What's that other stuff called?

[FreeNChrist]

In which case, can't we just call them "essential" and "nonessential?" Then give up the word "doctrine" altogether?

That would just create the question of essential and non-essential what? Sure, you can drop the word “doctrine”, but you will just have to replace it with something similar. The essentials of the Christian faith. The essential teachings of the Christian faith. Those essential truths upon which Christianity rests. They all express the same thought.

Those "essentials" are those undebatable truths upon which all Christians unite. The non-essentials are all debatable, and what we unfortunately tend to divide ourselves over.

 

[FreeNChrist]

calling lies of satan non-essential is giving lies a free pass imo...

Ephesians 5:11, "Do not participate in the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but instead even expose them."


Proverbs 19:2, “It is not good to have zeal without knowledge, nor to be hasty and miss the way.”

Folks believe all kinds of lies, that's why forums such as this exist, and why there is constant debate about what are lies and what are not lies. But, at least, we have the "essentials" to weed out the obvious lies and the posers.

 

[resurrection33]

I find when folks focus on unity, it often ends up compromising. Not a good thing.

I think we have to somewhat unity on here, but I no more expect a Methodist to compromise with a Presby than in reverse. Our commonality is God, but we're different denominations for sound reasoning.

The reason I am a United Methodist is because I was raised in a United Methodist Church. I pledged to be loyal to my church, and I intend to be loyal, even though there are things going on in our conference that anger me. There are battles that probably go on in every denomination.

 

[FreeNChrist]

I find when folks focus on unity, it often ends up compromising. Not a good thing.

I think we have to somewhat unity on here, but I no more expect a Methodist to compromise with a Presby than in reverse. Our commonality is God, but we're different denominations for sound reasoning.

"Has it ever occurred to you that one hundred pianos all tuned to the same fork are automatically tuned to each other? They are of one accord by being tuned, not to each other, but to another standard to which each one must individually bow. So one hundred worshippers meeting together, each one looking away to Christ, are in heart nearer to each other than they could possibly be were they to become unity conscious and turn their eyes away from God to strive for closer fellowship. Social religion is perfected when private religion is purified. The body becomes stronger as its members become healthier. The whole church of God gains when the members that compose it begin to seek a better and a higher life."

- A.W. Tozer

 

[Depleted]

Ok so i never even hinted at that, how you applied that thought to me is beyond me...

If one is teaching or following a false man made doctrine, yes we should inform them, as a fellow member of the body of Messiah it is right. However what does that have to do with claiming or not claiming a title on said person...

Yup, that's how I got there. "false man made." Now go back to that list and answer which is false and/or man made, and which is real? Most of them really are denominational doctrines. Many can be backed up by scripture either way. So, are you the one to judge which is "false man made?"

You use those words easily. Now I'm asking do you want to have the rubber hit the road? Because is salvation related to whether a woman can preach, whether water is partially or wholly applied in baptism, whether the person being baptised is a baby, a child, a teen, or adult, etc.? Look at the list. I picked that list for a reason. All those things mean something of what people believe is of Christ. And yet, none of them are agreed with completely.

Now do you want to do what? Avoid all "false man made" or verify which is false, which is manmade, and which connotes the right beliefs to be labeled "true believer?" Or, to give it the opposite of what you called it "true, God made?"

If there is no specifics on which is true and which is false, why use "false?"

I can answer every single one of those questions from my beliefs. I can back them up with scripture too. BUT that doesn't mean if you disagree with me, you're "false." You've left this wide open to think if I don't believe exactly like you, then I believe "false man made." Since I was asking for a new word for the difference between "essentials" and nonessentials," the "false man made" is nothing but hype, unless you can come up with an essential list that kills off everything you perceive as "false man made."

Your turn. Do you really want to tackle what is "false man made?"

 

[Depleted]

Paul wrote on the issue of which day should be kept as the Lords day in Romans or 1st Corinthians I believe. In the early church the Jewish born believers said the Sabbath was the day to honor the Lord. The Greek or Gentile believers said the first day of the week was the Lords as that was when Jesus was resurrected.

Paul wrote basically that no matter which day they believed The Lord should be honored on, the important thing was that the Lord was honored.

In the same way the Jewish believers thought they should not eat meat that came from idol temples. While the Gentiles believed that the meat was not unclean because the idols that the meat was sacrificed too had no power and thus could not be made unclean what the Lord has made clean.

Of that Paul wrote that through Faith the Gentiles honored God by believing in His power to make all things clean and not to look down on the Jewish believers who honored God by not eating what they believed was unclean and vice versa. In both cases they honored God.

