tozer

"To remain divided is sinful! Did not our Lord pray, that they may be one, even as we are one (Jn 17:22)? A chorus of ecumenical voices keep harping the unity tune. What they are saying is, “Christians of all doctrinal shades and beliefs must come together in one visible organization, regardless....Unite, unite!”
Such teaching is false, reckless and dangerous. Truth alone must determine our alignments. Truth comes before unity. Unity without truth is hazardous. Our Lord's prayer in John 17 must be read in its full context. Look at verse 17: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Only those sanctified through the Word can be one in Christ. To teach otherwise is to betray the Gospel."
- Charles H. Spurgeon, "The Essence of Separation"

"Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth."
- Basil of Caesarea



Ray :wave:
Amen Brother!

[mact]

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

Due to the fact that there are so many denominations and doctrines out there, I think an important thing to do is examine the scriptures to verify if what is being said is true. This goes down to how your church says you become a Christian. Then... take a look at the writtings of the 1st-3rd century Christians and see what they believed. Especially the 1st and early 2nd century church leaders were taught directly from the Disciples of Jesus. Now these letters are not inspired word of God, but they offer a great resource to find out what our doctrine should be.

In Him
Rick

[Athanasian Creed]

... Then... take a look at the writtings of the 1st-3rd century Christians and see what they believed. Especially the 1st and early 2nd century church leaders were taught directly from the Disciples of Jesus. Now these letters are not inspired word of God, but they offer a great resource to find out what our doctrine should be.

In Him
Rick

Hmmm...well you might want to check this site out on the view points of the ECF -

http://www.bible.ca/indexHistory.htm

Do you believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?? It would seem that many of the ECF of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, using Jesus' words to Nicodemus about "being born of the water and of the Spirit" as meaning baptism, whereas most commentators are divided on what it means:

Of water and of the Spirit. Water is emblematical of the public profession of repentance, and the Spirit is the agent that produces the inward change. The meaning, therefore, is, that an entire change in the spiritual condition of the soul must be openly avowed and truly experienced, to fit the sinner for the kingdom of heaven. (Abbott)

Be born of water. By water, here, is evidently signified baptism. Thus the word is used in Eph 5:26; Tit 3:5. Baptism was practised by the Jews in receiving a Gentile as a proselyte. It was practised by John among the Jews; and Jesus here says that it is an ordinance of his religion, and the sign and seal of the renewing influences of his Spirit. So he said (Mr 16:16), "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." It is clear from these places, and from the example of the apostles (Ac 2:38; 8:12; 13:1-52; 28:31,31; 9:18; 10:47; 28:31; 16:15; 28:31; 18:8; 22:16; Ga 3:27), that they considered this ordinance as binding on all who professed to love the Lord Jesus. And though it cannot be said that none who are not baptized can be saved, yet Jesus meant, undoubtedly, to be understood as affirming that this was to be the regular and uniform way of entering into his church; that it was the appropriate mode of making a profession of religion; and that a man who neglected this, when the duty was made known to him, neglected a plain command of God. It is clear, also, that any other command of God might as well be neglected or violated as this, and that it is the duty of everyone not only to love the Saviour, but to make an acknowledgment of that love by being baptized, and by devoting himself thus to his service. But, lest Nicodemus should suppose that this was all that was meant, he added that it was necessary that he should be born of the Spirit also. (Barnes)

Nicodemus not rightly understanding Christ's meaning in the former verse, our Saviour is pleased to explain himself in this, and tells him, That the birth he spake of was not natural, but spiritual, wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God, whose working is like water, cleansing and purifying the soul from all sinful defilement. (Burkitt)

Born of water and of the Spirit; purified by the Holy Spirit; of which baptism by water is a divinely appointed symbol. (FBN)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
All agree that the birth of the Spirit refers to the inward, or spiritual change that takes place, and all candid authorities agree that born of water refers to baptism. John the Baptist baptized both Jew and Gentile as a sign of purification by repentance from past sins. Nicodemus would then have certainly understood by the expression, 'born of water,' a reference to this rite of baptism." (PNTC)

Of water and the Spirit. Why does Jesus add ex hudatos (coming up out of water) here? In verse Joh 3:3 we have "anôthen" (from above) which is repeated in verse Joh 3:7, while in verse Joh 3:8 we have only ek tou pneumatos (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by ex hudatos (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (Joh 3:3,5,7)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse Joh 3:6 as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit.
By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. (A.T. Robertson)

Except one be born of water and the Spirit. By far the vast majority of scholars consider the word "water" in this verse as a reference to Christian baptism. The Cambridge Bible says "the outward sign and inward grace of Christian baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiased mind can scarcely avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still clearer when we compare Joh 1:26,33, where the Baptist declares, 'I baptize in water,' the Messiah 'baptizeth in the Holy Spirit.' The fathers, both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular unanimity." Water and Spirit are joined at Mt 28:19; Ac 2:38; 19:1-7; Tit 3:5. (TFG)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit - Except he experience that great inward change by the Spirit, and be baptized (wherever baptism can be had) as the outward sign and means of it. (Wesley)

So, as you can see for yourself, there is somewhat a differing of opinion on the necessity of baptism as it relates to salvation. :D


Ray :wave:

[mact]

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

Hmmm...well you might want to check this site out on the view points of the ECF -

http://www.bible.ca/indexHistory.htm

Do you believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?? It would seem that many of the ECF of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, using Jesus' words to Nicodemus about "being born of the water and of the Spirit" as meaning baptism, whereas most commentators are divided on what it means:

Of water and of the Spirit. Water is emblematical of the public profession of repentance, and the Spirit is the agent that produces the inward change. The meaning, therefore, is, that an entire change in the spiritual condition of the soul must be openly avowed and truly experienced, to fit the sinner for the kingdom of heaven. (Abbott)

