Questions I need answers to!

[the3bar0n]

Hi there,

I've been a Christian for several years but have grown very uneasy with my faith as I have tried to find a deeper relationship with God. Trust me when I say that I REALLY was a devoted believer. I truly gave my heart over to Jesus and looked for his guidance daily through study of his word, prayer and fellowship with other believers. I was truly commited and passionate about my God and was happy to witness to others. I've led services, bible and prayer study groups.

I had the unfortunate experience of getting involved in a word of faith (prosperity Gospel) church and in my quest to understand why such a fatally flawed theological position could be allowed to prosper, I started to dig for answers.

Some questions arise that I cannot answer.

1. When I ask a question, a common reply is to just "listen to God", meaning read the Bible, pray and listen to the Holy Spirit. That's fine and it's what I've always done. It's only when I find someone else has asked the same question and the "Holy Spirit" has given them a different answer.
Example: Spurgeon and Calvin both believe in predestination. Wesley and Arminius do not. All parties claim that the Bible backs their point, that the Holy Spirit has confirmed this to them. They all bore great fruits for Christianity and all seem to be great men of God. Other examples can be picked regarding baptism, creation, end-times, communion, day of worship, female teachers and pretty much anything else that the Bible mentions
My point? If I perceive to have an answer to a question, how can I have confidence that it is actually of God when these great men spent so much time in prayer and study and still disagree?

2. Bible Versions. I'm sick to death of it. I started with NIV, then got told that it's the Devils bible and got showed how it and most non-kjv bibles skip out several verses. Then I got told that the KJV uses unreliable manuscripts and the original KJV had the apocrypha. Then I get told to learn the original greek. Then I get told that the dead sea scrolls are more reliable manuscripts. On and On it goes. Again, this goes back a bit to q1. The bibles we have to day are by no means the original writings and so I could spend the next 30 years studying a false book inside out.

3. "My sheep hear my voice". No they don't. At least, if they do, there a VERY few of them. Now, I've tried, really. I've been up at all hours of the night hoping that God will be more real to me at 5am in the morning - he's not. I've tried hours of silence, hours on my knees, hours of "soaking", hours of talking to him and tried to find him, but I have not had a single piece of information from him that I cannot attribute to my own thoughts.
Example: My wife and I were looking for a new Church. We had prayed about it earneslty. One morning on my way to work, I was praying about the very subject. A bus crosses my path with a banner on the side advertising a new local church (this being in the very non-religious UK). I've never seen anything like it - at last an answer to prayer. The church was the afforementioned Word of Faith church where the chastised one young girl for taking her life preserving medication "Not trusting God" and told another that she should not only forgive her father who had repeatedly raped her, but she should ask forgiveness for ALLOWING her body to be violated before marriage (The latter girl later tried to commit suicide thinking she had sinned greatly against God).

I am grateful for any attempts to answer my questions, but please do acknowledge that I have already rebutted the "Just trust Jesus and read the Bible" answer!

Thanks
Mark

 

[aiki]

1. When I ask a question, a common reply is to just "listen to God", meaning read the Bible, pray and listen to the Holy Spirit. That's fine and it's what I've always done. It's only when I find someone else has asked the same question and the "Holy Spirit" has given them a different answer.
Example: Spurgeon and Calvin both believe in predestination. Wesley and Arminius do not. All parties claim that the Bible backs their point, that the Holy Spirit has confirmed this to them. They all bore great fruits for Christianity and all seem to be great men of God. Other examples can be picked regarding baptism, creation, end-times, communion, day of worship, female teachers and pretty much anything else that the Bible mentions
My point? If I perceive to have an answer to a question, how can I have confidence that it is actually of God when these great men spent so much time in prayer and study and still disagree?

These "great men" of whom you speak are referred to this way because, in part, they were great students of God's Word. They confidently held the views they did, even when other great men of God did not, because they had spent much time studying the Scriptures for themselves. They didn't look around and say, "There are so many disagreements! How can I know anything about Christian doctrine and theology?! I must give the whole thing up." No, they went to the Word of God, trusting the Holy Spirit of God to lead them into truth, and made up their own minds about what it said. They didn't let the discrepancy in belief among other Christians dissuade them from study, but impel them to better know the Bible for themselves. Whether these guys were right or wrong, they could all say that they came to their conclusions about doctrine and theology very thoughtfully and carefully.

While you can point to the men you did and say that they disagree, you can also point to them and say that their disagreement isn't entire. There are many things they held in common as Christians. All of the men you mention above agree that Jesus was "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world"; that Jesus was the only way to God; that the Word of God was inspired and inerrant. And so on. What disagreement you can observe among them is,at least in part, the result of the uniqueness of each individual. No two people are exactly alike and this fact shows up in what you've described above.

There are some who claim to be Christians who teach what is not true. This has been the case almost from the get-go of the Church. Paul and Peter warned against "false teachers" who were, even when these apostles still lived, trying to corrupt the doctrine they had taught. The way these false teachers could be perceived by early Christians was by testing what they were saying against what had already been taught by the apostles. Early Christians had to be careful students of the apostle's doctrine, they had to know it very well - just as Wesley and Spurgeon did.

You will be responsible to God for what you believe, not what others believed. I think God will have greater mercy on a sincere and thoughtful student of His Word who got some things wrong, than on a lazy, careless, milk-only Christian who obtained his mistaken understanding of the Bible from the faulty teaching of others.

2. Bible Versions. I'm sick to death of it. I started with NIV, then got told that it's the Devils bible and got showed how it and most non-kjv bibles skip out several verses. Then I got told that the KJV uses unreliable manuscripts and the original KJV had the apocrypha. Then I get told to learn the original greek. Then I get told that the dead sea scrolls are more reliable manuscripts. On and On it goes. Again, this goes back a bit to q1. The bibles we have to day are by no means the original writings and so I could spend the next 30 years studying a false book inside out.

Make up your own mind for yourself. Study the matter of translations and come to your own defensible conclusion about which is best. Use interlinear Greek-English or Hebrew-English Scriptures for study. Access to early copies of the Bible are available for comparison. As historical documents go, the Bible is in a league of its own in terms of accuracy and trustworthiness. But don't take my word for it; study the matter for yourself.

3. "My sheep hear my voice". No they don't. At least, if they do, there a VERY few of them. Now, I've tried, really. I've been up at all hours of the night hoping that God will be more real to me at 5am in the morning - he's not. I've tried hours of silence, hours on my knees, hours of "soaking", hours of talking to him and tried to find him, but I have not had a single piece of information from him that I cannot attribute to my own thoughts.

Which is why we have the Bible. God has spoken to us in it. All that He has wanted to say to us is said in His Word. You want to hear from God? Read the Bible. Listening for some ghostly voice from God is a sure way to find yourself confused and in error.

Example: My wife and I were looking for a new Church. We had prayed about it earneslty. One morning on my way to work, I was praying about the very subject. A bus crosses my path with a banner on the side advertising a new local church (this being in the very non-religious UK). I've never seen anything like it - at last an answer to prayer. The church was the afforementioned Word of Faith church where the chastised one young girl for taking her life preserving medication "Not trusting God" and told another that she should not only forgive her father who had repeatedly raped her, but she should ask forgiveness for ALLOWING her body to be violated before marriage (The latter girl later tried to commit suicide thinking she had sinned greatly against God).

And this is exactly why knowing your Bible well and living by it is necessary. What church should you have attended? A church which teaches what the Bible teaches. Does the Word of Faith church do that? Not from what you've described. But you would know this if you knew your Bible...

I am grateful for any attempts to answer my questions, but please do acknowledge that I have already rebutted the "Just trust Jesus and read the Bible" answer!

Rebutted? Trusting Jesus and reading your Bible are Christian basics. Why would you rebut these things?

Peace.

 

[Zebra1552]

Hi there,

I've been a Christian for several years but have grown very uneasy with my faith as I have tried to find a deeper relationship with God. Trust me when I say that I REALLY was a devoted believer. I truly gave my heart over to Jesus and looked for his guidance daily through study of his word, prayer and fellowship with other believers. I was truly commited and passionate about my God and was happy to witness to others. I've led services, bible and prayer study groups.

I do not get what most call a 'deep relationship with God'. I don't pray very often. I read about 3-6 chapters per day, and that's only because I don't have any other books to read right now. I do do a lot of worship though. That brings me close to God very easily.



Some questions arise that I cannot answer.

1. When I ask a question, a common reply is to just "listen to God", meaning read the Bible, pray and listen to the Holy Spirit. That's fine and it's what I've always done. It's only when I find someone else has asked the same question and the "Holy Spirit" has given them a different answer.
Example: Spurgeon and Calvin both believe in predestination. Wesley and Arminius do not. All parties claim that the Bible backs their point, that the Holy Spirit has confirmed this to them. They all bore great fruits for Christianity and all seem to be great men of God.

It is not predestination. It is not free will. It is both. Consider this. George and Sue are friends. George likes Sue, so he decides 'she is going to be my wife'. George, a few weeks later, decides to ask her out, and she accepts. The relationship prospers. They get married. George says to Sue, 'I chose you. Before I asked you out, I decided that you would marry me.' Sue responds, 'Perhaps, honey, but I also chose you. I would not be married to you if I did not want to.'

George did not pick Sue. Sue did not pick George. They chose each other.

Other examples can be picked regarding baptism, creation, end-times, communion, day of worship, female teachers and pretty much anything else that the Bible mentions

Right...
Baptism. It's in the Greek:
G907
βαπτίζω
baptizō
Thayer Definition:
1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe
3) to overwhelm
Part of Speech: verb

It's dunk, not sprinkle. It is the outward sign of an inward acceptance.

Creation: inconclusive.
Day of worship: EVERY day should be spent worshiping God in some way.

My point? If I perceive to have an answer to a question, how can I have confidence that it is actually of God when these great men spent so much time in prayer and study and still disagree?

Realize that some issues do not matter in the long run.

2. Bible Versions. I'm sick to death of it. I started with NIV, then got told that it's the Devils bible and got showed how it and most non-kjv bibles skip out several verses. Then I got told that the KJV uses unreliable manuscripts and the original KJV had the apocrypha. Then I get told to learn the original greek. Then I get told that the dead sea scrolls are more reliable manuscripts. On and On it goes. Again, this goes back a bit to q1. The bibles we have to day are by no means the original writings and so I could spend the next 30 years studying a false book inside out.

Go get yourself The Apologetics Study Bible. That will no doubt answer many of your questions. The stuff that changes across versions tends to be stuff that does not change the overall meaning of any particular passage. I do like the KJV version of Lazarus, though. 'He stinketh'

3. "My sheep hear my voice". No they don't. At least, if they do, there a VERY few of them. Now, I've tried, really. I've been up at all hours of the night hoping that God will be more real to me at 5am in the morning - he's not. I've tried hours of silence, hours on my knees, hours of "soaking", hours of talking to him and tried to find him, but I have not had a single piece of information from him that I cannot attribute to my own thoughts.
Example: My wife and I were looking for a new Church. We had prayed about it earneslty. One morning on my way to work, I was praying about the very subject. A bus crosses my path with a banner on the side advertising a new local church (this being in the very non-religious UK). I've never seen anything like it - at last an answer to prayer. The church was the afforementioned Word of Faith church where the chastised one young girl for taking her life preserving medication "Not trusting God" and told another that she should not only forgive her father who had repeatedly raped her, but she should ask forgiveness for ALLOWING her body to be violated before marriage (The latter girl later tried to commit suicide thinking she had sinned greatly against God).

Have you tried leaving prayer for things that you cannot decide or change by yourself? Many of the answers we ask tend to be in the Bible if we look. Like with churches, find what fits your worship style and preaches from the Word without reading into it. Or jobs, figure out your passions, strengths, and abilities, and base your decision on that. And leave things like impacting other's lives for prayer.

Hope I've helped. If not, ask more questions. I'll be around tomorrow.

 

[solarwave]

1. When I ask a question, a common reply is to just "listen to God", meaning read the Bible, pray and listen to the Holy Spirit. That's fine and it's what I've always done. It's only when I find someone else has asked the same question and the "Holy Spirit" has given them a different answer.
Example: Spurgeon and Calvin both believe in predestination. Wesley and Arminius do not. All parties claim that the Bible backs their point, that the Holy Spirit has confirmed this to them. They all bore great fruits for Christianity and all seem to be great men of God. Other examples can be picked regarding baptism, creation, end-times, communion, day of worship, female teachers and pretty much anything else that the Bible mentions
My point? If I perceive to have an answer to a question, how can I have confidence that it is actually of God when these great men spent so much time in prayer and study and still disagree?

The problem is that we are all human and so can interpret the bible wrong or not listen to God properly and because of that there is a difference in opinion. In times like this you just have to have faith in God while its hard to believe and pray and follow the answers which make most sense to you. You can't be blammed for if you happen to get it wrong as long as you have faith in God through it.

2. Bible Versions. I'm sick to death of it. I started with NIV, then got told that it's the Devils bible and got showed how it and most non-kjv bibles skip out several verses. Then I got told that the KJV uses unreliable manuscripts and the original KJV had the apocrypha. Then I get told to learn the original greek. Then I get told that the dead sea scrolls are more reliable manuscripts. On and On it goes. Again, this goes back a bit to q1. The bibles we have to day are by no means the original writings and so I could spend the next 30 years studying a false book inside out.

To be honest I dont think bible versions matter that much. I use NIV and God has spoken to me through it before. If the bible is really the book of God, dont you think He would have made sure that the major translations were in keeping with His word.

3. "My sheep hear my voice". No they don't. At least, if they do, there a VERY few of them. Now, I've tried, really. I've been up at all hours of the night hoping that God will be more real to me at 5am in the morning - he's not. I've tried hours of silence, hours on my knees, hours of "soaking", hours of talking to him and tried to find him, but I have not had a single piece of information from him that I cannot attribute to my own thoughts.
Example: My wife and I were looking for a new Church. We had prayed about it earneslty. One morning on my way to work, I was praying about the very subject. A bus crosses my path with a banner on the side advertising a new local church (this being in the very non-religious UK). I've never seen anything like it - at last an answer to prayer. The church was the afforementioned Word of Faith church where the chastised one young girl for taking her life preserving medication "Not trusting God" and told another that she should not only forgive her father who had repeatedly raped her, but she should ask forgiveness for ALLOWING her body to be violated before marriage (The latter girl later tried to commit suicide thinking she had sinned greatly against God).

Your problem is that it seems like a bad church to go to?

 

[lydeanphoenix]

Mark,

I deeply understand your frustration. I wish I had a simple answer. When Jesus was with us here in our world He helped open our spiritual eyes. He taught us about some heavenly things but never went into great detail because for those of us that could barely grasp the things of our world, how could we better understand the things in heaven? I'm sure Jesus was tried of these very things that people of our day have about our faith, as the Pharisees of His time often tried to do. Remember when they tried to get Jesus to stumble about the laws given to Moses, when they brought a prostitute before Him to be judged? He had a simple answer for them, "Let those among you who is without sin cast the first stone." If Jesus hadn't said it first, I wouldn't know how I could have dealt with the situation any better. They probably would have stoned me for answering wrong.

Keep in mind, as our spirits are yearning for the wisdom of God, Satan will always be ready to satisfy. Satan will come like an angel of light. He will deceive nations and distort the truth. As painful as it maybe sometimes not to have an answer at that moment, that the lack of Godly knowledge and wisdom is a form of suffering in itself. Sometimes we have to suffer a great deal in one form or another. Don't lose faith. Just as Jesus was tested and tried so will all who hear Him and speak of Him.

We are all human. I'm sure that even the disciples of Jesus argued amongst themselves about issues. Just as God put the word in the bible through inspiration, isn't it even better that He puts the living word in you? Answer when it is appropriate to answer, for when you answer it will not be you who gives that answer but the Holy Spirit in you...

 

[the3bar0n]

First, thank you all for taking the time to reply.

I'm really not sure that some of my questions can adequately be answered and it's too much of a sticking point to me.

It seems too easy to breeze over the point that people who are equally commited and founded in Jesus can disagree over central doctrinal points. In fact, lets expand that to the world in general!

Muslims are 100% convinced that they pray to Allah and receive guidance from the Quoran, they hear from him and they have peace because of it. Mormons or Jews would say similar things. I am sure that they would tell me that the advice I "receive from the Holy Spirit" is from Satan or someother trouble-maker. I don't see a difference.

It's Okay for you and I to say that we KNOW we are correct, but let's be honest here - everyone is the same. I'm not referring to those who just don't give a hoot and don't research anything, I'm talking about commited believers of all faith systems. There is unswerving faith based upon percieved fact and experience in all corners of the world.

I know now that the church I previously attended is not biblical, but I didn't at the time. The pastor used plenty of sound bible teaching to back up his theology. Look, there is a Word of faith board on Christian Forums. You can go look for yourself at the huge amounts of people who think they are right, that God and the bible confirms they are right and anyone who bashes them does not fully understand the workings of the holy spirit.

On Baptism, I thank you for your perception and explaination of why you feel full submersion is correct. However, I garauntee that at least one person reading this post can give you a biblically sound rebuttal. THIS is my point? How can we know the truth?

Thanks
Mark

 

[Gen50:20]

Hello Mark,

I would say that any Christian that spends much time arguing over baptism, day of worship, or female teachers might have glossed over the main reason we are here. Jesus said we must lead others to Him, being fishers of men. All the other things people tend to argue about sound more like human concerns then anything that would bother an all powerful, all knowing creator of everything.
I think that many times, as humans, we tend to overcomplicate things and add rules where maybe rules should not exist.
To try and answer your last question, I believe truth may be much simpler then we make it out to be. As Jesus was being questioned by pilot, He told him that He came to bear witness to the truth (John 18:37) The gospels spell out the truth that Jesus came to bring us, and that truth makes up the core of what we call Christianity. I think that it is this core that we need to stick to, instead of focusing on rules that exist (whether we created them or not) outside this truth.

I’m not sure if this really answers your question. I wish I could display some proof to shed light on your inquirey, but to be honest I struggle with the same questions at times.

 

[aiki]

It seems too easy to breeze over the point that people who are equally commited and founded in Jesus can disagree over central doctrinal points. In fact, lets expand that to the world in general!

Men like Spurgeon, Wesley, Calvin and Arminius and more modern-day teachers like John MacArthur, Charles Stanley, Vernon McGee, Chuck Swindoll all held/hold the same core Christian beliefs in common. On the truly essential tenets of the faith all these men - and many more besides - agree.

Why is it that the differences rather than the similarities are being magnified in your thinking? Why do you not emphasize the fact that all these men, in spite of their variances with each other doctrinally, would all consider one another as genuine brothers in Christ?

I have grown up in the Christian community and have been in many different evangelical churches over the years. Mennonites, Baptists, E-Free, Alliance, Nazarenes, and many non-denominational evangelical churches all teach largely the same thing. In my experience as a Christian, there has been far more doctrinal and theological agreement among these denominations than disagreement.

Muslims are 100% convinced that they pray to Allah and receive guidance from the Quoran, they hear from him and they have peace because of it. Mormons or Jews would say similar things. I am sure that they would tell me that the advice I "receive from the Holy Spirit" is from Satan or someother trouble-maker. I don't see a difference.

If truth were simply a matter of what one felt, well, the world would be in chaos. One must judge between what Christianity and other faiths - like Islam or Judaism - teach and the basis for believing those teachings. You must be persuaded in your own mind that the basis for believing the claims of Christianity is valid. I have considered the evidence in favor of Christianity and have concluded that it is the only faith deserving of my fidelity. You must do the same.

It's Okay for you and I to say that we KNOW we are correct, but let's be honest here - everyone is the same. I'm not referring to those who just don't give a hoot and don't research anything, I'm talking about commited believers of all faith systems. There is unswerving faith based upon percieved fact and experience in all corners of the world.

And this is as it should be. Sadly, this is true for the few, not the many.

I know now that the church I previously attended is not biblical, but I didn't at the time. The pastor used plenty of sound bible teaching to back up his theology.

There is the appearance of "sound doctrine" and then there is the real thing. Counterfeits always try to mimic the real thing as closely as possible. This is why it is so vital to have a very good grasp of what the Bible says. More and more, Christians are ceasing to be students of the Book they claim to hold central to their faith. As a result, there are growing numbers of false teachers leading the church into darkness and swelling groups of Christians who are confused as to what to believe.

On Baptism, I thank you for your perception and explaination of why you feel full submersion is correct. However, I garauntee that at least one person reading this post can give you a biblically sound rebuttal. THIS is my point? How can we know the truth?

Providing a rebuttal and actually successfully refuting a point are not the same things.

For the Christian, truth is found ultimately in a Person: Jesus Christ. The better you know him, the clearer the truth will be to you.

Peace.

Thanks
Mark

 

[salida]

1) Calvinism vs. Arminian - they both are true - the bible has a balance. Don't listen to what men say to you - they arn't God.

2) NIV - is a good version and its not the "devils" bible. It seems like you are surrounded by legalistic type christians - that do what their church institition says not what the Word of God says. Again, don't listen to people or carnal christians.

3) His sheep DO hear his voice. You have christians who are lead by their flesh instead of the Holy Spirit and the voice of God gets muffled with them. Whats the difference? What does the Bible say about it? If christians arn't in line with what the scripture literally says, pray for them. Don't listen to these types.

Who to believe and why does everyone seem so different? Some christians are lead by the Holy Spirit some arn't. They throw the word around "listen to God". The Bible is Gods Word. The Holy Spirit won't disagree with it - they work hand in hand like a glove fits your hand.

I would do my own research and homework and intellectually dissect these issues. As a start go to CRI (Christian Research Instititue).

 

[the3bar0n]

So, my presumption of the repliers to my email are that you all think Catholics, Muslims, Mormons and all those who have never encountered Jesus (such as those unreached by missionaries) are all going to Hell because they do not believe that in Jesus as they should? "No-one comes to the father except through me?"

What about the various surveys like the 1998 poll of ministers who do NOT believe in the Virgin Birth

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]American Lutherans 19%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]American Baptists 34%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Episcopalians 44%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Presbyterians 49%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Methodists 60%[/FONT]
I keep hearing that "Everyone agrees on the fundamentals". I am sorry - that is not correct.
7-th Day adventists would say that the Sabbath day is on Saturday and we are commanded to set that day apart.
Oneness pentecostals would say that we baptize only in the name of Jesus (denial of the trinity)

I read a news story about a women episcopal minister who thinks that we should call God "Mother" and we should cut various bits out of the Bible. I have heard of ministers who do not believe that Jesus is the only way to God (all religions lead to God and such like)

Everyone is quick to quote "We need to stick to Sound Doctrine", but when pushed they reply that you have to just study the Bible. In which case, I can find textual support for pretty much anything. WHAT exactly IS sound doctrine? Still, no-one has addressed my original issues.

1. Please tell me the tennets of Christianity that EVERYONE should and DOES agree on. As above, this does not include belief in the Trinity, or belief that Jesus is the only way to salvation. I am sure a baptist would tell me that Baptism by water is a tennet?

2. I understand that there are preferencial areas in life (like whether you believe in women pastors, divorce etc), but most will hold to thier point of view saying that the Bible and the Holy Spirit confirms that they are correct. Let me guess - everyone is deceived - except you. No two people have exactly the same belief set, therefore there is no universal, God given truth.

I have had replies telling me to study the word for myself (ok) - then in the next breathe telling me to go off to some website (Carm.org or CRI) - in fact, these two sources disagree on many issues, proving my point further.

Thanks for the discussion. I am not trying to belittle anyone elses beliefs - just trying to come to terms with mine and assure myself that the decision I make is correct.

Mark

 

[lydeanphoenix]

WHAT exactly IS sound doctrine?

We can research the Bible, study and memorize everything in it, and come to a conclusion of what is true to us and how we ought to live our lives and how we ought to worship. Then we can go to the next person who has done the same, perhaps, had done so for a lot longer than you have and had devoted most of their life to the studying of the Word. They may interperate verses to mean something else and find other verses that support it. They live their lives according to what they believe the Bible says to them, which may challenge or go against your own beliefs and practices.

Those of us who claim that we are believers will only hear the Words as plane as they had been written, and we will study it, interperate its meaning and mold it to fit our lifestyle. The true believers will not only hear the Words but it will be bestowed onto them by God, and the Word becomes the living spring within them and they will hear His voice. They will be convicted by It and It will lead keep them on the path to rightousness.

So, after all of that what exactly is sound doctrine?

It is something that not everyone will find just by reading the Bible and live by according to practices and traditions. It is a seed that is planted in those that seek the truth. In the true believers, it will grow and bare fruit. And what are the tenets of Christianity? What are your convictions?

 

[the3bar0n]

We can research the Bible, study and memorize everything in it, and come to a conclusion of what is true to us and how we ought to live our lives and how we ought to worship. .

Precisely my point. "What is true to us". So you are advocating a man-made religion where we all believe what we want and reject the bits we don't want. That is not universal truth. As previously said, Baptists believe that you need baptism for salvation etc.

Then we can go to the next person who has done the same, perhaps, had done so for a lot longer than you have and had devoted most of their life to the studying of the Word.

Again, as I have said - I have done this. I studied and came to my conclusions on various subjects. The problem is that when you come to "go to a more experienced Christian" - any of the greats past or present, or two different people in your Church say, they will give you 5 different conclusions that there studies have revealed to them!!

Thanks
Mark

 

[Radagast]

Hi!

Example: Spurgeon and Calvin both believe in predestination. Wesley and Arminius do not. All parties claim that the Bible backs their point, that the Holy Spirit has confirmed this to them. They all bore great fruits for Christianity and all seem to be great men of God.

I am a Calvinist with a very great respect for Wesley. Sometimes these conflicts indicate that different people have taken hold of different parts of a more complex truth. Even great men have had personal limitations, because we're all flawed human beings.

Bible Versions. I'm sick to death of it. I started with NIV, then got told that it's the Devils bible and got showed how it and most non-kjv bibles skip out several verses. Then I got told that the KJV uses unreliable manuscripts and the original KJV had the apocrypha. Then I get told to learn the original greek. Then I get told that the dead sea scrolls are more reliable manuscripts. On and On it goes. Again, this goes back a bit to q1. The bibles we have to day are by no means the original writings and so I could spend the next 30 years studying a false book inside out.

Well, the recognised Greek text (using all known ancient manuscripts) is a very very good guide to the original. Differences would be few and far between, and not very important. And the NIV is a very good translation (I use the NIV when I'm not reading the Greek), so I think you started out with the right version.

Example: My wife and I were looking for a new Church. We had prayed about it earneslty. One morning on my way to work, I was praying about the very subject. A bus crosses my path with a banner on the side advertising a new local church (this being in the very non-religious UK). I've never seen anything like it - at last an answer to prayer.

I don't believe this is how God answers prayer. Sometimes a bus is just a bus.

Sadly, I think you have been misled by some branches of Christendom that are, perhaps, less than wise. I'm sorry that this has hurt you.

I would suggest that perhaps you could investigate the evangelical branch of the Anglican church? On the whole, they seem to be both scriptural and sensible.

 

[Radagast]

1. Please tell me the tennets of Christianity that EVERYONE should and DOES agree on.

These tenets are summarised beautifully in a little book by CS Lewis called Mere Christianity.

2. I understand that there are preferencial areas in life (like whether you believe in women pastors, divorce etc), but most will hold to thier point of view saying that the Bible and the Holy Spirit confirms that they are correct. Let me guess - everyone is deceived - except you. No two people have exactly the same belief set, therefore there is no universal, God given truth.

I'm sure there is a God given truth, and I'd like to think that my personal beliefs get close to it, but I'm prepared to believe that my own personal flaws have resulted in me missing the mark in several key spots. Therefore I'm always happy to listen to what my various brothers and sisters in Christ have to say, and to see if their arguments hold water. CF is good for that.

I hope CF benefits you in the same way.

 

[the3bar0n]

Radagast - You said that you are a Calvinist. Why? Is it because you believe it is what the Bible teaches? Is it because the Holy Spirit has guided you that it is the truth? Arminianism and Calvinism are not compatible doctrines. I am sure there are plenty who would say that you are misguided or have not adequately studied. Again, my point is that I can be sure in my own mind of one thing AS LONG AS I ignore other people's thoughts on the subject. How many hours do you think Wesley spent studying the subject, yet you believe he has got it wrong.

I already own and have twice read Mere Christianity, which I agree is a must read. However, may I suggest that you read: C.S. Lewis, Letters To Malcolm: Chiefly on Prayer, chapter 20, paragraphs 7-10, pages 108-109 whereby he backs his belief in purgetory. I don't believe that he can offer me the tennets of the Christian faith.

I am not suggesting that we chose a church based soley on seeing a bus! Of course, it simply led me to hearing of this new church. My wife and I prayed about it and belived that God was telling us this was the correct move (or maybe it was the devil? or a figment of my imagination - who knows?)

LydeanPhoenix (or others), I would be interested to see your reply to post #12.

Thanks
Mark

 

[Radagast]

Radagast - You said that you are a Calvinist. Why? Is it because you believe it is what the Bible teaches?

Yes. Although I think some Calvinists go too far in rejecting other Biblical truths, such as the existence of free will.

How many hours do you think Wesley spent studying the subject, yet you believe he has got it wrong.

I think he saw some parts of the truth very clearly. I think that when it comes to balancing predestination and free will, the truth is too complex for much of our language (my favourite analogy is that light is made up of both waves and particles, which seems incompatible, but isn't).

I already own and have twice read Mere Christianity, which I agree is a must read.

Great!

CS Lewis' personal opinions may or may not be right, but in Mere Christianity he does a great job of describing the generally agreed fundamentals (and he got an Anglican, a Methodist, a Presbyterian, and a Roman Catholic to check at least part of the book to make sure of this).

He does a good job of avoiding issues that divide the Church (such as purgatory, or some of the specifics on baptism), but which aren't part of what you might call the fundamental core of Christianity. He is also careful not to recommend any specific church, such as "Congregationalism or Greek Orthodoxy or anything else." This makes the book a good example of Christian love, as well as of basic theology.

This fundamental core of Christianity is Biblical, not what you call "a man-made religion," and it is compatible with the "greats" of the past.

Now my beliefs go beyond what's in Mere Christianity, of course, and they are a result of reading the Bible as well as reading the "greats" of the past, and seeing which of their arguments are sensible and Biblical.

 

[aiki]

So, my presumption of the repliers to my email are that you all think Catholics, Muslims, Mormons and all those who have never encountered Jesus (such as those unreached by missionaries) are all going to Hell because they do not believe that in Jesus as they should? "No-one comes to the father except through me?"

What does the Bible say? What I think on this point is based on what the Bible teaches. I don't subscribe to the notion that a particular verse or passage in the Scriptures can have a multitude of meanings or interpretations. Usually, a verse has only one interpretation but many applications. The plainest, simplest meaning supported by the text is best. This doesn't mean one should regard everything in the Bible as simplistic, however. What I mean is that twisting and turning Scripture and contorting it to fit some arcane, obscure meaning is not the way to properly handle God's Word. So, when Christ says, "No one comes to the Father but by me," what do you think he is saying? Does the text and the context both immediate and general allow us to take Christ's words at face value? I think so.

What about the various surveys like the 1998 poll of ministers who do NOT believe in the Virgin Birth

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]American Lutherans 19%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]American Baptists 34%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Episcopalians 44%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Presbyterians 49%[/FONT]
[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]Methodists 60%[/FONT]
I keep hearing that "Everyone agrees on the fundamentals". I am sorry - that is not correct.
7-th Day adventists would say that the Sabbath day is on Saturday and we are commanded to set that day apart.
Oneness pentecostals would say that we baptize only in the name of Jesus (denial of the trinity)

All this poll indicates is that there is a segment of evangelical Christianity that holds liberal (and often heretical) views on classic Christian theology and doctrine. There has always been these sorts of "Christians" muddying the waters of the faith. You won't find that the ministers who teach that Mary wasn't a virgin do so easily from Scripture. They have to go through some significant linguistic gymnastics to make their case. The plainest and simplest reading of the Bible, however, is that Mary was indeed a Virgin.

And it is correct that there is agreement among many denominationally different Christian evangelicals on the "fundamentals." I have moved in their circles all my forty plus years and know whereof I speak. Yes, you can find those who take an opposing view, a fringe perspective, a counter-traditional position, but this doesn't necessarily mean that evangelical Christians are completely fractured and muddled in their theology and doctrine.

I will grant you this, however: There is more doctrinal and theological confusion today among Christians than there has ever been before. Fewer and fewer Christians actually know what their Bible says. It is primarily for this reason that liberal, fringe thinking has gained a greater foothold among believers.

I read a news story about a women episcopal minister who thinks that we should call God "Mother" and we should cut various bits out of the Bible. I have heard of ministers who do not believe that Jesus is the only way to God (all religions lead to God and such like)

I can guarantee you that the Episcopal minister you've mentioned has no Scriptural support at all for calling God "mother." And her desire to cut out portions of the Bible is in direct warning from Scripture not to do so. Again, it is the liberal Christian who carries on like this.

Any minister who teaches that there are multiple ways to God does so against the plain teaching of the Bible.

Everyone is quick to quote "We need to stick to Sound Doctrine", but when pushed they reply that you have to just study the Bible. In which case, I can find textual support for pretty much anything. WHAT exactly IS sound doctrine? Still, no-one has addressed my original issues.

You may be able to find textual support for "pretty much anything," but only at the expense of the context from which you draw your text. Again, you cannot interpret a passage from the Bible in a multitude of ways. There is typically only one reasonable, plain meaning for a particular verse or passage.

What is "sound doctrine"? It is not a strongly held point of view on Scripture. Many completely faulty points of view on what the Bible says are held very strongly. Sound doctrine is doctrine which can be easily and clearly supported biblically by text and context both immediate and general. Immediate context is what it suggests: the context in which a particular verse or passage appears. It sets boundaries for meaning for the verses within it. It qualifies and clarifies what is actually meant by a particular verse. But the meaning drawn from text and immediate context must also agree with all of the teaching of the Bible on the matter in question. If it doesn't, it must be set aside as mistaken.

1. Please tell me the tennets of Christianity that EVERYONE should and DOES agree on. As above, this does not include belief in the Trinity, or belief that Jesus is the only way to salvation. I am sure a baptist would tell me that Baptism by water is a tennet?

To what end? What would be established by providing these tenets?

2. I understand that there are preferencial areas in life (like whether you believe in women pastors, divorce etc), but most will hold to thier point of view saying that the Bible and the Holy Spirit confirms that they are correct. Let me guess - everyone is deceived - except you.

I am held to the same standard to which I hold all others. If I cannot meet the requirements I laid out above for interpreting Scripture, I stand in error, too.

No two people have exactly the same belief set, therefore there is no universal, God given truth.

This statement attempts to declare a universal truth: there is no universal truth. But if there is no universal truth, then this statement, which asserts a universal truth, cannot itself be true. This is a self-refuting statement.

Thanks for the discussion. I am not trying to belittle anyone elses beliefs - just trying to come to terms with mine and assure myself that the decision I make is correct.

Friend, if there is no universal truth, then there is no "correct."

Peace.

 

[lydeanphoenix]

Precisely my point. "What is true to us". So you are advocating a man-made religion where we all believe what we want and reject the bits we don't want. That is not universal truth. As previously said, Baptists believe that you need baptism for salvation etc.

Again, as I have said - I have done this. I studied and came to my conclusions on various subjects. The problem is that when you come to "go to a more experienced Christian" - any of the greats past or present, or two different people in your Church say, they will give you 5 different conclusions that there studies have revealed to them!!

A man-made religion is among the very results of our sinful nature, and God will take away sight from those that say they can see when they have not heard. Would a blind man trust another blind man to help him cross a busy street? Can a saved man save an unsaved man from the wrath of God? The truth we seek is bestowed by God in the minds of the true believers and written in their hearts once they've heard the Word.

 

[the3bar0n]

aiki: You have said that the simplest reading of the text is usually the best. Fine. I believe that the bible is clear that a woman should not teach a man. That seems a simple teaching does it not? That is what would be considered a conservative and fundamental translation. Perhaps you also believe it. However, when investigated, we learn of the context of the statement that Ephesian women were uneducated and not fit for teaching (as well as all the other counter-arguments of which I am sure you are fully versed). Perhaps it is precisely the fact that people look at the simplistic text that so much misinterpretation is abound?

Cornelius and his household's hearts had been accepted by thier faith BEFORE they were baptized. That is a simplistic reading of the text and seems obvious. I am sure you would like to throw counter-proof texts towards me, but really I am not looking to debate this one product - mearly I am trying to show you that everyone is selective with what texts they choose to be literal or symbolic.
Further, my overall point is to show you that all those (or maybe 99%) who claim that they are in contact with the Holy Spirit are indeed not. If this were so, we would be in one accord, but we are split on even the most fundamental areas of scripture and doctrine.

You ask to what end you should state the tennets of Christianity? I asked in reply to another poster who's claim was that there were such fundamental agreements - I disagree, perhaps you do as well.

I agree with you that very few Christians know the bible. In fact, I have held one Bible Study group in my own church and got asked by one attendee by a regular church goer where Colossians could be found in the Bible.
The problem with this (no I am not judging others), is that if you think how wide spread this must be, you are talking about believers in only the 1,000s of the 2bn Christians alive today who would have your fundamental belief set who are "true Christians".

What about the millions around the world who are untouched by Christianity of whom the Christian population is 0% and of who have never seen a Bible or (when eventually they are reached) have never heard of Jesus. In times past and present, you are talking of 100's of million people.

You've said there is no universal truth - I agree. Everyone must decide for themselves what is right or wrong - but now I begin to sound like an atheist.

Thanks
Mark

 

[aiki]

aiki: You have said that the simplest reading of the text is usually the best. Fine. I believe that the bible is clear that a woman should not teach a man. That seems a simple teaching does it not? That is what would be considered a conservative and fundamental translation. Perhaps you also believe it. However, when investigated, we learn of the context of the statement that Ephesian women were uneducated and not fit for teaching (as well as all the other counter-arguments of which I am sure you are fully versed). Perhaps it is precisely the fact that people look at the simplistic text that so much misinterpretation is abound?

You have just made the mistake I was afraid you would make. The simplest reading of a text is not always simple. Perhaps I should have said "The reading which requires the least amount of complication and convolution." There is a difference between the simplest, or the least convoluted, reading of a text, and a simplistic reading of it. The former takes into account only the necessary and essential factors required for a proper interpretation of a verse or passage of Scripture. The latter neglects to do this entirely.

Cornelius and his household's hearts had been accepted by thier faith BEFORE they were baptized. That is a simplistic reading of the text and seems obvious. I am sure you would like to throw counter-proof texts towards me, but really I am not looking to debate this one product - mearly I am trying to show you that everyone is selective with what texts they choose to be literal or symbolic.

Everyone? Do you know everyone? You are making a generalization here based on an assumption.

The fact is, it doesn't matter what one may want a text to be. A text is what it is. It may or may not legitimately bear a literal and/or symbolic reading; but this is determined by the text itself, not the reader of it.

Further, my overall point is to show you that all those (or maybe 99%) who claim that they are in contact with the Holy Spirit are indeed not. If this were so, we would be in one accord, but we are split on even the most fundamental areas of scripture and doctrine.

I don't agree with your percentage at all; nor do I agree with your conclusion based on that percentage. I see a great deal of agreement and unity among evangelical Christians on core doctrine and theology. Yes, there are those who disagree, but this doesn't necessarily mean that the Holy Spirit doesn't lead believers at all.

The problem with this (no I am not judging others), is that if you think how wide spread this must be, you are talking about believers in only the 1,000s of the 2bn Christians alive today who would have your fundamental belief set who are "true Christians".

I grow increasingly convinced that the number of genuine Christians is much, much smaller than is commonly thought. A relationship with Christ is a "narrow road" that "only a few find."

What about the millions around the world who are untouched by Christianity of whom the Christian population is 0% and of who have never seen a Bible or (when eventually they are reached) have never heard of Jesus. In times past and present, you are talking of 100's of million people.

What about them?

Jeremiah 29:13 (KJV)
13 And you shall seek me, and find me, when you shall search for me with all your heart.

Luke 12:47-48 (NKJV)
47 And that servant who knew his master's will, and did not prepare himself or do according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he who did not know, yet committed things deserving of stripes, shall be beaten with few. For everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required; and to whom much has been committed, of him they will ask the more.

You've said there is no universal truth - I agree. Everyone must decide for themselves what is right or wrong - but now I begin to sound like an atheist.

No, no, I did not say there was no universal truth, you did. To say there is no universal truth is a universal truth claim, which means that the statement "There is no universal truth" is self-refuting. Its like saying, "Everyone always lies." Okay, if everyone always lies then the statement "Everyone always lies" is also a lie and cannot be believed. Do you understand? The statement "There is no universal truth" is a statement which expresses a universal truth. But if there is no universal truth, then this statement cannot be true.

Furthermore, if everyone truly decides for themself what is right and wrong, then a serial axe-murderer who believes randomly chopping people up with an axe is "right" cannot be told otherwise. He has simply decided for himself what is right and wrong, just as you say we all must. Since there is no universal truth that says, "Serial axe-murdering is wrong" he is not constrained to stop axe murdering by anything except his own personal preference. Of course, this isn't how life actually works. There are laws and rules governing human behaviour everywhere which contradict the idea that "everyone decides for themself what is right and wrong."

Peace.