A list of some present day Disputable Matters

[numenian]

...which many Christians on both sides of any of these debates believe are clearly indisputable in their favor. My point is fellowship, to recognize we are of one faith and one baptism, and agree to disagree on those things not vital to salvation, contrary to dogma (essential truth), or against doctrine (central teaching). The trouble starts where such topics as, say, the Rapture, devolve into divisive and acrimonious arguments. A disputable matter is one where either side is not plainly right nor wrong, biblical nor unbiblical, moral nor immoral. It is reduced to a matter of conscience, opinion, of the believer. No need to get our panties in a bunch. (Is that too coarse?) I feel it is of the utmost importance that the church recognizes these disputable matters as just that, that there is an opposing and perhaps salient perspective that sees differently. I would like to see a section here dedicated strictly to Disputable Matters.

That said, below is simply a list of present day topics Christian disagree over and tend to cause disharmony in the Church. Most of it usually breaks down into generalize, and thus scandalous, labeling, mainly "accusations" of being Conservative or Progressive. This most often creates an unbridgeable chasm between our brothers and sisters in faith. What distinquishes a Christian, the one thing Christ said distinguishes a Christian, is that they love one another. Roman Chroniclers mocked Christians mainly for this great love they demonstrated for one another. Can America or any other nation mock us for this essential ingredient to faith? Sadly, no.

This is the list of topics that remain disputable matters of faith:
-Patriotism
-Any political involvement in government
-Participation in war
-Capital punishment
-American flag (or any nation's flag) in the sanctuary
-Law versus Grace
-The Sabbath: if and what day
-Subject to the Ten Commandments
-The status of women
-Feminism
-Women ordained as priest or pastors
-Same sex marriage
-Prohibitions against homosexuality
-Clear definition of marriage
-Climate change
-Protection of the environment
-Abortion
-Medical treatment
-School prayer
-Divorce
-Assisted suicide
-Halloween
-Christmas
-Easter
-Harry Potter
-Inter-faith marriage
-Spanking
-Bible inerrancy
-Pot Luck safe dishes

 

[lforrest]

It is a good list:

I would take issue with Law vs Grace being on there though. That is the main subject of Paul's letter to the of Galatians. By extension we should also not be subject to the ten commandments. The two greatest commandments are sufficient as they are the underlying spirit of the rest of the Law.

 

[numenian]

It is a good list:

I would take issue with Law vs Grace being on there though. That is the main subject of Paul's letter to the of Galatians. By extension we should also not be subject to the ten commandments. The two greatest commandments are sufficient as they are the underlying spirit of the rest of the Law.

Agreed, yet it is still contested.

 

[aspen]

Roman Chroniclers?

 

[numenian]

Roman Chroniclers?

And...?

 

[lforrest]

To support or not support modern Israel.

 

[aspen]

There is no 'and' - I am asking who you are referring to - roman historians?

 

[numenian]

There is no 'and' - I am asking who you are referring to - roman historians?

Lol, yes, and those common citizens who took note of and mentioned in letters or official documents their observations of this "new Jewish sect." What is the point of your question?

 

[Episkopos]

It is a good list:

I would take issue with Law vs Grace being on there though. That is the main subject of Paul's letter to the of Galatians. By extension we should also not be subject to the ten commandments. The two greatest commandments are sufficient as they are the underlying spirit of the rest of the Law.

As long as it is realized that grace takes us farther down the path of God's intent in giving us the law. We are to surpass the law in the same way Jesus did. A person who surpasses the law is not guilty of breaking the law...because his conduct is better than it. The law was given to show sin to the sinner. Once that has been done, hopefully the convicted one will turn to a source of strength and life (namely Jesus) and live by that power (grace) rather than try coping with a rigid set of laws that are NOT meant to be attempted by the power of the flesh.

 

[theophilus]

Most of the items on the list are in fact disputable matters on which sincere Christans can disagree and still maintain fellowship but there are some on which the Bible teaching is clear and there can be no compromise.

-Same sex marriage
-Prohibitions against homosexuality

Marriage is only between a man and a woman and any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong.

-Abortion
-Assisted suicide

It wrong to murder another person either by your own action or by knowingly giving someone the means to kill himself.

-Bible inerrancy

All we believe is based on the authority of the Bible. If we consider it possible that there could be errors in the Bible then we have no assurance that anything we believe is true.

 

[whitestone]

I would make sure at the top of the list is marking out those false prophets who teach Christians to some day be open to the idea of offering up animal sacrifices in a futuristic temple made with men's hands in the middle east. That is blasphemy and it is on this website

 

[Barrd]

I'm sorry....I gotta ask.
What is controversial about potluck dinners????

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

...which many Christians on both sides of any of these debates believe are clearly indisputable in their favor. My point is fellowship, to recognize we are of one faith and one baptism, and agree to disagree on those things not vital to salvation, contrary to dogma (essential truth), or against doctrine (central teaching). The trouble starts where such topics as, say, the Rapture, devolve into divisive and acrimonious arguments. A disputable matter is one where either side is not plainly right nor wrong, biblical nor unbiblical, moral nor immoral. It is reduced to a matter of conscience, opinion, of the believer. No need to get our panties in a bunch. (Is that too coarse?) I feel it is of the utmost importance that the church recognizes these disputable matters as just that, that there is an opposing and perhaps salient perspective that sees differently. I would like to see a section here dedicated strictly to Disputable Matters.

That said, below is simply a list of present day topics Christian disagree over and tend to cause disharmony in the Church. Most of it usually breaks down into generalize, and thus scandalous, labeling, mainly "accusations" of being Conservative or Progressive. This most often creates an unbridgeable chasm between our brothers and sisters in faith. What distinquishes a Christian, the one thing Christ said distinguishes a Christian, is that they love one another. Roman Chroniclers mocked Christians mainly for this great love they demonstrated for one another. Can America or any other nation mock us for this essential ingredient to faith? Sadly, no.

This is the list of topics that remain disputable matters of faith:
-Patriotism
-Any political involvement in government
-Participation in war
-Capital punishment
-American flag (or any nation's flag) in the sanctuary
-Law versus Grace
-The Sabbath: if and what day
-Subject to the Ten Commandments
-The status of women
-Feminism
-Women ordained as priest or pastors
-Same sex marriage
-Prohibitions against homosexuality
-Clear definition of marriage
-Climate change
-Protection of the environment
-Abortion
-Medical treatment
-School prayer
-Divorce
-Assisted suicide
-Halloween
-Christmas
-Easter
-Harry Potter
-Inter-faith marriage
-Spanking
-Bible inerrancy
-Pot Luck safe dishes

What is indisputable here, is the arbitrariness of <<<This ... list of topics that remain disputable matters of faith>>>

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I would make sure at the top of the list is marking out those false prophets who teach Christians to some day be open to the idea of offering up animal sacrifices in a futuristic temple made with men's hands in the middle east. That is blasphemy and it is on this website

Absolutely so!

 

[heretoeternity]

It is a good list:

I would take issue with Law vs Grace being on there though. That is the main subject of Paul's letter to the of Galatians. By extension we should also not be subject to the ten commandments. The two greatest commandments are sufficient as they are the underlying spirit of the rest of the Law.

Paul in Romans says "do we make void the law through faith? God forbid! We establish the law", and in Hebrews he says God says "I will write my laws on their hearts and their minds, and I will be their God, and they will be my people", and 1st John says "those who say they know Him and keep not His commandments are liars and the truth is not in them"....just three out of many proving that the Ten commandments are still in effect...yes we are saved by grace and because we are saved we should want to keep His Commandments, all ten, and not try to weasel out of keeping them...

 

[heretoeternity]

To support or not support modern Israel.

As the Apostle John said in 1st John, anti christ are those who deny Jesus as the saviour and messiah, and there were many anti christs in his day...anyone who denies the deity of Jesus....the non christian Jews, Muslims, etc etc all qualify for that title...the talmud following Jews, not only deny Jesus, but they denigrate and blaspheme Him, and the virgin birth, and Mary herself...so we should be trying to convert them like any other people of all religious stripes, including Muslims. It is ironical that Muslim people I have talked to recognize Jesus as a great prophet but refuse to accept He is the son of God...the talmud following Jews, do not even recognize Him as a prophet...read the Talmud for yourselves, it is on the 'net...

 

[rstrats]

Episkopos,
re: "The law was given to show sin to the sinner."


I wonder if "revealed" might not be a better word than "given"?

 

[Barrd]

Paul in Romans says "do we make void the law through faith? God forbid! We establish the law", and in Hebrews he says God says "I will write my laws on their hearts and their minds, and I will be their God, and they will be my people", and 1st John says "those who say they know Him and keep not His commandments are liars and the truth is not in them"....just three out of many proving that the Ten commandments are still in effect...yes we are saved by grace and because we are saved we should want to keep His Commandments, all ten, and not try to weasel out of keeping them...

I have never understood those who think that Paul "did away" with the law.
First of all, he had no authority to do such a thing!
And second, he kept the law himself.
Of course, the Ten Commandments are still valid.
And didn't Jesus, Himself say "If you love me, keep my commandments"?

All of His life, Jesus Himself kept the Ten Commandments, and taught His Apostles to do the same.
As He was preparing to ascend into Heaven, He instructed His Apostles to go into all nations and teach people all that He had taught them...which would include keeping those precious Ten Laws.

Now, why, after all that, would He go enlist a new guy to teach the people something different?

The answer, of course, is that He would not.

 

[epostle1]

People not using pot luck safe dishes are heretics and blasphemers!

 

[iakov]

It wrong to murder another person either by your own action or by knowingly giving someone the means to kill himself.


All we believe is based on the authority of the Bible. If we consider it possible that there could be errors in the Bible then we have no assurance that anything we believe is true.

<<It wrong to murder another person either by your own action or by knowingly giving someone the means to kill himself.>>

I wonder if you would still say that if you had to look forward to living every day of the rest of your, for years to come, life in agony without any relief.

How do advances in technology that would keep a person in a coma alive for decades who would otherwise die in a relatively short time affect your view?

<<All we believe is based on the authority of the Bible. If we consider it possible that there could be errors in the Bible then we have no assurance that anything we believe is true.>>

Since it is impossible to translate between languages without compromise, which is a departure from perfect accuracy and, therefore, error, and considering that many English speaking people choose to read a version of the Bible written in a language that they do not speak ( the KJV is written in Jacobean English AKA: Late Middle English) the possibility of error must be somewhere around 100% for every translation.

So how does one who requires inerrancy deal with that? Or is that not what you mean by "inerrancy"?