Doctrinal Purity

St. Amadeus II · Nov 8, 2004

Doctrinal purity is a plague when it unnecessarily divides that which has been made Holy by Christs blood. It may already be that doctrinal idols have invaded our churches after all, we too often sacrifice people on the altar of doctrinal purity. Then we politely and lovingly expel fellow believers from our churches and bless them on the way out because they baptize by immersion or don't, or speak in tongues or don't, or believe in pretrib or don't, etc. Hurt and confused, some wander the spiritual landscape looking for a safe haven only to fall prey to false teachers or the seductive call of the world. Yes, we need doctrinal purity and we may even need to die for it one day, but doctrinal purity is not our God. Confessions and creeds are not our bread and wine. We should not sacrifice the blessing of unity for the minutia of purity. But some will say, "These doctrines are important and our church has the truth." Perhaps. But Jesus said the world would know we were His disciples by the love we have for one another, not the purity of our doctrine.

How does this make you feel? Especially if you're Roman Catholic and believe in the neccessity of believing all "dogmas" in order to get to Heaven?

Wiffey · Nov 13, 2004

I am Orthodox and I know that the Apostolic Christian faith would have vanished long ago if it were not for the faithful preserving right doctrine.

In the absence of "doctrinal purity" you may get a lot of personal freedom to craft your faith, but you do NOT get the Faith as it was delivered to the Church on Pentecost. You end up with all sorts of heresy and about 25,000 "denominations", most of which no 1st century Christian would be able to recognize. You get as many versions of "the Truth" as there are individuals in the room.

I do not feel in the least oppressed by the "doctrinal purity" I see every Sunday in church. Rather, I am grateful to have such guidance as I grow in Christ. When I have a question I get clear, unmuddied answers based on the experiences of the faithful Orthodox who have travelled this path for 2000 years. I thank God every day that they preserved the Faith that Christ gave them without adding to it or taking away from it.

Wiffey

reformedfan · Jan 18, 2005

Doctrinal purity is important when the issue is heresy.

Bizzlebin Imperatoris · Jan 20, 2005

Can we really know True Love without the True Faith?

reformedfan · Jan 21, 2005

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.

Wigglesworth · Jan 22, 2005

It is disturbing to me when unity is sacrificed on the altar of doctrine when the particular doctrine is not essential to a relationship with Jesus Christ in Spirit and in Truth.

The way I see to make unity a priority over doctrine is to demand conformity to only the most foundational elements of the faith. The Nicene Creed is a good example of a minimal requirement. The Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral of the Episcopal Church is another good example.

The more rules a church makes, the more introverted and incapacitated it becomes in relation to the lost and dying world it was commissioned to serve.

Bizzlebin Imperatoris · Jan 22, 2005

reformedfan said:
Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.

Ephesians 2:8
"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God"

On a side note, the Bible is not the full word of God. The Bible was not canonized untill a few hundred years after Christ. And, if you are considering the Protestant Canon, that wasn't until around the 1500's(?).

Bizzlebin Imperatoris · Jan 22, 2005

Wigglesworth said:
The way I see to make unity a priority over doctrine is to demand conformity to only the most foundational elements of the faith.

What is fundamental? Is it defined by the heretics who leave the Church and want to bend the truth? Or the Church itself?

Wigglesworth · Jan 22, 2005

Bizzlebin Imperatoris said:
What is fundamental? Is it defined by the heretics who leave the Church and want to bend the truth? Or the Church itself?

Well, those questions remind me of the ecumenical councils of the first millenium that were held before the eastern churches and the western churches separated from one another. The Church defined the pronouncements of those.

The Nicene Creed, referenced earlier and used by Christian Forums to define Christianity, was defined by the Church.

What is fundamental for you or me is the minimum standard you or I will require to have fellowship with another who doesn't share all of your or my dogma. The standard you or I set will depend on the degree to which you or I make unity a priority.

Bizzlebin Imperatoris · Jan 22, 2005

Wigglesworth said:
Well, those questions remind me of the ecumenical councils of the first millenium that were held before the eastern churches and the western churches separated from one another. The Church defined the pronouncements of those.

The Nicene Creed, referenced earlier and used by Christian Forums to define Christianity, was defined by the Church.

But it is only part of that agreed upon. Anyone not holding to all the accepted pronouncements can not claim to hold to any of them.

Wigglesworth said:
What is fundamental for you or me is the minimum standard you or I will require to have fellowship with another who doesn't share all of your or my dogma. The standard you or I set will depend on the degree to which you or I make unity a priority.

Fellowship? Or true unity? Talking together and meeting together does not garauntee doctrinal agreement nor even mean that the two are both in the Body. For only Christ knows.

Wigglesworth · Jan 23, 2005

Can't argue with that.

