Results 1 - 12 of 12
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 223213 | ||
Inquisitor, Unless I'm mistaken, the doctrine being of issue with the Campbellites is baptismal regeneration. Or is simple terms, teaching that the physical act of dipping somebody in water is needed for salvation. I may be wrong, if so somebody please correct me. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
2 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224565 | ||
But it's still quite a quandry to me. These people, at least most of the ones I've seen here on the Forum ask sincere questions based on scripture and most of the time, all they get in response is name-calling. Is there any justification for this kind of behavior? |
||||||
3 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | BradK | 224567 | ||
Hello inquisitor, This is a public Forum and as such all of our postings can be scrutinized and commented upon by anyone. Here's my reply based on some 8-plus years active on this Forum: Many- I'd even offer a large percentage- people come to this forum with an agenda and/or desire to push pet doctrines- not the study of scripture! They come here seeking to cause dissention and strife, not "in humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph. 4:3). The Forum does have guidelines set forth by the host, The Lockman Foundation. Further, these same types appear to blatantly ignore the posted warnings (top of Home Page), Terms of Use, and About Forum. (if they're even read). Without getting too far astray, specifically what "name calling" do you refer to? Name calling in and of itself would not be proper or acceptable and I don't see this being practiced by those of us who participate on a regular basis! However, if you're referring to taking issue over a post or it's content, pointing out an error in doctrine, or naming a heresy, there is justification for that (Eph.4:14). The promotion of sound doctrine is something we all should strive for. One of the ways, we all get to know each other a little better, is to post something about ourselves on the User Profile. Won't you join us by please doing so:-) Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
4 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224568 | ||
The easiest response would be to look up the number of posts on this Forum referencing the name of derision "Campbellites." I looked up this controversy as it refers to Alexander Campbell who was a famous (apparently well earned) debater during the Restoration Period of Christianity. I understand his debates to this date are considered classics in the logical use of God's Word, reminding one of Paul's Letter to the Romans. Of course Campbell was not inspired but it is great that we have such a rich history of Godly men in the recent past. Hope this helps and God's blessings in your studies, Inquisitor. |
||||||
5 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | BradK | 224572 | ||
Hello inquistitor, Simply applying a label would not- as Beja noted- be what I'd term "name-calling"! It rather gives a category to a belief system! As a note, our church has it's roots in Alexander Campbell (Church of Christ), though we don't hold to his doctrines! He had a high regard for scripture, for sure. However, his course down the path of ridding denominations in pursuit of a New Testament church- ultimitely lead to solo-scriptura. This being the belief that (only) scripture is the sole basis and authority in the life of the Christian. This is where he erred IMO. He shunned all creeds, confessions and tradition and felt them useless and misleading. Now, I wouldn't (and don't) throw the baby out with the bathwater with him. He provided much valuable teaching and writing for the Church. Unfortunately, he's more "famous" for his departure from Orthodoxy than the rest of his ministry. That's why the term "Campbellite". Speaking the Truth in Love, BradK |
||||||
6 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224577 | ||
BradK, I'm acknowledging that you, Beja and Searcher have all made good points about the weaknesses of mankind over the centuries. When I looked up Campbellite in Wikapedia, it mentioned that this custom was started much in the same way the folks who followed Martin Luther's teachings were called Lutherans. They didn't like it and Mr. Luther certainly didn't like it. He fought hard to stop it. What he wanted was and is what all God's people want. We all want the church on a universal, world-wide scale is to go back to the Bible for simple guidance, nothing more and nothing less. That's what I want and what I earnestly seek after. In a more calm mood now, I can only conclude maybe it would be better to refer to people who follow Mr. Campbell as believers in Campbellism like Calvinism, etc. As mentioned Christian groups all think they're following God's Word and interpreting God's Word to the very best they possibly can. And in spite of this and the Lord's prayer for unity and like mindedness, we still disagree on so many, many differences, thus the different names and denominations. It is truly sad to me as a humble child of God that we can't agree on these Bible basic truths but that's been the plight of mankind since the beginning. We can only try to adhere to Jesus' adminotions and resolve to minimize our spirits in this regard and instead put our focus on the Lord like Peter did on the water. I certainly didn't want to raise a big fuss on this topic. I was just hoping to raise our standards of behavior and thinking to those of our Lord's. I sincerely thank you for your responses. It's been enlightening. God's blessings on you all and the whole Forum, Inquisitor |
||||||
7 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224579 | ||
Inquisitor, You said, "I'm acknowledging that you, Beja and Searcher have all made good points about the weaknesses of mankind over the centuries." Ack! I'm more than willing to let the thread die but I feel I've been sorely missrepresented here! You took a minor thought in my post and made it the main idea. I confessed that I thought calvinist and amillinialist was poor titles yes. But my POINT was that even though I think that I own and accept those titles because I believe we do need them! We must have ways of talking about contrasting theologies. When somebody calls me a baptist I don't take offense to that. It would be silly to. I don't stop them and say, "Wait a minute...call me simply christian if you will. For everybody needs to recognize that what I believe is the true Christian Faith!" No no, I accept these titles and I use them with regards to others. Would I love it if the whole world of Christianity all became united in one doctrine and one title? Absolutely I would. But I freely confess that the only way that would ever happen is if the whole world converted to my own beliefs because here I stand! I do not think we should all ignore our differences. The only way anybody should be ashamed of their title is if they are ashamed of the doctrines which it represents. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
8 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224580 | ||