I'm not really asking for a study on every nonessential issue. I'm asking for a word that describes them.

 

[Depleted]

Okay then, let's rephrase the question. Consider the person who loves and worships God and his only begotten son Jesus Christ, has repented, has received the Holy Spirit, and keeps God's commandments as well as anyone could be expected to.

Is that person not a Christian because he questions or has doubts about some aspect of the doctrine you presented above?

Examples of doctrines:
-- Salvation is through Christ. He is the only way.
-- While on earth Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man.
-- God is triune -- Father, Son and Spirit. Three-in-one.

Questioning them? I'll stop questioning how Jesus was both 100% man and 100% God when I can wrap my head around that. The same is true for the Trinity.

But doubt it? Good time to start question if that person is a believer, yes.

 

[Depleted]

That would just create the question of essential and non-essential what? Sure, you can drop the word “doctrine”, but you will just have to replace it with something similar. The essentials of the Christian faith. The essential teachings of the Christian faith. Those essential truths upon which Christianity rests. They all express the same thought.

Those "essentials" are those undebatable truths upon which all Christians unite. The non-essentials are all debatable, and what we unfortunately tend to divide ourselves over.

Yeah, but it cuts down on the debates a bit. The essentials are a given. The nonessentials are the debates we enjoy. I'll argue until the cows are asleep. (Hey, they came home hours ago. lol) But at least we can all truthfully question who is and isn't a Christian by the lack of trust/acceptance in the essentials.

 

[Depleted]

The reason I am a United Methodist is because I was raised in a United Methodist Church. I pledged to be loyal to my church, and I intend to be loyal, even though there are things going on in our conference that anger me. There are battles that probably go on in every denomination.

I'm PCA (specific branch of Presbyterian) because of battles. Would have been PC-USA but they did overstep, so another denomination was born. Yeah, I get it.

 

[Depleted]

"Has it ever occurred to you that one hundred pianos all tuned to the same fork are automatically tuned to each other? They are of one accord by being tuned, not to each other, but to another standard to which each one must individually bow. So one hundred worshippers meeting together, each one looking away to Christ, are in heart nearer to each other than they could possibly be were they to become unity conscious and turn their eyes away from God to strive for closer fellowship. Social religion is perfected when private religion is purified. The body becomes stronger as its members become healthier. The whole church of God gains when the members that compose it begin to seek a better and a higher life."

- A.W. Tozer

Ha! I'm tone deaf. But, boy, I wish I could hear like he heard. Great quote.

(Would have repped you. Alas -- spreading is required. lol)

 

[FreeNChrist]

I'm PCA (specific branch of Presbyterian) because of battles. Would have been PC-USA but they did overstep, so another denomination was born. Yeah, I get it.

I know those battles well. I'm from back when it was the "United" Presbyterian church.

 

[Depleted]

I know those battles well. I'm from back when it was the "United" Presbyterian church.

I was nondenom back in those days. (Or Catholic, depending on how far back we're talking.)

I really wish there was the ability for people to understand some things are essential. I wouldn't divide over women being deacons or elder. (I believe women can be/should be deacons, but not pastors, unless there are no men older than the woman.) I sure would when it got to the point of homosexual leaders and marriages.

 

[Prov910]

Examples of doctrines:
-- Salvation is through Christ. He is the only way.
-- While on earth Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man.
-- God is triune -- Father, Son and Spirit. Three-in-one.

Questioning them? I'll stop questioning how Jesus was both 100% man and 100% God when I can wrap my head around that. The same is true for the Trinity.

But doubt it? Good time to start question if that person is a believer, yes.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Nearly everyone has questions about doctrine. Like Jesus being 100% God and 100% man. Or the Trinity. Does anyone really understand these things? Yet, despite not entirely understanding them, most will say they believe in them. How can anyone truly believe in something if they don't understand it?

Wouldn't it be better to admit what you don't understand, and state what you actually do understand and have faith in?

I believe in God and his only begotten son, Jesus Christ. I believe Jesus was with God when the heavens and earth were created. I believe Jesus is in God, and God is in Jesus. I believe Jesus died for our sins, and rose on the third day. I believe God the Father sent the Holy Spirit to us when Jesus ascended into heaven. I believe faith in Jesus is the way to God. But I have to admit that I don't understand some of the things you call doctrine. I think someday, when I die, my questions will be answered. In the mean time I guess there's nothing I can do about it if some want to characterize me as not being a Christian because of my lack of understanding.

 

[oldethennew]

That would just create the question of essential and non-essential what? Sure, you can drop the word “doctrine”, but you will just have to replace it with something similar. The essentials of the Christian faith. The essential teachings of the Christian faith. Those essential truths upon which Christianity rests. They all express the same thought.

