The Gospel of Grace:

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Hi RichardBurger,

I was wondering what your testimony was? I am not looking for how you were saved and came to the knowledge of Christ but what is your present testimony of the Life of Christ in your life?

What has His life done to alter the way you think and act (we are new creatures, right)? How has his life changed you?

Thank you,
Axehead
 

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
Hi dragonfly and Axehead,

A few questions for you both.

Are you both members of the same church and what is that church?
Do you still sin?
How do you define sin?
What is your standing if you still sin?

Thanks
 

williemac

New Member
Apr 29, 2012
1,094
65
0
Canada
Again...taking one verse and ignoring the others that bring the full picture is to do one of 2 things

1. enjoying a game of see-saw

2. Creating a man made doctrine that is not based in the truth.

I try to assume that those who venture into these debates realize that there is a whole bible and that there are adherents to various fringe doctrines that are easily refutable by verses that have been omitted in order to create the idea that there is truth to the polarized view. Anybody can quote a verse that refutes another verse. The crux is to understand the scriptures and place them in the approprite way.

Grandstanding on a verse like...

Whoever sins is the servant of the devil....one can then continually ask...do you sin? Do you sin? then you are of the devil...then you are of the devil!!

We can program computers to argue these type of things...over and over again. But where is the life in this?

Of course there is truth to any given position. But it is not the entire truth.
Hey, bro. I am not the one who is calling anyone "of the devil". John also wrote .." if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for the whole world"
(1John 2:1,20) Explain that one, please.

And in ch.3:9, he wrote " whoever has been born of God does not sin...." Note that he didn;t say "should not sin", or, "had better not sin". He said "does not sin". And the rest of the verse...."for His seed remains in him; AND HE CANNOT SIN, because he has been born of God".

You and others have continually preached "you had better not sin". Hey, in the first place, if we do sin, we have an advocate with the Father. But not to worry. If we are born of God, we cannot sin anyway. You know something? John sounds a little confused.
Unless of course we can get a hint of what he was talking about.
You seem to enjoy accusing others of taking a few choice passages and ignoring the rest. Are you going to prove yourself innocent of this? Show us how these passages from John make any sense in the whole equation.
 

dragonfly

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2012
1,882
141
63
UK
Hi haz,

Do you still sin?
How do you define sin?
What is your standing if you still sin?

Do you see in the scriptures that this is how believers are to speak to one another? Why do you keep asking these questions????

I recognise from some of the verses you quote, that you seem to know the Lord - but there is no exaltation of Him in this line of questioning.

It would be different if you didn't know what the New Testament teaches, and you were genuinely seeking answers for your own heart, but that is not the spirit in which you are asking. Please, brother, just drop it? No-one needs to trust you with their failings, while you sound as if you are going to rejoice over them, or over some point of doctrine which questions the reality of the working of the gospel in us to manifest the life of Christ.


I write the above for your consideration, because we are not entirely as anonymous as we may seem, in the Lord. By the same token, if the Holy Spirit is not ministering through us, that also is transparent to those who know Him.

Hi haz,

A postscript.

How do you define sin?


In the past, I would have said, 'in the same way that the Bible does', but on this forum, that's the kind of answer which is likely to bring several tons of bricks crashing down. So... I'm musing.

Do you really not know how to define sin?

Does the definition of sin vary from person to person? Please read the following. What do you conclude?


OTHERS MAY: You CANNOT
-by G.D. Watson.

If God has called you to be really like Jesus He will draw you into a life of crucifixion and humility, and put upon you such demands of obedience, that you will not be able to follow other people, or measure yourself by other Christians, and in many ways He will seem to let other people do things which He will not let you do.

Other Christians and ministers who seem very religious and useful, may push themselves, pull wires, and work schemes to carry out their plans, but you cannot do it, and if you attempt it, you will meet with such failure and rebuke from the Lord as to make you sorely penitent.

Others may boast of themselves, of their work, of their successes, of their writings, but the Holy Spirit will not allow you to do any such thing, and if you begin it, He will lead you into some deep mortification that will make you despise yourself and all your good works.

Others may be allowed to succeed in making money, or may have a legacy left to them, but it is likely God will keep you poor, because He wants you to have something far better than gold, namely, a helpless dependence upon Him, that He may have the privilege of supplying your needs day by day out of an unseen treasury.

