- Nov 2, 2021
- 11
- 3
- 39
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
I see a lot of believers often checking their beliefs with others for confirmation. It's often difficult to avoid doing this & we probably all have done so. It's surely a sign that we are all trying to do what's right, like anyone else. But I believe the Bible teaches that the correct actions we seek to do don't come from any particular set of beliefs, but from a full persuasion of our own beliefs (Romans 14:5, 1John 2:27 KJV).
To try to illustrate this, the following is a depiction of a hypothetical scenario involving 2 Christians who don't know each other, and each has very different beliefs but is fully convinced of his own (referred to as Christian "A" & Christian "B"). The ordeal is actually only an encounter between 2 believers who are both sharing their personal faith to help people. The experience is recounted from both sides, but as seen from the perspective of each person:
(B's perspective)
DAY 1:B hears of a man with the reputation of a radical who is teaching people a very unorthodox doctrine. B encounters this man and, after hearing what he disagrees with, rebukes him, telling him he's a wicked man for trying to deceive people, then leaves immediately. Though he hears different rumors about the man, B judges from his own experience and determines (FAITH) that the man has been deceived by evil and is working to turn people away from God. Knowing his Christian duty, B knows he can't avoid the man, but must come to him (LOVE) to help him (1 Timothy 2:3-4). Although he's concluded (FAITH) that the man is a worshipper of evil, B knows his faith must be stronger to deal with this man correctly.
DAY 4: After strengthening his beliefs enough to be able to tolerate the man (FAITH), he creates a plan to reach out to him, to persuade him from pursuing the evil spirits he worships (LOVE, FAITH). Now stronger in his beliefs, he's thankful he met the unfortunate man, believing God had arranged their encounter to force B to settle his own doubts (FAITH, THANKFULNESS).
DAY 5: He sends a friend to the poor man, who has a meeting with him and reports back, and now B learns startling new things about him. B, now having the correct information about the man, humbles himself and admits how little he knows (HUMILITY) & believes the new information (FAITH).
DAY 7: Out of the blue, B gets a chance to teach abroad. He departs the same day, to teach about the importance of humility and not judging others, and happens to never see the man again.
(A's perspective)
DAY 1: As he shares his faith with others (LOVE), an angry man rails on him for no reason and storms out. A bears this and keeps teaching (LONGSUFFERING).
DAY 5: A is approached accusingly by another person. Being sure of his teachings (FAITH), A bears this man as well, patiently explaining everything he asks (LONGSUFFERING, GENTLENESS, MEEKNESS), then the person leaves.
DAY 8: A hears a rumor that the railer of last week was a teacher & that he's out teaching others. Remembering his accusations from last week, A believes (FAITH) the railer is teaching others in A's area to avoid A and that A is wrong. A, therefore, prays that God will open the eyes of A's hearers (LOVE) & also save A from any violent reaction (FAITH).
DAY 14: Seeing the positive response of the people & the absence of the railer, he thanks God, assured he has saved him from danger and answered his prayers (FAITH, THANKSGIVING). He lives the rest of his life sure of this (FAITH), adding this ordeal to his message to others that they too can trust in God (LOVE, PEACE).
Since we can see from both sides, we know that neither Christian was "correct" about what was going on (speaking from the all-seeing standpoint of hindsight). But their actions were those that a believer seeks to produce from spiritual growth (faith, love, patience, etc). This experience should not be unfamiliar to a believer, to expect one outcome and get a totally different result. And I think there are verses referring to this "phenomenon" and illustrate that we cannot know how things will turn out (Romans 8:28, 2 Peter 2:9, 1 Corinthians 4:4-5, 2 Corinthians 5:7, Acts 11:2-4/17-18, *Luke 2:48-51). I believe this is the process of learning we all will experience as believers, and not for the purpose of being more "correct" but for the purpose of spiritual growth, which i think we all are to eventually be well-rounded in. Believers are also already known for distancing themselves from this burden of correctness, saying things like "God will make a way", "God will provide", etc.
The previous example attempts to show that even polar opposites in beliefs can produce the correct actions in the absence of doubt, but it is also shown with a "working" level of experience (that which causes minimal offense). Any ordeal that's too much for us can be removed by God (2 Thessalonians 3:2), but just to show hypothetically how well being fully persuaded can work, here are a few instances involving less-than-ideal levels of experience:
If B was in such a condition that he honestly thought the best way to help A was to assassinate him, we know that sudden death for a righteous man is not a problem. If B truly thought that A needed "tough love" and sends hooligans to assault him, A would believe he's experiencing the sufferings of Christ at this time, which are necessary. And if B honestly believed his Christian duty was to avoid A for the rest of his life, A (with his focus on God) would never be aware of this and would just continue doing the right thing.
In none of these examples would either person's faith be broken nor would either have committed sin: there would only be the "fruits of the Spirit" (Galatians 5:22-23). The Bible explains the definition of sin, which I believe is doing what you believe to be wrong (James 4:17) or what you believe might be wrong (Romans 14:23). But "incorrectness" doesn't fall under this definition. I think John 6:45 & John 15:22 speak of the necessity of having to be shown information, that we can't know it otherwise. With faith, there's no offense in ignorance, nor in transition from ignorance to knowledge, which I believe God provides. Therefore, our concern shouldn't be correctness (which is in God's power, knowing all things) but following after the works of the Spirit, one of most important being faith (Ephesians 6:16, 1 Peter 1:7).
From practical experience, we also know one can only do his best with the knowledge he has, & if the knowledge is incomplete, there's no shame in those actions he did incorrectly, as long as he believed he was doing it correctly. The main message of the Gospel constantly reminds us of the primary importance of faith and the problem of doubt (James 1:8/4:8, 1 Timothy 2:8, 1 Corinthians 9:26), this being the recurring tone of the Messiah himself & also of the early apostles and Christians.
I believe full persuasion also solves the problem of teaching the Gospel to another. Here's an example: Christian 1 teaches "doctrine X" and Christian 2 teaches "doctrine Y" and both seek to teach the "receiver". If the receiver encountered X first and was fully convinced of his new beliefs, he would patiently allow Y to then be taught to him, not believing it but as an act of *longsuffering* to not offend Christian 2; if the receiver encountered Y first, he would do the same for X. I think the doctrine called "wrong" is the one causing turmoil early in our growth, but if the receiver learned this one first, he would believe that he's merely experiencing his sufferings already. And if he later ran into the "right" doctrine (the one not causing turmoil in that area), he would believe it to be his sought-after relief from God. I think the only difference with belief systems is that the order in which we develop the fruits will be different, but I don't think we know the order anyway, so I think no system is better than another. It seems the importance of full belief, which could be included regardless of style of doctrine, is one of the most important parts of the message.
On the subject of belief systems, there are also "denominations". I understand the temptation to distance yourself from one that doesn't share your beliefs, including those of the Christian faith. I've struggled with this too. But I believe this is an error: I don't believe denominations should exist (1 Corinthians 1:10-13, 1 Corinthians 3:3-4). To anyone struggling with them, I thought there may be some reasons why we do:
One reason may be that we are trying to do too much. We probably know there is a limit to what we can accomplish, I believe that impact being ultimately determined by God ( 1 Corinthians 3:5-7). I believe our job then is to not judge others (Romans 14:4, 13) but to follow Jesus and not be ashamed of his testimony, I think in this case meaning to speak up on what we believe is wrong instead of remaining silent (Acts 20:26-27). But I believe we can do no more than this. I think we also have to check our reasons for dealing with a person, being careful not to come to him for the purpose of exalting ourselves in pride, but out of obedience & in meekness. It may also help to remember that the person may learn or get help from another if not from us (Acts 20:32).
I think another reason for a denomination may be doubt. Not being fully sure of one's doctrine would keep us from openly discussing all issues to get to the bottom of them, which I think we all want. And if we do examine one another's beliefs (when our actions are not present for confirmation), I believe it's not a difference in scriptual interpretation but a lack of an answer or an inconsistency that is an indication of error (meaning a sign of a personal system that won't produce the right actions or a sign that system is being performed incorrectly). This would be the opportunity to offer our system, or encourage the person to fix/properly execute his own. But if a brother has a belief system that appears to be complete, I think this should be enough for us to respect it and hope in the adaquacy of his actions. I think a denomination is merely a name given to a personal set of beliefs, but by this practice there would be no end to the names because every person may have a system that's unique.
