What is the point that we should judge someone as being a false teacher?

[justbyfaith]

I think that the Bible as we understand it in English gives the correct meaning as concerning for ever and ever.

Universalism is not the gospel of Jesus Christ; for He spoke of an eternal hell (Matthew 13:41-42, Matthew 13:49-50, Matthew 25:46)

 

[Scoot]

We should not judge someone else as Jesus had warn us to not judge others, because the gauge that you'd put on others will be put on you (Matthew 7:1-2), but you must be able to filter which is judgement and which is the warn and advice. We have to be able to discern the teaching that teach righteousness of the words of God and the teaching that led to astray and worship other than God.

Good point. We're told not to judge others, but then we're told to judge others (or see examples where others were judged in the bible). I don't want to derail this thread - as this thread is primarily about at what point to we discern someone as being a false teacher as opposed to being mistaken - but I think that your response raises a good question that I'd like to pursue more.

As a result - I've created a new post: Judge Not...

 

[OzSpen]

To answer your question directly - I am convinced that the bible is the word of God. I am convinced that it speaks truth. I am not convinced that I have a full understanding on it and that my convictions of scripture are correctly understood, so I am willing to hear others out that disagree with me on secondary issues.

I am striving to be Quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to get angry (Jam 1:19).

I find that by listening - it helps me to see where I am wrong or can grow - or, it further cements my understanding of scripture if their response is weak and mine is strong.

I also find that by hearing people out - more often than not I find that my perception of what they believed was first wrong.

Take the recent example of ceassation. I assumed thought they didn't believe in healing at all. Yet by being willing to listen - I find they do - they just believe that the "sign gift" where someone has a ministry of miraculous healing where they can lay hands on people and they will all be healed ceased with the apostles. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening.

I once judged Once Saved Always Saved as believing that once you say a prayer of repentance you were saved and you could go on then sinning and still be saved, because Once Saved Always Saved. When I was willing to hear them out and strive to understand why they believe what they believe nothing could be further from what they believe. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening.

This doesn't mean that I end up agreeing with OSAS or cessationists. But it does mean that I have a greater understanding of what they believe - and i have also been able to see scripture in a different light in some matters to what I have before.

I could go on with areas in my life where I misunderstood where someone was coming from, and if I was not willing to hear them out - I would still be wallowing in my ignorance.

I have learned that many genuine people are on opposite ends of many debates. One of my favourite teachers (Chuch and Nancy Missler) opposed with each other on OSAS. Martin Luther did an incredible work with the reformation, and I respect and have Lutherans as close friends today, but I disagree with them on infant baptism. Yet I don't discount Martin as being a false teacher, or my friends pastors as being the same.

I am not ready to call anyone who differs on my views with Calvanism vs Arminianism / OSAS vs not / Ceassationists vs Continuists as being false teachers. Rather I believe it is healthy for people to respectfully discuss their differences and hear each other out. Iron sharpens Iron. (Prov 27:17).

However I also believe it is unhealthy and I want to avoid those who want to engage in arguments with others who have a different view. (2 Timothy 2:14)

How do I reconcile the two? For me - I believe the key here is the heart of the people and the discussion. Is it a discussion willing to hear each other out in patience and love - or is it a closed minded discussion and only willing to quarrel, argue and put down?

If I take this to the extreme - I see the latter view going the way of our modern society. No fair debates, stacked panels, promoting censorship, drowning anyone with a different view out with shouting and arguments. No more is this prevalent than what I see with our universities, or organizations such as BLM. How will these people ever learn of their deception if they are not willing to hear out another?

Likewise, how will I be willing to see my mistakes too if I am unwilling to hear others out if I am wrong. I believe as I listen, if someone speaks truth - the Holy Spirit can convict me when I'm wrong and can give me revelation, the same as reading scripture.

Scripture is my foundation. I love it - and for me - it is the only thing that is solid. My understanding of it however has a lot of improvement left and I value the input of others.

I am seeking to find greater understanding of the bible, and I find it's just as healthy to be challenged on what I believe as it is to have people support what I believe. This is why I love the way the early church started, and I love home group settings. It's not one person preaching and all others just listening - it is a place where we can discuss, and ask questions and grow together.

When two or more people are willing to sit down and respectfully discuss issues - we can learn from each other. The alternative is to not listen to any opposing views to our own, which I believe is arrogant and dangerous because it leaves no room for correction, or to otherwise engage in arguments instead.

I am not ready to throw cessationists out as false teachers. From what I can tell, they are not preaching a false gospel message (even if they may be incorrect with their understanding on gifts) - unless you believe that the gospel isn't complete unless one believes that the sign miracles are in effect today and the sign gifts are part of the gospel message?

From my discussions so far I believe that they are very passionate about Christ, and scripture and I value their input if they're willing to have discussions with me.

I hope this helps to explain why I am willing to have conversations with others on these topics and hear them out.

Scoot,

I consider that most of the core doctrines for sound teaching are contained in the:

Apostles' Creed
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

It is my view this Creed contains the essential doctrines for biblical faith except for one line, 'he descended to hell'. This statement has caused so much controversy. I'm content to accept Protestant theologian Wayne Grudem's explanation in He Did Not Descend into Hell: A Plea for Following Scripture Instead of the Apostles’ Creed.

Oz

 

[Hidden In Him]

This question is inspired by @Joseph77, when he asked me in Genuine Questions for Cessationist's

I will answer your question in the next post - but what I am keen to hear from you (and others) is the topic of this thread:

I think it's a good question that needs further consideration.

What is the point that we judge someone as being a false teacher? Is it when they preach a different gospel message, or deny the deity of Christ?

Or is it more - such as if they differ from our perception on matters such as OSAS / Calvanism / Sign Gifts being ready today?

Where do we draw the line at disregarding someone else as being a false teacher?

- Scoot

I accept the Apostles Creed in its entirety as posted above, with "the communion of the saints" being understood as including the corporate operation and participation in the supernatural gifts. The word Catholic is to be understood as meaning the "universal" church, as suggested by the asterisk.

Greetings, Oz, and blessings in Christ, my brother.

 

[Truther]

See, this is an example of what I was speaking of when I talk about “False Teachers”. There is no one that can honestly read John Chapter 1 and come away believing that Jesus is not God. The confusion and error sown by this false teaching has nothing to do with an English word vs the Greek root needing clarification. This is a rejection of what Scripture clearly and plainly states.

You must be calling Jesus a false teacher, because Jesus said in John 4:24 that God is a Spirit, then called God "him...him", speking of someone other than himself.
Maybe, just maybe, John 1 is saying the spoken word of God is God, just like your spoken word is you.

 

[Truther]

You do believe in spouting nonsense. So here is a simple question for you: "Is Jesus GOD or is He not?"

He was made God after he was resurrected by his God, via the Col 2:9 effect on his quickening spirit body.

He is God by default because of this amazing thing his God did to him.

 

[Nancy]

To answer your question directly - I am convinced that the bible is the word of God. I am convinced that it speaks truth. I am not convinced that I have a full understanding on it and that my convictions of scripture are correctly understood, so I am willing to hear others out that disagree with me on secondary issues.

I am striving to be Quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to get angry (Jam 1:19).

I find that by listening - it helps me to see where I am wrong or can grow - or, it further cements my understanding of scripture if their response is weak and mine is strong.

I also find that by hearing people out - more often than not I find that my perception of what they believed was first wrong.

Take the recent example of ceassation. I assumed thought they didn't believe in healing at all. Yet by being willing to listen - I find they do - they just believe that the "sign gift" where someone has a ministry of miraculous healing where they can lay hands on people and they will all be healed ceased with the apostles. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening.

I once judged Once Saved Always Saved as believing that once you say a prayer of repentance you were saved and you could go on then sinning and still be saved, because Once Saved Always Saved. When I was willing to hear them out and strive to understand why they believe what they believe nothing could be further from what they believe. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening. I was wrong, and I have learned something by listening.

This doesn't mean that I end up agreeing with OSAS or cessationists. But it does mean that I have a greater understanding of what they believe - and i have also been able to see scripture in a different light in some matters to what I have before.

I could go on with areas in my life where I misunderstood where someone was coming from, and if I was not willing to hear them out - I would still be wallowing in my ignorance.

I have learned that many genuine people are on opposite ends of many debates. One of my favourite teachers (Chuch and Nancy Missler) opposed with each other on OSAS. Martin Luther did an incredible work with the reformation, and I respect and have Lutherans as close friends today, but I disagree with them on infant baptism. Yet I don't discount Martin as being a false teacher, or my friends pastors as being the same.

I am not ready to call anyone who differs on my views with Calvanism vs Arminianism / OSAS vs not / Ceassationists vs Continuists as being false teachers. Rather I believe it is healthy for people to respectfully discuss their differences and hear each other out. Iron sharpens Iron. (Prov 27:17).

However I also believe it is unhealthy and I want to avoid those who want to engage in arguments with others who have a different view. (2 Timothy 2:14)

How do I reconcile the two? For me - I believe the key here is the heart of the people and the discussion. Is it a discussion willing to hear each other out in patience and love - or is it a closed minded discussion and only willing to quarrel, argue and put down?

If I take this to the extreme - I see the latter view going the way of our modern society. No fair debates, stacked panels, promoting censorship, drowning anyone with a different view out with shouting and arguments. No more is this prevalent than what I see with our universities, or organizations such as BLM. How will these people ever learn of their deception if they are not willing to hear out another?

Likewise, how will I be willing to see my mistakes too if I am unwilling to hear others out if I am wrong. I believe as I listen, if someone speaks truth - the Holy Spirit can convict me when I'm wrong and can give me revelation, the same as reading scripture.

Scripture is my foundation. I love it - and for me - it is the only thing that is solid. My understanding of it however has a lot of improvement left and I value the input of others.

I am seeking to find greater understanding of the bible, and I find it's just as healthy to be challenged on what I believe as it is to have people support what I believe. This is why I love the way the early church started, and I love home group settings. It's not one person preaching and all others just listening - it is a place where we can discuss, and ask questions and grow together.

When two or more people are willing to sit down and respectfully discuss issues - we can learn from each other. The alternative is to not listen to any opposing views to our own, which I believe is arrogant and dangerous because it leaves no room for correction, or to otherwise engage in arguments instead.

I am not ready to throw cessationists out as false teachers. From what I can tell, they are not preaching a false gospel message (even if they may be incorrect with their understanding on gifts) - unless you believe that the gospel isn't complete unless one believes that the sign miracles are in effect today and the sign gifts are part of the gospel message?

From my discussions so far I believe that they are very passionate about Christ, and scripture and I value their input if they're willing to have discussions with me.

I hope this helps to explain why I am willing to have conversations with others on these topics and hear them out.

Awesome...and DITTO!

 

[DPMartin]

This question is inspired by @Joseph77, when he asked me in Genuine Questions for Cessationist's



I will answer your question in the next post - but what I am keen to hear from you (and others) is the topic of this thread:

I think it's a good question that needs further consideration.

What is the point that we judge someone as being a false teacher? Is it when they preach a different gospel message, or deny the deity of Christ?

Or is it more - such as if they differ from our perception on matters such as OSAS / Calvanism / Sign Gifts being ready today?

Where do we draw the line at disregarding someone else as being a false teacher?

- Scoot

look to Christ and you can't go wrong. Jesus is the definition and the interpretation and the fulfillment of what God made man to be.


Mat_5:19　 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Joseph77]

re false teachings, on purpose and not on purpose:

eventually in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic,

(learning of, from, etc)

it becomes apparent that the words or phrases 'eternal', 'forever', 'for ever and ever', and so forth,
are not always
with the same meanings, even throughout Scripture....

 

[justbyfaith]

Jesus said that as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days and three nights, so He would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth (hell). Matthew 12:40.

 

[CharismaticLady]

This question is inspired by @Joseph77, when he asked me in Genuine Questions for Cessationist's



I will answer your question in the next post - but what I am keen to hear from you (and others) is the topic of this thread:

I think it's a good question that needs further consideration.

What is the point that we judge someone as being a false teacher? Is it when they preach a different gospel message, or deny the deity of Christ?

Or is it more - such as if they differ from our perception on matters such as OSAS / Calvanism / Sign Gifts being ready today?

Where do we draw the line at disregarding someone else as being a false teacher?

- Scoot

The answer to the question in the title, is because followers of false teachers wind up teaching others and so on and so on and after 500 years, generations wind up in hell.

 

[justbyfaith]

"Easter"

Yes, I know that the devil has a beef with Easter and desperately wants that word taken out of the Bible; because he was of course defeated by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes, I know that the devil has a beef with Easter and desperately wants that word taken out of the Bible; because he was of course defeated by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

meh, so go roll eggs and buy bunnies during Passover and call it Christian if you like, too, jbf, ok with me. I like candy

Chocolate Jesus

 

[ChristisGod]

Are you saying Jesus was a false teacher???....


24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.


Jesus here, denies he, himself, is deity.

where did Jesus deny His deity in that passage ?

 

[Truther]

where did Jesus deny His deity in that passage ?

He said God is someone other than his fleshly self.

God is a Spirit...him...him...(someone else)

 

[ChristisGod]

He said God is someone other than his fleshly self.

God is a Spirit...him...him...(someone else)

So do you believe John 17:3 is the same ?

 

[ChristisGod]

He said God is someone other than his fleshly self.

God is a Spirit...him...him...(someone else)

Also when Thomas called Jesus His Lord and His God in John 20:28 was Thomas denying the Father is God ?

I'm following your same logic here.

 

[Truther]

So do you believe John 17:3 is the same ?

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

I believe the ancient KJV.

 

[Truther]

Also when Thomas called Jesus His Lord and His God in John 20:28 was Thomas denying the Father is God ?

I'm following your same logic here.

No, Thomas was actually the first Apostle that understood that Jesus was made God(as per Col 2:9 says) after Jesus was resurrected.

Thomas, no doubt(pun intended), educated the rest of the Apostles, including Paul on how a dead man was resurrected as God..

 

[ChristisGod]

No, Thomas was actually the first Apostle that understood that Jesus was made God(as per Col 2:9 says) after Jesus was resurrected.

Thomas, no doubt(pun intended), educated the rest of the Apostles, including Paul on how a dead man was resurrected as God..

Jesus wasn't made God. The Eternal Son(God, the 2nd Person of the Trinity) became man. He was made a man, not God. He is the Eternal God never for a moment void of His Deity.