There is NO risk to me if I am wrong about "certain" doctrinal positions.

[BobRyan]

(a number of people have asked that this topic be posted in a more open area of CF - so here it is)

Realizing first of all - that there are saved saints in all Christian denominations:

As a Seventh-day Adventist -- if I am wrong about my beliefs – there is still no risk to me.

1. IF I am wrong to be a Christian and instead Atheists have the right belief – there is no risk to me. I get the exact same “glorious ending” as the atheist true believer – the hole in ground ending. However to take the reverse POV - there is at least "some risk" to the idea of betting your life that "There is no God".

2. IF I am wrong about rejecting the secret rapture and millennial kingdom on Earth (when I say that in the future the saints are raptured at Christ's Rev 19 appearing according to Matt 24 - and the saints spend the millennium with Christ in heaven, while earth is desolate for that period of time) – there is no risk to me. I get raptured anyway and learn about the details in heaven.

3. IF I am wrong about rejecting OSAS (once saved always saved) and the OSAS groups are right – there is no risk to me. I am saved by accepting Jesus as my savior either way. By contrast the one holding to the OSAS point of view is subject to at least some risk if it is found to be incorrect.

4. IF I am wrong about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment being the same as the 2 Cor 5:10 judgment which is the same as the judgment in Rom 2:6-16 ( and so then those who ignore that judgment are right in this scenario) – then there is still no risk to me. By contrast if one assumes that the Bible information about that future pre-advent judgment in Dan 7 - can be ignored, and if that assumption turns out to be incorrect, well then at least "some risk" is incurred.

5. IF I am wrong about the 7th day Sabbath of Ex 20 and Gen 2:1-3, and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me – let each one observe the day as he is persuaded Rom 14. If the POV of ignoring it is wrong - then some risk is incurred given that when God says "A" and we respond with "no , I say 'B'" then some risk is incurred.

6. IF I am wrong about God’s health message and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me. The Adventist church has one of the 5 “blue zones” in the world, and live 5-7 years longer on average.

7. If I am wrong about Rev 14 (three Angel's messages) being the final warning to mankind before the tribulation-plagues of Rev 16 and the Rev 19 appearing of Christ, and those who ignore it are right, then still there is no risk to me for reading the warning as it is scripture and so is not a problem to share it "anyway". By contrast it is generally the case in the Bible - that ignoring a warning message from God to mankind - results in at least some risk.

8. IF I am wrong about rejecting "communion with the dead" (958) and those who choose to commune with the dead are right - there is no risk to me.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."500 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective. "
​

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

===========================

The are other Christian groups that share some of my same beliefs above and so I think they too would also have "no risk" even if they are wrong on the position above that they share with me.

========================== Two real life examples

1. Noah - if he is wrong then he has a "boat" in his yard for a long time but nobody dies. If he is right -- then it is a huge risk to those who ignored the warning message

2. John the baptizer - and his "repent for the time is fulfilled" message about the Christ - before Jesus meets John. If John is wrong then just a lot more "repent and be baptized" sermons until he dies. But if those who ignored John's message are wrong - the nation itself is at risk of rejecting the Messiah.

=========== one final addendum

I think I can say with some level of confidence that on CF -- I am one of the top examples of posting something like this "you have free will you can ignore whatever you wish"

But what I never add is "no matter what the topic or doctrine - ignoring whatever you wish, cannot possibly incur some level of risk"

 

[BobRyan]

So while "the risk" to me for being wrong on #1 above (Atheist vs Christian) - which means "the risk that choosing christianity is wrong". I get the same wonderful hole-in-ground ending as the atheist, but don't have to live the atheist life. I live as a Christian but then when I die - nothing else happens.

By contrast Rev 20 and the lake of fire is included in the part of the "More that happens" when the atheist dies if his/her view is wrong.

============================

Very few Bible believing Christians argue that it is in the best interest of Atheists to ignore the problem they are faced with in scenario #1 in the OP.

They idea that "they need to notice it" but "we don't" is not exactly objective.

=========================

Some will argue that Christians should not have to make strong logical arguments since the Holy Spirit could take lame arguments just as well and have them work.

But the internet is full of examples where atheists point to lame failed logic statements made by certain Christians - and use them to recruit more into atheism.

Christ gives a great example of making a strong logical argument with his hostile-audicence enemies in Matt 22 for defending the doctrine of the future resurrection. In Mark 7:6-13 Christ makes a strong logical argument with his opposers regarding their bogus traditions that are in opposition to the Word of God.