The Lord may let others be honored and put forward, and keep you hidden in obscurity, because He wants to produce some choice fragrant fruit for His coming glory, which can only be produced in the shade. He may let others be great, but keep you small. He may let others do a work for Him and get the credit for it, but He will make you work and toil on without knowing how much you are doing; and then to make your work still more precious He may let
others get credit for the work which you have done, and thus make YOUR REWARD TEN TIMES GREATER when JESUS COMES.

The Holy Spirit will put a strict watch over you, with a jealous love, and will rebuke you for little words and feelings or for wasting your time, which other Christians never feel distressed over. So make up your mind that God is an Infinitely Sovereign Being, and has a right to do as He pleases with His own. He may not explain to you a thousand things which puzzle your reason in His dealings with you, but if you absolutely sell yourself to be His love slave, He will wrap you up in Jealous Love, and bestow upon you many blessings which come only to those who are in the inner circle.

Settle it forever, then that you are to DEAL DIRECTLY WITH the HOLY SPIRIT, and that He is to have the privilege of tying your tongue, or chaining your hand, or closing your eyes, in ways that He does not seem to use with others. Now, when you are so possessed with the living God that you are, in your secret heart, pleased and delighted over this PECULIAR, PERSONAL, PRIVATE, JEALOUS GUARDIANSHIP and MANAGEMENT OF the HOLY SPIRIT OVER YOUR LIFE, then you will have found the vestibule of Heaven.

-G.D.Watson (1845-1924).
SOURCE: Faith, Prayer, & Tract League,
Tract #76; Grand Rapids, MI 49504.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Episkopos

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
Hi haz,



Do you see in the scriptures that this is how believers are to speak to one another? Why do you keep asking these questions????

I recognise from some of the verses you quote, that you seem to know the Lord - but there is no exaltation of Him in this line of questioning.

It would be different if you didn't know what the New Testament teaches, and you were genuinely seeking answers for your own heart, but that is not the spirit in which you are asking. Please, brother, just drop it? No-one needs to trust you with their failings, while you sound as if you are going to rejoice over them, or over some point of doctrine which questions the reality of the working of the gospel in us to manifest the life of Christ.


I write the above for your consideration, because we are not entirely as anonymous as we may seem, in the Lord. By the same token, if the Holy Spirit is not ministering through us, that also is transparent to those who know Him.


Hi dragonfly,

My questions are to try and understand what your doctrine states. I'm still unsure whether your doctrine is about works of the law or grace. There is no seeking on my part to rejoice over your failings, etc.

Having had previous discussions with Episkopos (who shares your same church/doctrine beliefs) I found he offered ambiguous arguments, whilst accusing others on this forum of believing in fables, etc. It's only appropriate to ask questions to try to determine what you are actually trying to say.

I'm unsure what you, Epi and Axehead are trying to say. When I seem to get an idea of your doctrine (based on your claims) you guys deny everything. It would be helpful for us all to answer plainly, explaining yourself more thoroughly, and avoiding the approach that Episkopos uses. If your genuinely sharing on scriptures then there's nothing to fear from speaking plainly to explain them.

Episkopos stated that he sinned and your answer also suggests that you still "sin" too. But your argument against RichardBurger about his claim we still "sin" is contradictory.

Episkopos said that the law is the gauge of whether we are abiding in Christ or not. What law does your doctrine say this speaks of?
As you yourself still "sin" what is your standing? Episkopos claimed this means you are not abiding in Christ. He claimed that his doctrine could condemn him too.

Can you give us a plain explaination of your doctrine and/or what church you guys follow? This would help to clarify what your claiming.

Thanks
 

dragonfly

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2012
1,882
141
63
UK
Hi ttruscott,

'until the sinful church (the wheat) is matured in holiness and the angels can gather these tares to be burned'.


Please explain using other parts of Christ's teaching, how the 'wheat' is the same as the 'tares'?


Many thanks.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,857
19,373
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The true church is going from faith to faith and glory to glory. The false church is going from doctrine to doctrine and reaching to teaching. The result of the first is more life (Jesus came to give us life MORE abundantly). The result of the latter is more indoctrination in the death they are defending through selected bible verses.

There's the church of the heart and the church of the head. Was David a man after God's own brain? Or His heart? The NewTestament is not based on human logic but a far more visceral new creation in the heart. Trying to explain the heart to another person's brain can seem futile at times! :)
 

dragonfly

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2012
1,882
141
63
UK
Hi haz,

I'd intended to answer this earlier, but lost where you'd posted it. (I think it may be in another thread, also, but here is where I'm replying.)

Hi dragonfly and Axehead,

...

Are you both members of the same church and what is that church?


Yes, we are members of the same Church. As I said elsewhere, it is not a denomination, (if this is what you are asking)?



Hi haz,

Thank you for your even response to my previous post. I will try to explain the difficulty I (and possibly the others, but in this case I am speaking only for myself) have with your approach. First, let me put this scripture at the top of what I want to say.

2 Corinthians 10:12
For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves:
but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.

Way back at the start of 1 Corinthians 1, Paul writes this:

10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me of you, my brethren, by them [which are of the house] of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now this I say, that every one of you says, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.

Understanding Paul's reasoning is going to help you understand mine. Paul was continually being accused of preaching a false gospel by unbelieving Jews, until it had been stripped of everything except Christ crucified, the power of God and the wisdom of God. (My paraphrase.) By the time he was writing to the Galatians, he had circumcised Timothy. Now, he was having to explain why outward circumcision was unnecessary for salvation.

Do you see the problem?

The scriptures plainly declare through both the law and the prophets the gospel which the apostles had come to understand through Christ's teaching to them after He had risen. This did not cover everything. Occasionally, they would remember something new, and put it together with the rest of their understanding. This is exactly what happens to us, as we go on with the Lord, being tutored by the Holy Spirit, and by those who are given understanding of scripture for the equipping of the saints and their ministry - one to another - within the body of Christ. We all need each other to have truth expounded to us in a fuller way; but this should lead us to focus again and again on Christ, and not ourselves, if it is of the Lord's leading.


Noting that you are in Australia, I can see there may be quite a mystery in your mind over what people 'over here' believe, and how it is expressed. As a Brit, I've had surprise after surprise about the way (what is seriously called) 'doctrine' has drifted from any scriptural roots it may once have had, in certain group mentalities which express themselves in parts of the 'church in America'. For instance, the Cal-Arm debate has been taken to extremes which are totally unknown in the UK, and would be considered indecent over here. (I speak for myself, anyway, because those who take into account the whole counsel of God, can see holes in the arguments through which a coach and horses would easily pass!)

I probably sound as if I'm ducking your questions, but I hope the foregoing is useful padding to our future discussions. And this is what I want to share - that I have been taught the Bible is the word of God, and I have found this to be so as I've learned to listen to Him speaking to me through it.

God has given every person the faculty to recognise when He speaks to them, and He does speak to everyone. But as Christians, (with the Holy Spirit), our challenge is to obey Him from the heart, and to keep bringing our lives into line with scripture's testimony as to what that should look like.

To me, this is the correct emphasis. John 3 contains a many verses which speak to this issue. What I've seen happening in the discussions here, (CyB), is a focus on earth instead of 'above'; on fallen man, instead of upon redeemed man; on redeemed man, instead of on the Redeemer. Do you catch my drift? We are looking in the wrong place for doctrine if it is to be based on the thinking of partly renewed minds, or, unregenerate minds.


Oswald Chambers' editors entitled one of the entries in My Utmost for His Highest, 'Continuous Conversion'.

Here it is from utmost.org, Dec 28th.


. . . unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven —Matthew 18:3

These words of our Lord refer to our initial conversion, but we should continue to turn to God as children, being continuously converted every day of our lives. If we trust in our own abilities, instead of God’s, we produce consequences for which God will hold us responsible. When God through His sovereignty brings us into new situations, we should immediately make sure that our natural life submits to the spiritual, obeying the orders of the Spirit of God. Just because we have responded properly in the past is no guarantee that we will do so again. The response of the natural to the spiritual should be continuous conversion, but this is where we so often refuse to be obedient. No matter what our situation is, the Spirit of God remains unchanged and His salvation unaltered. But we must “put on the new man . . .” (Ephesians 4:24). God holds us accountable every time we refuse to convert ourselves, and He sees our refusal as willful disobedience. Our natural life must not rule— God must rule in us.

To refuse to be continuously converted puts a stumbling block in the growth of our spiritual life. There are areas of self-will in our lives where our pride pours contempt on the throne of God and says, “I won’t submit.” We deify our independence and self-will and call them by the wrong name. What God sees as stubborn weakness, we call strength. There are whole areas of our lives that have not yet been brought into submission, and this can only be done by this continuous conversion. Slowly but surely we can claim the whole territory for the Spirit of God.



That said, I would point out to you that Oswald Chambers' unconcealed emphasis on the choices we make by ourselves for ourselves, is no less than Paul's. There are just a few places in the New Testament where 'yourself', 'yourselves', or 'ye' (KJV) meaning 'you all', are critical to grasping the live meaning of the verse - like taking hold of a live wire. Miss those emphases, and the same word is dead as a dodo.

Therefore, in the discussion about sin upon which you have been intent, the operation of the faith of God in me, is dependant on my submission to His death and His resurrection. It is not something which I 'do', in that sense, and yet it is entirely with my active co-operation that He both slays me, and raises me to walk in newness of life. Without my co-operation, He can do nothing with me or through me. Romans 8:13. John 15:1 - 8.

Now sin is not all about doing, just as the Day of Atonement was about sins of omission and sins in the realm of the mind. Therefore, not sinning, is sometimes about not doing what was used to be done, and doing what was not used to being done - a revolution in both thinking and acting out the word of God as it comes to us continuously through our fellowship with Him in the Spirit.

The Holy Spirit has quite a few names, and even more operations available to Him as He moves upon and inside our hearts and lives. Every name He is given is relevant to His ministry - which is, after all else is said, to bring Christ right into us, right alongside us, right into our full view, to comfort and strengthen, admonish and rebuke, convict and to heal. To God, the issue is not the sin from which we have been delivered in principle (if we will believe that part of the gospel at all - if we don't, are we saved from sin and death?) but whether we are being obedient children - Matthew 7:21, Ephesians 2:3 - or children of wrath (unbelief) - disobedient.


I will stop here. I hope you are getting a sense of my direction, and perspective.

 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,857
19,373
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Hey, bro. I am not the one who is calling anyone "of the devil". John also wrote .." if anyone sins, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins and not for ours only, but also for the whole world"
(1John 2:1,20) Explain that one, please.

It means that as Christians we don't have exclusive rights to the sacrifice of Christ...much as we would like to think they do. We are covered for sins as we are progressing to walk in the perfection of Christ. It is like you get a government bursary as long as you remain in school. But as soon as you think you can take it easy while still collecting the bursary...you are cut off.

A
nd in ch.3:9, he wrote " whoever has been born of God does not sin...." Note that he didn;t say "should not sin", or, "had better not sin". He said "does not sin". And the rest of the verse...."for His seed remains in him; AND HE CANNOT SIN, because he has been born of God".

You and others have continually preached "you had better not sin". Hey, in the first place, if we do sin, we have an advocate with the Father. But not to worry. If we are born of God, we cannot sin anyway. You know something? John sounds a little confused.

John is speaking on one side or pole of the dialectic to warn gnostics that there is no such thing as a saving knowledge. We have to walk the walk. So what John means is that..unless you have walked in a perfect holiness at any time...you have never met Jesus Christ yet...so keep looking! :) It is like... Unless you have seen the Eiffel tower in person...you have not yet visited Paris.


Unless of course we can get a hint of what he was talking about.
You seem to enjoy accusing others of taking a few choice passages and ignoring the rest. Are you going to prove yourself innocent of this? Show us how these passages from John make any sense in the whole equation.

I am showing the verses that are ignored in order to make a feel good man made gospel...that will only get them cut off in the end. Our walk must be in truth...not just doctrine.
 

williemac

New Member
Apr 29, 2012
1,094
65
0
Canada
It means that as Christians we don't have exclusive rights to the sacrifice of Christ...much as we would like to think they do. We are covered for sins as we are progressing to walk in the perfection of Christ. It is like you get a government bursary as long as you remain in school. But as soon as you think you can take it easy while still collecting the bursary...you are cut off.
The bible talks about our assurance being that which is given to us by God. According to this comment of yours, we have no assurance outside of our own effort. You are mixing grace with works. This is leaven. This is a works salvation message you are preaching. So here is the dilema; How does anyone know he is doing well enough?

Furthermore, what this means is that the blood of bulls and goats was more powerful than the blood of Jesus. Under the law, they were kept in good standing by the daily sacrifices. Under the grace you preach, the good standing is by the sacrifice of Jesus only to the degree that one is trying hard enough to behave himself.

John is speaking on one side or pole of the dialectic to warn gnostics that there is no such thing as a saving knowledge. We have to walk the walk. So what John means is that..unless you have walked in a perfect holiness at any time...you have never met Jesus Christ yet...so keep looking! :) It is like... Unless you have seen the Eiffel tower in person...you have not yet visited Paris.
John also was given a vision of the future in Revelation. He saw a great multitude that no one could number standing before the throne. How many do you suppose left this life in faith but did not have this perfect holiness you are speaking of? Did John ever use that phrase? You are putting words in his mouth. And you have not explained the apparent contradiction in his letter. Especially with Paul's condition for salvation in Rom.10:9,10.

But what we have here is merely a difference of opinion as to just what is required of a person after he has received the new birth. Jesus gave a parable of the talents in Math.25:14-30. In it he talks of those who were given money and what they did with it for the master. This is an allegory, of course. It is not about money. In the first place, they did not all have the same measure to work with. And they did not do as well as each other. However, the person who failed the test was he who buried his talent. According to Jesus, it would have been acceptable to have merely placed it in the bank to collect interest. According to your interpretaion, that would never have sufficed. But I would rather listen to Jesus. We are called to bear fruit. And as He Himself said..."some 100, some 60, some 30" .

So just because you are not interseted in cutting people any slack for their weak effort, doesn't mean Jesus has the same attitude. He did not make eternal life difficult to attain. He made it easy. Hence the multitude before the throne. The guy who buried his talent used more effort to stop the fruit than it would have taken to let fruit happen. Here is the truth; Fruit happens.

Go back and read John's letter. Do you know what the underlying theme is? LOVE for others. We are to walk in love. Those who don't are of the devil. On the other hand, we love Him because He first loved us. The measure of the understanding of God's love towards a person is what will then flow out from him. Is there a saving knowledge? You better believe it. But it is more accurate to call it a saving understanding.

But how much love does your gospel reveal? Your gospel is one of conditional love. 1John 2:1 describes another kind of love. It makes no mention that our advocate will turn His back on a person who isn't giving it enough effort. That is your intepretation in so many words.
I am showing the verses that are ignored in order to make a feel good man made gospel...that will only get them cut off in the end. Our walk must be in truth...not just doctrine.
Balony. The word gospel means good news. Your news is anything but. Good news should feel good. This is called joy. It is called peace. These are two of the first three mentioned by Paul in what he called the fruit of the spirit. The first is love. These first three come into our hearts. These plus the next six flow out from us towards others. They are patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self control. " Against such there is no law". One cannot understand John's letter apart from this truth.

However, as I shared from Rev.2:20-22, Jesus practices something called chastening. In your world, He would have cut those off in that context. He did not. He promised them great tribulation for their sexual immorality, unless they repented of it.

As much as you feel you are sharing truth, this does not mean you are as accurate as you think in it. There are those who will suffer loss at the judgment seat of Christ. But cut off they will not be.
 

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Hi dragonfly and Axehead,

A few questions for you both.

Are you both members of the same church and what is that church?
Do you still sin?
How do you define sin?
What is your standing if you still sin?

Thanks

Are you both members of the same church and what is that church?
I certainly believe dragonfly is a member of Christ's church. What other churches are there? Are you speaking of a human institution? I am not a member of any man's religious institution.

How do you define sin?
Anything that is not of God is sin. Another way to say it is: "Whatever is not of faith is sin." (Romans 14:23) Faith is not an academic nod! It is total dependence upon God and produces divine action in man. Relationship with Christ is not static, but dynamic. Is your relationship with Christ static or dynamic?

"You either implement the purpose of your creation, by dependence upon God, or prostitute your humanity! You were created to please God. Without faith it is impossible to please Him, so without faith, whatever you do, no matter what it may be, is sin! The only alternative to faith is sin! That is why Satan will always present you with a reasonable alternative to faith, for he knows that if only he can get you to act in other than dependence upon God, you are defying your Creator, no matter how lofty your motives, or otherwise commendable your actions." (W. Ian Thomas - The Mystery of Godliness.)

I will answer your other two questions later, because these questions say more about you than anyone else and it will take some time to explain that to you.

Kindly,
Axehead
 
  • Like
Reactions: whitestone

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,857
19,373
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Are you both members of the same church and what is that church?
I certainly believe dragonfly is a member of Christ's church. What other churches are there? Are you speaking of a human institution? I am not a member of any man's religious institution.

How do you define sin?
Anything that is not of God is sin. Another way to say it is: "Whatever is not of faith is sin." (Romans 14:23) Faith is not an academic nod! It is total dependence upon God and produces divine action in man. Relationship with Christ is not static, but dynamic. Is your relationship with Christ static or dynamic?

"You either implement the purpose of your creation, by dependence upon God, or prostitute your humanity! You were created to please God. Without faith it is impossible to please Him, so without faith, whatever you do, no matter what it may be, is sin! The only alternative to faith is sin! That is why Satan will always present you with a reasonable alternative to faith, for he knows that if only he can get you to act in other than dependence upon God, you are defying your Creator, no matter how lofty your motives, or otherwise commendable your actions." (W. Ian Thomas - The Mystery of Godliness.)

I will answer your other two questions later, because these questions say more about you than anyone else and it will take some time to explain that to you.

Kindly,
Axehead

We could call the church...the church of the set free in Christ... :)
 

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
Hi dragonfly,

Hi haz,

I'd intended to answer this earlier, but lost where you'd posted it. (I think it may be in another thread, also, but here is where I'm replying.)

Yes, we are members of the same Church. As I said elsewhere, it is not a denomination, (if this is what you are asking)?

Hi dragonfly,

Thanks for your answer.
It was however quite lengthy and did not explain your doctrine plainly. Sorry for being so persistent.
I have learnt that it's best to try to keep messages concise and simple for all to understand. Especially as the written word can be so easily misunderstood, and we each have our own mindset to look beyond in understanding what others are trying to say.

I note an avoidance of revealing the name of the church you, Axehead and episkopos fellowship at.
We know it's non-denominational but it might help to understand your doctrine better if we had a name of that church. No offence, but it seems from the hesitation in offering it's name that it might be a church that is well known and criticized.

That aside, even if it is such a church there should be no fear in sharing it's doctrine plainly. Remember it's the Spirit wihtin us that gives us understanding.

Thanks for your openness so far.
 

dragonfly

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2012
1,882
141
63
UK
Hi haz,

Methinks you might have to do quite a bit more digging in scripture, to determine 'my doctrine', as I have quite an aversion to 'theology'. I don't reject any verses because they stand alone in what their message appears to be - perhaps contradictory to other verses - and I don't pit verses against each other as if they are in some kind of competition. God inspired them all and has a purpose for them all, whether we can receive His understanding through the operation of the Holy Spirit, or not.

About the 'church' to which Ah, Ek and myself are referring, it is simply the Church in scripture. A good description is found in Ephesians. Then there is 1 Corinthians 12 - 16, Romans, Hebrews, Galatians, Acts... Do you know what we mean, now? ;)

Regarding doctrine which is not in scripture, I'm not interested. I don't read about it, don't study it, don't espouse it in any way, personally, although I recognise that many people are blessed, for instance, by liturgy. For me, if it's not in the Bible, it's disposable.

Does this help you any?
 

neophyte

Member
Apr 25, 2012
669
12
18
Especially in posts# 25, 26, 27,31 you mentioned church, the question is which church, for the answer ,use your Bible and you'll find that answer in a few verses, lets start with Matt. 18:15-18,read it carefully ,if you will notice that "church'' is a particular church, it is the Church that existed then in the 1st century [ Pentecost] being the very same church then and also in the 5th century 15th century , 21st century and will be the same church in the last century. Notice it says about "binding and loosing " in [ Matt. 18: 15-18 ] Jesus speaking to His apostle[ s ] and the same as in [ Matt.16:15-19] " ...... ; and whatever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" . How can you honestly deny that church being spoken about ,not be the One and only "One True Apostolic Church , only a Church that can trace it's religious lineage directly back to the Apostles is that church that Jesus formed for us. Only One Church fits that description and it is the Catholic/Apostolic Church.
In that verse of Matt. 18: 15-18 you can almost hear the note of amazement in the voice of Jesus when He said :,"If he refuses to listen even to the church.... "] implying that for someone to ignore the Church--His Church--- would be the height of stupidity and foolishness. Sadly since the Reformation many have refuse or ignored the teaching authority of that Apostolic Church.
The word doctrine was used in those same posts that you non-Catholics wrote. If you notice in [ Romans 16: 17-18 "... to take note note of those who create dissensions and difficulties , in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught .... " Notice the doctrine was well established way back when that verse and also [ 1 Cor. 1: 10 ] were penned, no need for future man-made Reformation churches when the One True Church already contained the doctrine as approved by Jesus. Also notice, Jesus never once in the Bible gave anybody else the authority to invent any new church different from the Church of His Apostles/Successors. Only One Church can trace itself directly back to Jesus and His talmudic teaching apostle [s ] ,and that Church is His Catholic Church.
 

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
Hi haz,

Methinks you might have to do quite a bit more digging in scripture, to determine 'my doctrine', as I have quite an aversion to 'theology'. I don't reject any verses because they stand alone in what their message appears to be - perhaps contradictory to other verses - and I don't pit verses against each other as if they are in some kind of competition. God inspired them all and has a purpose for them all, whether we can receive His understanding through the operation of the Holy Spirit, or not.

About the 'church' to which Ah, Ek and myself are referring, it is simply the Church in scripture. A good description is found in Ephesians. Then there is 1 Corinthians 12 - 16, Romans, Hebrews, Galatians, Acts... Do you know what we mean, now? ;)

Regarding doctrine which is not in scripture, I'm not interested. I don't read about it, don't study it, don't espouse it in any way, personally, although I recognise that many people are blessed, for instance, by liturgy. For me, if it's not in the Bible, it's disposable.

Does this help you any?

Hi dragonfly,

I agree that there is really only one church, that is the body of Christ.

As you, Axehead and Episkopos all fellowship at the same church this indicates a choice of adherance (for whatever reason) to follow that church's doctrines.
I had hoped that your revealing which church you guys fellowship at would help to cut through the misunderstandings on this forum of what your actually trying to say.

As you guys will not reveal which church you follow it would be appreciated if you could al least offer more concise, direct, and plain answers. So far all I can ascertain from the answers provided is that your church doctrine appears to be mixing grace with works of the law.

Thanks
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,857
19,373
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Hi dragonfly,

I agree that there is really only one church, that is the body of Christ.

As you, Axehead and Episkopos all fellowship at the same church this indicates a choice of adherance (for whatever reason) to follow that church's doctrines.
I had hoped that your revealing which church you guys fellowship at would help to cut through the misunderstandings on this forum of what your actually trying to say.

As you guys will not reveal which church you follow it would be appreciated if you could al least offer more concise, direct, and plain answers. So far all I can ascertain from the answers provided is that your church doctrine appears to be mixing grace with works of the law.

Thanks

I'm in Montreal Canada... I have never met Dragonfly (from the UK at is says on the page) or Axehead. We just seem to have been taught by the same Master! :)
 

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
I'm in Montreal Canada... I have never met Dragonfly (from the UK at is says on the page) or Axehead. We just seem to have been taught by the same Master! :)

Hi Epi,

Thanks, but it was already mentioned earlier that you guys follow the same church but you haven't met, being in different countries.

I realise you have been "taught by the same Master" (as you put it), but what I'm trying to determine is what you doctrine actually is and thereby determine whether your Master is actually God or men's doctrines.
 

Axehead

New Member
May 9, 2012
2,222
205
0
Hi Epi,

Thanks, but it was already mentioned earlier that you guys follow the same church but you haven't met, being in different countries.

I realise you have been "taught by the same Master" (as you put it), but what I'm trying to determine is what you doctrine actually is and thereby determine whether your Master is actually God or men's doctrines.

Hey there Haz,

I am neither in Canada or the UK. I am in Texas. Do you really not understand what dragonfly and Episkopos have been trying to say? I gave you a hint. "I am not a member of any human religious institution."

The doctrine that I abide in is the doctrine of Christ.

Whosoever 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. (2Jn 1:9)


What doctrine do you abide in?


Axehead
 
  • Like
Reactions: Episkopos

haz

Member
Feb 17, 2011
271
16
18
Brisbane, Australia
Hey there Haz,

I am neither in Canada or the UK. I am in Texas. Do you really not understand what dragonfly and Episkopos have been trying to say? I gave you a hint. "I am not a member of any human religious institution."

The doctrine that I abide in is the doctrine of Christ.

Whosoever 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. (2Jn 1:9)


What doctrine do you abide in?


Axehead

Hi Axehead,

I abide in the doctrine of Christ.

BTW, no I don't get your hints. Remember I already had discussions with your church colleague Epi with his ambiguous claims on sin, not abiding in Christ, making Christ harder to attain, condemnation, etc and his boasts of being one of the very few with the truth in spite of his not abiding in Christ.

Perhaps you can explain your church doctrine plainly.

Thanks