I think the only value in separation would be for keeping a higher standard of performance, but I don't get the feeling the reason the Church has so many divisions is because of the unacceptable actions of certain believers. I think the contention mentioned in Acts 15:37-40 was over an action (not a belief), and personally, I've never heard of one denomination being known for worse actions than another, as if the Episcopalians are known to be more prone to backsliding than the Presbyterians or the Calvinists are more likely to sin than the Anabaptists. Similarly, I don't know of any benefits denominations have caused. I figure they help the Church to exist (since believers are known for fighting over beliefs), but I don't think maintaining is a gain, and there seem to still be new ones popping up.
A practical comparison (Romans 1:20) to dealing with different beliefs would be a list of one's favorite songs. This is something that people often do online and it's grown to the point where people are starting to explain their individual way of ranking their songs, explaining their own personal systems. We know each person has his own preference in music, but as we examine one another's lists, preference isn't what we're looking for: what people want to see is what your rules are for ranking each song, whether you abided by them, and whether or not you have a full list (meaning every song [of a number mentioned upfront] individually ranked with no omissions, no ties/decimals, etc). *Such things would not be respected because they would be indications of the ultimate offense: the person doesn't know what he likes. Your system would also be less respected if your songs weren't listed from true personal preference: for instance, if a song appearing in your list was ranked based on what popular opinion says about the song rather than your own rules. I think this would be the "inconsistency". However, a complete personal list meeting all criteria would be appreciated, no matter how strange the preference is.
I believe part of having a reality as a believer will involve the breaking of the "letter", the verbatim wording of the verses in the Bible. I think this is largely what being a Christian is about (Galatians 5:1). No matter how you live, there is some verse that a person can throw at you accusingly, and we've probably all seen the Bible used to justify almost any belief. But Romans 14:14 indicates that there will be many personal belief systems that are viable. I think a lot of this trouble can be settled if we examine our beliefs with honesty and diligence and then put our full faith into them. Hopefully, this can help some people settle their doubts & also help in unifying the Church, the divisions being a problem almost since it began.
To try to illustrate this, the following is a depiction of a hypothetical scenario involving 2 Christians who don't know each other, and each has very different beliefs but is fully convinced of his own (referred to as Christian "A" & Christian "B"). The ordeal is actually only an encounter between 2 believers who are both sharing their personal faith to help people. The experience is recounted from both sides, but as seen from the perspective of each person:
(B's perspective)
DAY 1:B hears of a man with the reputation of a radical who is teaching people a very unorthodox doctrine. B encounters this man and, after hearing what he disagrees with, rebukes him, telling him he's a wicked man for trying to deceive people, then leaves immediately. Though he hears different rumors about the man, B judges from his own experience and determines (FAITH) that the man has been deceived by evil and is working to turn people away from God. Knowing his Christian duty, B knows he can't avoid the man, but must come to him (LOVE) to help him (1 Timothy 2:3-4). Although he's concluded (FAITH) that the man is a worshipper of evil, B knows his faith must be stronger to deal with this man correctly.
DAY 4: After strengthening his beliefs enough to be able to tolerate the man (FAITH), he creates a plan to reach out to him, to persuade him from pursuing the evil spirits he worships (LOVE, FAITH). Now stronger in his beliefs, he's thankful he met the unfortunate man, believing God had arranged their encounter to force B to settle his own doubts (FAITH, THANKFULNESS).
DAY 5: He sends a friend to the poor man, who has a meeting with him and reports back, and now B learns startling new things about him. B, now having the correct information about the man, humbles himself and admits how little he knows (HUMILITY) & believes the new information (FAITH).
DAY 7: Out of the blue, B gets a chance to teach abroad. He departs the same day, to teach about the importance of humility and not judging others, and happens to never see the man again.
(A's perspective)
DAY 1: As he shares his faith with others (LOVE), an angry man rails on him for no reason and storms out. A bears this and keeps teaching (LONGSUFFERING).
DAY 5: A is approached accusingly by another person. Being sure of his teachings (FAITH), A bears this man as well, patiently explaining everything he asks (LONGSUFFERING, GENTLENESS, MEEKNESS), then the person leaves.
DAY 8: A hears a rumor that the railer of last week was a teacher & that he's out teaching others. Remembering his accusations from last week, A believes (FAITH) the railer is teaching others in A's area to avoid A and that A is wrong. A, therefore, prays that God will open the eyes of A's hearers (LOVE) & also save A from any violent reaction (FAITH).
DAY 14: Seeing the positive response of the people & the absence of the railer, he thanks God, assured he has saved him from danger and answered his prayers (FAITH, THANKSGIVING). He lives the rest of his life sure of this (FAITH), adding this ordeal to his message to others that they too can trust in God (LOVE, PEACE).
Since we can see from both sides, we know that neither Christian was "correct" about what was going on (speaking from the all-seeing standpoint of hindsight). But their actions were those that a believer seeks to produce from spiritual growth (faith, love, patience, etc). This experience should not be unfamiliar to a believer, to expect one outcome and get a totally different result. And I think there are verses referring to this "phenomenon" and illustrate that we cannot know how things will turn out (Romans 8:28, 2 Peter 2:9, 1 Corinthians 4:4-5, 2 Corinthians 5:7, Acts 11:2-4/17-18, *Luke 2:48-51). I believe this is the process of learning we all will experience as believers, and not for the purpose of being more "correct" but for the purpose of spiritual growth, which i think we all are to eventually be well-rounded in. Believers are also already known for distancing themselves from this burden of correctness, saying things like "God will make a way", "God will provide", etc.
The previous example attempts to show that even polar opposites in beliefs can produce the correct actions in the absence of doubt, but it is also shown with a "working" level of experience (that which causes minimal offense). Any ordeal that's too much for us can be removed by God (2 Thessalonians 3:2), but just to show hypothetically how well being fully persuaded can work, here are a few instances involving less-than-ideal levels of experience:
If B was in such a condition that he honestly thought the best way to help A was to assassinate him, we know that sudden death for a righteous man is not a problem. If B truly thought that A needed "tough love" and sends hooligans to assault him, A would believe he's experiencing the sufferings of Christ at this time, which are necessary. And if B honestly believed his Christian duty was to avoid A for the rest of his life, A (with his focus on God) would never be aware of this and would just continue doing the right thing.
In none of these examples would either person's faith be broken nor would either have committed sin: there would only be the "fruits of the Spirit" (Galatians 5:22-23). The Bible explains the definition of sin, which I believe is doing what you believe to be wrong (James 4:17) or what you believe might be wrong (Romans 14:23). But "incorrectness" doesn't fall under this definition. I think John 6:45 & John 15:22 speak of the necessity of having to be shown information, that we can't know it otherwise. With faith, there's no offense in ignorance, nor in transition from ignorance to knowledge, which I believe God provides. Therefore, our concern shouldn't be correctness (which is in God's power, knowing all things) but following after the works of the Spirit, one of most important being faith (Ephesians 6:16, 1 Peter 1:7).
From practical experience, we also know one can only do his best with the knowledge he has, & if the knowledge is incomplete, there's no shame in those actions he did incorrectly, as long as he believed he was doing it correctly. The main message of the Gospel constantly reminds us of the primary importance of faith and the problem of doubt (James 1:8/4:8, 1 Timothy 2:8, 1 Corinthians 9:26), this being the recurring tone of the Messiah himself & also of the early apostles and Christians.
I believe full persuasion also solves the problem of teaching the Gospel to another. Here's an example: Christian 1 teaches "doctrine X" and Christian 2 teaches "doctrine Y" and both seek to teach the "receiver". If the receiver encountered X first and was fully convinced of his new beliefs, he would patiently allow Y to then be taught to him, not believing it but as an act of *longsuffering* to not offend Christian 2; if the receiver encountered Y first, he would do the same for X. I think the doctrine called "wrong" is the one causing turmoil early in our growth, but if the receiver learned this one first, he would believe that he's merely experiencing his sufferings already. And if he later ran into the "right" doctrine (the one not causing turmoil in that area), he would believe it to be his sought-after relief from God. I think the only difference with belief systems is that the order in which we develop the fruits will be different, but I don't think we know the order anyway, so I think no system is better than another. It seems the importance of full belief, which could be included regardless of style of doctrine, is one of the most important parts of the message.