Be born of water. By water, here, is evidently signified baptism. Thus the word is used in Eph 5:26; Tit 3:5. Baptism was practised by the Jews in receiving a Gentile as a proselyte. It was practised by John among the Jews; and Jesus here says that it is an ordinance of his religion, and the sign and seal of the renewing influences of his Spirit. So he said (Mr 16:16), "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." It is clear from these places, and from the example of the apostles (Ac 2:38; 8:12; 13:1-52; 28:31,31; 9:18; 10:47; 28:31; 16:15; 28:31; 18:8; 22:16; Ga 3:27), that they considered this ordinance as binding on all who professed to love the Lord Jesus. And though it cannot be said that none who are not baptized can be saved, yet Jesus meant, undoubtedly, to be understood as affirming that this was to be the regular and uniform way of entering into his church; that it was the appropriate mode of making a profession of religion; and that a man who neglected this, when the duty was made known to him, neglected a plain command of God. It is clear, also, that any other command of God might as well be neglected or violated as this, and that it is the duty of everyone not only to love the Saviour, but to make an acknowledgment of that love by being baptized, and by devoting himself thus to his service. But, lest Nicodemus should suppose that this was all that was meant, he added that it was necessary that he should be born of the Spirit also. (Barnes)

Nicodemus not rightly understanding Christ's meaning in the former verse, our Saviour is pleased to explain himself in this, and tells him, That the birth he spake of was not natural, but spiritual, wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God, whose working is like water, cleansing and purifying the soul from all sinful defilement. (Burkitt)

Born of water and of the Spirit; purified by the Holy Spirit; of which baptism by water is a divinely appointed symbol. (FBN)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
All agree that the birth of the Spirit refers to the inward, or spiritual change that takes place, and all candid authorities agree that born of water refers to baptism. John the Baptist baptized both Jew and Gentile as a sign of purification by repentance from past sins. Nicodemus would then have certainly understood by the expression, 'born of water,' a reference to this rite of baptism." (PNTC)

Of water and the Spirit. Why does Jesus add ex hudatos (coming up out of water) here? In verse Joh 3:3 we have "anôthen" (from above) which is repeated in verse Joh 3:7, while in verse Joh 3:8 we have only ek tou pneumatos (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by ex hudatos (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (Joh 3:3,5,7)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse Joh 3:6 as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit.
By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. (A.T. Robertson)

Except one be born of water and the Spirit. By far the vast majority of scholars consider the word "water" in this verse as a reference to Christian baptism. The Cambridge Bible says "the outward sign and inward grace of Christian baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiased mind can scarcely avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still clearer when we compare Joh 1:26,33, where the Baptist declares, 'I baptize in water,' the Messiah 'baptizeth in the Holy Spirit.' The fathers, both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular unanimity." Water and Spirit are joined at Mt 28:19; Ac 2:38; 19:1-7; Tit 3:5. (TFG)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit - Except he experience that great inward change by the Spirit, and be baptized (wherever baptism can be had) as the outward sign and means of it. (Wesley)

So, as you can see for yourself, there is somewhat a differing of opinion on the necessity of baptism as it relates to salvation. :D


Ray :wave:

Yes I do believe Baptism is required as did all the EC leaders. LOTS of "modern" church theologens have gone to the extreme to explain baptism away.
IN Him
Rick

[threeinone]

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

[holo]

I realize one can say that as long as I believe anything at all, that can be called doctrine, but apart from that, I'm no fan of the term, so to speak.

Basically, I think it's about a person, not a belief, creed or a definition. It's about Jesus. Look at all the folks in the NT who met him personally. He didn't offer them doctrine, he offered them himself.

Yes, but look at what Paul was teaching Timothy when he made the comments about watching our doctrine in this scripture. We must not water down what was being said. A little false doctrine (aka a lie from satan) is like the yeast that works it's way through all the dough.
IN HIM
rickIf that is so, your own doctrine is probably all wrong by now, since it's pretty much impossible that you've got every single detail wrong. :)

But luckily, you don't have to. Personally, I don't really have a doctrine on the trinity, communion, baptism, tounges and so forth, and I'm doing great :D

[threeinone]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick

The OP post is a question of church Doctrine. There was some question somewhere as to whether it was our own doctrine or church doctrine or what. I never even thought of personal Doctrine because that would be personal interpretation of the bible which I thought nobody around here agreed with. This is what I was thinking about.

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

[mact]

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

I realize one can say that as long as I believe anything at all, that can be called doctrine, but apart from that, I'm no fan of the term, so to speak.

Basically, I think it's about a person, not a belief, creed or a definition. It's about Jesus. Look at all the folks in the NT who met him personally. He didn't offer them doctrine, he offered them himself.

If that is so, your own doctrine is probably all wrong by now, since it's pretty much impossible that you've got every single detail wrong. :)

But luckily, you don't have to. Personally, I don't really have a doctrine on the trinity, communion, baptism, tounges and so forth, and I'm doing great :D

Well the scripture ACTUALLY says this... so even if you think something different that doesn't make it change.
LIFE and DOCTRINE both must be payed close attention too.

Life is how you live your doctrine... Doctrine is based on your correct or incorrect understanding of scripture. To him who has ears let him hear... If we are humble to God's word we will understand his word.

The following is the "rules" if you will, to the NT Kingdom of God. The doctrine of belonging to HIS kingdom.


Mat 5:3-48 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (4) "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. (5) "Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth. (6) "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. (7) "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy. (8) "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (9) "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (10) "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (11) "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. (12) "Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (13) "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men. (14) "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; (15) nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. (16) "Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. (17) "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. (18) "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (19) "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (20) "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. (21) "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.' (22) "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (23) "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, (24) leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering. (25) "Make friends quickly with your opponent at law while you are with him on the way, so that your opponent may not hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. (26) "Truly I say to you, you will not come out of there until you have paid up the last cent. (27) "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; (28) but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (29) "If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (30) "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. (31) "It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; (32) but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (33) "Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.' (34) "But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, (35) or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. (36) "Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. (37) "But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil. (38) "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' (39) "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (40) "If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. (41) "Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. (42) "Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. (43) "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' (44) "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (45) so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. (46) "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? (47) "If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? (48) "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

[threeinone]

Hi mact

I get crosseyed trying to read that. It is extremely hard on the eyes all together like that. I assume you mean the New Testament Kingdom of God is His Kingdom. Why? And how does that fit in with Doctrine. Church Doctrine? Personal Doctrine?

