Doctrines of Devils?

[amariselle]

Did you fail to read accurately what was posted ? (what you claimed I did- as if I did not read your posts) \
See >>
QUOTE="yeshuaslavejeff, post: 71539902, member: 96665"]This is a kind of doctrine of demons -
not that it specifically is, but it is used to oppose God's Word instead of to obey God's Word.

We don't obey God's Word in order to be saved.

We obey JOYOUSLY and GLADLY and TOTALLY WILLINGLY because we are GOD'S CHILDREN BORN AGAIN BY HIM !!!!!!!!!!!!

as written throughout His Word.[/QUOTE

Note that what you posted is / has been/ used by OTHERS to convince some to not obey God.

Did you know that ? I don't if you know that or not >> That's why I ASKED.

Just like the other doctrines of demons YOU POSTED (to ask about them) IN THE OP - the doctrines of demons that are described in Scripture, the doctrines of demons that others use to deceive,
and those who are deceived don't know it at first (hopefully they do find out, right ?)

At this point I truly have no idea what you're going on about. I never once told anyone not to obey God.

Now, you can stay on topic, or I kindly ask that you refrain from commenting further.

The purpose of this thread is clearly laid out in the OP.

 

[amariselle]

Do you know of anyone currently in Christianity making religious demands to eat certain a foods?

I know that there are demands and ordinances regarding abstaining from certain foods, yes.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

moved

 

[amariselle]

You did not clarify at all. You did post what I asked you about.
There lies the problem. There was no accusation nor attack, personal nor otherwise in any way.

Notice as I replied to and answered all your questions, and you did not bother to answer mine -
totally in line with the OP - "doctrines of demons"....
and
questions to see if you know what you are posting about (you did post first, what I asked about).

You are seeking God's Way in Scripture, right ? That is the purpose of this thread, right ?

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the forbidding of marriage and of eating certain foods, in light of Scripture referring to such as "doctrines of devils."

 

[claninja]

Also, I think that vehicle related deaths likely come pretty close to heart disease, perhaps even higher (and not just because of driving under the influence) should we be telling all Christians they shouldn't drive or ride in vehicles as well?

Humans have always traveled. In civilized societies we have licenses and tests that people must acquire before being able to drive. These are for safety reasons. These restrictions help reduce death. These requirements are forced on us. Diet is currently not forced on us. With heart disease being the number 1 cause of death, especially in areas that have adopted western diets, should we or should we not advise our fellow christians to eat healthy , as our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit?

 

[claninja]

I know that there are demands and ordinances regarding abstaining from certain foods, yes.

Who are making these demands in the Christian community, if I may ask?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

moved

 

[Soyeong]

The inward man does not sin, but this mortal flesh (which will perish) still struggles with sin.

If a person needs to stop sinning (which is really just another way of saying, keep the Law) to be saved, no one will be saved.

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's Law (1 John 3:4), so our salvation is from living in transgression of God's Law, which means that it necessarily involves being made to live in obedience to it. Our obedience to God's Law is not something that we need to do in order to become saved, but rather it is what our salvation from sin involves being trained to do. As Philippians 2:12 says, we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling, which again refers to this training that we are receiving by grace. We will not stop sinning in this life, but He who began a good work in us will be faithful to complete it on the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6), so being trained to stop sinning is a work in progress that will continue for the rest of our lives.

To use an analogy, it is kind of like someone paying off your insurmountable student loans and paying your college tuition for the rest of your life at a prestigious university as a free gift. In one sense the gift is yours in that it has been paid for and given to you, but in another sense you need to attend classes for the rest of your life in order to fully receive the gift.

 

[amariselle]

Humans have always traveled. In civilized societies we have licenses and tests that people must acquire before being able to drive. These are for safety reasons. These restrictions help reduce death. These requirements are forced on us. Diet is currently not forced on us. With heart disease being the number 1 cause of death, especially in areas that have adopted western diets, should we or should we not advise our fellow christians to eat healthy , as our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit?

Do you think a specific diet should be enforced? If so, I wholeheartedly disagree with you. We should not be legalistic and impose such things on others.

And yes, by all means, advise people. That is not the same as demanding that others conform to a specific set of rules or requirements.

 

[amariselle]

Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's Law (1 John 3:4), so our salvation is from living in transgression of God's Law, which means that it necessarily involves being made to live in obedience to it. Our obedience to God's Law is not something that we need to do in order to become saved, but rather it is what our salvation from sin involves being trained to do. As Philippians 2:12 says, we must work out our salvation with fear and trembling, which again refers to this training that we are receiving by grace. We will not stop sinning in this life, but He who began a good work in us will be faithful to complete it on the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6), so being trained to stop sinning is a work in progress that will continue for the rest of our lives.

To use an analogy, it is kind of like someone paying off your insurmountable student loans and paying your college tuition for the rest of your life at a prestigious university as a free gift. In one sense the gift is yours in that it has been paid for and given to you, but in another sense you need to attend classes for the rest of your life in order to fully receive the gift.

Again, salvation and discipleship.

 

[GingerBeer]

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained." 1 Timothy 4:1-6

If the Bible says that forbidding to marry and commanding that people "abstain" from meats are "doctrines of devils", why do so many Christians accept these restrictions (often commanded and imposed by church leadership) as actually from God Himself?

Thoughts?

I think you choices about underlining are poor. The first "doctrine of demons" is to speak lies in hypocrisy. Then comes forbidding to marry. And after that commanding to abstain from foods (meats is Jacobean English for foods). The likely heresies that Paul has in mind are those taught by early Gnosticism. A modern reader ought to apply the principles outlined by Paul to modern heresies or to ancient heresies that are still current or have been revived today. Christians ought to be alert to any and every form of lying hypocrisy and every form of religiously inspired marriage prohibition and every form of religiously inspired dietary restriction. So if your religious leaders tell you that you'll be excommunicated or disfellowshipped or shunned if you marry outside of "the faith" or if you eat pork or if you do not give a tithe and then in addition give offerings beware.

 

[amariselle]

Who are making these demands in the Christian community, if I may ask?

There are several denominations. But, as I have said repeatedly, it is not the purpose of this thread to target or call out specific denominations.

 

[amariselle]

I think you choices about underlining are poor. The first "doctrine of demons" is to speak lies in hypocrisy. Then comes forbidding to marry. And after that commanding to abstain from foods (meats is Jacobean English for foods). The likely heresies that Paul has in mind are those taught by early Gnosticism. A modern reader ought to apply the principles outlined by Paul to modern heresies or to ancient heresies that are still current or have been revived today. Christians ought to be alert to any and every form of lying hypocrisy and every form of religiously inspired marriage prohibition and every form of religiously inspired dietary restriction. So if your religious leaders tell you that you'll be excommunicated or disfellowshipped or shunned if you marry outside of "the faith" or if you eat pork or if you do not give a tithe and then in addition give offerings beware.

Fair enough. I don't disagree with you, as deception is most often a gradual progression.

The reason I emphasized what I did was because those specific things (forbidding marriage and the eating of certain foods) is what was warned in this case would be the result of deception. And, I was hoping people might want to share their thoughts on that.

 

[Soyeong]

Do you think a specific diet should be enforced? If so, I wholeheartedly disagree with you. We should not be legalistic and impose such things on others.

And yes, by all means, advise people. That is not the same as demanding that others conform to a specific set of rules or requirements.

There is a big difference between saying that we are required to do something and saying that we are required to do something in order to become saved. God requires His followers to obey His Law, but did not require obedience to it in order to become saved. He did not require the Israelites to obey His Law before He saved them out of bondage in Egypt, but rather He saved them by faith first, then gave them instructions for how to live by faith.

Do you think that someone is legalistic if they think that the laws of their country should be obeyed? Was Jesus was being legalistic by living in perfect obedience to God's Law and by teaching others to follow his example? Is it not legalistic to think that the 1,050 commands in the NT should be obeyed, but legalistic to think that the 613 commands in the OT should be obeyed? Legalism is not in regard to whether someone thinks one or many laws should be obeyed, but rather it refers to the manner in which someone obeys them in regard whether they seek to obey them exactly how they are written or whether they seek to obey them according to the spirit or intent of the law.

 

[amariselle]

There is a big difference between saying that we are required to do something and saying that we are required to do something in order to become saved. God requires His followers to obey His Law, but did not require obedience to it in order to become saved. He did not require the Israelites to obey His Law before He saved them out of bondage in Egypt, but rather He saved them by faith first, then gave them instructions for how to live by faith.

Do you think that someone is legalistic if they think that the laws of their country should be obeyed? Was Jesus was being legalistic by living in perfect obedience to God's Law and by teaching others to follow his example? Is it not legalistic to think that the 1,050 commands in the NT should be obeyed, but legalistic to think that the 613 commands in the OT should be obeyed? Legalism is not in regard to whether someone thinks one or many laws should be obeyed, but rather it refers to the manner in which someone obeys them in regard whether they seek to obey them exactly how they are written or whether they seek to obey them according to the spirit or intent of the law.

The thing about diet is, that the Bible is clear that what one person may be convicted about in terms of eating or not eating, is not necessarily the same for another person. So we must not cause another to stumble by burdening them with what we are personally convicted of.

Romans 14

 

[amariselle]

Also, Jesus' perfect obedience to the Law/sinlessness is ultimately what enabled Him to save us (as He was the spotless Lamb of God). It is true that He taught His disciples many things, but precisely because they were His disciples. Those things would not save them in and of themselves, but are the result of having been saved and forgiven.

Out of love for Jesus our Saviour, we too should desire to take up our cross as His disciples and be imitators of Him. We grow in Christian maturity throughout our lives.

 

[claninja]

Do you think a specific diet should be enforced? If so, I wholeheartedly disagree with you. We should not be legalistic and impose such things on others.

And yes, by all means, advise people. That is not the same as demanding that others conform to a specific set of rules or requirements.

No I agree no enforcement, just education

 

[claninja]

There are several denominations. But, as I have said repeatedly, it is not the purpose of this thread to target or call out specific denominations.

Just curious, as I have never heard of any current denomination doing that. We have freedom in Christ so I wouldn't worry about it too much

 

[Widlast]

Why are you talking about not eating meat on Fridays? Orthodox Christians don't eat meat on Wednesdays and Fridays.

Just saying...
Edit for typo

I understand that, but was speaking from a Catholic point of view.

 

[Widlast]

Paul maybe, but Peter? Peter was married and had children...

You may note that Peter left his wife in Judea when

Not "painting with a broad brush" at all. I clearly specified with Scripture what I was referring to.

But you are correct, celibacy may have been "preferred" but it was not "mandated". The point of this thread was to refer to what the Bible says regarding forbidding marriage and abstaining from "meats." Specifically, the Bible says such things are "doctrines of devils."

Which is why you are painting with a broad brush. You are calling practices "doctrine of the devil" that are completely consistent with Biblical and Christian practice. What would we call that?