Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations we find? Or, is it the Lord?

[PeaceJoyLove]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations that we find? Or, is it the Lord? Denominations that contradict one another, and claim inspiration from God. How can they be?

Yes.

Then you can not grow and mature in more and more doctrinal truth. Only form a social club in the name of Christ. Some people like the idea as being seen as being tolerant. Some churches will give them that opportunity to think well of themselves.

Yet.... If the teaching of the Church is accurate and sound doctrine? It will teach what is needed to straighten out the Calvinist... or he will leave. And, if tongues are not for today? Then that one will leave as well. Sound doctrine does that. Many do not want it. For it requires that we must deny self and take up our crosses if we are in fact going to be following the Word of God.

2 Tim 4:3

"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine.
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great
number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."​

When we truly seek Him, we will find Him...
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. John 14:26

First the natural, then the spiritual (as it relates to the process taking place within)...duality, not single of eye perceiving for a time...perception of lack causes a measuring and dividing of that which has always been ONE God/son/spirit/truth.

But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. John 16:7 (being a picture of the process taking place within...the revealing/revelation...

 

[Rajni]

Is Satan behind the division of the many denominations we find? Or, is it the Lord?

It's the fact that there are as many relationships to
God as there are people. This is why there are not
only so many denominations within a particular religion,
but also so many religions.

It's incredibly difficult (not to mention inadvisable) to
simply shove God—or oneself, for that matter—into a
single theological box and call it a day.

-

 

[GenemZ]

When we are faced with each others differences of beliefs, some of those beliefs quite disturbing depending upon our way of thinking, it presses us to make the decision of what we will hate. And we learn about our self by what we find our self hating. Do we hate falsehood? We are supposed to. But do we allow another person's falsehood to move us to hate that person?

Nowhere in Scripture are we told to hate believers who follow false teaching. But, we are to hate the teachings and to *separate* our selves from them... Either by avoiding them bodily, or waiting patiently for them to leave your church by effectively refuting what they wrongly believe... Yet, while in doing so, in hopes that they may repent and turn from their evil.

 

[GenemZ]

Yes.



When we truly seek Him, we will find Him...
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you. John 14:26

First the natural, then the spiritual (as it relates to the process taking place within)...duality, not single of eye perceiving for a time...perception of lack causes a measuring and dividing of that which has always been ONE God/son/spirit/truth.

But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. John 16:7 (being a picture of the process taking place within...the revealing/revelation...

Yes... true! But one can not test the spirits (who will gladly act as a pseudo counterfeit Holy Spirit).

The only way to test? Find a competent teacher who knows how to teach soundly. There will always be a few amongst the many who are not. Sounds simple. Right?

The Holy Spirit will lead those who are being victimized by false teachings to a good pastor if that believer's heart is right before God. It is that simple For we end up getting as much from God as we are humble before God. Some believers learning this will walk in false humility... and? /////// find false teachers to tell them that they are right with God.

No one gets away with anything with God. And, no one who chooses wrongly is with excuse. For the Holy Spirit is everywhere and knows all things and will lead those honest before God to what is good.

Hard to believe. But some believers who read the Bible are so stuck on their own opinions that they will seek teachers to reinforce what they want to believe. These believers will be shown to be unworthy to be trusted with much power. They will lose all their rewards when before the Lord when their works are shown to have been wood hay and stubble. All to be burned up and lost at the evaluation of the believer.

Its that simple.

 

[Monk Brendan]

And they are NOT Sola Scriptura. It's common for Catholics to try to lay the origin of division on Protestants,

Gee, Abion, the Anglican church doesn't believe in Sola Scriptura, either. Sola Scriptura was not even an issue when St. Thomas au Becket was around. Nor was Henry II. He only wanted someone to rid him of that meddlesome priest.

BTW, Albion, if you were SS, you wouldn't have women priests, either.

 

[Monk Brendan]

It is Jezebel being thrown out the window....

Would you prefer it if I called you donkeys braying on a hill?

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Would you prefer it if I called you donkeys braying on a hill?

You can call me what ever you want as long as it makes you feel important.

You asked what the picture in my avatar was and I told you, it is Jezebel being thrown out the window....ironic...

Let's review our interaction.

You engaged me, I did not engage you. BTW I have seen you on here for a while yet I never engaged you. The is a reason why I haven't. The big hat tells me all I need to know. And you are just proving my theory about you was correct from what is our first interaction.

You quoted me incorrectly when I said when one study the roots of "many" denominations you find the root of the splits are greed, power, and control.

You then invoked some pseudo intellectual angle about the RCC to which I was not even talking about and accused me of judgement of the Catholic Church...again I had not mentioned the Catholic church up to that point.

Then you went on to tell me to google it because I know nothing and you know soooooo much about the RCC. Again, I wasn't even originally talking about the RCC.

Now you are just being belligerent.

 

[Albion]

BTW, Albion, if you were SS, you wouldn't have women priests, either.

My church doesn't. But by the way, both Tradition AND Scripture teach an all-male clergy, so I have to agree with you on that matter.

 

[☦Marius☦]

If that were true, that would be Sola Scriptura. Checking everything by Scripture is what Sola Scriptura means.

But it's not true; some aspects of what's called Tradition are not found in Scripture.

Sola Scriptura means that nothing outside the Bible is valid or needed for a Christian's life. This is different then saying our Traditions are checked by scripture- as in none of them go against or seek to override scripture. Sola Scriptura enthusiasts claim that they have no traditions outside of what is directly given from the Bible.

As for Transubstantiation- I don't believe it, but just because something isn't in the Bible doesn't mean its not a reality. The theology of the Trinity and Incarnation found in the Nicene creed come to mind- Derived from the Scripture, but not directly stated within it.

 

[Radagast]

Sola Scriptura means that nothing outside the Bible is valid or needed for a Christian's life.

No, it doesn't mean that. To quote from here:

One of the great slogans of the sixteenth-century Reformation against the Roman Catholic church was the Latin phrase sola scriptura, meaning the “Bible alone”. However, like any slogan that summarises something, it has been misunderstood. For example, sola scriptura does not mean that the Bible is the only authority for believers. ...

Firstly, sola scriptura meant Scripture was the supreme authority over the church. It did not mean Scripture was the only authority. Luther, Calvin, and the other reformers used other authorities like reason and tradition. They developed arguments using logic (reason) and learned from the writings of past Christians (tradition) as they explored the Bible. Yet the Bible was the supreme authority that ruled reason and tradition because Scripture alone was infallible precisely because it is God’s word. All other authorities (including church leadership) were fallible and must submit to Scripture. ...

The second aspect to sola scriptura was the sufficiency of Scripture ... the reformers argued that, whilst there were many truths of science and history that are not in Scripture, the Bible is sufficient for final salvation. ...

As for Transubstantiation- I don't believe it, but just because something isn't in the Bible doesn't mean its not a reality. The theology of the Trinity and Incarnation found in the Nicene creed come to mind- Derived from the Scripture, but not directly stated within it.

The doctrine of the real presence is derived from the Bible, but transubstantiation (a specific doctrine involving "substance" and "accidents") is not.

 

[☦Marius☦]

No, it doesn't mean that.



The doctrine of the real presence is derived from the Bible, but transubstantiation is not.

The words "sola scriptura" literally translate "by Scripture alone".

 

[Radagast]

The words "sola scriptura" literally translate "by Scripture alone".

You obviously didn't read my post, and you clearly have no idea what the Reformers meant by that phrase. I think further discussion is pointless.

 

[☦Marius☦]

You obviously didn't read my post, and you clearly have no idea what the Reformers meant by that phrase. I think further discussion is pointless.

No I didn't, because I didn't refresh before I replied to your first post. However now having read it yes- you are correct, Sola Scriptura as Luther meant it, is meant to go with the other five Solas. However in Evangelical Christianity, as well as most latter protestant churches (such as Baptist, which I used to be)- this is not applied. Unfortunately the literal definition of Sola Scriptura is now most churches definition of it. However Sola Scriptura as a concept is flawed in itself because the NT itself gives authority to the Oral Tradition in 2 Thess 2:15-16 (By word of mouth AND letter). The Oral tradition is what makes up the majority of Holy Tradition (that isn't scripture), with the rest being made up of conclusions made from both Oral and Written Tradition (Scripture is part of Holy Tradition), at church councils.

 

[Danoded]

Denominations are satanic, as Christians are to be united under Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ did not separate anyone in their faith, so why should we?

 

[Radagast]

Denominations are satanic

Nonsense! And stop calling me Satanic!

Christians are to be united under Jesus Christ

Being united to millions of other Christians in a denomination is at least partway there. It's better than being united to your five friends and nobody else.

 

[Albion]

Sola Scriptura means that nothing outside the Bible is valid or needed for a Christian's life.

No. It means that nothing is to be required for salvation in the way of doctrine except that which is taught in the Bible.

This is different then saying our Traditions are checked by scripture- as in none of them go against or seek to override scripture. Sola Scriptura enthusiasts claim that they have no traditions outside of what is directly given from the Bible.

No again. See the above for the meaning of Sola Scriptura.

As for Transubstantiation- I don't believe it, but just because something isn't in the Bible doesn't mean its not a reality.

All sorts of things are not in Scripture, but may be real--how to bake a pineapple upside down cake for example. BUT Scripture, being God's revelation, is the final word on essential doctrine.

 

[☦Marius☦]

No. It means that nothing is to be required for salvation in the way of doctrine except that which is taught in the Bible.


No again. See the above for the meaning of Sola Scriptura.


All sorts of things are not in Scripture, but may be real--how to bake a pineapple upside down cake for example. BUT Scripture, being God's revelation, is the final word on essential doctrine.

Of course it is. Even the RCC believes that.

 

[Buzz_B]

Nowhere in Scripture are we told to hate believers who follow false teaching. But, we are to hate the teachings and to *separate* our selves from them... Either by avoiding them bodily, or waiting patiently for them to leave your church by effectively refuting what they wrongly believe... Yet, while in doing so, in hopes that they may repent and turn from their evil.

Yes, have been seeing lately that there is good reason for us to separate ourselves to an environment where the unity of the holy spirit is not always being attacked. We must protect that atmosphere and keep it holy.

 

[Albion]

Of course it is. Even the RCC believes that.

So Holy Tradition or Sacred Tradition doesn't apply to the RCC (or the EO)? Apparently you have picked up the wrong idea somewhere along the line--or misread what I've posted.

 

[Phil 1:21]

But IMO we're already left with the uncomfortable truth that Sola Scriptura doesn't work-that's the starting point.

If one is seeking to form a religion based on the whims of man and not the will of God, then it won't work very well.

And the next question is, how then can we know with any degree of assurance what many important truths of our faith are?