In Matt 22 Christ's stellar logic "silenced the Sadducees" as the Pharisees themselves admitted.

Some may claim that we could be equally as successful making statements that don't make sense -- I disagree.

A great many atheists have become Christian - including one reading this thread - and they did so because of issues like #1 in the OP. But I have yet to find even one that claimed they came to be a Christian while Atheist because of the force of the statement "I don't think my atheism is giving God glory".

===================

Peter says not to give lame arguments.

1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, but with gentleness and respect

Paul agrees.

Titus 1:7 For the overseer must be beyond reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not overindulging in wine, not a bully, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, self-controlled, righteous, holy, disciplined, 9 holding firmly the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.

It does not say "able to contradict those who contradict" but rather "able to refute those who contradict". In some circles merely name-calling and contradicting is "enough" -- and is all that should be asked of them in their own POV. Scripture does not agree.

Rom 12:3
For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith.

1 Tim 1:10
... immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching,

1Tim 4:6
In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following.
1 Timothy 6:3
If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,

2 Timothy 1:13
Retain the standard of sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.

2 Timothy 4:3
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires,

Titus 1:9 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.
Titus 1:13 This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith,

Titus 2:1
But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.

Titus 2:2
Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.

Titus 2:8
sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.
Hebrews 12:19

1 Peter 4:7
The end of all things is near; therefore, be of sound judgment and sober spirit for the purpose of prayer.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

(a number of people have asked that this topic be posted in a more open area of CF - so here it is)

Realizing first of all - that there are saved saints in all Christian denominations:

As a Seventh-day Adventist -- if I am wrong about my beliefs – there is still no risk to me.

1. IF I am wrong to be a Christian and instead Atheists have the right belief – there is no risk to me. I get the exact same “glorious ending” as the atheist true believer – the hole in ground ending

2. IF I am wrong about rejecting the secret rapture and millennial kingdom on Earth (when I say that in the future the saints are raptured at Christ's Rev 19 appearing according to Matt 24 - and the saints spend the millennium with Christ in heaven, while earth is desolate for that period of time) – there is no risk to me. I get raptured anyway and learn about the details in heaven.

3. IF I am wrong about rejecting OSAS (once saved always saved) and the OSAS groups are right – there is no risk to me. I am saved by accepting Jesus as my savior either way.

4. IF I am wrong about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment being the 2 Cor 5:10 judgment also in Rom 2:6-16, and so then those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me.

5. IF I am wrong about the 7th day Sabbath of Ex 20, and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me – let each one observe the day as he is persuaded Rom 14.

6. IF I am wrong about God’s health message and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me. The Adventist church has one of the 5 “blue zones” in the world, and live 5-7 years longer on average.

7. If I am wrong about Rev 14 (three Angel's messages) being the final warning to mankind before the tribulation-plagues of Rev 16 and the Rev 19 appearing of Christ, and those who ignore it are right, then still there is no risk to me for reading the warning as it is scripture and so is not a problem to share it "anyway".

8. IF I am wrong about rejecting "communion with the dead" (958) and those who choose to commune with the dead are right - there is no risk to me.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."500 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective. "
​

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

I agree. I have thought about this a lot over the years. There is so many false teachings out there in the world today even in Christianity, designed to lead us away from God and His Word, so we know the second coming of Jesus is at hand and that our only safety today is in seeking Jesus through His Word. This is why I appreciate God's Word and God's promises to be our guide and teacher as we seek him with all of our heart through His Word. Jesus of course being our example who we should believe and follow. For me personally, I believe that for some things even if we are wrong in our beliefs that there is no risk for anyone because it is simply a mistaken belief that does not effect God or man. However, I believe that according to the scriptures, if our beliefs are leading us away from God and His Word into sin which is defined in the scriptures as breaking anyone of God's commandments and/or not believing and following what God's Word say (1 John 3:4; James 2:10-11; Romans 14:23; John 3:31; John 3:18-21; 1 John 2:3-4) then the bible teaches these things are leading us away from Gods' Word to receive God's judgements as shown in Hebrews 10:26-31; John 3:31. Of course then there is risk to what we believe or do not believe according to the scriptures. I have always thought that for me personally, if Gods' "seventh day" Sabbath is one of Gods' 10 commandments that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken (Romans 3:20: Romans 7:7; 1 John 3:4) and the scriptures teach in Hebrews 10:26-31 that if we knowingly continue in unrepentant sin after God gives us a knowledge of the truth of His Word the risk here for me personally is too high to disregard God's 4th commandment of the 10 commandments and any of God's Word to be honest. Thanks for sharing your thoughts here.

God bless.

 

[Fervent]

If the options are binary, then perhaps you are correct as far as these points go. Yet at the same time, if you are wrong and, for example, the Muslims are correct then there is a risk to you. So ultimately, being convinced on a point has little to nothing to do with whether it carries a risk. And true propositions may carry a great risk in accepting, so risk alone is not a sufficient consideration. In fact, considering Christ calls for us to die for His sake the acceptance of Christ is a pure risk...We have to be all in on the truth of the gospel, so choosing doctrine by mitigating risk is contrary to proclamation of Christ.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

(a number of people have asked that this topic be posted in a more open area of CF - so here it is)

Realizing first of all - that there are saved saints in all Christian denominations:

As a Seventh-day Adventist -- if I am wrong about my beliefs – there is still no risk to me.

1. IF I am wrong to be a Christian and instead Atheists have the right belief – there is no risk to me. I get the exact same “glorious ending” as the atheist true believer – the hole in ground ending

2. IF I am wrong about rejecting the secret rapture and millennial kingdom on Earth (when I say that in the future the saints are raptured at Christ's Rev 19 appearing according to Matt 24 - and the saints spend the millennium with Christ in heaven, while earth is desolate for that period of time) – there is no risk to me. I get raptured anyway and learn about the details in heaven.

3. IF I am wrong about rejecting OSAS (once saved always saved) and the OSAS groups are right – there is no risk to me. I am saved by accepting Jesus as my savior either way.

4. IF I am wrong about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment being the 2 Cor 5:10 judgment also in Rom 2:6-16, and so then those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me.

5. IF I am wrong about the 7th day Sabbath of Ex 20, and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me – let each one observe the day as he is persuaded Rom 14.

6. IF I am wrong about God’s health message and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me. The Adventist church has one of the 5 “blue zones” in the world, and live 5-7 years longer on average.

7. If I am wrong about Rev 14 (three Angel's messages) being the final warning to mankind before the tribulation-plagues of Rev 16 and the Rev 19 appearing of Christ, and those who ignore it are right, then still there is no risk to me for reading the warning as it is scripture and so is not a problem to share it "anyway".

8. IF I am wrong about rejecting "communion with the dead" (958) and those who choose to commune with the dead are right - there is no risk to me.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."500 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective. "
​

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

===========================

The are other Christian groups that share some of my same beliefs above and so I think they too would also have "no risk" even if they are wrong on the position above that they share with me.

The truth is that we look at the things of God "through a glass darkly". In other words we view things through the wrong end of the telescope. There are many things that are not made totally clear to us and we have to take "educated guesses" concerning some aspects of doctrine. But what has been made totally clear is that Jesus suffered and died for us on the Cross and that we are reconciled to God through faith in that finished work on the Cross.

But whether we decide to live by the Mosaic Law, or live according to our own conscience, or whether we observe Saturday or Sunday as our "sabbath", or whether we observe a sabbath at all, does not affect our standing with Christ. We are justified by faith in Christ, period. We are not justified by holding to what people think is "correct" doctrine. God is not impressed with outward appearances or observances to particular doctrines or ceremonies. He looks right into the heart of people, and it is what a person is in his heart that God sees and accepts.

I go out of my way not to be outwardly religious. One of my work colleagues said about me to a visitor, "You wouldn't know that he is a church elder, would you?" This is because I was behaving in ways totally unlike a church elder. I don't have to be super religious or subscribe to the "correct" doctrines in order to impress anyone, because I don't answer to them. My accounting is to Christ, and one day I will be standing before Him giving my account of the life I have lived. So, I subscribe to what Spurgeon quoted: "I'm just a poor sinner, and nothing at all, but Jesus Christ is my all in all."

 

[SabbathBlessings]

The truth is that we look at the things of God "through a glass darkly". In other words we view things through the wrong end of the telescope. There are many things that are not made totally clear to us and we have to take "educated guesses" concerning some aspects of doctrine. But what has been made totally clear is that Jesus suffered and died for us on the Cross and that we are reconciled to God through faith in that finished work on the Cross.

But whether we decide to live by the Mosaic Law, or live according to our own conscience, or whether we observe Saturday or Sunday as our "sabbath", or whether we observe a sabbath at all, does not affect our standing with Christ. We are justified by faith in Christ, period. We are not justified by holding to what people think is "correct" doctrine. God is not impressed with outward appearances or observances to particular doctrines or ceremonies. He looks right into the heart of people, and it is what a person is in his heart that God sees and accepts.

I go out of my way not to be outwardly religious. One of my work colleagues said about me to a visitor, "You wouldn't know that he is a church elder, would you?" This is because I was behaving in ways totally unlike a church elder. I don't have to be super religious or subscribe to the "correct" doctrines in order to impress anyone, because I don't answer to them. My accounting is to Christ, and one day I will be standing before Him giving my account of the life I have lived. So, I subscribe to what Spurgeon quoted: "I'm just a poor sinner, and nothing at all, but Jesus Christ is my all in all."

If God didn't care what day we worshiped on than why would He bother coming down from Heaven and personally writing the day we are to Remember and keep holy Exodus 20:8. He kept His holy law in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of His Temple which is also revealed in heaven. Revelation 11:19. If this is God's will for us and His law reflects the very character of our Creator, what makes you think its optional?

Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. 1 Peter 1:16

Did you know the only commandment that uses the word "holy" is the Sabbath commandment? The seventh day is the only day the Lord "blessed" and once God blesses something it cannot be reversed Numbers 23:20. When God said "Remember" this commandment- I don't think that means the opposite- that's we should forget or its optional.

God cared about 1 tree, what makes you think He doesn't care about the holy day of the Lord thy God, the seventh day Sabbath Exodus 20:10, Isaiah 58:13 that God wants us to keep holy the same day that is holy to Him. Exodus 20:8-11. Where in the bible does it say we are to do the opposite of God or Jesus who is our example and also kept the Sabbath holy. Genesis 2:1-3, Luke 4:16-23 as did the disciples. Acts 18:4

Like the topic of this thread, there seems to be a lot more to lose by disobeying this commandment than keeping it. Jesus said the same thing, it's better to keep the commandments of God, which is Sabbath keeping, than traditions- which is worshipping on a day that God did not deem His holy day. Matthew 15:3-9

God promised the seventh day Sabbath would be a perpetual covenant Exodus 31:16 and we see that fulfilled for eternity Isaiah 66:23 because we can trust the promises of Christ.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

But whether we decide to live by the Mosaic Law, or live according to our own conscience, or whether we observe Saturday or Sunday as our "sabbath", or whether we observe a sabbath at all, does not affect our standing with Christ. We are justified by faith in Christ, period. We are not justified by holding to what people think is "correct" doctrine. God is not impressed with outward appearances or observances to particular doctrines or ceremonies. He looks right into the heart of people, and it is what a person is in his heart that God sees and accepts.

For me personally I see in all of Gods' Word in both the old and new testament scriptures, that the only time God ever pours out His judgements to all mankind is only because of sin and unbelief which is defined in the scriptures as breaking anyone of Gods' commandments and disregarding Gods Word. To take this lightly I believe when the scriptures teach that God destroyed the whole world with a flood or Sodom and Gomorrah with fire which are examples of what is to come before the second coming of Christ in the clouds of Heaven to the wicked who do not believe God's Word and practice known unrepentant sin is unacceptable risk in my view according to the scriptures.

I go out of my way not to be outwardly religious. One of my work colleagues said about me to a visitor, "You wouldn't know that he is a church elder, would you?" This is because I was behaving in ways totally unlike a church elder. I don't have to be super religious or subscribe to the "correct" doctrines in order to impress anyone, because I don't answer to them. My accounting is to Christ, and one day I will be standing before Him giving my account of the life I have lived. So, I subscribe to what Spurgeon quoted: "I'm just a poor sinner, and nothing at all, but Jesus Christ is my all in all."

If we are inwardly born again from a new heart to love how can this not be expressed outwardly in our lives and actions, as we believe and follow what God's Word says? For me if we believe and follow what Gods' Word says it will be seen and expressed in our lives and how we live (see James 2:17-26). That said you are correct we will all stand before God come judgement day and will be judged according to the Words of God we accepted believed and followed from the heart or rejected in unbelief and sin according to John 12:47-48. Transgressing God's law and not believing God's Word is indeed unacceptable risk in my view according to the scriptures.

Take Care.