[AlHannah]

But whose doctrine?
And may I add, when will the point be mooted???

[mact]

Hi mact

I get crosseyed trying to read that. It is extremely hard on the eyes all together like that. I assume you mean the New Testament Kingdom of God is His Kingdom. Why? And how does that fit in with Doctrine. Church Doctrine? Personal Doctrine?

I know.... sorry about that. It is Mt 5:3-48 the Sermon on the Mount.

Do you understand what the Kindom is? I am not being sarcastic here. If you have never studied this out, it is an incredable study that will increase a persons faith in God, the continuty of His word and an amazment of the "coming of His kingdom".

This may need to be its own thread.... but what do you think the theme of Jesus' preaching was? It is interesting to look at that. It will surprise most prople that even though He talked about things like our need for salvation, God's love, the new birth the main theme was the kingdom. What the kingdom is, that it is/was coming, and the rules for this kingdom.

How this plays into doctrine, is our doctrine needs to match what God says it means to be part of the Kingdom.

R

[mact]

Hi mact

I get crosseyed trying to read that. It is extremely hard on the eyes all together like that. I assume you mean the New Testament Kingdom of God is His Kingdom. Why? And how does that fit in with Doctrine. Church Doctrine? Personal Doctrine?

And may I add, when will the point be mooted???

Why would it be mooted?

[holo]

Well the scripture ACTUALLY says this... so even if you think something different that doesn't make it change.
LIFE and DOCTRINE both must be payed close attention too.

Life is how you live your doctrine... Doctrine is based on your correct or incorrect understanding of scripture. To him who has ears let him hear... If we are humble to God's word we will understand his word.Well, very little of my life and the life of those around me has to do with baptism, so things like that aren't too important in the grand scheme. If I must define my faith in a doctrine, it would be something like this "Jesus lives and loves me". That's my basis. The moment I stray from that doctrine, yes, I get in trouble. For example, I have a tendency to try to take control of things myself and get self-righteous.

It demands focus. And Jesus is so big that when you gaze on him, the littler stuff fades away :)

[AlHannah]

Why would it be mooted?
That's what I mean ... it won't be ... I was being facetious.:)

[ROGER459]

(Isaiah 28:13) But the word of the LORD was unto them
precept upon precept,
precept upon precept;
line upon line, line upon line;
here a little,
and there a little;
that
they might go,
and fall backward,
and be broken,
and snared,
and taken.

HOW NOW, can you say that DOCTRINE, "is not Important....?"

(John 10:1) Verily, verily, I [JESUS] say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

Thanks, Roger459

[mact]

Well, very little of my life and the life of those around me has to do with baptism, so things like that aren't too important in the grand scheme. If I must define my faith in a doctrine, it would be something like this "Jesus lives and loves me". That's my basis. The moment I stray from that doctrine, yes, I get in trouble. For example, I have a tendency to try to take control of things myself and get self-righteous.

It demands focus. And Jesus is so big that when you gaze on him, the littler stuff fades away :)
Well Baptism may not be a day to day thing in your life, it would be part of your doctrine. Understanding God's plan of salvation is VERY important. Once a person is saved how they live based on doctrine is was keeps them "in the vine".
R

[ROGER459]

WATER BAPTISM, IS NOT SALVATION......!

It is Simply "A Word Picture" of our identification with CHRIST, to His Death, Burial and Resruction! Nothing More - Nothing Less!

(1Corinthians 12:13) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

(Romans 8:9) But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

(Tittus 3:5-6-7) Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
(Tit 3:6) Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
(Tit 3:7) That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

WATER BAPTISM, is simply a work of righteousness! Nothing more, nothing less!

Thanks, Roger459

[gracekeepsme]

Doctrine matters because it communicates our Savor to us in a deeper way...sure it matters as long as it helps us to know Him better.

[bod44]

WATER BAPTISM, IS NOT SALVATION......!

It is Simply "A Word Picture" of our identification with CHRIST, to His Death, Burial and Resruction! Nothing More - Nothing Less!

(1Corinthians 12:13) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

(Romans 8:9) But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

(Tittus 3:5-6-7) Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
(Tit 3:6) Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
(Tit 3:7) That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

WATER BAPTISM, is simply a work of righteousness! Nothing more, nothing less!

Thanks, Roger459


yes, baptism is not the act of salvation. But, it is very important to be baptised, because the apostles put a very high level of importance on being baptised after salvation. its often considered a sacrament along with communion. Its not necessary for salvation, but Jesus did command it. Therefore it is a necessary part of the christian life.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

[threeinone]

I know.... sorry about that. It is Mt 5:3-48 the Sermon on the Mount.

Do you understand what the Kindom is? I am not being sarcastic here. If you have never studied this out, it is an incredable study that will increase a persons faith in God, the continuty of His word and an amazment of the "coming of His kingdom".

This may need to be its own thread.... but what do you think the theme of Jesus' preaching was? It is interesting to look at that. It will surprise most prople that even though He talked about things like our need for salvation, God's love, the new birth the main theme was the kingdom. What the kingdom is, that it is/was coming, and the rules for this kingdom.

How this plays into doctrine, is our doctrine needs to match what God says it means to be part of the Kingdom.

R

I thought you were talking about some Kingdom church on earth here being His Kingdom. Sorry about the misunderstanding. I was wondering what Kingdom churon on earth was His Kingdom. I know what His Kingdom is as His Kingdom in Heaven and on earth is. I understand stuff like that. The misunderstanding of church crept in there.

[threeinone]

I need to know what is meant by Doctrine here. My understanding of Doctrine is Church Doctrine because I can't figure personal Doctrine since personal interpretation of the bible is frowned upon here.

In my mind, even Church Doctrine requires interpretation of the bible by church leaders because all churches differ in Doctrine and I figure Doctrine has to come from the bible. So I ask what is Doctrine? Is it interpretation by church leaders?

[Athanasian Creed]

I need to know what is meant by Doctrine here. My understanding of Doctrine is Church Doctrine because I can't figure personal Doctrine since personal interpretation of the bible is frowned upon here.

In my mind, even Church Doctrine requires interpretation of the bible by church leaders because all churches differ in Doctrine and I figure Doctrine has to come from the bible. So I ask what is Doctrine? Is it interpretation by church leaders?