On the subject of belief systems, there are also "denominations". I understand the temptation to distance yourself from one that doesn't share your beliefs, including those of the Christian faith. I've struggled with this too. But I believe this is an error: I don't believe denominations should exist (1 Corinthians 1:10-13, 1 Corinthians 3:3-4). To anyone struggling with them, I thought there may be some reasons why we do:
One reason may be that we are trying to do too much. We probably know there is a limit to what we can accomplish, I believe that impact being ultimately determined by God ( 1 Corinthians 3:5-7). I believe our job then is to not judge others (Romans 14:4, 13) but to follow Jesus and not be ashamed of his testimony, I think in this case meaning to speak up on what we believe is wrong instead of remaining silent (Acts 20:26-27). But I believe we can do no more than this. I think we also have to check our reasons for dealing with a person, being careful not to come to him for the purpose of exalting ourselves in pride, but out of obedience & in meekness. It may also help to remember that the person may learn or get help from another if not from us (Acts 20:32).
I think another reason for a denomination may be doubt. Not being fully sure of one's doctrine would keep us from openly discussing all issues to get to the bottom of them, which I think we all want. And if we do examine one another's beliefs (when our actions are not present for confirmation), I believe it's not a difference in scriptual interpretation but a lack of an answer or an inconsistency that is an indication of error (meaning a sign of a personal system that won't produce the right actions or a sign that system is being performed incorrectly). This would be the opportunity to offer our system, or encourage the person to fix/properly execute his own. But if a brother has a belief system that appears to be complete, I think this should be enough for us to respect it and hope in the adaquacy of his actions. I think a denomination is merely a name given to a personal set of beliefs, but by this practice there would be no end to the names because every person may have a system that's unique.
I think the only value in separation would be for keeping a higher standard of performance, but I don't get the feeling the reason the Church has so many divisions is because of the unacceptable actions of certain believers. I think the contention mentioned in Acts 15:37-40 was over an action (not a belief), and personally, I've never heard of one denomination being known for worse actions than another, as if the Episcopalians are known to be more prone to backsliding than the Presbyterians or the Calvinists are more likely to sin than the Anabaptists. Similarly, I don't know of any benefits denominations have caused. I figure they help the Church to exist (since believers are known for fighting over beliefs), but I don't think maintaining is a gain, and there seem to still be new ones popping up.
A practical comparison (Romans 1:20) to dealing with different beliefs would be a list of one's favorite songs. This is something that people often do online and it's grown to the point where people are starting to explain their individual way of ranking their songs, explaining their own personal systems. We know each person has his own preference in music, but as we examine one another's lists, preference isn't what we're looking for: what people want to see is what your rules are for ranking each song, whether you abided by them, and whether or not you have a full list (meaning every song [of a number mentioned upfront] individually ranked with no omissions, no ties/decimals, etc). *Such things would not be respected because they would be indications of the ultimate offense: the person doesn't know what he likes. Your system would also be less respected if your songs weren't listed from true personal preference: for instance, if a song appearing in your list was ranked based on what popular opinion says about the song rather than your own rules. I think this would be the "inconsistency". However, a complete personal list meeting all criteria would be appreciated, no matter how strange the preference is.
I believe part of having a reality as a believer will involve the breaking of the "letter", the verbatim wording of the verses in the Bible. I think this is largely what being a Christian is about (Galatians 5:1). No matter how you live, there is some verse that a person can throw at you accusingly, and we've probably all seen the Bible used to justify almost any belief. But Romans 14:14 indicates that there will be many personal belief systems that are viable. I think a lot of this trouble can be settled if we examine our beliefs with honesty and diligence and then put our full faith into them. Hopefully, this can help some people settle their doubts & also help in unifying the Church, the divisions being a problem almost since it began.
Last edited:
