Does Doctrine matter?

[mact]

Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.

I would disagree, Paul said ALL scripture is God breathed... if I had to pick one book or partial book it would be Jesus' words of the sermon on the mount. The first and second century churchs used that as the foundation of thier fellowship/church.
rick

 

[bod44]

I would disagree, Paul said ALL scripture is God breathed... if I had to pick one book or partial book it would be Jesus' words of the sermon on the mount. The first and second century churchs used that as the foundation of thier fellowship/church.
rick

sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

 

[BamaLady53]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick

Amen!

 

[Amisk]

Originally Posted by bod44
"Doctrine is the basis for a religion. You can't have a religion without doctrine. You see, What society is pushing right now, is that everyone seeks the same God the same spiritual ideals, just under whatever name or form they are doing it. Every religion is just another way to get to God. Not true. Really, if we as Christians were to pick a doctrinal statement to follow, we should all follow Romans. Its considered the doctrinal book and it holds all the important points. Doctrine is the framing for the ideas. Without doctrine anyone could do whatever they wanted to do. Remember, proverbs says that there is a way that seems right unto a man but the end thereof is death. Just cuz its right to us doesn't mean its right to God. Let us "hold fast to the doctrine you have heard" as Paul said. Doctrine is vitally important.Quote "

The word doctrine means "something taught as a principle (a basic) of religion, law, policy, or main stay of learning."

In the medical field then, is it important the doctrines or principles that your doctor learnt in medical school? Is it important what we learnt in school?

Without doctrine in the Christian religion we have no knowledge on which to base our claim to Christianity. We have no sound teaching from scripture then we remain weak in our understanding. We are merely a leave blowing in the wind.

Many good verses have been quoted here to warn us that doctrine is important. Here are a couple more: 2Ti 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Tit 1:9 - Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

Tit 2:1 - But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:"

As for as the Christian doctrine goes, if we miss the doctrine of Salvation then we have missed Heaven. Every man must be sure of his doctrines on Salvation and Holiness in his daily walk. If there is no sound doctrine in our church then it is time to seek one in which there is sound doctrine. When the doctrines of a church doesn't line up with scripture then we are walking in dangerous territory. So we need to be cautious when it comes to our doctrines. Demand scripture from pastors, authors, and anyone else bring doctrine to our attention that we have not seen before in scripture, and it is our duty to make sure that such scripture fits into the basic teaching of the rest of scripture. After all we are the one who will suffer if we fall from the true gospel.

 

[Exegete12]

Yes, I agree that sound doctrine is very important in establishing and keeping our faith.

However, there are certain doctrines that are paramount for salvation i.e. the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and that He is our Lord and Saviour and is the Son of God and is God.

But any denominational differences on doctrine ... well like St Paul said, we only see through a dark glass ....

I don't think God holds a clipboard in heaven, and hands out an examination of what you know about Him. Maybe once we get to heaven, well yes, not maybe... we will know the fulness of His glory and the 'correct' doctrine. In the meantime it is good to fine tune our doctrines .. but not dogmatically saying this is the only way ... when Jesus Himself has made the gospel simple.

What I think is important is that you know WHAT you believe and WHY you believe, that you would not doubt Jesus Christ as Lord. Knowing the doctrines to support those questions encourage faith and edification.

 

[rosiecotton]

I have a bit of a problem with that. How can we mere humans know what God, someone so far superior to us, know for absolute sure exactly what He intended something to mean? How does every person read and understand exactly the same thing. We are all created unique, so unique and then expected to see something exactly the same as everybody else? I just have a bit of a problem with that.

I know what you're saying!
You might enjoy the book Velvet Elvis, by Rob Bell. He talks about this, and has some very good points. It's a very good book! Here is one excerpt from it. At the beginning of the book, he is talking about jumping on the trampoline with his son. He relates the trampoline to the Christian faith.

"Which leads to a really obvious observation: A trampoline only works if you take your feet off the firm, stable ground and jump into the air and let the trampoline propel you upward. Talking about trampolines isn't jumping; it's talking. Two vastly different things. And so we jump and we invite others to jump with us, to live the way of Jesus and see what happens. You don't have to know anything about the springs to pursue living 'the way.'
In brickworld, the focus often becomes getting people to believe the right things so they can be 'in'. There is often a list of however many doctrines, and the goal is to get people to intellectually assent to these things being true. Once we believe the right things, then we're in. And once we're in, the goal often becomes learning how to get others in with us. I know this is harsh, but in many settings it is true. It is possible in these settings to be in, and to believe all of the correct things, and even to be effective at getting others in, and yet our hearts can remain unaffected. It's possible to believe all the right things and be miserable. It's possible to believe all the right doctinres and not live as Jesus teaches us to live. This is why I am so passionate about the trampoline. I want to invite people to actually live this way so the life Jesus offers gradually becomes their life. It becomes less and less about talking, and more and more about the experience we are actually having.
And what is the point, while we're at it, of a trampoline?"

Honestly, lately when I hear the word doctrine, I cringe. It's become such a huge issue in our church. It's become the main focus of things in our church...like they have to make sure everyone believes exactly the same thing and if they don't, well we have to change their minds!! I understand that churches have to have a doctrine they stand by, but to have it be the main focus is wrong. And just because someone in the church doesn't totally agree with everything that church teaches doesn't make them less saved.
I know we need to search for the truth. When I read the Bible I pray, I ask God to reveal to me what He wants me to understand. But I still may disagree with the person sitting right beside me reading the same passage. Does that mean one of us isn't listening to the Holy Spirit correctly or what? I don't know.
All I know is I can only do my best and listen to God as best I can and follow what He wants me to do. If I'm wrong, hopefully I'll be able to hear Him tell me what's right!

 

[Athanasian Creed]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Jude 1:3 (b) (KJV) ... it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

We should also be as the Bereans in Acts 17 -

Acts 17:10-11 (KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Here the Bereans had a teacher who worked miracles and whose life modelled Christ's greater than any other man who lived then or has lived since YET they still searched the Scriptures to test Paul's words to see if they were biblical. How much more so should we today, with false doctrines and heretics abounding, do the same thing - whether it's something we hear from the pulpit, read on the internet or from a book!!

Here are some quotes to ponder:

"It is obvious that Jesus and the Father are one in perfect love, but are they not also one in perfect doctrine? Certainly Jesus in not asking in this prayer that God's children be united in love regardless of doctrine! Without sound doctrine there can be no Christian unity. And without sound doctrine there can be no true Christian love either." (Source: Human Races, a message delivered at Indian Hills Community Church, Lincoln, Nebraska, Fall of 1984).

"Any of it [teaching] that is good is in the Word of God, and any that is not in the Word of God is not good. I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I'm awfully sorry, you don't bring any references with you'" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 67)
- A.W. Tozer

"To remain divided is sinful! Did not our Lord pray, that they may be one, even as we are one (Jn 17:22)? A chorus of ecumenical voices keep harping the unity tune. What they are saying is, “Christians of all doctrinal shades and beliefs must come together in one visible organization, regardless....Unite, unite!”
Such teaching is false, reckless and dangerous. Truth alone must determine our alignments. Truth comes before unity. Unity without truth is hazardous. Our Lord's prayer in John 17 must be read in its full context. Look at verse 17: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Only those sanctified through the Word can be one in Christ. To teach otherwise is to betray the Gospel."
- Charles H. Spurgeon, "The Essence of Separation"

"Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth."
- Basil of Caesarea



Ray

 

[rosiecotton]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Ray

But whose doctrine?

 

[jad123]

But whose doctrine?

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

 

[mact]

sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

I am in agreement then...
Let me suggest two books for you in your study. They have both been life changing for me.
http://www.amazon.com/Will-Real-Her...f=pd_bxgy_b_img_b/102-6029140-8656928?ie=UTF8
and
http://www.amazon.com/Dictionary-Ea...ef=sr_1_1/102-6029140-8656928?ie=UTF8&s=books

In Him
Rick

 

[mact]

sorry I wasn't very clear in that statement both you and threeinone. What I meant was as far as if you were going to get a big thick book on doctrine like the heavy stuff, I would go to romans. I agree with you, I consider the sermon on the mount kinda the 'ten commandments' of new testament christians. All scripture is inspired by God and given for reproof, edification, etc. I agree. All I'm saying is as far as the heavy doctrine stuff I'd go with romans. You see if you start studying everything like at school, you'll see that doctrine is more along the lines of theology, a bit deeper, while I would consider the sermon on the mount the standards and the lifestyle. Doctrine is the belief system and the lifestyle and standards are a somewhat separate field while theology is of course the very deep ground work. I like studying Theology and doctrine from all different denominations. I'm workign on my bachelor's in theology right now but I'm not studying one particular doctrinal version of it. I'm studying each. Am I making any sense? All christians may agree on lifestyle standards or the way christians should act, but doctrine can vary based on background etc. baptists have different doctrines then holiness or lutherans even though they have the same standards for the christian life. you know what I mean? Doctrine is like once saved always saved or not, or pre-millenial or post-millenial, or pre-trib or post-trib. Stuff like that. Maybe I'm just taking words to literally in the thread. lol Sorry if I'm not making any sense.

Yes, I agree that sound doctrine is very important in establishing and keeping our faith.

However, there are certain doctrines that are paramount for salvation i.e. the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, and that He is our Lord and Saviour and is the Son of God and is God.

But any denominational differences on doctrine ... well like St Paul said, we only see through a dark glass ....

I don't think God holds a clipboard in heaven, and hands out an examination of what you know about Him. Maybe once we get to heaven, well yes, not maybe... we will know the fulness of His glory and the 'correct' doctrine. In the meantime it is good to fine tune our doctrines .. but not dogmatically saying this is the only way ... when Jesus Himself has made the gospel simple.

What I think is important is that you know WHAT you believe and WHY you believe, that you would not doubt Jesus Christ as Lord. Knowing the doctrines to support those questions encourage faith and edification.

Yes, but look at what Paul was teaching Timothy when he made the comments about watching our doctrine in this scripture. We must not water down what was being said. A little false doctrine (aka a lie from satan) is like the yeast that works it's way through all the dough.
IN HIM
rick

 

[mact]

YES, YES, YES - doctrine is of extreme importance. The word says -

Jude 1:3 (b) (KJV) ... it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

We should also be as the Bereans in Acts 17 -

Acts 17:10-11 (KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming [thither] went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Here the Bereans had a teacher who worked miracles and whose life modelled Christ's greater than any other man who lived then or has lived since YET they still searched the Scriptures to test Paul's words to see if they were biblical. How much more so should we today, with false doctrines and heretics abounding, do the same thing - whether it's something we hear from the pulpit, read on the internet or from a book!!

Here are some quotes to ponder:

"It is obvious that Jesus and the Father are one in perfect love, but are they not also one in perfect doctrine? Certainly Jesus in not asking in this prayer that God's children be united in love regardless of doctrine! Without sound doctrine there can be no Christian unity. And without sound doctrine there can be no true Christian love either." (Source: Human Races, a message delivered at Indian Hills Community Church, Lincoln, Nebraska, Fall of 1984).

"Any of it [teaching] that is good is in the Word of God, and any that is not in the Word of God is not good. I am a Bible Christian and if an archangel with a wingspread as broad as a constellation shining like the sun were to come and offer me some new truth, I'd ask him for a reference. If he could not show me where it is found in the Bible, I would bow him out and say, 'I'm awfully sorry, you don't bring any references with you'" (Counterfeit Revival, p. 67)
- A.W. Tozer

"To remain divided is sinful! Did not our Lord pray, that they may be one, even as we are one (Jn 17:22)? A chorus of ecumenical voices keep harping the unity tune. What they are saying is, “Christians of all doctrinal shades and beliefs must come together in one visible organization, regardless....Unite, unite!”
Such teaching is false, reckless and dangerous. Truth alone must determine our alignments. Truth comes before unity. Unity without truth is hazardous. Our Lord's prayer in John 17 must be read in its full context. Look at verse 17: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” Only those sanctified through the Word can be one in Christ. To teach otherwise is to betray the Gospel."
- Charles H. Spurgeon, "The Essence of Separation"

"Therefore let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favour of that side will be cast the vote of truth."
- Basil of Caesarea



Ray

Amen Brother!

 

[mact]

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

Due to the fact that there are so many denominations and doctrines out there, I think an important thing to do is examine the scriptures to verify if what is being said is true. This goes down to how your church says you become a Christian. Then... take a look at the writtings of the 1st-3rd century Christians and see what they believed. Especially the 1st and early 2nd century church leaders were taught directly from the Disciples of Jesus. Now these letters are not inspired word of God, but they offer a great resource to find out what our doctrine should be.

In Him
Rick

 

[Athanasian Creed]

... Then... take a look at the writtings of the 1st-3rd century Christians and see what they believed. Especially the 1st and early 2nd century church leaders were taught directly from the Disciples of Jesus. Now these letters are not inspired word of God, but they offer a great resource to find out what our doctrine should be.

In Him
Rick

Hmmm...well you might want to check this site out on the view points of the ECF -

http://www.bible.ca/indexHistory.htm

Do you believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?? It would seem that many of the ECF of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, using Jesus' words to Nicodemus about "being born of the water and of the Spirit" as meaning baptism, whereas most commentators are divided on what it means:

Of water and of the Spirit. Water is emblematical of the public profession of repentance, and the Spirit is the agent that produces the inward change. The meaning, therefore, is, that an entire change in the spiritual condition of the soul must be openly avowed and truly experienced, to fit the sinner for the kingdom of heaven. (Abbott)

Be born of water. By water, here, is evidently signified baptism. Thus the word is used in Eph 5:26; Tit 3:5. Baptism was practised by the Jews in receiving a Gentile as a proselyte. It was practised by John among the Jews; and Jesus here says that it is an ordinance of his religion, and the sign and seal of the renewing influences of his Spirit. So he said (Mr 16:16), "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." It is clear from these places, and from the example of the apostles (Ac 2:38; 8:12; 13:1-52; 28:31,31; 9:18; 10:47; 28:31; 16:15; 28:31; 18:8; 22:16; Ga 3:27), that they considered this ordinance as binding on all who professed to love the Lord Jesus. And though it cannot be said that none who are not baptized can be saved, yet Jesus meant, undoubtedly, to be understood as affirming that this was to be the regular and uniform way of entering into his church; that it was the appropriate mode of making a profession of religion; and that a man who neglected this, when the duty was made known to him, neglected a plain command of God. It is clear, also, that any other command of God might as well be neglected or violated as this, and that it is the duty of everyone not only to love the Saviour, but to make an acknowledgment of that love by being baptized, and by devoting himself thus to his service. But, lest Nicodemus should suppose that this was all that was meant, he added that it was necessary that he should be born of the Spirit also. (Barnes)

Nicodemus not rightly understanding Christ's meaning in the former verse, our Saviour is pleased to explain himself in this, and tells him, That the birth he spake of was not natural, but spiritual, wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God, whose working is like water, cleansing and purifying the soul from all sinful defilement. (Burkitt)

Born of water and of the Spirit; purified by the Holy Spirit; of which baptism by water is a divinely appointed symbol. (FBN)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
All agree that the birth of the Spirit refers to the inward, or spiritual change that takes place, and all candid authorities agree that born of water refers to baptism. John the Baptist baptized both Jew and Gentile as a sign of purification by repentance from past sins. Nicodemus would then have certainly understood by the expression, 'born of water,' a reference to this rite of baptism." (PNTC)

Of water and the Spirit. Why does Jesus add ex hudatos (coming up out of water) here? In verse Joh 3:3 we have "anôthen" (from above) which is repeated in verse Joh 3:7, while in verse Joh 3:8 we have only ek tou pneumatos (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by ex hudatos (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (Joh 3:3,5,7)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse Joh 3:6 as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit.
By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. (A.T. Robertson)

Except one be born of water and the Spirit. By far the vast majority of scholars consider the word "water" in this verse as a reference to Christian baptism. The Cambridge Bible says "the outward sign and inward grace of Christian baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiased mind can scarcely avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still clearer when we compare Joh 1:26,33, where the Baptist declares, 'I baptize in water,' the Messiah 'baptizeth in the Holy Spirit.' The fathers, both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular unanimity." Water and Spirit are joined at Mt 28:19; Ac 2:38; 19:1-7; Tit 3:5. (TFG)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit - Except he experience that great inward change by the Spirit, and be baptized (wherever baptism can be had) as the outward sign and means of it. (Wesley)

So, as you can see for yourself, there is somewhat a differing of opinion on the necessity of baptism as it relates to salvation.


Ray

 

[mact]

Excellent point!!!!! Whose doctrine is right. I am sure there will be the generic answers (Jesus, God, Bible, etc.) But come on. Catholic doctrine, Orthodox, Protestant. If it is Protestant, then what, no clear agreement here either. Doctrine differs on baptism, OSAS, communion, etc. And the best part of it all is taht WE ALL THINK WE ARE RIGHT. So then what do yo do. Take the weak approach and just speak of love and acceptance? Or tell people to look at scripture. Heck, we can't agree on what scripture is telling us.

Hmmm...well you might want to check this site out on the view points of the ECF -

http://www.bible.ca/indexHistory.htm

Do you believe that baptism is necessary for salvation?? It would seem that many of the ECF of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, using Jesus' words to Nicodemus about "being born of the water and of the Spirit" as meaning baptism, whereas most commentators are divided on what it means:

Of water and of the Spirit. Water is emblematical of the public profession of repentance, and the Spirit is the agent that produces the inward change. The meaning, therefore, is, that an entire change in the spiritual condition of the soul must be openly avowed and truly experienced, to fit the sinner for the kingdom of heaven. (Abbott)

Be born of water. By water, here, is evidently signified baptism. Thus the word is used in Eph 5:26; Tit 3:5. Baptism was practised by the Jews in receiving a Gentile as a proselyte. It was practised by John among the Jews; and Jesus here says that it is an ordinance of his religion, and the sign and seal of the renewing influences of his Spirit. So he said (Mr 16:16), "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." It is clear from these places, and from the example of the apostles (Ac 2:38; 8:12; 13:1-52; 28:31,31; 9:18; 10:47; 28:31; 16:15; 28:31; 18:8; 22:16; Ga 3:27), that they considered this ordinance as binding on all who professed to love the Lord Jesus. And though it cannot be said that none who are not baptized can be saved, yet Jesus meant, undoubtedly, to be understood as affirming that this was to be the regular and uniform way of entering into his church; that it was the appropriate mode of making a profession of religion; and that a man who neglected this, when the duty was made known to him, neglected a plain command of God. It is clear, also, that any other command of God might as well be neglected or violated as this, and that it is the duty of everyone not only to love the Saviour, but to make an acknowledgment of that love by being baptized, and by devoting himself thus to his service. But, lest Nicodemus should suppose that this was all that was meant, he added that it was necessary that he should be born of the Spirit also. (Barnes)

Nicodemus not rightly understanding Christ's meaning in the former verse, our Saviour is pleased to explain himself in this, and tells him, That the birth he spake of was not natural, but spiritual, wrought in the soul by the Spirit of God, whose working is like water, cleansing and purifying the soul from all sinful defilement. (Burkitt)

Born of water and of the Spirit; purified by the Holy Spirit; of which baptism by water is a divinely appointed symbol. (FBN)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
All agree that the birth of the Spirit refers to the inward, or spiritual change that takes place, and all candid authorities agree that born of water refers to baptism. John the Baptist baptized both Jew and Gentile as a sign of purification by repentance from past sins. Nicodemus would then have certainly understood by the expression, 'born of water,' a reference to this rite of baptism." (PNTC)

Of water and the Spirit. Why does Jesus add ex hudatos (coming up out of water) here? In verse Joh 3:3 we have "anôthen" (from above) which is repeated in verse Joh 3:7, while in verse Joh 3:8 we have only ek tou pneumatos (of the Spirit) in the best manuscripts. Many theories exist. One view makes baptism, referred to by ex hudatos (coming up out of water), essential to the birth of the Spirit, as the means of obtaining the new birth of the Spirit. If so, why is water mentioned only once in the three demands of Jesus (Joh 3:3,5,7)? Calvin makes water and Spirit refer to the one act (the cleansing work of the Spirit). Some insist on the language in verse Joh 3:6 as meaning the birth of the flesh coming in a sac of water in contrast to the birth of the Spirit.
By using water (the symbol before the thing signified) first and adding Spirit, he may have hoped to turn the mind of Nicodemus away from mere physical birth and, by pointing to the baptism of John on confession of sin which the Pharisees had rejected, to turn his attention to the birth from above by the Spirit. That is to say the mention of "water" here may have been for the purpose of helping Nicodemus without laying down a fundamental principle of salvation as being by means of baptism. (A.T. Robertson)

Except one be born of water and the Spirit. By far the vast majority of scholars consider the word "water" in this verse as a reference to Christian baptism. The Cambridge Bible says "the outward sign and inward grace of Christian baptism are here clearly given, and an unbiased mind can scarcely avoid seeing this plain fact. This becomes still clearer when we compare Joh 1:26,33, where the Baptist declares, 'I baptize in water,' the Messiah 'baptizeth in the Holy Spirit.' The fathers, both Greek and Latin, thus interpret the passage with singular unanimity." Water and Spirit are joined at Mt 28:19; Ac 2:38; 19:1-7; Tit 3:5. (TFG)

Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit - Except he experience that great inward change by the Spirit, and be baptized (wherever baptism can be had) as the outward sign and means of it. (Wesley)

So, as you can see for yourself, there is somewhat a differing of opinion on the necessity of baptism as it relates to salvation.


Ray

Yes I do believe Baptism is required as did all the EC leaders. LOTS of "modern" church theologens have gone to the extreme to explain baptism away.
IN Him
Rick

 

[threeinone]

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

 

[holo]

I realize one can say that as long as I believe anything at all, that can be called doctrine, but apart from that, I'm no fan of the term, so to speak.

Basically, I think it's about a person, not a belief, creed or a definition. It's about Jesus. Look at all the folks in the NT who met him personally. He didn't offer them doctrine, he offered them himself.

Yes, but look at what Paul was teaching Timothy when he made the comments about watching our doctrine in this scripture. We must not water down what was being said. A little false doctrine (aka a lie from satan) is like the yeast that works it's way through all the dough.
IN HIM
rick

If that is so, your own doctrine is probably all wrong by now, since it's pretty much impossible that you've got every single detail wrong.

But luckily, you don't have to. Personally, I don't really have a doctrine on the trinity, communion, baptism, tounges and so forth, and I'm doing great

 

[threeinone]

Does it matter what a church teaches? I SAY YES.

1Ti 4:16
Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; persevere in these things, for as you do this you will ensure salvation both for yourself and for those who hear you. NASB

Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV

Take heed vnto thy selfe, and vnto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this, thou shalt both saue thy selfe, and them that heare thee. KJ 1611


Would the opposite be true too??? If you are teaching the wrong thing, those you teach and yourself will not have ensured salvation?

In Him
Rick

The OP post is a question of church Doctrine. There was some question somewhere as to whether it was our own doctrine or church doctrine or what. I never even thought of personal Doctrine because that would be personal interpretation of the bible which I thought nobody around here agreed with. This is what I was thinking about.

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

 

[mact]

This is probably as much a question as anything else because I am not totally sure of where Doctrine comes form. I assume Doctrine comes from the leaders of the Church reading the bible and basing the Doctrines of their church of how they interpret the bible.

I say it that way because every Church/Religion has Doctrines, all different from each other's Doctrines in some way so people go to certain Churches because they agree with that Churches Doctrines.

So I guess I am saying it seems that the Doctrines come from the bible according to the leaders of that Churche's interpretation. Perhaps this is not the way it is. But if this is the way it is, then interpreting the bible is what we do. I don't see anything wrong with that. Just that I cannot see all the churches adopting the exact same doctrine any more than each of us agrees with every other.

To me it is just in agreeing to our differences and uniting in our love for God. And I edit, in our belief in Jesus as Savior, as God.

Maybe I don't express myself too well here but I have done the best I know at the moment.

I realize one can say that as long as I believe anything at all, that can be called doctrine, but apart from that, I'm no fan of the term, so to speak.

Basically, I think it's about a person, not a belief, creed or a definition. It's about Jesus. Look at all the folks in the NT who met him personally. He didn't offer them doctrine, he offered them himself.

If that is so, your own doctrine is probably all wrong by now, since it's pretty much impossible that you've got every single detail wrong.

But luckily, you don't have to. Personally, I don't really have a doctrine on the trinity, communion, baptism, tounges and so forth, and I'm doing great

Well the scripture ACTUALLY says this... so even if you think something different that doesn't make it change.
LIFE and DOCTRINE both must be payed close attention too.

Life is how you live your doctrine... Doctrine is based on your correct or incorrect understanding of scripture. To him who has ears let him hear... If we are humble to God's word we will understand his word.

The following is the "rules" if you will, to the NT Kingdom of God. The doctrine of belonging to HIS kingdom.


Mat 5:3-48 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (4) "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. (5) "Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth. (6) "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied. (7) "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy. (8) "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. (9) "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (10) "Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (11) "Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. (12) "Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. (13) "You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men. (14) "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden; (15) nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. (16) "Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven. (17) "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. (18) "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (19) "Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (20) "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. (21) "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.' (22) "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell. (23) "Therefore if you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, (24) leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering. (25) "Make friends quickly with your opponent at law while you are with him on the way, so that your opponent may not hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the officer, and you be thrown into prison. (26) "Truly I say to you, you will not come out of there until you have paid up the last cent. (27) "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; (28) but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (29) "If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. (30) "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. (31) "It was said, 'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; (32) but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (33) "Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.' (34) "But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, (35) or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. (36) "Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. (37) "But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil. (38) "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.' (39) "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. (40) "If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also. (41) "Whoever forces you to go one mile, go with him two. (42) "Give to him who asks of you, and do not turn away from him who wants to borrow from you. (43) "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' (44) "But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, (45) so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. (46) "For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? (47) "If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? (48) "Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

 

[threeinone]

Hi mact

I get crosseyed trying to read that. It is extremely hard on the eyes all together like that. I assume you mean the New Testament Kingdom of God is His Kingdom. Why? And how does that fit in with Doctrine. Church Doctrine? Personal Doctrine?