Doctrine = a belief (or system of beliefs) accepted as authoritative.

These beliefs are hopefully based on what the word of God teaches or else it is considered heresy.

Basic doctrinal beliefs taught in the Bible/by the Church -

1) One God, eternally existing as three distinct Divine Persons - revealed as Father, Word (Son) and Holy Spirit.

2) Jesus was fully God and fully man.

3) Salvation by grace through faith in Christ alone.

4) Belief in eternal life for the saved and eternal damnation for the lost.

etc., etc., etc.

I wouldn't necessarily say "all churches differ in doctrine" because most mainstream (read: true Christian churches) churches accept the basic tenets of belief as outlined in Scripture, differing only in practice.

Any doctrines that don't originate from the word of God are man-made and therefore, "traditions of men" which is the term Jesus used of some of the things the Pharisees believed/practiced. ;)



Ray :wave:

[Athanasian Creed]

Yes I do believe Baptism is required as did all the EC leaders. LOTS of "modern" church theologens have gone to the extreme to explain baptism away.
IN Him
Rick

I would agree about baptism in the sense that we do so to be obedient to Christ and the Scriptures but would strongly disagree that baptism is salvific - it is belief in Christ's finished work on the Cross that saves -

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The omission of baptized with "disbelieveth" would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. (A.T. Robertson)


Ray :wave:

[WesWoodell]

I would agree about baptism in the sense that we do so to be obedient to Christ and the Scriptures but would strongly disagree that baptism is salvific - it is belief in Christ's finished work on the Cross that saves -

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The omission of baptized with "disbelieveth" would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. (A.T. Robertson)


Ray :wave:

Why in the world would a person be baptized if they didn't first believe?

I've heard people use that argument before, and it doesn't make logical sense.

You've also failed to consider Acts 2:37-41; Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-17; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 3:21

The Bible is very clear about baptism, and if you read any of the extra-biblical writings of the early church fathers you'll see that their view of baptism was very different from your own, and they were the ones who sat directly at the feet of the Apostles.

I know of a good book that's a quick read if you're interested in this subject ... its called "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" Google it.

[AlHannah]

(Isaiah 28:13) But the word of the LORD was unto them
precept upon precept,
precept upon precept;
line upon line, line upon line;
here a little,
and there a little;
that
they might go,
and fall backward,
and be broken,
and snared,
and taken.

HOW NOW, can you say that DOCTRINE, "is not Important....?"

(John 10:1) Verily, verily, I [JESUS] say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.

Thanks, Roger459



Yes, I agree doctrine is important, and I don't think anyone disagrees on this matter.

But what constitutes doctrine? Who is to say they have the rights over the 'correct' doctrine, when Paul said we only see through a dim glass.

There is certain doctrine that is non-negotiable, but other doctrines that may only be the words of men, hence why we have so many different denominations, based around various interpretations of doctrine.

[AlHannah]

Also the other vital element of sound doctrine is that of the trinity and salvation by faith in Jesus Christ.

Christian's need a sound doctrine of these things, so they can HOLD fast to their salvation.

On the NCF forum we had Bostonlass from One Body One Bread forum who converted to Islam. Now she was not given that sound doctrine of the trinity or salvation, and we (i.e. us on the NCF board) failed her.

Christians come over to the board and don't even know their scriptures, The Muslims know it more than us, and tell us so. Then the Christians start talking to us about the trinity and are explaining concepts such as modalism, which proves the point to Muslims, that we don't really know our own doctrines.

Yes, sound doctrine is vital for holding and securing our salvation.

How many of us here, really know the doctrine of the Trinity for starters?

[seekingpurity047]

Calvinism :)

[mact]

Well, very little of my life and the life of those around me has to do with baptism, so things like that aren't too important in the grand scheme. If I must define my faith in a doctrine, it would be something like this "Jesus lives and loves me". That's my basis. The moment I stray from that doctrine, yes, I get in trouble. For example, I have a tendency to try to take control of things myself and get self-righteous.

It demands focus. And Jesus is so big that when you gaze on him, the littler stuff fades away :)

I would agree about baptism in the sense that we do so to be obedient to Christ and the Scriptures but would strongly disagree that baptism is salvific - it is belief in Christ's finished work on the Cross that saves -

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

The omission of baptized with "disbelieveth" would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. (A.T. Robertson)


Ray :wave:

Mk 16:16 is proof that Baptism is required for salvation.

Let me give you an analogy.

Here are the keys to my car. If you go to the car put the keys in and drive you will reach your destination, but if you don't put the keys you will not reach your destination.
Does that mean driving is not required? No. Just that with our the first part the second is not possible.

Baptism without faith is just getting wet. Faith is requried first then God saves AT baptism.
Col 2:12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

The rebirth Jesus spoke about happens at baptism.

You would be hard pressed to find ANY of the early church fathers that would agree with your position. In fact the reason there are quite a few letters and other writings by the ECF about baptism is because they were refuting the Gnostics about this very point.

And take a look when the NT church started, when Peter opened the doors to the Kindom. What was preached?
Act 2:37-38 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" (38) Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Baptized for the forgiveness of sins.

What did Peter say later in life? Peter ties Jesus' resurection right in with baptism.
1Pe 3:20-21 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. (21) Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Please take some time and reconcider your stance on this.

IN Him

Rick

[mact]

Why in the world would a person be baptized if they didn't first believe?

I've heard people use that argument before, and it doesn't make logical sense.

You've also failed to consider Acts 2:37-41; Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-17; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 3:21

The Bible is very clear about baptism, and if you read any of the extra-biblical writings of the early church fathers you'll see that their view of baptism was very different from your own, and they were the ones who sat directly at the feet of the Apostles.

I know of a good book that's a quick read if you're interested in this subject ... its called "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" Google it.