Maximus · Feb 6, 2005

Eph. 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

One faith, not many.

1 Cor. 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

The Church is not divided nor can she be.

She is One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, and not a multitude of conflicting sects teaching a variety of errors.

Titus 3:10 A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid

Avoid.

Not, "Seek 'unity' based on false sentimentality."

Doctrinal purity is not the plague.

Ecumenism is.

VioletAngel · Feb 6, 2005

It is my understanding that the Scriptures were fully utilized by the early church, and in fact written shortly after Christ arose from the dead. The fact it "was not canonized" until around 400 A.D. was only a formality. The authors were, for the most part, 1st century.

Wigglesworth · Feb 7, 2005

Maximus said:
Titus 3:10 A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid

Avoid.

Not, "Seek 'unity' based on false sentimentality."

Doctrinal purity is not the plague.

Ecumenism is.

The prayer of Jesus Christ that we may be one was not false sentimentality.

artybloke · Feb 7, 2005

Paisley Rose said:
It is my understanding that the Scriptures were fully utilized by the early church, and in fact written shortly after Christ arose from the dead. The fact it "was not canonized" until around 400 A.D. was only a formality. The authors were, for the most part, 1st century.

Depends what you mean by "shortly after." The NT books were not written until between 25-60 years or so after the death of Christ, and not all at the same time.

With regard to doctrine, I would say that there are certain things which are essential and certain things which aren't on an individual basis. I think if you can except the Nicene Creed, you're in the church; but what makes a person a Christian is following Christ, not signing on a dotted line to something you might not even properly understand (I'm sure everyone here knows the meaning of "of one substance with the father" but does everyone in your congregation? I doubt it.) And there are an awful lot of periferals; as outlined above.

I mean, if I had to accept creationism in order to be a True Christian(TM) I'd be straight out the door. As I'm sure would anyone with a brain.

Maximus · Feb 7, 2005

Wigglesworth said:
The prayer of Jesus Christ that we may be one was not false sentimentality.

Jesus' prayer was not the "we" (whoever "we" are) may all be one. It was that His followers may all be one.

Undiscerning ecumenism is based on false sentimentality.

How do we know who His followers are?

By the standard of truth, the truth the Church has preserved through the power of the Holy Spirit since the beginning.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Here we have the Lord's promise to send the Holy Spirit to guide His Church into all truth.

It is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church - the Church that has continuity with Jesus and the Apostles through the straightline succession of its bishops - that has preserved the truth through the power of the Holy Spirit.

The vast multitude of competing sects cannot make this claim, and they cannot be guided by the Holy Spirit, since the Holy Spirit knows nothing of multiple, conflicting "truths."

Koey · Feb 8, 2005

St. Amadeus II said:
Doctrinal purity is a plague when it unnecessarily divides that which has been made Holy by Christs blood...

I agree! Doctrinal purity ought to be on the essentials, not the twigs. Such theories as transubstantiation or not, immersion or not, leavened or not, wine or kiddie juice, Saturday or Sunday, Rome or not, married or celibate, contraception or not, are all twigs. Teaching them as dogma causes picky Pharisaic Christians. We are unified by faith in Jesus, not Rome, not some stupid dogma that has nothing to do with salvation.

I believe that God gave the church the Holy Scriptures to be enough of a guide. We do not need some overinterpretation creating a whole Talmudic list of legalism. We've had 2,000 years of both good and bad church leadership. The good has imitated the wonderful example of our Savior. The bad has exceeded that of the Pharisees.

Jesus did not make a long list of stupid dogmas, the Pharisees did. Whose example do we want to follow?

Wigglesworth · Feb 8, 2005

The worst consequences of extreme Puritanism are legalism and separatism. Both are sin.

Koey · Feb 8, 2005

I agree. However, titles like "Full Gospel" are also divisive. If you study the theology behind the title, you realize it is really just another divisive twig, which has little or no basis in the meaning of the word gospel.

Wigglesworth · Feb 9, 2005

Ironically, the Full Gospel Business Men's Fellowship, the basis for my custom title to which reference was made, includes members from denominations across the Christian spectrum, from Anglican to Baptist, to Catholic, to the Worldwide Church of God, and everything in between.

However, as a fellowship, it could certainly be considered divisive amongst hermits.

We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Doctrinal Purity

St. Amadeus II

Guest

He is my refuge and my fortress...

Senior Veteran

A Sinner

Senior Veteran

Simple Chicken Farmer

A Sinner

A Sinner

Simple Chicken Farmer

A Sinner

Simple Chicken Farmer

Orthodox Christian

God bless!

Simple Chicken Farmer

Well-Known Member

Orthodox Christian

Veteran

Simple Chicken Farmer

Veteran

Simple Chicken Farmer

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency