Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations we find? Or, is it the Lord?

[Thomas1987]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations that we find? Or, is it the Lord? Denominations that contradict one another, and claim inspiration from God. How can they be?

As far as i know there is one Body of Christ not 40 000 bodies . People make new denominations for money gains .

 

[Radagast]

People make new denominations for money gains .

That is a vicious and unfounded slander against good Christian men and women. I am appalled that you would say that.

People establish new denominations because they are separating from some existing denomination that they believe has become un-Biblical in some way. Examples include:

• Anglican Church in North America -- separated from the Episcopal Church in 2009 over perceived liberal theology
• Presbyterian Church in America -- separated from the Presbyterian Church in the United States in 1973 over perceived liberal theology

 

[Daniel9v9]

The division in the church is pretty complex and a result of man being divided, for God is not divided. Man is divided because of Satan's temptations and man's own willingness to concede to evil. In like manner, Satan tempted Adam and Adam sinned. (I know we could point to Eve, but I'm using Adam as a reference to Romans 5:12)

There are a lot of adiaphora through which we differ; that is, things not commanded nor forbidden in the Bible, but things that are used for the sake of good order and edification. Hierarchy, liturgy, style of worship etc.

However, I don't think it's true to say that the division is merely cosmetic, or simple difference of phraseology (though in many instances I suppose it can be), for there are some fundamental differences in doctrine, which have strong implications on the Gospel.

I think in the early church the differences were commonly due to freeness and boldness of speech, which often either got misunderstood or had an extreme tendency as a result of emphasizing a particular teaching. It was partly due to cultural differences as well. (especially between Jewish and non-Jewish) Around the reformation, I feel like there was a certain amount of political interest, sophistry, mysticism and rationalism clashing - but also a genuine desire to reform. In our day I think in many respects we're dominated by inherited bitterness, suspicion and a whole lot of confusion towards each other - add to this indifference, private revelation and strong influences from secularism.
(This is really highlighting the negative trends - not to be understood as a denial of true Christianity)

I can't speak for the Eastern church, but my experience in the West is that while there is a strong desire for unification, it tends to either be hoped via means of vague formulations (as opposed to genuine agreement) or plain ignorance, which results in even more schism, because by throwing out old creeds, it needs to formulate new ones. We get into situations like:
A: "We have no creed but Christ!"
B: "OK, that sounds good. Hey, what are your views on baptism?"
A: "Well, we teach such and such!"
B: "Ah, so you do have a particular teaching on it... It's almost like a... creed?"

Despite all of this, I hold that it's through faith in Jesus Christ that we can have true unity, for it is God who mercifully upholds us, even though we're prone to schism. The Church may err and stumble, just as the apostles did, but(!) we can be glad that the church rests on God's word and promise and is worked by the Holy Spirit, not our natural efforts. We can argue about doctrines, but we can't argue against people's genuine faith and trust in Jesus Christ. I think here we can have real unity, and be confident in God's word, in light of Romans 14.

 

[fhansen]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations that we find? Or, is it the Lord? Denominations that contradict one another, and claim inspiration from God. How can they be?

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is the reason behind the division. Once authority for receiving and determining and declaring truth is placed in the hands of the written Word rather than the Church God established for that purpose, then in actual fact each individual reader becomes the authority. Division is then inevitable. Satan may be laughing, but we don't need his help in accomplishing this.

 

[Radagast]

The doctrine of Sola Scriptura is the reason behind the division.

So remind me, why exactly did you guys split from the Orthodox?

 

[fhansen]

So remind me, why exactly did you guys split from the Orthodox?

It's a valid point. But IMO we're already left with the uncomfortable truth that Sola Scriptura doesn't work-that's the starting point. And the next question is, how then can we know with any degree of assurance what many important truths of our faith are? And I'd submit that we simply cannot know without the input of an entity having a continuous living legacy or experience with roots traceable to the beginnings of Christianity.