AMEN to that ..... I think the best book outside the Bible I have ever read.... welll maybe not the best but one of the most life changing. I have 10 copies sitting on my shelf. If anyone wants a copy, and can't afford it let me know I will send one to you..
Rick

[holo]

Christians come over to the board and don't even know their scriptures, The Muslims know it more than us, and tell us so. Then the Christians start talking to us about the trinity and are explaining concepts such as modalism, which proves the point to Muslims, that we don't really know our own doctrines.Perhaps it's true that christians should know the scriptures better. But don't forget that all muslims have, are scriptures and interpretations and culture. They don't have Jesus, they don't have the Holy Spirit. They don't have the stuff which actually makes us christians, which makes us children of God. It's like comparing myself to Bob Dylan's old friends just because I read a book about him :)

How many of us here, really know the doctrine of the Trinity for starters?I probably know a lot about different doctrines on the trinity, but I don't have one myself. Should I?

[holo]

Mk 16:16 is proof that Baptism is required for salvation.

Let me give you an analogy.

Here are the keys to my car. If you go to the car put the keys in and drive you will reach your destination, but if you don't put the keys you will not reach your destination.
Does that mean driving is not required? No. Just that with our the first part the second is not possible.

Baptism without faith is just getting wet. Faith is requried first then God saves AT baptism.
Col 2:12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

The rebirth Jesus spoke about happens at baptism.

You would be hard pressed to find ANY of the early church fathers that would agree with your position. In fact the reason there are quite a few letters and other writings by the ECF about baptism is because they were refuting the Gnostics about this very point.

And take a look when the NT church started, when Peter opened the doors to the Kindom. What was preached?
Act 2:37-38 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?" (38) Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Baptized for the forgiveness of sins.

What did Peter say later in life? Peter ties Jesus' resurection right in with baptism.
1Pe 3:20-21 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. (21) Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Please take some time and reconcider your stance on this.

IN Him

RickWell, I know I am born again and that I've got the Spirit in me and around me, and I haven't been baptized. Except as a tiny baby, but you probably agree that doesn't count.

I'm not so sure what difference baptism would make, apart from satisfying my conscience if my conscience told me I needed to.

I'm very much open to this question, but as for now I'm mostly inclined to see baptism as an early tradition sort of like circumcision. I don't think I can do anything physical ("magical") to change how God views me.

[New_Wineskin]

Well, I know I am born again and that I've got the Spirit in me and around me, and I haven't been baptized. Except as a tiny baby, but you probably agree that doesn't count.

I'm not so sure what difference baptism would make, apart from satisfying my conscience if my conscience told me I needed to.

I'm very much open to this question, but as for now I'm mostly inclined to see baptism as an early tradition sort of like circumcision. I don't think I can do anything physical ("magical") to change how God views me.

Since water baptism is a Jewish ritual , Paul would not say that it is necessary for salation - and , thus , not necessary at all . You can always use that forced infant ritual to shut people up . Or , you can stand outside in the rain and allow the Lord to water baptize you . That should satisfy those "mutilators of the flesh" , as Paul refers to such people .

[New_Wineskin]

Perhaps it's true that christians should know the scriptures better. But don't forget that all muslims have, are scriptures and interpretations and culture. They don't have Jesus, they don't have the Holy Spirit. They don't have the stuff which actually makes us christians, which makes us children of God. It's like comparing myself to Bob Dylan's old friends just because I read a book about him :)


Paul urges people to walk by the Spirit and *not* the written code . Yet , those you force the Scriptures at people demand that one disobey the Scriptures by their forcing .



I probably know a lot about different doctrines on the trinity, but I don't have one myself. Should I?

Nope . If so , why stop at three ? Aren't their *seven* spirits of God as the Scriptures say ?

[Athanasian Creed]

Why in the world would a person be baptized if they didn't first believe?

I've heard people use that argument before, and it doesn't make logical sense.

You've also failed to consider Acts 2:37-41; Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-17; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 3:21

The Bible is very clear about baptism, and if you read any of the extra-biblical writings of the early church fathers you'll see that their view of baptism was very different from your own, and they were the ones who sat directly at the feet of the Apostles.

I know of a good book that's a quick read if you're interested in this subject ... its called "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" Google it.

I'm not interested in "extra-biblical" writings if these writings are contrary to the teaching of God's word!

The Bible does not teach baptismal regeneration, that one's sins are forgiven by being baptised. Baptism is an outward sign of inward grace. It is not the means by which one is saved - Mark 16:16 says that belief (or the lack thereof) is what saves (or damns)

As to your verses, let's look at a few of them for clarification:

Acts 2:38 -

For the remission of sins. Not merely the sin of crucifying the Messiah, but of all sins. There is nothing in baptism itself that can wash away sin. That can be done only by the pardoning mercy of God through the atonement of Christ. But baptism is expressive of a willingness to be pardoned in that way; and a solemn declaration of our conviction that there is no other way of remission. He who comes to be baptized, comes with a professed conviction that he is a sinner, that there is no other way of mercy but in the gospel, and with a professed willingness to comply with the terms of salvation, and receive it as it is offered through Jesus Christ. (Barnes)

Acts 22:16

And wash away thy sins. Receive baptism, as an act expressive of the washing away of sins. It cannot be intended that the external rite of baptism was sufficient to make the soul pure, but that it was an ordinance divinely appointed as expressive of the washing away of sins, or of purifying the heart. Comp. Heb 10:22. Sinners are represented in the Scriptures as defiled or polluted by sin. To wash away the sins denotes the purifying of the soul from this polluted influence, 1Co 6:11; Re 1:5; 7:14; Isa 1:16; Ps 51:2,7. (Barnes)

Rom. 6: 3,4

Is an analogy - just as Christ died and was raised, so we, in baptism,"... are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life"

Romans 6:10 (KJV) For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

"The picture in baptism points two ways, backwards to Christ's death and burial and to our death to sin (verse Ro 6:1), forwards to Christ's resurrection from the dead and to our new life pledged by the coming out of the watery grave to walk on the other side of the baptismal grave (F. B. Meyer)." (A.T. Robertson)

Gal. 3:26, 27

What the apostle had asserted in the foregoing verse, he proves in this; namely, that all believers are the children of God, through faith in Christ Jesus, because they are baptized into Christ and have put on Christ;

Col. 2:12


One purpose of baptism is to symbolise the death and burial of the old man, and that by the mighty power of God alone, whose power we lay hold on by faith, in the death and resurrection of Christ; we do not need an external sign to the extent which our fathers had, seeing that our baptism is a most effectual pledge and witness, of that inward restoring and renewing. (Geneva)

Faith in God's mighty operation in raising again Jesus, is saving faith (Ro 4:24; 10:9); and it is wrought in the soul by His same "mighty working" whereby He "raised Jesus from the dead" (Eph 1:19-20). (J-F-B)

1 Pet. 3:21

The sense is, that baptism, including all that is properly meant by baptism as a religious rite--that is, baptism administered in connexion with true repentance, and true faith in the Lord Jesus, and when it is properly a symbol of the putting away of sin, and of the renewing influences of the Holy Spirit, and an act of unreserved dedication to God--now saves us.

It may be said to save us, not as the meritorious cause, but as the indispensable condition of salvation. No man can be saved without that regenerated and purified heart of which baptism is the appropriate symbol, and when it would be proper to administer that ordinance. The apostle cannot have meant that water saves us in the same way in which it saved Noah, for that cannot be true. It is neither the same in quantity, nor is it applied in the same way, nor is it efficacious in the same manner. It is indeed connected with our salvation in its own proper way, as an emblem of that purifying of the heart by which we are saved. (Barnes)

Christ with his inward virtue, which the outward baptism shadows, preserves us being washed, so that we may call upon God with a good conscience. (Geneva)

by the resurrection of Jesus--joined with "saves you": In so far as baptism applies to us the power of Christ's resurrection. As Christ's death unto sin is the source of the believer's death unto, and so deliverance from, sin's penalty and power; so His resurrection life is the source of the believer's new spiritual life.

As you hopefully can clearly see, baptism is symbolic of what happens when regeneration comes as a result of belief in Christ. Baptism is an ordinance, a commandment even, but as Mark 16:16 says, it is unbelief that damns a person, NOT that they were not baptised. Mark did not say "and he who does not believe and is not baptised shall be damned" leading one to belief that baptism is not necessary nor salvific to effect or bring about salvation in a person's life. Only repentance, faith and regeneration of the Spirit brings salvation.

Ephesians 5:26 (KJV) That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Titus 3:5 (KJV) Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


Ray :wave:

[mact]

Why in the world would a person be baptized if they didn't first believe?

I've heard people use that argument before, and it doesn't make logical sense.

You've also failed to consider Acts 2:37-41; Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:26-17; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 3:21

The Bible is very clear about baptism, and if you read any of the extra-biblical writings of the early church fathers you'll see that their view of baptism was very different from your own, and they were the ones who sat directly at the feet of the Apostles.

I know of a good book that's a quick read if you're interested in this subject ... its called "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up?" Google it.

Since water baptism is a Jewish ritual , Paul would not say that it is necessary for salation - and , thus , not necessary at all . You can always use that forced infant ritual to shut people up . Or , you can stand outside in the rain and allow the Lord to water baptize you . That should satisfy those "mutilators of the flesh" , as Paul refers to such people .

I'm not interested in "extra-biblical" writings if these writings are contrary to the teaching of God's word!

The Bible does not teach baptismal regeneration, that one's sins are forgiven by being baptised. Baptism is an outward sign of inward grace. It is not the means by which one is saved - Mark 16:16 says that belief (or the lack thereof) is what saves (or damns)

As to your verses, let's look at a few of them for clarification:

Acts 2:38 -

For the remission of sins. Not merely the sin of crucifying the Messiah, but of all sins. There is nothing in baptism itself that can wash away sin. That can be done only by the pardoning mercy of God through the atonement of Christ. But baptism is expressive of a willingness to be pardoned in that way; and a solemn declaration of our conviction that there is no other way of remission. He who comes to be baptized, comes with a professed conviction that he is a sinner, that there is no other way of mercy but in the gospel, and with a professed willingness to comply with the terms of salvation, and receive it as it is offered through Jesus Christ. (Barnes)

Acts 22:16

And wash away thy sins. Receive baptism, as an act expressive of the washing away of sins. It cannot be intended that the external rite of baptism was sufficient to make the soul pure, but that it was an ordinance divinely appointed as expressive of the washing away of sins, or of purifying the heart. Comp. Heb 10:22. Sinners are represented in the Scriptures as defiled or polluted by sin. To wash away the sins denotes the purifying of the soul from this polluted influence, 1Co 6:11; Re 1:5; 7:14; Isa 1:16; Ps 51:2,7. (Barnes)

Rom. 6: 3,4

Is an analogy - just as Christ died and was raised, so we, in baptism,"... are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life"

Romans 6:10 (KJV) For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

"The picture in baptism points two ways, backwards to Christ's death and burial and to our death to sin (verse Ro 6:1), forwards to Christ's resurrection from the dead and to our new life pledged by the coming out of the watery grave to walk on the other side of the baptismal grave (F. B. Meyer)." (A.T. Robertson)

Gal. 3:26, 27

What the apostle had asserted in the foregoing verse, he proves in this; namely, that all believers are the children of God, through faith in Christ Jesus, because they are baptized into Christ and have put on Christ;

Col. 2:12


One purpose of baptism is to symbolise the death and burial of the old man, and that by the mighty power of God alone, whose power we lay hold on by faith, in the death and resurrection of Christ; we do not need an external sign to the extent which our fathers had, seeing that our baptism is a most effectual pledge and witness, of that inward restoring and renewing. (Geneva)

Faith in God's mighty operation in raising again Jesus, is saving faith (Ro 4:24; 10:9); and it is wrought in the soul by His same "mighty working" whereby He "raised Jesus from the dead" (Eph 1:19-20). (J-F-B)

1 Pet. 3:21

The sense is, that baptism, including all that is properly meant by baptism as a religious rite--that is, baptism administered in connexion with true repentance, and true faith in the Lord Jesus, and when it is properly a symbol of the putting away of sin, and of the renewing influences of the Holy Spirit, and an act of unreserved dedication to God--now saves us.

