Combating Inclusive/Progressive Christianity

[bekkilyn]

What saves anyone is obeying the gospel. Creeds are superfluous to the gospel. There's not a word in the Bible asking us to recite creeds or to fashion creeds. As a matter of fact Paul tells us not to teach according to men's principles. Creeds are man's ways.

The Bible is itself far more effective than any man-made creed.

Provided it is correctly interpreted, which seems to be an uncomfortable problem throughout the centuries. The creeds at least solidify our standard Christian dogma.

Maybe it would be useful to your argument to learn the history of the creeds and how and why they came to be.

We also aren't saved by "obeying the gospel" (our own effort) but by God's grace alone.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Provided it is correctly interpreted, which seems to be an uncomfortable problem throughout the centuries. The creeds at least solidify our standard Christian dogma.

No man-made words will ever be better than God's. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[bekkilyn]

No man-made words will ever be better than God's. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Matthew said of Judas, "Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself" (Matthew 27:5). Per Luke, Jesus says, "Go and do likewise" (Luke 10:37). Therefore, we conclude that Jesus wants us all to go hang ourselves.

The creeds help prevent this sort of fallacy.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Matthew said of Judas, "Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself" (Matthew 27:5). Per Luke, Jesus says, "Go and do likewise" (Luke 10:37). Therefore, we conclude that Jesus wants us all to go hang ourselves.

The creeds help prevent this sort of fallacy.

So the creeds are more authoritative than God's word? Come on.

 

[bekkilyn]

So the creeds are more authoritative than God's word? Come on.

So you believe that Jesus wishes us all to hang ourselves? After all, that's what scripture clearly says.

 

[Al Touthentop]

So you believe that Jesus wishes us all to hang ourselves? After all, that's what scripture clearly says.

You cut and pasted two scriptures from different gospel accounts and claim that this is 'clear'? They're not even related. You pasted the end of the parable of the good Samaritan on to the end of the account of Judas hanging himself. If there is anyone who is content to twist scripture that way, no creed could help them anyway.

 

[bekkilyn]

You cut and pasted two scriptures from different gospel accounts and claim that this is 'clear'? They're not even related. You pasted the end of the parable of the good Samaritan on to the end of the account of Judas hanging himself. If there is anyone who is content to twist scripture that way, no creed could help them anyway.

By whose authority are you claiming that I twisted scripture or that they are unrelated? The passages came directly from scripture and they very clearly say what they say. I'm only doing what countless numbers of people have done for centuries and who is it that has the authority to decide that I or they or even anyone is wrong? As long as it comes directly from the bible, anything goes right?

Or if anything does *not* go, then...who has the authority to decide?

 

[Al Touthentop]

By whose authority are you claiming that I twisted scripture or that they are unrelated?

You know in your own heart that this is what you did.

The passages came directly from scripture and they very clearly say what they say. I'm only doing what countless numbers of people have done for centuries

They clearly say what they say but you know yourself that they are not talking about the same subject. That you would twist scripture in order to defend the use of man-made creeds shows me where your loyalty lies. It isn't with the scriptures. That somebody else may have twisted scripture in the past is no excuse for doing it yourself, even if it is merely to prove a point.

Creeds in and of themselves are statements which assume people are too stupid to understand the scriptures. That's why I object to them. They are purely man-made doctrines which may or may not conform to the scriptures.

 

[ViaCrucis]

No one was ever saved because they recited a creed. If this were important, we'd find it in scripture.

You mean like in Romans 10:9?

"because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

"Jesus is Lord" is the earliest Creed of the Church.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Al Touthentop]

You mean like in Romans 10:9?

"because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

"Jesus is Lord" is the earliest Creed of the Church.

-CryptoLutheran

That isn't a creed invented by man.

 

[bekkilyn]

You know in your own heart that this is what you did.

They clearly say what they say but you know yourself that they are not talking about the same subject. That you would twist scripture in order to defend the use of man-made creeds shows me where your loyalty lies. It isn't with the scriptures. That somebody else may have twisted scripture in the past is no excuse for doing it yourself, even if it is merely to prove a point.

Creeds in and of themselves are statements which assume people are too stupid to understand the scriptures. That's why I object to them. They are purely man-made doctrines which may or may not conform to the scriptures.

My loyalty doesn't lie with the scriptures or with creeds, but with the *person* of Christ Jesus.

There can be no such thing as twisting of scripture if scripture is so clear and simple that even 5 year old could easily understand all of it. After all, there have been no arguments at all throughout history as to how it should be interpreted, right?

I presented you with a case where scripture very clearly showed that Jesus wants us all to go hang ourselves, and you claim that it's wrong, but why? What gives you the authority and understanding to decide it's wrong when this statement comes directly from scripture? Why isn't "We believe Jesus wants us to hang ourselves" part of our statements of faith as Christians, included in the traditional creeds?

What if I started a huge movement that gained great popularity based on this interpretation of scripture and confused millions of people as to what it means to be a faithful Christian? After all, I can easily prove everything with scripture.

Well guess what similar sorts of things were going on in the years while the various creeds were being created and revised?

 

[redleghunter]

My loyalty doesn't lie with the scriptures or with creeds, but with the *person* of Christ Jesus.

Why create a false trichotomy.

If the Person of Christ differs to the Christ in Scriptures, then Houston we have a problem.

If the Person of Christ differs from the historic Christian creeds, not only do we have a problem Houston, we have no church.

The only folks twisting Scriptures are those who say we really don’t need them or those who pick and choose what they want from them and seek the rest “Holy suggestions.”

 

[bekkilyn]

Why create a false trichotomy.

Because Bible idolatry is real.

 

[redleghunter]

Because Bible idolatry is real.

Doesn’t mean we should create a false trichotomy.

Would not it be best if you define Bible idolatry. Some believe Sola Scriptura is Bible idolatry. They do so because they do not know the definition of Sola Scriptura as the Reformers taught it.

According to sola scriptura, the church does not speak infallibly in its traditions, but only in scripture. John Wesley stated in the 18th century, "In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church."[45] For this reason, sola scriptura is called the formal cause or principle of the Reformation.

Sola scriptura - Wikipedia
​

Here’s the source of the Wesley quote in context:

The Works of the Rev. John Wesley

My estimate is you would not be calling John Wesley a “Biblical idolater.”

 

[Al Touthentop]

My loyalty doesn't lie with the scriptures or with creeds, but with the *person* of Christ Jesus.

Good. Then stop arguing that the creeds are superior to scripture.

 

[bekkilyn]

Doesn’t mean we should create a false trichotomy.

Would not it be best if you define Bible idolatry. Some believe Sola Scriptura is Bible idolatry. They do so because they do not know the definition of Sola Scriptura as the Reformers taught it.

According to sola scriptura, the church does not speak infallibly in its traditions, but only in scripture. John Wesley stated in the 18th century, "In all cases, the Church is to be judged by the Scripture, not the Scripture by the Church."[45] For this reason, sola scriptura is called the formal cause or principle of the Reformation.

Sola scriptura - Wikipedia
​

Here’s the source of the Wesley quote in context:

The Works of the Rev. John Wesley

My estimate is you would not be calling John Wesley a “Biblical idolater.”

First, Wesley was prima scriptura, not sola scriptura. There is a difference. You are taking his quote out of context to support a view he did not support. While he certainly recognized scripture as the primary authority, he never made any claims that scripture was the *only* authority.

Second, even in your cherry-picked quote, Wesley, despite holding scripture in very high regard, does not claim it is the scripture itself (or creeds) that have his loyalty, a loyalty that is only appropriately given to God.

Third, unless you also have (falsely) decided that my loyalty lies with written words vs. the person of Christ, then I'm not certain why you are arguing with me here except for the sake of arguing.

 

[bekkilyn]

Good. Then stop arguing that the creeds are superior to scripture.

Please stop making false accusations.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Please stop making false accusations.

It's not a false accusation. Your entire premise has been that since people misunderstand scripture and some people intentionally twist scripture, that we should rely on creeds.

That is putting the creed ahead of scripture. And you even then twisted scripture yourself to "prove" that this it was creeds that prevented the effectiveness of that. That elevates the creed to being more useful and authoritative than the scripture.

 

[redleghunter]

First, Wesley was prima scriptura, not sola scriptura. There is a difference. You are taking his quote out of context to support a view he did not support. While he certainly recognized scripture as the primary authority, he never made any claims that scripture was the *only* authority.

I gave you the link to the context of Wesley’s quote. Did you check it out? He clearly argued for the Scriptures (because they are Divinely inspired and therefore infallible in teachings) above church traditions which must be examined by Holy Scriptures.


“My ground is the Bible. Yea, I am a Bible-bigot. I follow it in all things, both great and small.”

-John Wesley

 

[redleghunter]

That is putting the creed ahead of scripture. And you even then twisted scripture yourself to "prove" that this it was creeds that prevented the effectiveness of that. That elevates the creed to being more useful and authoritative than the scripture.

I have to say not all Methodists follow this. Not even John Wesley.

Even ordained ministers in the UMC are seeing how their clergy handle Scriptures not even in the tradition of the Wesleyan Quadrilateral:

The Wesleyan Quadrilateral and Sola Scriptura