Now is it possible for schism to arise even where Scripture isn't considered to be the sole rule of faith? Well, schism apparently erupts easier than outright heresy, going by the issues causing separation between the eastern and western ancient churches anyway. Because the amazing thing is the degree of consistency between their practices and beliefs, even after centuries of isolation. The liturgy, sacramentology, the Real Presence by whatever name and the centrality of the Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, infant baptism, some form of a final state of purification in the next life, etc. But going by Scripture alone many beliefs end up on a smorgasbord, with people taking whatever they like, dismissing whatever they deem irrelevant or personally distasteful, disagreeing with the next diner over what should be on the menu to begin with.

But disagreements can still arise in the non-SS world, as you say. Both parties in this case agree that the Church is the instrument God uses to maintain a unified faith, and yet we have division, not over the basic elements of the faith so much as over just how that church authority should be wielded. And the Roman Catholic Church for its part insists on the necessity of a central living authority, where the buck stops, guided by the Holy Spirit. The eastern Churches rely on the decrees of certain earlier councils (which can still be disagreed over, of course), while no central figure can resolve contemporary issues or questions in any necessary universally accepted and agreed upon manner.

While the RCC has a logical and practical solution, this fact still matters little to the extent that we simply disagree with her.

 

[TuxAme]

So remind me, why exactly did you guys split from the Orthodox?

It's actually the other way around.

 

[Tree of Life]

If the Holy Spirit were filling all believers there would be no denominations.

Are you subtly suggesting that if the Holy Spirit were filling all believers that everyone would agree with you and your church?

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations that we find? Or, is it the Lord? Denominations that contradict one another, and claim inspiration from God. How can they be?

When you research many denominations you find out that there was never really a split because of doctrine. What you find is that men wanted power and money for themselves. So yes, satan is behind much of it.

Example:
Assemblies of God had 5 elders/leaders split in the 1940s. They created foursquare full gospel. Then there were several who split from foursquare and out of that came Calvary Chapel, Praise Chapel, Pottershouse. Interesting enough Praise Chapel has re yoked it self with many dual ordained "pastors" being members of AOG and PC at the same time. Why? It provides a wider audience to sift funds from and increased influence...nothing more.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

That is a vicious and unfounded slander against good Christian men and women. I am appalled that you would say that.

People establish new denominations because they are separating from some existing denomination that they believe has become un-Biblical in some way. Examples include:

• Anglican Church in North America -- separated from the Episcopal Church in 2009 over perceived liberal theology
• Presbyterian Church in America -- separated from the Presbyterian Church in the United States in 1973 over perceived liberal theology

That was the public explanation provided. Many times we find out the truth is much different. I have witnessed these splits first hand in leadership. Every time the root of it was power, greed, control, and pride. Yet the public presentation was a false spiritual one, either "doctrinal disagreement" or the Lord removed the "undercurrents" or the rebellious....

 

[Monk Brendan]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations that we find?

Satan is, and he has done many things to divide us. But the divisions go back before Luther. We have to go all of the way back to the Arian controversy in the 1st Ecumenical Council. Arius believed that Jesus was merely a creation, and not one of the Persons of the Holy Trinity.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Satan is, and he has done many things to divide us. But the divisions go back before Luther. We have to go all of the way back to the Arian controversy in the 1st Ecumenical Council. Arius believed that Jesus was merely a creation, and not one of the Persons of the Holy Trinity.

It is all rooted in pride, greed, and control from the beginning.

 

[Monk Brendan]

When you research many denominations you find out that there was never really a split because of doctrine.

Oh really? Let's start with the Arian Controversy, back in 325 A.D. Or the reason that Roman Catholics split from Orthodoxy? Can you tell the difference between Calcedon vs. Non Calcedon Christianity? Or who Nestorius was?

No, I'm not going to tell you the differences. Use Google, and look them up one at a time, and you will find out what I am talking about.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Oh really? Let's start with the Arian Controversy, back in 325 A.D. Or the reason that Roman Catholics split from Orthodoxy? Can you tell the difference between Calcedon vs. Non Calcedon Christianity? Or who Nestorius was?

No, I'm not going to tell you the differences. Use Google, and look them up one at a time, and you will find out what I am talking about.