Those "essentials" are those undebatable truths upon which all Christians unite. The non-essentials are all debatable, and what we unfortunately tend to divide ourselves over.

==================================================
you've shown a big heart here, but, Free, you sometimes sound so naïve, so led...

True Christians never 'dis-unite', even if they should dis-agree - they may be 'tempted',
but the non-essentials/of-no-consequence-stuff, will go by the wayside as we learn to travel the High-Road...

 

[FreeNChrist]

==================================================
you've shown a big heart here, but, Free, you sometimes sound so naïve, so led...

True Christians never 'dis-unite', even if they should dis-agree - they may be 'tempted',
but the non-essentials/of-no-consequence-stuff, will go by the wayside as we learn to travel the High-Road...

I would say that thinking "true" Christians never divide over disagreements is being naive.

 

[stonesoffire]

==================================================
you've shown a big heart here, but, Free, you sometimes sound so naïve, so led...

True Christians never 'dis-unite', even if they should dis-agree - they may be 'tempted',
but the non-essentials/of-no-consequence-stuff, will go by the wayside as we learn to travel the High-Road...

Galatians 5: 23

no doctrines needed to go by if we heed this word. The high road could be a term to show the truth but doesn't mention by whose power.

 

[Hizikyah]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Psalm 119:160, "The sum of Your word is truth, And all Your righteous right-rulings are forever." [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Hebrews 4:12, “For the Word of Yah is living, and working, and sharper than any two-edged sword, cutting through even to the dividing of being and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”[/FONT]

 

[Depleted]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Nearly everyone has questions about doctrine. Like Jesus being 100% God and 100% man. Or the Trinity. Does anyone really understand these things? Yet, despite not entirely understanding them, most will say they believe in them. How can anyone truly believe in something if they don't understand it?

Wouldn't it be better to admit what you don't understand, and state what you actually do understand and have faith in?

I believe in God and his only begotten son, Jesus Christ. I believe Jesus was with God when the heavens and earth were created. I believe Jesus is in God, and God is in Jesus. I believe Jesus died for our sins, and rose on the third day. I believe God the Father sent the Holy Spirit to us when Jesus ascended into heaven. I believe faith in Jesus is the way to God. But I have to admit that I don't understand some of the things you call doctrine. I think someday, when I die, my questions will be answered. In the mean time I guess there's nothing I can do about it if some want to characterize me as not being a Christian because of my lack of understanding.

I don't understand electricity. I believe in it.

I really don't get modern car engines. (Had enough trouble figuring out how cars worked in the 1960's when they only had mechanical parts. lol) I believe car engines work.

I don't understand spirit vs. body vs. soul. I might even lean to spirit and soul. But it doesn't stop me from being saved.

If I ever thought I understood God fully, I'm guaranteed one of two things: Either I am way too full of myself or I created a smaller god in my own mind. The finite cannot understand the infinite completely.

There's lots of stuff I don't get that I still believe.

If you don't trust that Jesus was 100% God and 100% Man? If you don't trust that God is triune? If you think there is another way besides Jesus? Yup. You might not be a believer.

 

[Prov910]

I don't understand electricity. I believe in it.

I really don't get modern car engines. (Had enough trouble figuring out how cars worked in the 1960's when they only had mechanical parts. lol) I believe car engines work.

I don't think it's valid to compare relatively straightforward things like electricity and auto mechanics to God. If you put in even a little effort you could understand electricity and the workings of your car. However, mankind will never have the capacity to understand or even comprehend God.

If I ever thought I understood God fully, I'm guaranteed one of two things: Either I am way too full of myself or I created a smaller god in my own mind. The finite cannot understand the infinite completely.

There's lots of stuff I don't get that I still believe.

But aren't there doctrinal statements about God that characterize him in a humanly confident manner that we aren't really qualified to know? When you say Jesus was 100% God, then who was Jesus praying to? And the Trinity. Sure we know about God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. But wouldn't is be possible for God to appear to us someday in other forms that we are not yet aware of? It seems to me that if God wanted to, he could do that. Labeling God as the Trinity--a term I have yet to find in the bible--seems to put a humanly conceived limit on him.

If you think there is another way besides Jesus? Yup. You might not be a believer.

Who said this? I'm trying to hold an honest conversation in order to learn about things I'm grappling with. I don't think it helps when you fabricate things I didn't say.

 

[FreeNChrist]

It’s interesting that the ones who disagree that the essentials are essential, are those who usually deny one or more of the essentials. Funny how that works.