Does God care about which denomination or church you belong to?

[BobRyan]

Mark 7 is about the Pharisees lipservice and hypocrisy isn't it?

In Mark 7 Jesus is not offering them "another denomination" he is a Jew and called "Rabbi" (Teacher) by many Jews of his day. yet he points to doctrinal error so significant that the text says "in vain do they worship Me" in Mark 7.

 

[zoidar]

False doctrine matters to God.

I'm sure it matters. But let's face it. Most (or even all?) churches have one or another false doctrine. I don't think that is God's biggest concern with Christians today.

 

[BobRyan]

n
Galatians, isn't that about Christians who wanted to go back to the Mosaic Law, circumsision etc?

We don't have that in our churches today, luckly so I might add

In Gal 5 -- Paul addresses Christian who were being snookered by the Christian Jews referenced in Acts 15:1-2 - who argued that gentiles could not be saved unless they were circumcised like the other Christian Jews were. It is Christian-on-Christian issues just as Gal 1:6-9 says that "insider" problem had insiders distorting the Gospel

 

[BobRyan]

I'm sure it matters. But let's face it. Most (or even all) churches have one or another false doctrine. I don't think that is God's biggest concern with Christians today.

"IN vain do they worship Me" - is not a "does not matter" alias.

Gal 1 -- Paul says "let them be accursed" and is talking about anyone even if they claim to be an Apostle or an angel from heaven - having some --spin-- on the gospel that amounts to "another gospel"

I gave you examples all the way from Mormon and JW to Catholic and all in between and the people in those various groups freely admit 'it would matter"

 

[Hazelelponi]

The difference is that Christians (Christ is the greek term for Messiah) accept Jesus of Nazareth IS that Messiah.

It's a difference that is salvific, making it more than a mere difference of opinion on something non-essential.

I'm Calvinistic, but the debate between Arminian and Calvinist only matters to a degree. It's not the be all end all... it's about whether we are holding onto Christ for our salvation and there are people in both camps going to heaven and in both camps who will see judgement, making the debate itself seem a little silly at times.

 

[zoidar]

"IN vain do they worship Me" - is not a "does not matter" alias.

Gal 1 -- Paul says "let them be accursed" and is talking about anyone even if they claim to be an Apostle or an angel from heaven - having some --spin-- on the gospel that amounts to "another gospel"

I gave you examples all the way from Mormon and JW to Catholic and all in between and the people in those various groups freely admit 'it would matter"

Mormons and JW are not considered being Christian churches, as far as I know.

I didn't say it doesn't matter. I said: "I don't think it matters that much".

 

[BobRyan]

I'm Calvinistic, but the debate between Arminian and Calvinist only matters to a degree. It's not the be all end all... .

I am not claiming that everyone in any group at all is lost - that is not my point. My point is that doctrinal error matters just as Jesus said in Mark 7:6-13 'in vain do they worship me" where in that case it was an "in-house" dispute, not a claim that all Jews were lost.

And when you see Arminians and Calvinists in an open unrestrained debate they QUICKLY go to "well sir THAT is ANOTHER Gospel" -- you see them freely admit to the level of difference -- both sides will make that claim about the other POV.

And the fact is - if you go through a careful study of the Gospel as God's salvation solution for mankind - it is impossible to claim that the Arminian version and the 4 or 5 point Calvinist version of that salvation solution is 'identical". They both agree that Christ is God the Son and died for somebody's sins - but that is where the similarities end

We are not talking about insignificant differences like "was God looking left or right when you were saved" - we are talking about models for salvation that are very different.

I have never seen any indepth discussion between Arminians and Calvinists where at the end they both say "well then it is 6 of one - and half-dozen of the other like - potato vs potahto

 

[Strathos]

There have been and are congregations of people calling themselves Christians who are mortally sinful in their hearts, where the Holy Spirit is not among them in their gatherings.

Careful not to name names, though. Forum rules.

 

[BobRyan]

It says they make a poor choice. I think you can be saved and still make poor choices for different reasons. Or they think they can be a light for the people there, waking them up.

But is the question "are there saved people in every denomination"? or is it "does doctrine matter, does error matter"?

 

[Hazelelponi]

I am not claiming that everyone in any group at all is lost - that is not my point. My point is that doctrinal error matters just as Jesus said in Mark 7:6-13 'in vain do they worship me" where in that case it was an "in-house" dispute, not a claim that all Jews were lost.

And when you see Arminians and Calvinists in an open unrestrained debate they QUICKLY go to "well sir THAT is ANOTHER Gospel" -- you see them freely admit to the level of difference -- both sides will make that claim about the other POV.

And the fact is - if you go through a careful study of the Gospel as God's salvation solution for mankind - it is impossible to claim that the Arminian version and the 4 or 5 point Calvinist version of that salvation solution is 'identical". They both agree that Christ is God the Son and died for somebody's sins - but that is where the similarities end

We are not talking about insignificant differences like "was God looking left or right when you were saved" - we are talking about models for salvation that are very different.

I have never seen any indepth discussion between Arminians and Calvinists where at the end they both say "well then it is 6 of one - and half-dozen of the other like - potato vs potahto

Yet under the surface the difference between the two groups really is insignificant.

Both claim the saved work and should work, and both claim Christ is necessary to salvation. So is the person sitting under either Pastor really missing so much as to be misled to the point of being unsaved themselves? No.. I don't think so, not unless they take an extreme view of either position, which may have more to do with their own hearing of the message given than it is the message itself.

 

[zoidar]

But is the question "are there saved people in every denomination"? or is it "does doctrine matter, does error matter"?

Yes it matter, but how much does it matter? Are the doctrines I hold more important than my heart?

 

[BobRyan]

Yes it matter, but how much does it matter? Are the doctrines I hold more important than my heart?

Let's take an example in history -

Rev 12 describes 1260 years of dark ages history that happens sometime after the ascension of Christ. In those years a great many saints lost their lives over doctrine. Blood of the martyrs - seed of the saints - for centuries.

So then we all condemn the persecuting religious powers be they the centuries of Catholic rulers or the decades of protestant governments condemning and "exterminating" (Lateran IV term) the other side, that it was really a crime against humanity to persecute and exterminate like that.

But what about those saints that Rev 12 depicts as the good guys who were getting mowed down by the millions over centuries of time? Were they really being foolish to cling to what they viewed as good doctrine at the cost of their lives?? Should the protesting Catholics (and several other groups that were under persecution) simply have "Stopped" and said "wait a minute! what are we doing here - we are putting our lives at risk. Doctrine is just not worth it. We will stop here and now"???

Or would that have put them at risk of being on the short-end of the stick described by Christ in Mark 7:6-13? and by Paul in Gal 1:6-9 in your view?

They appear to view the "significance" of the issue of false doctrine - at the level we see in the Bible texts found here -- Today at 7:31 PM #17

Yet under the surface the difference between the two groups really is insignificant.

Would you consider that the answer for the dark ages? The saints should simply have laid down their faith in doctrines as they understood them and said "well whatever! This is too hard and too risky with nothing to gain other than correct doctrine"?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Does God care about which denomination or church you belong to?

My thoughts on this is that God wants you belong to a church where its members take God seriously, live for Him. I don't think it matters that much whether you belong to a Catholic church, Orthodox church, Angelican church, Reformed church, Lutheran church, Pentacostal church or any other Protestant church.

What I think God is serious about is our heart, that it's of less importance our theological views. Even children or maybe I should say especially children that don't have that strong formulated theological views, but really have a heart for God truly belong to the kingdom of God, and that is what God is looking for in all of us.

What do you think?

But Jesus said, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
— Matthew 19:14

God will care if it's detrimental to His calling in your life.

Also there are some instances where the foundation of the faith Jesus identified is turned on it's head, one might feel like they're suffocating being in a church - Like any Father God wants His children to be able to breathe, that's natural.

 

[BobRyan]

So while I believe it's essential to hold onto Christ alone for one's salvation I'm not sitting in condemnation of a message just because they raise works higher than I might - which is kind of funny because you hear more about sin and works in Calvinist churches than you do most Arminian ones.

I am in an Arminian denomination and I would argue that my denomination does give the topic of sin and works a pretty fair amount of air time. But in general I do agree with your comparison -- there are some Arminian settings in other denominations that do no have as much focus on that subject as do certain Calvinist groups.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Let's take an example in history -

Rev 12 describes 1260 years of dark ages history that happens sometime after the ascension of Christ. In those years a great many saints lost their lives over doctrine. Blood of the martyrs - seed of the saints - for centuries.

So then we all condemn the persecuting religious powers be they the centuries of Catholic rulers or the decades of protestant governments condemning and "exterminating" (Lateran IV term) the other side, that it was really a crime against humanity to persecute and exterminate like that.

But what about those saints that Rev 12 depicts as the good guys who were getting mowed down by the millions over centuries of time? Were they really being foolish to cling to what they viewed as good doctrine at the cost of their lives?? Should the protesting Catholics (and several other groups that were under persecution) simply have "Stopped" and said "wait a minute! what are we doing here - we are putting our lives at risk. Doctrine is just not worth it. We will stop here and now"???

Or would that have put them at risk of being on the short-end of the stick described by Christ in Mark 7:6-13? and by Paul in Gal 1:6-9 in your view?



Would you consider that the answer for the dark ages? The saints should simply have laid down their faith in doctrines as they understood them and said "well whatever! This is too hard and too risky with nothing to gain other than correct doctrine"?

If it came down to it I would give my life for what I percieve as correct doctrine today concerning essential doctrines in practice.

But no one is asking me to, and I refuse to condemn others lest I find myself condemned. In the end God is our judge, and I'm not going to damn people to hell just because I disagree with their interpretation, when in practice they aren't so far from me.

 

[BobRyan]

If it came down to it I would give my life for what I percieve as correct doctrine today concerning essential doctrines in practice.

But no one is asking me to, and I refuse to condemn others lest I find myself condemned. In the end God is our judge, and I'm not going to damn people to hell just because I disagree with their interpretation, when in practice they aren't so far from me.

Ok let's agree that the topic is not about "condemning others" - it is about what I choose to do when it comes to doctrine that is true vs false - and how important or significant I view the issue of false doctrine.

Christ and Paul put that significance wayyyyyyy up here -- Today at 7:31 PM #17

But they never say "so torture, torment, persecute anyone that does not share your view of who to pray to how to pray when to worship etc"

I don't think that Christ and Paul would be using such strong terms "on a whim" knowing that saints would lose their lives over this issue in the coming years. If it really were six of one and half-dozen of the other they would have spoken along the lines of "Don't sweat the small stuff we will all find out about it when we get to heaven" which would have saved everyone a lot of grief and heartache over the centuries of war over doctrine and religion.

So let's take a simple example

"Love your neighbor as yourself" - Lev 19:18 - means you can never - ever persecute/torment/exterminate anyone for holding to some opposing doctrine.

Now we might be able on this thread to all sign up for that - but I am pretty certain that there are some groups of Christians still around today that would have a very hard time saying that such a truth is "timeless" and applies equally to every age of the Christian church in defining right from wrong behavior.

 

[Hazelelponi]

I don't think that Christ and Paul would be using such strong terms "on a whim" knowing that saints would lose their lives over this issue

Again, your talking about salvation itself hinging upon belief in the Messiah, or the rejection of Him.

That's like saying Islam is coming to tell you the choice is say shahadah or die, and when the time comes it's better to die.

That's different than saying a Calvinist attending an Arminian church will not go to hell for it, or vice versa. Or that everyone sitting under an Arminian pastor is damned because their doctrine is incorrect, or vice versa.

The only reason my preference is to sit under a Calvinist pastor is because bad doctrine sets my teeth on edge, not because I think everyone in an Arminian church is going to hell.. but I dont see my pastoral choice to be salvific.

 

[BobRyan]

Again, your talking about salvation itself hinging upon belief in the Messiah, or the rejection of Him.

The examples I gave here --Today at 7:31 PM #17 were from Mark 7 and Gal 1 and Gal 5:4

Neither of those were about "who is the Messiah".

In Mark 7 we have an in-house debate about the issue of "Corban" vs the 5th Commandment and also the issue of traditions related to baptizing hands and pots after returning from the market place.

In Gal 1:6-9 it is just about false doctrine coming into the church from within - an in-house debate.

Gal 5:4 was another in-house debate between certain Christian-Jews vs other gentile Christians as we see in Act 15:1 and in Acts 20

Nobody in either of those cases were arguing for "we reject the Messiah and you don't"

So while Muslims and Hindus may well be making such arguments - we don't.

The point is that all of them are examples of in-house debates.

 

[Hazelelponi]

The examples I gave here --Today at 7:31 PM #17 were from Mark 7 and Gal 1 and Gal 5:4

Neither of those were about "who is the Messiah".

In Mark 7 we have an in-house debate about the issue of "Corban" vs the 5th Commandment and also the issue of traditions related to baptizing hands and pots after returning from the market place.

In Gal 1:6-9 it is just about false doctrine coming into the church from within - an in-house debate.

Gal 5:4 was another in-house debate between certain Christian-Jews vs other gentile Christians as we see in Act 15:1 and in Acts 20

Nobody in either of those cases were arguing for "we reject the Messiah and you don't"

So while Muslims and Hindus may well be making such arguments - we don't

You said "loose their lives" - but those weren't the issues anyone lost their lives over.

 

[BobRyan]

I'm sure it matters. But let's face it. Most (or even all?) churches have one or another false doctrine. I don't think that is God's biggest concern with Christians today.

Given that everyone differs on at least one doctrine -- then at "best" exactly one - is correct on everything and at worst - everyone has some error.

Certainly God would know what the real situation is and short of a prophet with a direct-line to God we will simply have to wait until we get to heaven to know if all had some error or if one had none.