It may be said to save us, not as the meritorious cause, but as the indispensable condition of salvation. No man can be saved without that regenerated and purified heart of which baptism is the appropriate symbol, and when it would be proper to administer that ordinance. The apostle cannot have meant that water saves us in the same way in which it saved Noah, for that cannot be true. It is neither the same in quantity, nor is it applied in the same way, nor is it efficacious in the same manner. It is indeed connected with our salvation in its own proper way, as an emblem of that purifying of the heart by which we are saved. (Barnes)

Christ with his inward virtue, which the outward baptism shadows, preserves us being washed, so that we may call upon God with a good conscience. (Geneva)

by the resurrection of Jesus--joined with "saves you": In so far as baptism applies to us the power of Christ's resurrection. As Christ's death unto sin is the source of the believer's death unto, and so deliverance from, sin's penalty and power; so His resurrection life is the source of the believer's new spiritual life.

As you hopefully can clearly see, baptism is symbolic of what happens when regeneration comes as a result of belief in Christ. Baptism is an ordinance, a commandment even, but as Mark 16:16 says, it is unbelief that damns a person, NOT that they were not baptised. Mark did not say "and he who does not believe and is not baptised shall be damned" leading one to belief that baptism is not necessary nor salvific to effect or bring about salvation in a person's life. Only repentance, faith and regeneration of the Spirit brings salvation.

Ephesians 5:26 (KJV) That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Titus 3:5 (KJV) Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


Ray :wave:

Interesting that you say this "I'm not interested in "extra-biblical" writings if these writings are contrary to the teaching of God's word!" but then quote people who explain away clear scripture.

[mact]

Well, I know I am born again and that I've got the Spirit in me and around me, and I haven't been baptized. Except as a tiny baby, but you probably agree that doesn't count.

I'm not so sure what difference baptism would make, apart from satisfying my conscience if my conscience told me I needed to.

I'm very much open to this question, but as for now I'm mostly inclined to see baptism as an early tradition sort of like circumcision. I don't think I can do anything physical ("magical") to change how God views me.


I think you will agree that God never changes, and the OT gave a glimpse of what was to come.

Take a look at the story of Naaman.

Lepersy was symbolic of being "unclean".
Would he have been cleansed if he had not done what was told to him?
What detail did he need to follow.
God chooses how he saves or the vehicle to cleanse us.2Ki 5:1-14
(1) Now Naaman, captain of the army of the king of Aram, was a great man with his master, and highly respected, because by him the LORD had given victory to Aram. The man was also a valiant warrior, but he was a leper.
(2) Now the Arameans had gone out in bands and had taken captive a little girl from the land of Israel; and she waited on Naaman's wife.
(3) She said to her mistress, "I wish that my master were with the prophet who is in Samaria! Then he would cure him of his leprosy."
(4) Naaman went in and told his master, saying, "Thus and thus spoke the girl who is from the land of Israel."
(5) Then the king of Aram said, "Go now, and I will send a letter to the king of Israel." He departed and took with him ten talents of silver and six thousand shekels of gold and ten changes of clothes.
(6) He brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, "And now as this letter comes to you, behold, I have sent Naaman my servant to you, that you may cure him of his leprosy."
(7) When the king of Israel read the letter, he tore his clothes and said, "Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man is sending word to me to cure a man of his leprosy? But consider now, and see how he is seeking a quarrel against me."
(8) It happened when Elisha the man of God heard that the king of Israel had torn his clothes, that he sent word to the king, saying, "Why have you torn your clothes? Now let him come to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel."
(9) So Naaman came with his horses and his chariots and stood at the doorway of the house of Elisha.
(10) Elisha sent a messenger to him, saying, "Go and wash in the Jordan seven times, and your flesh will be restored to you and you will be clean."
(11) But Naaman was furious and went away and said, "Behold, I thought, 'He will surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, and wave his hand over the place and cure the leper.'
(12) "Are not Abanah and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Could I not wash in them and be clean?" So he turned and went away in a rage.
(13) Then his servants came near and spoke to him and said, "My father, had the prophet told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more then, when he says to you, 'Wash, and be clean'?"
(14) So he went down and dipped himself seven times in the Jordan, according to the word of the man of God; and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child and he was clean.

[mact]

Well, I know I am born again and that I've got the Spirit in me and around me, and I haven't been baptized. Except as a tiny baby, but you probably agree that doesn't count.

I'm not so sure what difference baptism would make, apart from satisfying my conscience if my conscience told me I needed to.

I'm very much open to this question, but as for now I'm mostly inclined to see baptism as an early tradition sort of like circumcision. I don't think I can do anything physical ("magical") to change how God views me.

Since water baptism is a Jewish ritual , Paul would not say that it is necessary for salation - and , thus , not necessary at all . You can always use that forced infant ritual to shut people up . Or , you can stand outside in the rain and allow the Lord to water baptize you . That should satisfy those "mutilators of the flesh" , as Paul refers to such people .
Well Paul did in Rom, Col, his conversion (including baptism) is recorded twice in Acts.
What are people being baptised in that it would "mutilate the flesh"?... Paul was talking about the Jewish ritual of circumsision. Which he address in Col.
Col 2:11-12
(11) and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;
(12) having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

It is no longer the cutting of the flesh that marks a person as God's child, but through baptism God gives us His spirit and marks us as His.
Rick

[bod44]

Perhaps it's true that christians should know the scriptures better. But don't forget that all muslims have, are scriptures and interpretations and culture. They don't have Jesus, they don't have the Holy Spirit. They don't have the stuff which actually makes us christians, which makes us children of God. It's like comparing myself to Bob Dylan's old friends just because I read a book about him :)

I probably know a lot about different doctrines on the trinity, but I don't have one myself. Should I?
well, as far as knowing your doctrine, its good for at least one reason. Paul said to always have a ready answer for the hope that burns within you. We should be able to logically and Biblically answer why we believe what we believe. You see, if you're working with someone who isn't a christian but is seekign God or a new christian, they want to know why they do certain things and why they believe certain things and we should know why. As I started to learn theology and doctrine it has helped me so much to be able to explain the why questions a whole lot better. It even helps our own understanding alot.

[holo]

I think you will agree that God never changes, and the OT gave a glimpse of what was to come.

Take a look at the story of Naaman.