 

[BobRyan]

The truth is that we look at the things of God "through a glass darkly". In other words we view things through the wrong end of the telescope. There are many things that are not made totally clear to us and we have to take "educated guesses" concerning some aspects of doctrine.

True to some extent.

But it was also True for those living at the time of Noah, and John the baptizer and others. Only God sees everything perfectly.

Still there is this same weighing of the options and evaluating risk - like in the case of the atheist and the Christian in scenario 1 of the OP.

But what has been made totally clear is that Jesus suffered and died for us on the Cross and that we are reconciled to God through faith in that finished work on the Cross.

True. and in the case of Noah they could say "what is totally clear is that God made the world but did not destroy Lucifer when he rebelled in heaven and did not destroy Adam when he sinned on Earth".

Still when weighing whether to ignore God's message to Noah - they had to ask themselves about the risk of being wrong whichever way they went with it.

And in the case of John the baptizer they could say "we know it was God himself that called Abraham out and started the one true nation church at Sinai and gave us the temple and the priesthood" - but still they would have to weigh the warning message that God gave John the baptizer and the risk of ignoring it.

===========================
This focus on "Sound doctrine" may get opposed at some point during this thread - but the Bible affirms sound doctrine as noted in the first example in the OP. Neglecting sound reasoning provides the atheist with "yet another avenue" for rejecting Christ, and the speculation that a "focus on sound doctrine" is "bad" is the opposite teaching from what we find in scripture.

the Bible teaching on "sound doctrine" is not the "optional thing" some may have hoped it would be.

1. 1 Timothy 6:3
   If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,
   
2. 2 Timothy 4:3
   For the time will come when they will not tolerate sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance with their own desires,
   
3. Titus 1:9
   holding firmly the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.
   
4. Titus 2:1
   Proclaim Sound Doctrine
   But as for you, proclaim the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.
5. 1 Peter 3: 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: (KJV)
   
   15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; (NKVJ)
6. Acts 17:2 Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ.” 4 And some of them were persuaded; and a great multitude of the devout Greeks, and not a few of the leading women, joined Paul and Silas.
7. Acts 19:8 And he entered the synagogue and continued speaking out boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading them about the kingdom of God. 9 But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the people, he withdrew from them and took away the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus.

 

[Carl Emerson]

(a number of people have asked that this topic be posted in a more open area of CF - so here it is)

Realizing first of all - that there are saved saints in all Christian denominations:

As a Seventh-day Adventist -- if I am wrong about my beliefs – there is still no risk to me.

1. IF I am wrong to be a Christian and instead Atheists have the right belief – there is no risk to me. I get the exact same “glorious ending” as the atheist true believer – the hole in ground ending

2. IF I am wrong about rejecting the secret rapture and millennial kingdom on Earth (when I say that in the future the saints are raptured at Christ's Rev 19 appearing according to Matt 24 - and the saints spend the millennium with Christ in heaven, while earth is desolate for that period of time) – there is no risk to me. I get raptured anyway and learn about the details in heaven.

3. IF I am wrong about rejecting OSAS (once saved always saved) and the OSAS groups are right – there is no risk to me. I am saved by accepting Jesus as my savior either way.

4. IF I am wrong about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment being the 2 Cor 5:10 judgment also in Rom 2:6-16, and so then those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me.

5. IF I am wrong about the 7th day Sabbath of Ex 20, and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me – let each one observe the day as he is persuaded Rom 14.

6. IF I am wrong about God’s health message and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me. The Adventist church has one of the 5 “blue zones” in the world, and live 5-7 years longer on average.

7. If I am wrong about Rev 14 (three Angel's messages) being the final warning to mankind before the tribulation-plagues of Rev 16 and the Rev 19 appearing of Christ, and those who ignore it are right, then still there is no risk to me for reading the warning as it is scripture and so is not a problem to share it "anyway".

8. IF I am wrong about rejecting "communion with the dead" (958) and those who choose to commune with the dead are right - there is no risk to me.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."500 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective. "
​

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

===========================

The are other Christian groups that share some of my same beliefs above and so I think they too would also have "no risk" even if they are wrong on the position above that they share with me.

========================== Two real life examples

1. Noah - if he is wrong then he has a "boat" in his yard for a long time but nobody dies. If he is right -- then it is a huge risk to those who ignored the warning message

2. John the baptizer - and his "repent for the time is fulfilled" message about the Christ - before Jesus meets John. If John is wrong then just a lot more "repent and be baptized" sermons until he dies. But if those who ignored John's message are wrong - the nation itself is at risk of rejecting the Messiah.

Two things come to mind...

First is that there is a direct connection between what you believe and how free you are.

Therefore the closer we are to the doctrine of Jesus the better it is for us in this life and the next.

Second - the references to the hole in the ground don't really wash, given that Jesus spoke of eternal consequences for the unbelieving and disobedient.

So it does matter that we are Taught of God in what we believe and this is the rub - denominational teaching has to be suspected in the areas of disagreement with fundamental truth.

 

[fhansen]

(a number of people have asked that this topic be posted in a more open area of CF - so here it is)

Realizing first of all - that there are saved saints in all Christian denominations:

As a Seventh-day Adventist -- if I am wrong about my beliefs – there is still no risk to me.

1. IF I am wrong to be a Christian and instead Atheists have the right belief – there is no risk to me. I get the exact same “glorious ending” as the atheist true believer – the hole in ground ending

2. IF I am wrong about rejecting the secret rapture and millennial kingdom on Earth (when I say that in the future the saints are raptured at Christ's Rev 19 appearing according to Matt 24 - and the saints spend the millennium with Christ in heaven, while earth is desolate for that period of time) – there is no risk to me. I get raptured anyway and learn about the details in heaven.

3. IF I am wrong about rejecting OSAS (once saved always saved) and the OSAS groups are right – there is no risk to me. I am saved by accepting Jesus as my savior either way.

4. IF I am wrong about the Dan 7 pre-advent judgment being the 2 Cor 5:10 judgment also in Rom 2:6-16, and so then those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me.

5. IF I am wrong about the 7th day Sabbath of Ex 20, and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me – let each one observe the day as he is persuaded Rom 14.

6. IF I am wrong about God’s health message and those who ignore it are right – there is no risk to me. The Adventist church has one of the 5 “blue zones” in the world, and live 5-7 years longer on average.

7. If I am wrong about Rev 14 (three Angel's messages) being the final warning to mankind before the tribulation-plagues of Rev 16 and the Rev 19 appearing of Christ, and those who ignore it are right, then still there is no risk to me for reading the warning as it is scripture and so is not a problem to share it "anyway".

8. IF I am wrong about rejecting "communion with the dead" (958) and those who choose to commune with the dead are right - there is no risk to me.

958 Communion with the dead. "In full consciousness of this communion of the whole Mystical Body of Jesus Christ, the Church in its pilgrim members, from the very earliest days of the Christian religion, has honored with great respect the memory of the dead; and 'because it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they may be loosed from their sins' she offers her suffrages for them."500 Our prayer for them is capable not only of helping them, but also of making their intercession for us effective. "
​

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

===========================

The are other Christian groups that share some of my same beliefs above and so I think they too would also have "no risk" even if they are wrong on the position above that they share with me.

========================== Two real life examples

1. Noah - if he is wrong then he has a "boat" in his yard for a long time but nobody dies. If he is right -- then it is a huge risk to those who ignored the warning message

2. John the baptizer - and his "repent for the time is fulfilled" message about the Christ - before Jesus meets John. If John is wrong then just a lot more "repent and be baptized" sermons until he dies. But if those who ignored John's message are wrong - the nation itself is at risk of rejecting the Messiah.

We just need to know what God requires of us. And He's certainly told us.

"He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

"What is written in the Law?” Jesus replied. “How do you read it?”

He answered, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’ and ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’"

“You have answered correctly,” Jesus said. “Do this and you will live.” Luke 10

That's what faith is meant to accomplish, through the union with God that it fosters, that it means .

 

[DamianWarS]

In each one of these example there is an argument that could be made to show that “if I am right” on a given point above and someone rejects that point entirely, then “some risk” might exist for them.

I won't comment on specific points but the risk of getting one of these wrong is not living to the full potential God has planned for you which seems to be a missing focus. It feels more safety driven than giving God glory driven. I'm not saying that's how you're motivated but the OP presents itself that way. It's a type of economical way of obedience and just sort of flying under the radar and too me is misfocused.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

If God didn't care what day we worshiped on than why would He bother coming down from Heaven and personally writing the day we are to Remember and keep holy Exodus 20:8. He kept His holy law in the ark of the covenant in the Most Holy of His Temple which is also revealed in heaven. Revelation 11:19. If this is God's will for us and His law reflects the very character of our Creator, what makes you think its optional?

Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. 1 Peter 1:16

Did you know the only commandment that uses the word "holy" is the Sabbath commandment? The seventh day is the only day the Lord "blessed" and once God blesses something it cannot be reversed Numbers 23:20. When God said "Remember" this commandment- I don't think that means the opposite- that's we should forget or its optional.

God cared about 1 tree, what makes you think He doesn't care about the holy day of the Lord thy God, the seventh day Sabbath Exodus 20:10, Isaiah 58:13 that God wants us to keep holy the same day that is holy to Him. Exodus 20:8-11. Where in the bible does it say we are to do the opposite of God or Jesus who is our example and also kept the Sabbath holy. Genesis 2:1-3, Luke 4:16-23 as did the disciples. Acts 18:4

Like the topic of this thread, there seems to be a lot more to lose by disobeying this commandment than keeping it. Jesus said the same thing, it's better to keep the commandments of God, which is Sabbath keeping, than traditions- which is worshipping on a day that God did not deem His holy day. Matthew 15:3-9

God promised the seventh day Sabbath would be a perpetual covenant Exodus 31:16 and we see that fulfilled for eternity Isaiah 66:23 because we can trust the promises of Christ.

Keeping the Sabbath in a way that God accepts and appreciates depends on how the person keeps it. Keeping it as part of an outward rule because that is what your church does, out of either a sense of duty or to show that you are a good member of your church in front of the spectators, is not enough, and God would have the same response to your observance as resulting from Cain's sacrifice.

But if you, for some reason, happen to leave the SDA church and still kept the Saturday Sabbath because it is in your heart of love and respect for God that you want to continue with it, then you would have the right attitude in it, because it would be more than just an outward observance to please the leadership of your SDA church.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

For me personally I see in all of Gods' Word in both the old and new testament scriptures, that the only time God ever pours out His judgements to all mankind is only because of sin and unbelief which is defined in the scriptures as breaking anyone of Gods' commandments and disregarding Gods Word. To take this lightly I believe when the scriptures teach that God destroyed the whole world with a flood or Sodom and Gomorrah with fire which are examples of what is to come before the second coming of Christ in the clouds of Heaven to the wicked who do not believe God's Word and practice known unrepentant sin is unacceptable risk in my view according to the scriptures.

If we are inwardly born again from a new heart to love how can this not be expressed outwardly in our lives and actions, as we believe and follow what God's Word says? For me if we believe and follow what Gods' Word says it will be seen and expressed in our lives and how we live (see James 2:17-26). That said you are correct we will all stand before God come judgement day and will be judged according to the Words of God we accepted believed and followed from the heart or rejected in unbelief and sin according to John 12:47-48. Transgressing God's law and not believing God's Word is indeed unacceptable risk in my view according to the scriptures.

Take Care.

You have just explained the difference between a genuine believer and a religious hypocrite. When a person is truly born again of the Spirit of God and has a new heart to follow Christ, it will certainly show in his outward conduct. No doubt about that!

A religious hypocrite may observe all the requirements of the church he attends, but it is all outward to show that he is a good church person; but his heart toward God hasn't changed. He wants the best of both worlds. He wants to appear as a faithful, regular church goer, walking the walk, talking the talk, living a moral life, kind to children and animals, developing his Bible knowledge, etc., but it is all outward show. In fact he is living a double life, and those closest to him, ie: his wife and children know it.

My daughter went through Sunday school at my church and saw me at church as well as at home. I asked her when she was about 22 years of age whether I was being more religious at church than at home. She told me, "You're just the same Dad. You as crazy at church as you are at home!"

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

True to some extent.

But it was also True for those living at the time of Noah, and John the baptizer and others. Only God sees everything perfectly.

Still there is this same weighing of the options and evaluating risk - like in the case of the atheist and the Christian in scenario 1 of the OP.



True. and in the case of Noah they could say "what is totally clear is that God made the world but did not destroy Lucifer when he rebelled in heaven and did not destroy Adam when he sinned on Earth".

Still when weighing whether to ignore God's message to Noah - they had to ask themselves about the risk of being wrong whichever way they went with it.

And in the case of John the baptizer they could say "we know it was God himself that called Abraham out and started the one true nation church at Sinai and gave us the temple and the priesthood" - but still they would have to weigh the warning message that God gave John the baptizer and the risk of ignoring it.

I think what is being expressed in the thread is whether we set out our doctrine with a drafting pencil or a road marker. A hypocrite can set out his doctrinal position with a drafting pencil and yet be condemned because his heart is not right with God and his insistence on doctrinal accuracy may be just for outward show.

 

[RDKirk]

I go out of my way not to be outwardly religious. One of my work colleagues said about me to a visitor, "You wouldn't know that he is a church elder, would you?" This is because I was behaving in ways totally unlike a church elder.

Totally? You mean none of the following applied to you?

An elder must not give people a reason to criticize him, and he must have only one wife. He must be self-controlled, wise, respected by others, ready to welcome guests, and able to teach. He must not drink too much wine or like to fight, but rather be gentle and peaceable, not loving money. He must be a good family leader, having children who cooperate with full respect.

'Cause, like, y'know, acting totally not like an elder would mean a person is doing all those things an elder is not supposed to be doing.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

Keeping the Sabbath in a way that God accepts and appreciates depends on how the person keeps it. Keeping it as part of an outward rule because that is what your church does, out of either a sense of duty or to show that you are a good member of your church in front of the spectators, is not enough, and God would have the same response to your observance as resulting from Cain's sacrifice.

But if you, for some reason, happen to leave the SDA church and still kept the Saturday Sabbath because it is in your heart of love and respect for God that you want to continue with it, then you would have the right attitude in it, because it would be more than just an outward observance to please the leadership of your SDA church.

Me keeping the Sabbath holy has nothing to do with the SDA church and has everything to do with loving God with all my heart and wanting to obey Him becuase He asked. My post that you responded to has nothing to do with me and has everything to do with scripture that was posted and following the Word of God. God did not just give the SDA church the 4th commandment. Hopefully something to consider.

 

[Fervent]

I go out of my way not to be outwardly religious. One of my work colleagues said about me to a visitor, "You wouldn't know that he is a church elder, would you?" This is because I was behaving in ways totally unlike a church elder. I don't have to be super religious or subscribe to the "correct" doctrines in order to impress anyone, because I don't answer to them. My accounting is to Christ, and one day I will be standing before Him giving my account of the life I have lived. So, I subscribe to what Spurgeon quoted: "I'm just a poor sinner, and nothing at all, but Jesus Christ is my all in all."

While it is certainly an error to be a religious hypocrite, I wonder if you've gone too far the other direction from this. As Christ said, who lights a lamp and hides it under a basket? Our religion is the salvation and hope of the world, so while there certainly nothing admirable about parading ourselves in a holier than thou manner it's encumbent upon us to live in a way that is markedly set apart from the world and undeniably religious.

 

[Jake Arsenal]

There are around 40,000 Christian denominations claiming a hegemony on the truth, but there is no 100% perfect Christian denomination. All have fallen short of the glory of God. It is each person's responsibility to build a personal relationship with Jesus and to be accountable to the Scripture and their conscience.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Totally? You mean none of the following applied to you?

An elder must not give people a reason to criticize him, and he must have only one wife. He must be self-controlled, wise, respected by others, ready to welcome guests, and able to teach. He must not drink too much wine or like to fight, but rather be gentle and peaceable, not loving money. He must be a good family leader, having children who cooperate with full respect.

'Cause, like, y'know, acting totally not like an elder would mean a person is doing all those things an elder is not supposed to be doing.

Let's see which boxes I can tick here:
I never give anyone a reason to criticise me about the genuineness of my faith. I have only one wife, am very self controlled, respected by my work colleagues and fellow church members, ready to welcome guests, very competent to teach, don't drink alcohol, never violent, the type of person that children and dogs can have confidence in, content with my income, and my daughter respects me fully and sees me as a totally genuine Christian believer.

I don't have to be overtly religious to have those character attributes. Perhaps my work colleague expected a church elder to have a "holier than thou" religious aura around them like the "spare tyre" haloes that artists' impressions of Jesus and the Apostles had. I think she was intrigued that I conducted myself at work as a committed colleague who concentrated on the job rather than preaching religion at work.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Me keeping the Sabbath holy has nothing to do with the SDA church and has everything to do with loving God with all my heart and wanting to obey Him becuase He asked. My post that you responded to has nothing to do with me and has everything to do with scripture that was posted and following the Word of God. God did not just give the SDA church the 4th commandment. Hopefully something to consider.

If I observed the Saturday sabbath just because others thought that I should, it would make me a hypocrite because I would be doing it just to please those who believe in it.