I don't care the difference. Until you understand the root of the RCC you will not get all the other baloney that came from it.

Maybe you can get a bigger hat, they may help make you look more spiritual. Maybe you can google that.

 

[Monk Brendan]

It is all rooted in pride, greed, and control from the beginning.

Wrong!

It is pure evil to create Schism in a church. Here is what Jude said (verses 4-12)
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, "The Lord rebuke thee." But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core (those that form the traditional body of believers.) These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

Or are you saying that Peter, Paul, and the rest of the Apostles were greedy and proud, grasping for places that didn't even exist before them?

 

[Monk Brendan]

I don't care the difference. Until you understand the root of the RCC you will not get all the other baloney that came from it.

I understand the RCC better than YOU do, obviously, or you would not even begin to judge the Catholics.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

I understand the RCC better than YOU do, obviously, or you would not even begin to judge the Catholics.

You have no idea what I know about the Catholic church or my background. You understand their rules and history that has been taught but do not see the spiritual root which only the Holy Spirit can teach.

I know all I need about you who has to be addressed by some title and your literal Pharisee garb. Isn't that right Brendan.

 

[Haipule]

Non essentials can not defy and contradict the Word of God. That is not liberty. Only the Truth will make you free.

Charity? Even deeply carnal hippies spoke of love and giving. Human good is not the love of God, but it still is a form of love.

If the Holy Spirit were filling all believers there would be no denominations.

I've brought up these points before. Two pastors on the same street, one conservative "non-denominational(whatever that means)" and one a Pentecostal(also divided in to several sub-groups), and both are openly hostile to each others teaching and both proclaim to be keepers and teachers of the truth "filled with the Holy Spirit" with the "spiritual gift" of pastor-teacher and therefore cannot lie. How can this be?

Or, if a pastor says he's "filled with the Spirit" decades ago and now refutes his own teaching then, was he "filled with the Spirit" then or now?

This is the reason I call myself a "pre-denominationalist". I can study the first century autographed languages of the bible and translate it perfectly into English. All Christian denominational divisions were born in the first century and have continued to date and will continue the division and all claiming "truth".

It is ridiculous! It is stupid! And calling the KJV the "Holy Spirit" translation is even stupider!

The clergy is called to study and teach. Paul told us all that we should check out every breath to make sure it is from God like good Bureans. If we do not do that then we are disobedient and we are being self-deceived.

Can we say on judgement day, "Well God, the pastor THAT YOU GAVE ME, said..." I don't think that excuse is going to fly.

Yet, do we challenge or, do we just accept the teaching as authoritative without challenging it. Oh, and good luck with challenging the self-proclaimed "Spirit filled". "You see Bill, these things are only 'spiritually' discerned and you are far too fleshly to grasp it"! What a pile of crap!

I'll ask you a question: Does the Word of God unite us as one? If it does then there are serious problems with the translation into English as the clergy is divided. I will tell you some truth:

The Word unites us as one. The teaching of men divides us infinitely.

Satan himself is a powerless wonder angel having been rendered dysfunctional by the first advent of Jesus. If you don't believe me--read Paul's writing.

 

[Monk Brendan]

I don't care the difference. Until you understand the root of the RCC you will not get all the other baloney that came from it.

Maybe you can get a bigger hat, they may help make you look more spiritual. Maybe you can google that.

It is obvious that you know NOTHING about the Roman Catholic Church, otherwise you would thank God every day for the Catholic Church.

As far as my attire, I'll wear what God has given me. The big hat is the hat that a Melkite Catholic Monk wears. At least you get to see my face. A lot of the cowards don't even post a face on this Forum, but instead, you post an ink drawing of some guy being thrown over a wall.

 

[Monk Brendan]

You have no idea what I know about the Catholic church or my background. I know all I need about you who has to be addressed by some title and your literal Pharisee garb. Isn't that right Brendan.

Gee, I don't know what Pharisees wore? Must be a fascinating issue. I am wearing the traditional habiliments of an Eastern Christian monk.