Beja, My only response would be from God's Word: Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent. 6 But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. From this passage, we learn about a group of people who apparently were in violation to God's Will and His Word. I don't know the details but it's sufficient the name was most certainly not complimentary. Rev 2:19 “I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience; and as for your works, the last are more than the first. 20 Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21 And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. Another report of christians following another person in conflict with God's Word. Nuff said. 1 Cor 1:11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. This passage indicates Paul's own regret in baptizing. What a shameful condition to take place in the Lord's church. 1 Tim 1:18 This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, 19 having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, 20 of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme. Well I think I could come up with other examples, including those from the OT but I think you get my point. When one gives his life and everything he hopes be to the Lord, sacrificing his all, it's a natural thing for such a child of God to be a little sensitive to this thing as name-calling. Sure we are to take such ridicule and abuse from the world but when a christian comes to this Forum dedicated to Bible study by christians and for christians to use to build up the Lord's church, we naturally think we won't be stuck with labels other than simply christians. I think the scriptures above and all the other examples from the Bible clearly support this position but that of course is just my opinion. What do you think? Still wishing God's richest blessings on you, Inquisitor |
||||||
9 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224582 | ||
Inquisitor, I don't understand your post at all unless you are saying the following. 1.) That anybody who accepts a label by that are saying they follow a man other than Jesus. That is rediculous. 2.) All Christians should naturally respond to being given a label as if they are being told that they are not a Christian, which again is rediculous. You ask me what I think. And here is my honest opinion. There are some Christians who spend time discussing matters of theology and some who try to avoid it. Those who try to discuss it by absolute necessity must use titles to refer to different views or the entire process of communication breaks down. Now when those who aren't use to discussing various theological positions happens upon these conversations, sometimes they get deeply offended because they think all these lables are being thrown around out of pure meanness. And it is at times very hard to get them to understand that this is not at all the case. I'll give you a good example. I am a calvinist, I readily admit it. My wife has come to believe the same doctrines which I mean when I say this. However, she's not use to these titles and is slightly offended to be given a title that SOUNDS like it means she is something other than Christian. So in response she has now decided to rename calvinism as biblicism. So now that's how she refers to it. Its from this same sensibility you are expressing. Well, what shall we think of that? Well, in one sense we think, "good for her." However should she come into discussion with other believers and start refering to her "biblicism" either one or two things will happen. One, they will have no clue what she is talking about because nobody knows what a biblicist is! Or the second thing that will happen is that they will automatically assume she is referring to what they themselves believe. Because at the end of the day, we all own the title of biblicist in our own mind don't we? We all believe that what we think is the "biblical" view point. So just simply saying we all believe scripture does not communicate. We can't discuss with terms we all define with our own meaning. So what we need are terms that freely and openly communicate what I personally believe scripture teaches. It is a necessity of communication, nothing more. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
10 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224585 | ||
Beja, I too believe in being a philosopher and discuss Bible all day long. But I'm thinking the scriptures (and History) I provided proves that people don't like labels when we're encouraged by God to wear His name and show His Word through our lives. I noticed your post didn't really address any of the scriptures as referenced in my post. How can one argue against them? Jesus says we're either for Him or against Him... Luke 11:23 He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters. Yes, as I mentioned above I too am a philosopher but I'm thinking we should only pilosophize (sp?) on those items as optional in the Bible. There are a few things in the NT (much fewer than in the OT) that should not be up for debate. As I understand these verses, our Lord doesn't like to see name-calling used in any regard, especially when we re-read the 1 Corinthian letter. We should not place an undue amount of value on any one person's opinion (including mine BTW) but instead Christ is to get ALL the preeminence. Colossians 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. I can imagine since you've argued so passionately for your position that you're not going to change your way of thinking, at least not easily. I'm just hoping to give you some "food for thought," hopefully from the Lord. God bless you, Inquisitor |
||||||
11 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 224586 | ||
Inquisitor, I didn't respond to your verses because I had no idea what you were trying to show by them. If anything the verses you used thoroughly established my view! For did not Christ himself give their errant doctrine a name? I can only come to one of two conclusions. Either you intend to argue against something regardless of whether it is what anybody is saying which is called a strawman arguement, or you completely don't understand my view I'm trying to express. Here are some things you are speaking against as if we are taking the opposite view when nobody, including myself would disagree with you. 1.) You say that nobody should regard a particular mans's teaching above scripture. Nobody is arguing that a person should! When I say that I am a Calvinist I do not mean by that that I am an ardent follower of John Calvin. There are several things that Calvin says which I believe he is dead wrong about. He believed in and tought infant baptism and I think he's dead wrong. I am not a follower of John Calvin. BUT the particular five doctrines that have come to be termed today as Calvinism, those I do believe and I believe them only because I believe they are clearly taught by scripture, not because John Calvin happened to teach them. When I say I am a calvinist it is not declaring myself as a follower of John Calvin but rather a simple way in one word to express my affirmation that those particular five doctrines are actually taught in scripture as true. It really seems, as I said, either you don't know what I mean when I say that, or you intend to argue against a strawman position which nobody is defending. 2.) You keep insisting scripture is against name calling. Nobody thinks scripture is for it! We are not at all suggesting that scripture is in favor of insulting or calling people derrogatory phrases at all. That you think we are defending such a position makes me think once again, either you don't at all understand what I'm saying or you intend to argue against this strawman position which nobody is defending. So let me offer this. I agree that we should not say mean things to each other, and I agree that we should exclusively follow the teachings of scripture and not those of any man who is teaching something contrary. Does that bring us into agreement? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
12 | Harsh Treatment? | Bible general Archive 4 | Inquisitor | 224588 | ||
Quoted from Beja: So let me offer this. I agree that we should not say mean things to each other, and I agree that we should exclusively follow the teachings of scripture and not those of any man who is teaching something contrary. I think I can live with that. Thanks for your patience. And as always, God's blessings on you, Inquisitor |
||||||