Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Essential Doctrines
- Thread starter mcgyver
- Start date
TRUTH over TRADITION
Member
I want to thank everyone for their replies!
But still there remains the question: What are the essential doctrines of the Christian faith?
(I'm just looking for a consensus....)
I guess the last half of post 12 and post 15 didn't do it for you huh Mc?
mcgyver
Member
Not really...I appreciate your posts and especially the scripture...
But how about the deity of Christ? Is that an essential doctrine?
The Trinity...Is that an essential doctrine?
And to try to answer a question ref. the definition of Christian, the short answer is that one must be born again...
Not sure what Ps 2 has to do with the meaning of a Greek word. It is in hebrew is it not?
Just because Strongs interprets the meaning of a word as something, doesn't mean that is its meaning. Strongs is quite old. Try looking up Thayer. There you can see how the word is used in other writings of the times, not just the bible.
If you compare other translations today, the use only son, not only begotten son, because the idea of begotten isn't in monogenes.
farouk
Member
I think we don't need to cherry pick the Scriptures with a view to deciding what God supposedly ought to find acceptable about our unbelief or belief. Rather, we need to believe that God is God, and has revealed Himself in the Person of His Son, in accordance with His Word.
Re. monogenes, another way of translating it would be 'one and only'.
Re. monogenes, another way of translating it would be 'one and only'.
I think the more important question for each person is who they would be willing to work with in mission - in reaching out to others. Mission drives people towards what they really think is important in the gospel. That is, of course, if we do have a sense of mission.
Mike
Member
McGyver, this is (or was) a great thread. I planned on returning to post a "back to topic" reminder. Rather than continuing to hash out the authenticity of the Trinity, it would be better to focus on whether it is essential or not. It seems to be getting back there. Hopefully, it stays back on track. We are on a hiatus from threads disputing the Trinity due to a time when we were getting slammed by them, or I would have advised that that discussion gets started in another thread. Due to our current policy, I will advise not to.
A few months ago, I had conceived of a brilliant thread, typed it all up, and ran it by the mod team. It turned out to be "not so brilliant. Fail. No one could understand how I wanted to run this thread or what I was trying to accomplish. I was trying for an end goal that you have. What I did was lay out about 40 significant beliefs that I have. This would have been put in the CT&A, so only Christians who adhere to our Statement of Faith could participate. Debating isn't allowed there, so it wouldn't/shouldn't get ugly. The concept was to have the next person who posted copy my list to their post, and delete the ones they didn't believe to be true. The following person would take that person's list, copy it down to their post and do the same thing. This would continue along, always using the most recent list. In the end, I was hoping that there would remain a list (probably very small) of things we agreed upon that would be essential to our faith.
I had a secondary motive in doing this in the CT&A. I was hoping in the end, we could say, "We all believe these things. This is what binds us!
Rather than being so critical of one another throughout the board, let's remember we agree on the big stuff. We are brothers and sisters in Christ! 
"
To confusing (as anyone reading this will probably agree) and bound to break down if 2 or more people are replying at the same time. I believe the Nicene Creed was intended to be just this - our essential doctrines. Some believe certain things were decided as "true" or "not true", but I've read enough documentation to convince me that they already agreed up things like the Trinity and the points of the Nicene Creed. They were deciding how to represent them.
I had to laugh at your first post.
(I still am) When I first started posting, I was astonished at the beliefs that were so foreign to me. I guess I was living my Christian life in a bubble of sorts prior to joining in on the fray.
Back to topic, I used to hold that the Trinity was essential as Handy does, but I guess I just came to feel that as long as they hold that Jesus is Fully God and don't "dethrone Him", I could see it. So many Christians have such wonderful faith, Dee for example, but they just don't make that connection. I do believe to know the Fullness of Him, one has got to be this knowledge of Him, but this isn't a litmus test that I use.
I don't believe a Christian can reject the virgin birth. In rejecting this, one is in effect calling the Holy Spirit a liar with the conversation between Mary and the Angel Gabriel as well as other verses that speak to it.
So, I'm back to the Nicene Creed as my list of essentials. The Holy Spirit guided their decisions when they met, I believe. I'd say He did a fine job!
A few months ago, I had conceived of a brilliant thread
, typed it all up, and ran it by the mod team. It turned out to be "not so brilliant. Fail. No one could understand how I wanted to run this thread or what I was trying to accomplish. I was trying for an end goal that you have. What I did was lay out about 40 significant beliefs that I have. This would have been put in the CT&A, so only Christians who adhere to our Statement of Faith could participate. Debating isn't allowed there, so it wouldn't/shouldn't get ugly. The concept was to have the next person who posted copy my list to their post, and delete the ones they didn't believe to be true. The following person would take that person's list, copy it down to their post and do the same thing. This would continue along, always using the most recent list. In the end, I was hoping that there would remain a list (probably very small) of things we agreed upon that would be essential to our faith. I had a secondary motive in doing this in the CT&A. I was hoping in the end, we could say, "We all believe these things. This is what binds us!