Lepersy was symbolic of being "unclean".
Would he have been cleansed if he had not done what was told to him?
What detail did he need to follow.
God chooses how he saves or the vehicle to cleanse us.Sure, if God decides I have to go to a river to accomplish something, I'll comply. But I won't take the story of Naaman as a message personally to me :)

I believe in Christ. That's it, basically. God apparently decided to save me by taking my punishment and doing away with the enmity. It's a gift, not a buy :)

It's true that God doesn't change, but it's also true that he does something new.

It is no longer the cutting of the flesh that marks a person as God's child, but through baptism God gives us His spirit and marks us as His.
RickNo, baptism is the mark, love is. I have God's Spirit and I haven't been baptised, therefore I know baptism isn't a requirement for that.

[holo]

well, as far as knowing your doctrine, its good for at least one reason. Paul said to always have a ready answer for the hope that burns within you. We should be able to logically and Biblically answer why we believe what we believe. You see, if you're working with someone who isn't a christian but is seekign God or a new christian, they want to know why they do certain things and why they believe certain things and we should know why. As I started to learn theology and doctrine it has helped me so much to be able to explain the why questions a whole lot better. It even helps our own understanding alot.I agree to some extent. There are people who can be persuaded by clever logics and bible knowledge, but AFAIK they're few and far between.

The gospel is foolishness to those who won't accept it, so I've stopped trying to make it clever. I found that my testimony works approx. 11527 times better anyway :)

I believe because Jesus gave me rest (I took him up on his word), and because he turned me into a whole new man, so that's what I'll point to if I need "evidence".

But by all means, do whatever is best in your situation. God is greater than our methods :)

[New_Wineskin]

Well Paul did in Rom, Col, his conversion (including baptism) is recorded twice in Acts.
What are people being baptised in that it would "mutilate the flesh"?... Paul was talking about the Jewish ritual of circumsision. Which he address in Col.
Col 2:11-12
(11) and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;
(12) having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

It is no longer the cutting of the flesh that marks a person as God's child, but through baptism God gives us His spirit and marks us as His.
Rick

Paul did not say that water replaced circumcism as a means of salvation . He talked of those that demanded such as those who bragged about the flesh . To say that one work of the flesh isn't applicable because it is a work of the flesh ( even though a command of the Scriptures ) and then make another work of the flesh as a command because it is their words is hypocritical . Paul states that , if any set of writings could bring about righteousness , that set would be the law . Paul was not arogant enough to say that Moses' writings which quoted the Lord were no longer applicable but his own writings which had few quotes from the Lord ( except quoting other writings that quoted Him ) were applicable would make him into a megalomaniac - "don't listen to Moses - listen to me" . Paul made it clear that it isn't about obeying a written code ( even his own ) - it is about walking in the Spirit .

[New_Wineskin]

Paul said to always have a ready answer for the hope that burns within you. We should be able to logically and Biblically answer why we believe what we believe.


If you really believe this , you should have a biblical answer as to why you do believe this .

[mact]

Sure, if God decides I have to go to a river to accomplish something, I'll comply. But I won't take the story of Naaman as a message personally to me :)

I believe in Christ. That's it, basically. God apparently decided to save me by taking my punishment and doing away with the enmity. It's a gift, not a buy :)

It's true that God doesn't change, but it's also true that he does something new.

No, baptism is the mark, love is. I have God's Spirit and I haven't been baptised, therefore I know baptism isn't a requirement for that.

How did you receive God's spirit and how do you know that you did?
Also, please address the Col 2 scripture that I posted that draws the connection between circumsision and baptism.

The story of Naaman was recorded to teach us about God and the coming of Jesus.

Just believing does not give you the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit.
Act 19:1-5
(1) It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus, and found some disciples.
(2) He said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said to him, "No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit."
(3) And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" And they said, "Into John's baptism."
(4) Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
(5) When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Rick

[mact]

Sure, if God decides I have to go to a river to accomplish something, I'll comply. But I won't take the story of Naaman as a message personally to me :)

I believe in Christ. That's it, basically. God apparently decided to save me by taking my punishment and doing away with the enmity. It's a gift, not a buy :)

It's true that God doesn't change, but it's also true that he does something new.

No, baptism is the mark, love is. I have God's Spirit and I haven't been baptised, therefore I know baptism isn't a requirement for that.

Paul did not say that water replaced circumcism as a means of salvation . He talked of those that demanded such as those who bragged about the flesh . To say that one work of the flesh isn't applicable because it is a work of the flesh ( even though a command of the Scriptures ) and then make another work of the flesh as a command because it is their words is hypocritical . Paul states that , if any set of writings could bring about righteousness , that set would be the law . Paul was not arogant enough to say that Moses' writings which quoted the Lord were no longer applicable but his own writings which had few quotes from the Lord ( except quoting other writings that quoted Him ) were applicable would make him into a megalomaniac - "don't listen to Moses - listen to me" . Paul made it clear that it isn't about obeying a written code ( even his own ) - it is about walking in the Spirit .
Address this scripture then. He clearly says that circumsision is not saving and what brings us into contact with the scracrifice of Jesus is baptism. Faith in God is what raises us to a new life out of baptism.
Look at EVER conversion in the book of Acts baptism is part of it. According to acts 2:38 it is the point that our sins are forgiven and we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

In Him
Rick

[bod44]

I agree to some extent. There are people who can be persuaded by clever logics and bible knowledge, but AFAIK they're few and far between.

The gospel is foolishness to those who won't accept it, so I've stopped trying to make it clever. I found that my testimony works approx. 11527 times better anyway :)

I believe because Jesus gave me rest (I took him up on his word), and because he turned me into a whole new man, so that's what I'll point to if I need "evidence".

But by all means, do whatever is best in your situation. God is greater than our methods :)
i totally agree holo! and yes the best way we can win someone is with a vibrant testimony and a matching vibrant life!

[bod44]

Address this scripture then. He clearly says that circumsision is not saving and what brings us into contact with the scracrifice of Jesus is baptism. Faith in God is what raises us to a new life out of baptism.
Look at EVER conversion in the book of Acts baptism is part of it. According to acts 2:38 it is the point that our sins are forgiven and we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

In Him
Rick
Partially I agree, yet not really. Every co