Name a doctrine that you used to believe in but dont anymore.

[Albion]

I believe it is safe to expect that if the omnipotent Creator of our universe supernaturally and purposefully inspired men to write down His Words, that these unique documents would contain a special quality about them that would distinguish them from any ordinary document. Maybe I am giving God too much credit.

Since almost any theologian would agree with this, it seems a pity that you have to spell it out so carefully.

 

[Jig]

Far more likely that the inspired books would be identified by people who God enabled to do so rather than that the books would have some kind of quality that made them immediately recognisable as canonical scripture.

Are you stating that the books that make up our Bible were ultimately recognized as canonical because of who they were written by AND NOT because of their divinely inspired content?

To me this sounds like you are claiming that the men behind the words are more important than the words themselves. However, these are not ordinary words. These are God's Words.

Plus, you'd need to explain why not ALL of Paul's letters were preserved as canonical. If it was his authorship that give the ultimate reasoning to canonize a book, then why did some of his work just simply disappear?

It is not God that you are crediting in your theory but the books. While it is true that you are assigning the cause for the books having a "special quality" it is nevertheless the books that are "special" in your theory and God is in the background.

What? You've got this all backwards. I'm the one putting God up front. I'm giving Him all the credit. It is you that is putting God in the background by crediting men as the primary reason for these books becoming canon.

I believe the "words" in these books as "special" because they are Gods!

I prefer to think of the books of sacred scripture as books that God calls the church to identify as special because his Spirit works within the church to make that identification.

You prefer? You mean "assume"...right?

Thus God is to the fore and the books are placed in their proper place as witnesses to God's grace in revealing himself to the church. If it takes the Spirit to enable the church to identify the books as canonical then the books themselves do not possess a "special quality" that can be identified without the Spirit's aid, thus the books themselves are books like other books, it is the Spirit that gives life the books have nothing to offer as far as deciding canonicity is concerned.

I noticed you never really addressed my main points. I stated that it was God's Words (and not church councils) that gave these documents their authority. Do you deny this?

 

[Cjwinnit]

Are you stating that the books that make up our Bible were ultimately recognized as canonical because of who they were written by AND NOT because of their divinely inspired content?

Both.

Name a doctrine I used to believe in but don't anymore? Theological Progressivism.

 

[Jig]

Both.

What about the books that have ambiguous authorship?

 

[Rev Randy]

What about the books that have ambiguous authorship?

That is an excellent question. I would disagree that authorship verification is always necessary. The content can override a signature or lack thereof. Hebrews is a prime example.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Far more likely that the inspired books would be identified by people who God enabled to do so rather than that the books would have some kind of quality that made them immediately recognisable as canonical scripture.

Are you stating that the books that make up our Bible were ultimately recognized as canonical because of who they were written by AND NOT because of their divinely inspired content?

To me this sounds like you are claiming that the men behind the words are more important than the words themselves. However, these are not ordinary words. These are God's Words.

Plus, you'd need to explain why not ALL of Paul's letters were preserved as canonical. If it was his authorship that give the ultimate reasoning to canonize a book, then why did some of his work just simply disappear?

"Are you stating that the books that make up our Bible were ultimately recognized as canonical because of who they were written by AND NOT because of their divinely inspired content?" No. What I wrote is "[It is] Far more likely that the inspired books would be identified by people who God enabled to do so rather than that the books would have some kind of quality that made them immediately recognisable as canonical scripture." My words are not about the authors of letters or books in the bible. What I referred to is the people who discerned which of the many letters and books available were chosen as canonical scripture while the others were rejected.

It is not God that you are crediting in your theory but the books. While it is true that you are assigning the cause for the books having a "special quality" it is nevertheless the books that are "special" in your theory and God is in the background. I prefer to think of the books of sacred scripture as books that God calls the church to identify as special because his Spirit works within the church to make that identification.

What? You've got this all backwards. I'm the one putting God up front. I'm giving Him all the credit. It is you that is putting God in the background by crediting men as the primary reason for these books becoming canon.

I believe the "words" in these books as "special" because they are Gods!

You prefer? You mean "assume"...right? ...

Thus God is to the fore and the books are placed in their proper place as witnesses to God's grace in revealing himself to the church. If it takes the Spirit to enable the church to identify the books as canonical then the books themselves do not possess a "special quality" that can be identified without the Spirit's aid, thus the books themselves are books like other books, it is the Spirit that gives life the books have nothing to offer as far as deciding canonicity is concerned.

I noticed you never really addressed my main points. I stated that it was God's Words (and not church councils) that gave these documents their authority. Do you deny this?

"I stated that it was God's Words (and not church councils) that gave these documents their authority. Do you deny this?" The authority of the canonical scriptures is from God and not from the books as books. The books contain some material that would repulse most readers and would not be accepted but for being included in the canon. It is always and in every case God who gives authority to the words of scripture. The church recognised the books as inspired and hence authoritative because they have God as their ultimate author. Those books that were not recognised as canonical are not accounted as authoritative.

 

[Jig]

"I stated that it was God's Words (and not church councils) that gave these documents their authority. Do you deny this?" The authority of the canonical scriptures is from God and not from the books as books.

I'm not sure you understand my position.

Of course ink and paper bound together have no intrinsic authority alone. The authority of the Bible comes from the fact that the ink and paper within is being used to convey a divinely inspired message. It is this supernatural Spirit-produced message that holds authority. This is because it is from God Himself. I'm in no way denying God is not directly responsible for this authority.

The question you should be asking is why did God decide that the best medium to preserve this divine message was ink and paper. This is because other forms of communication are more susceptible to error. Written revelation is durable and can be universally and quickly disseminated. Corruptions (especially due to memory or bias) are minimized and are easier to spot when made. We have a traceable and tangible trail of physical manuscripts that can be read and thoroughly investigated by anyone of any faith or religious organization. Written revelation also has the attribute of fixedness and purity. And because of this, it gives it a finality and normativeness which other forms a communication simply cannot attain.

Why do you think Jesus always explicitly referenced written Scripture and not oral tradition? Why do you think Paul told Timothy that all Scripture was profitable for training, correction, and equipping for every good work?

The books contain some material that would repulse most readers and would not be accepted but for being included in the canon.

So? Just because some parts of Scripture contain content that is raw and shocking doesn't mean it's God-given authority isn't apparent by those who are indwelled by the very same Person who wrote it.

It is always and in every case God who gives authority to the words of scripture. The church recognised the books as inspired and hence authoritative because they have God as their ultimate author. Those books that were not recognised as canonical are not accounted as authoritative.

I'm not sure if I've said anything different.

Edit: Let me clarify. I believe that these inspired works already had authority because they were a product produced by God. It is this authority that the church later identified and used to determine which works were canonical or not.

 

[Albion]

Let me clarify. I believe that these inspired works already had authority because they were a product produced by God. It is this authority that the church later identified and used to determine which works were canonical or not.

All the books included in the canon had already been considered scripture by the churches of the Christian world, so IDENTIFIED is the correct word here. It's NOT as though these churchmen introduced the books of the Bible as we have them today.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

To use the words of our Lord,"Have you not read what God hath said?"

It is sad to see so many people who have moved away from the plain reading of scripture, away from the truth of God's word...I think it would do many of you well to go back to the 22nd chapter of 2 Kings... and heed the warning put forth for not obeying the word of God...

"Great is the Lord’s anger that burns against us, because those who have gone before us have not obeyed the words ofthis book;
they have not acted in accordance with all that is written there concerning us.”

Are you talking about this "Book"?

Kindgdom Bible Studies Lambs Book of Life Part 1

According to the Emphatic Diaglott the correct rendering of the latter part of this passage is: "The Book of the Life of the Lamb." Now, what is meant by this term – THE BOOK OF THE LIFE OF THE LAMB? The wise man said,

"...of the making of many books there is no end..." (Eccl. 12:12)

.

The book stores are filled to overflowing today with all types of books dealing with every aspect of earthly life. Even in the church world there are books setting forth every kind of viewpoint relating to God, the Bible, doctrine, Christian experience, and church order. However the subject material of most of these books largely contains a message of religious tradition and spiritual death.
But God is also producing a Book – a Book containing a message of life. For the past two millenniums God, by His Holy Spirit, has been writing portions of this Book in the minds and hearts of His people...............

Dan 12:1
"At that time Michael, the great prince who protects your people, will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then.
But at that time your people--everyone whose name is found written in the book--will be delivered.

.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

64013984Also, I didn't just say any person could necessarily discern this. I stated that it was "Spirit-indwelled" Christians that would see this more clearly than non-Christians. What was written through the Spirit should be discoverable by the Spirit.

If it takes the Spirit to enable the church to identify the books as canonical then the books themselves do not possess a "special quality" that can be identified without the Spirit's aid, thus the books themselves are books like other books, it is the Spirit that gives life the books have nothing to offer as far as deciding canonicity is concerned.

So many books and so little time.............

Kindgdom Bible Studies Lambs Book of Life Part 1
THE BOOK OF THE LIFE OF THE LAMB

According to the Emphatic Diaglott the correct rendering of the latter part of this passage is: "The Book of the Life of the Lamb." Now, what is meant by this term – THE BOOK OF THE LIFE OF THE LAMB? The wise man said,

"...of the making of many books there is no end..." (Eccl. 12:12)

The book stores are filled to overflowing today with all types of books dealing with every aspect of earthly life. Even in the church world there are books setting forth every kind of viewpoint relating to God, the Bible, doctrine, Christian experience, and church order. However the subject material of most of these books largely contains a message of religious tradition and spiritual death.

But God is also producing a book – a Book containing a message of life. For the past two millenniums God, by His Holy Spirit, has been writing portions of this Book in the minds and hearts of His people...........

 

[Serpentslayer]

The devil has been working overtime in the hearts and minds of people by deceiving them to think that they need to wait at the End of Age for a manifested earthly Christ to resurrect them.

That is why they reject the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD (first resurrection) being now after the thief (death) comes in a day and hour we know not to destroy (kill) our earthly house (body).

Saint Paul contended with false teachings of the early Christian fathers by saying the following:

If the dead rise not then Christ is not risen and if Christ is not risen then those who have already died have most certainly perished never to be raised. For if we only had hope in Christ without being immediately resurrected after we die then we are men most miserable and found to be false witnesses.

The second coming doctrine is related to the identity of Christ and if people are waiting for a manifested earthly messiah to resurrect them then they have the wrong identity.

Basically those who say that the resurrection of the dead did not commence when the Old Covenant Saints tombs were opened right up to the end of age for the remaining elect who hold it out in a lifeless destroyed planet, these same people deny the following:

1) Christ has already laid for all of us a MANIFEST TOKEN to eternal inheritance that is tied to the Living Seal God the Holy Spirit.
2) Christ completed the question of salvation and does not need to come back the second time to earth to put the cherry on top so to speak.
3) God the Holy Spirit completely finishes the question of salvation right up to our resurrection for he is the guarantor of the sealing of the faithful departed in Christ, where he resurrects us in the heavenly angelic spirit bodies (Romans 8:11).
4) God the Holy Spirit is never to be bypassed after we die we are not left naked without a resurrection body for the 2000+ years in the making second coming, as Saint Paul said he was given in earnest so that we are not left naked without a resurrection body.
5) God the Holy Spirit never leaves us and so departed Christians CAN NOT die and be left naked without a resurrection body for God is the God of the living.

So the true identity of the Christ will guide people to reject the manifested devil when he comes. For those faithful who die before he comes then they are lucky because they don't face the hour of temptation that comes upon all the inhabitants of that generation who are faced with the question of is this THE TRUE MESSIAH OR NOT.

We now now beyond a shadow of a doubt that any manifested earthly messiah will be the devil pretending to be Christ.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Hey! This is a "name a doctrine" thread for doctrines holders anonymous

Not write an essay on why other folks are wrong

 

[Rev Randy]

The devil has been working overtime in the hearts and minds of people by deceiving them to think that they need to wait at the End of Age for a manifested earthly Christ to resurrect them.

That is why they reject the RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD (first resurrection) being now after the thief (death) comes in a day and hour we know not to destroy (kill) our earthly house (body).

Saint Paul contended with false teachings of the early Christian fathers by saying the following:

If the dead rise not then Christ is not risen and if Christ is not risen then those who have already died have most certainly perished never to be raised. For if we only had hope in Christ without being immediately resurrected after we die then we are men most miserable and found to be false witnesses.

The second coming doctrine is related to the identity of Christ and if people are waiting for a manifested earthly messiah to resurrect them then they have the wrong identity.

Basically those who say that the resurrection of the dead did not commence when the Old Covenant Saints tombs were opened right up to the end of age for the remaining elect who hold it out in a lifeless destroyed planet, these same people deny the following:

1) Christ has already laid for all of us a MANIFEST TOKEN to eternal inheritance that is tied to the Living Seal God the Holy Spirit.
2) Christ completed the question of salvation and does not need to come back the second time to earth to put the cherry on top so to speak.
3) God the Holy Spirit completely finishes the question of salvation right up to our resurrection for he is the guarantor of the sealing of the faithful departed in Christ, where he resurrects us in the heavenly angelic spirit bodies (Romans 8:11).
4) God the Holy Spirit is never to be bypassed after we die we are not left naked without a resurrection body for the 2000+ years in the making second coming, as Saint Paul said he was given in earnest so that we are not left naked without a resurrection body.
5) God the Holy Spirit never leaves us and so departed Christians CAN NOT die and be left naked without a resurrection body for God is the God of the living.

So the true identity of the Christ will guide people to reject the manifested devil when he comes. For those faithful who die before he comes then they are lucky because they don't face the hour of temptation that comes upon all the inhabitants of that generation who are faced with the question of is this THE TRUE MESSIAH OR NOT.

We now now beyond a shadow of a doubt that any manifested earthly messiah will be the devil pretending to be Christ.

So you don't believe the Creeds?

At His coming, all men are to arise with their own bodies; and they are to give an account of their own deeds.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

and he will come again to judge the living and the dead.

your post belongs in unorthodox theology IMO.

 

[Serpentslayer]

He has been coming friends, don't you see.

He came for Saint Stephen when the heavens opened and Saint Stephen was translated and he also came for then chief rabbi when he told him that he would see the son of man sitting on the right hand of God as God sitting in judgement of all nations.

However for the chief priest it didn't go down well because he was sent into darkness as a goat in the separation of the sheep and goats.

 

[Rev Randy]

He has been coming friends, don't you see.

He came for Saint Stephen when the heavens opened and Saint Stephen was translated and he also came for then chief rabbi when he told him that he would see the son of man sitting on the right hand of God as God sitting in judgement of all nations.

However for the chief priest it didn't go down well because he was sent into darkness as a goat in the separation of the sheep and goats.

So, "In like manner' does not really mean in like manner?

 

[Noxot]

some Godly men of the past have said that the second coming is in the here and now and constantly happening. what most commonly think of as the second coming is really the third coming. God is "was, is and will be". the second coming is the "is"

anyone arguing things from mere words and static definitions will not be able to increase with the Spirit of God to the degree that God desires us to, we must be silent and listen. we can receive or prevent the grace of God as much as we are disobedient or obedient. we must humble ourselves and know nothing of our own and depend wholly on God to teach us to constantly go from glory to glory. the Spirit of God is alive, active and moving and he blows wherever he wants. we must not attempt to quench God by thinking we understand, we must sit at the feet of our Father and listen to him.

it is the virgin who births Christ, not the harlot.

 

[Serpentslayer]

So, "In like manner' does not really mean in like manner?

Do you believe in the resurrection of the dead that it is now after a faithful in Christ departs from the earthly life.

 

[Rev Randy]

Do you believe in the resurrection of the dead that it is now after a faithful in Christ departs from the earthly life.

No I do not believe we receive our bodies until the Second Advent.
If you are speaking of Partial Preterism we simple disagree. If you are speaking of Full Preterism, you are in the wrong forum.

 

[Serpentslayer]

How could there be a risen Christ if there is no resurrection of the dead?

Did not CHRIST open the Old Covenant Saints tombs in fulfilment of Ezekiel 37.

 

[Serpentslayer]

Saint Paul speaking to the early church fathers:

1 Corinthians 15:12-19
12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.

The above versus were all present tense participle to the audience of that day.
, meaning that the resurrection of the dead encompasses from when then Old Covenant tombs were opened until the last remaining elect at Christ's brilliant light coming at the End of Age.