Rather than being so critical of one another throughout the board, let's remember we agree on the big stuff. We are brothers and sisters in Christ! "To confusing (as anyone reading this will probably agree) and bound to break down if 2 or more people are replying at the same time. I believe the Nicene Creed was intended to be just this - our essential doctrines. Some believe certain things were decided as "true" or "not true", but I've read enough documentation to convince me that they already agreed up things like the Trinity and the points of the Nicene Creed. They were deciding how to represent them.
I had to laugh at your first post.
(I still am) When I first started posting, I was astonished at the beliefs that were so foreign to me. I guess I was living my Christian life in a bubble of sorts prior to joining in on the fray. Back to topic, I used to hold that the Trinity was essential as Handy does, but I guess I just came to feel that as long as they hold that Jesus is Fully God and don't "dethrone Him", I could see it. So many Christians have such wonderful faith, Dee for example, but they just don't make that connection. I do believe to know the Fullness of Him, one has got to be this knowledge of Him, but this isn't a litmus test that I use.
I don't believe a Christian can reject the virgin birth. In rejecting this, one is in effect calling the Holy Spirit a liar with the conversation between Mary and the Angel Gabriel as well as other verses that speak to it.
So, I'm back to the Nicene Creed as my list of essentials. The Holy Spirit guided their decisions when they met, I believe. I'd say He did a fine job!
TRUTH over TRADITION
Member
Not really...I appreciate your posts and especially the scripture...
But how about the deity of Christ? Is that an essential doctrine?
The Trinity...Is that an essential doctrine?
And to try to answer a question ref. the definition of Christian, the short answer is that one must be born again...
Gotcha Mcgyver, now I can see the heart of the question you pose seems to be (correct me please if I err) centered around the "Godhood" of Jesus of Nazareth.
If this is indeed the question, then the correct answer in a resounding NO. There is no trinity alluded to in scripture and those who support it do so (unwhitingly perhaps) by misusing scripture and because they have been misled by mainstream religion who is a powerful proponent of this deception. Jesus is separate from The FATHER and holy breath (the no "The') is not a 3rd member of a mythical godhead (nice how translators 'placed' this word in their trinitarian translations).
Essential christian doctrine should be based in truth and love. All else is but a recipe' for division.
W
Who Says
Guest
How shall I explain the window to Paul’s writings by means of principles that keep that window open as one reads in his letters?
Paul believes that God does not tie us down with rules simply to take away our freedom and test whether we love him. God is not insecure.
Paul believes that we love God by loving the whole body or bunch of us thus showing we esteem God’s lead in loving the whole body or bunch of us.
Paul believes that a work belonging to our self is a work that we just blindly think we must do to make God happy with no understanding of how it makes God happy or benefits the body or bunch of us whom God loves.
Paul believes that a work we do as though commanded of God of which we do not see how that work benefits the whole of the body or bunch of us is a work that is done blindly and communicates to the world that God demands selfish obedience as though He is insecure.
To learn to love this way requires that we implicitly trust in God’s love for us and cast all fear out of our love (as 1 John 4:18 says) that we are not afraid to move beyond rote compliance with God.
Sadly, most men are so far away from even beginning to understand what I am speaking about that they are as the blind groping in the dark only hoping that they are doing the right thing.
They hate what they do not understand and they love what they do not know.
For them, that is how good improperly becomes bad and bad improperly becomes good.
That is why there is only a few of us selected as part of the kingdom government in Christ.
mcgyver
Member
Fair 'nuff....
Yessir...thus the title of the thread. There must be certain doctrines that are essential to Christianity, upon which we all agree...lest we be blown to and fro by every wind of doctrine.I had a secondary motive in doing this in the CT&A. I was hoping in the end, we could say, "We all believe these things. This is what binds us!
Agreed. Nothing new, just presenting in a cogent manner those things already held as true by the early church.
What surprised me a bit was to see denial of the deity of Christ on a Christian board (hadn't learned to navigate it yet)I had to laugh at your first post.
I'd agree that the Nicene Creed does as well as any creed of man can at expressing our core beliefs.Back to topic, I used to hold that the Trinity was essential as Handy does, but I guess I just came to feel that as long as they hold that Jesus is Fully God and don't "dethrone Him", I could see it. So many Christians have such wonderful faith, Dee for example, but they just don't make that connection. I do believe to know the Fullness of Him, one has got to be this knowledge of Him, but this isn't a litmus test that I use.
I don't believe a Christian can reject the virgin birth. In rejecting this, one is in effect calling the Holy Spirit a liar with the conversation between Mary and the Angel Gabriel as well as other verses that speak to it.
