False Religions: How to Recognize Them

It's not that simple. If you go to a group's website and look at their statement of faith, you're likely to find these ten items in all of them. So you shouldn't necessarily set your mind at ease; you should look at everything. What do they mean by these statement? For example, number 1: Biblical inspiration, authority, and sufficiency. Many groups claim this but they also teach "present truth" and "new revelation"; meaning they give lip service to Biblical inspiration, authority, and sufficiency while also claiming prophetic and apostolic authority to proclaim new truths which only they, at this time, have been granted authority to reveal.

And what else is part of their statement of faith? I wouldn't stop after number 10. A lot of groups are heavy-laden with confessions. They would probably agree with the list of 10 but would also add many other things that may or may not be truth.

You have to look at what a given group practices too, not just what they say. For example, the statement of faith of the United Methodist Church has most of the things in the list of 10, but they also ordain women ministers; and are currently split over LGBTQ issues.

So if I see a list like that my mind isn't set at ease at all.

I dont know why this is such a problem.
The scripture gives credit to God for the man who recieves God, and puts the onus of rejection upon the ome who rejects him. Calvin and arminius is wrong. Calvin blames God for the damned and arminius credits man for the saved. But it really is as simy as read the scripture and believe what it says.

Yes but I’ve listened to you enough to know you mean God’s saving grace and faith is offered to all mankind yet only some choose to accept it.

You don’t see it do you, I mean you honestly don’t realize your soteriology is of Arminian roots do you? I guess that’s good thing, better than teaching Arminianism on purpose.

Like RC used to say, Arminians who… Let’s just let him speak for himself in this 3 minute clip, could be useful for both sides of the debate here on CC.

Yes but I’ve listened to you enough to know you mean God’s saving grace and faith is offered to all mankind yet only some choose to accept it.

You don’t see it do you, I mean you honestly don’t realize your soteriology is of Arminian roots do you? I guess that’s good thing, better than teaching Arminianism on purpose.

Like RC used to say, Arminians who… Let’s just let him speak for himself in this 3 minute clip, could be useful for both sides of the debate here on CC.

You could be wrong, you have been before :- )

I don't understand why you are presenting R.C. Sproul as an authority, in the original post it was basically stated that Scipture was the sufficient/sole authority. I don't believe in many of the things that Sproul wrote/spoke about Christianity. Despite our disagreements, I never even thought that Sproul wasn't a Christian.

So, why do you cite Sproul as an authority on who is Christian and who isnt?

Why don't I agree with Sproul, because R.C. Sproul was a Calvinist. He affirmed predestination, unconditional election of some and not others to eternal life as the source of salvation, and the idea of a limited atonement, that is, that Christ died only for the elect, rather than all people. And I don't agree with any of these ideas.

Ask the Arminians. Better yet, what's your view of the atonement?

Do you always expect others to answer your questions when you refuse to answer theirs?

The shed righteous blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to save the whole world, but is efficacious only for those who believe.

Do you always expect others to answer your questions when you refuse to answer theirs?.

I'm more than willing to answer intelligent questions. However, I'm hesitant to engage someone who is known for their one liner's, I find they're often uneducated, only seeking to derail the conversation.

Post13/Nov25, I must say that I'm puzzled with your post????????

In your post, you say that the true Christian faith is dependant on 'Scripture Alone'. "It is the written authoritative source for the practice of our faith and is sufficient for all of our needs in living the Christian life"

So, why am I puzzled? Instead of referring to Scripture to identify false religions, you cite a link from 'Preach It/Teach It'. While this link does reference many of it's ideas in Scripture, it is basically only the 'Translational Opinion' of the author of the link. So, why are you citing someone's opinion as an authoritative opinion, when you previously said that 'Scripture Alone' is the only authority?

Much of this article is just the opinion of the author and his/her interpretation of Scripture. So, if I don't agree with the author, does that mean that I am not a true Christian? Thanks..

In short, yes.

Even my Arminian brothers here know better than to deny a single one of the ten, they may twist 6, 9 & 10 a bit but never dare to deny outright.

How is Jesus’ substitutionary atonement twisted?

Ask the Arminians. Better yet, what's your view of the atonement?

Do you always expect others to answer your questions when you refuse to answer theirs?

I'm more than willing to answer intelligent questions. However, I'm hesitant to engage someone who is known for their one liner's, I find they're often uneducated, only seeking to derail the conversation.

I specifically asked about a point in your your OP, which means I am on topic. Your refusal to
answer a simple question is doing more to derail your thread than anything I have said or done.
I do understand that ad homs such as you have resorted to are used primarily as a diversion tactic.

Why do you apostrophize a plural?

Not true, you're either confused or being dishonest. 👆

You didn't ask about the OP, you injected yourself into a conversation I was having with another member. This is exactly my point. --->I'm more than willing to answer intelligent questions. However, I'm hesitant to engage someone who is known for their one liners, I find they're often uneducated, only seeking to derail the conversation.

I specifically asked about a point in your your OP, which means I am on topic. Your refusal to
answer a simple question is doing more to derail your thread than anything I have said or done.
I do understand that ad homs such as you have resorted to are used primarily as a diversion tactic.

Why do you apostrophize a plural?

I'm hesitant to engage someone who is known for their one liner's, I find they're often uneducated, only seeking to derail the conversation.

You could be wrong, you have been before :- )

Do you affirm the above truths?

If the shoe fits

We knew what you meant 😊👍

Can you be more specific, what do you mean by "punishment"?

I'm not going anywhere, feel free to research any unfamiliar terms and get back to me whenever. 👍

Don Smith and Robert Madu seem to be different sides of the same coin.

What’s the matter?

I agree with all of that except the first half of the first sentence, there's an option for everyone. 😉

I was saved after an extremely sinful 38 years.

It was so long ago you can't remember? 😆

Who's on 3rd?

You were supposed to say, I dont know is not 3rd

I don't know.

Huh?

Please choose one that best describes your position regarding man's role in salvation.

The assertion you made to the other poster was about point #6 in your OP, which I asked about.

Why are you being dishonest?

Some of your many one liners:

NOV25 is trying to set himself up as the 'Judge' who determines who is Christian and who is not. NOV25's judgements on others are judgements on himself.

NOV25 is trying to set himself up as the 'Judge' who determines who is Christian and who is not. NOV25's judgements on others are judgements on himself.

You seem a bit confused. You'd be better off spending your time reviewing the OP, the list of 10 Christian beliefs. As the writer states, if you find yourself denying, redefining or supplementing all or some, then you find yourself outside Christian orthodoxy. You have a false religion.