So, I'm back to the Nicene Creed as my list of essentials. The Holy Spirit guided their decisions when they met, I believe. I'd say He did a fine job!
mcgyver
Member
Thanks for your answer ToT...So then, for you the deity of Christ is not an essential doctrine.
What is your understanding of the phrase "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh" as used by the Apostle John in 1 John 4 et. al.?
mcgyver
Member
So what do you hold as essential doctrines? Are there any?
TRUTH over TRADITION
Member
According to John, those who were against the Anointed One (aka antichrists) denied that Jesus of nazareth was the Anointed One and either held one of 2 possible beliefs. Belief 1, asserts that the Anointed One would come, but just had not yet come in the flesh. Belief 2, seems to buy into the idea that the Anointed One would not come in human form. I find the 2nd possibility hard to accept because the Jews of the day knew and believed that the Anointed One would be the son of David.
As far as the essential doctrine, it cannot be more than what Peter shared in Acts 2. Jesus of Nazareth was the Anointed One, he lived a sin free life, was murdered, then resurrected by God, and afterward ascended to the right hand of glory to receive his promised kingdom, and would shortly return in judgment on the world (Jerusalem) and to redeem his elect.
H
Hitch
Guest
7For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.
8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
8Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
E
Elijah674
Guest
James 2
[8] If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
[9] But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
[11] For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
[12] So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
[13] For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
[14] What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
[15] If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
[16] And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
[17] Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
[18] Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
[19] Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
[20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
All 'Required' Doctrine's are based on 'Gods Way' of His Psalms 77:13 Truth + His Eternal Heb. 13:20 Ten Command Covenant! Christ came to magnify & make 'His Moral Epistle Letter Law Charactor' HONORABLE! Isa. 42:21 - 2 Cor. 3:3 in ones Heart! And James VAIN ONE in verse 20 above just flat out will not be there!
Who that is Born Again & 'IN CHRIST' would openly violate any of His Commandments?????
--Elijah
[8] If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
[9] But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
[11] For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
[12] So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
[13] For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
[14] What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
[15] If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
[16] And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
[17] Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
[18] Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
[19] Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
[20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
All 'Required' Doctrine's are based on 'Gods Way' of His Psalms 77:13 Truth + His Eternal Heb. 13:20 Ten Command Covenant! Christ came to magnify & make 'His Moral Epistle Letter Law Charactor' HONORABLE! Isa. 42:21 - 2 Cor. 3:3 in ones Heart! And James VAIN ONE in verse 20 above just flat out will not be there!
Who that is Born Again & 'IN CHRIST' would openly violate any of His Commandments?????
--Elijah
W
Who Says
Guest
I hold that the essential doctrines are the things that make for peace. The things that form the loving atmosphere where men have time to learn at their own pace without biting and devouring one another.
There are doctrines which men use to lord it over one another parading themselves as superior because of their knowing something (or at least thinking they do). And then there are teachings that are beneficial to all, pavng the road of peace, helping each other grow in love and not faulting them as though some little thing they have not yet learned makes them a candidate for hell.
Between those two things which do you think our unselfish God of love sees as essential?
Would it not only be to our benefit to see as essential what he does?
Or would you rather let some human church father have the say of that?
Philippians 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.
Until we put these things first seeing them as the essentials we are responsible for the atmosphree which prevents men from learning and even discourages men from learning.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike
Member
Webster's Dictionary defines "doctrine" this way: "something that is taught; teachings collectively: religious doctrine"
IMO, you are confusing the teachings of churches (men) with the teachings of Jesus or the apostles (Holy Spirit).
IMO, to deny teachings of the apostles is to deny what the Holy Spirit Inspired them to write and teach us. I believe if someone rejects any of the core doctrine expressed in the Nicene Creed, he is re-inventing a god to suit his own personal preference. Pick any of the doctrines in this creed. If you deny any of them, I believe the result is a lesser god. The first commandment speaks to this in not having any other gods. There is One God. IMO, essential doctrines point toward the core understanding of Who He is and what He has Done.
mcgyver
Member
Once again I thank you for your reply...but I have a question: In English "anti" means against, but in the Koine Greek it means either "Instead [of]" or "Opposite [of]" ("Instead" being the far more common meaning). Therefore if we accept that antichrist means "Instead of Christ" or "Opposite of Christ", would that change your interpretation?
mcgyver
Member
Thanks for your reply...but I'm a bit fuzzy here.
Are you speaking of things solely within the Christian faith, or is this more universal in nature?
Are you speaking of things solely within the Christian faith, or is this more universal in nature?
Very true...
My answer would be: Truth.
I'd say we've got to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater...there is a great misconception among many Christians as to what the various ecumenical councils and early polemicists actually did...especially during the ante-Nicence period, and up to the council of Chalcedon.
Once again we come full circle: True, honest, just, pure, etc.