Why so many theologies?

[manichunter]

Why so many theologies? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Why don't Christians have the same theology? What is the matter? I believe it is carnality. I believe carnality has been disguising itself as spirit, hence every man is right in his own eyes.

 

[manichunter]

One thing I find amazing is that the Lord left the natural nation of Israel with an established theology and doctrine. He only gave them one theology. It was evident that they got off course a few times by people doing right in their own eyes. They went apostate because they got away from the theology God gave them. Jesus revealed to the Pharisees and Sadducees that carnality was at the root of their factionalism and different theologies.Here is the riddle. Why would the Lord come in person to establish a new spiritual people (Israel) and not leave them a theology and doctrine. According to the Second Covenant Scripture, Jesus did leave His people with one theology and doctrine straight from His mouth. So how did we go from one theology that was again given by God Himself to mutltiple and different theologies? I believe carnality is at work again and everyone is right in their own eyes.

 

[Red_Letters88]

Yeah, plain and simple its mans flesh. I went through the phase when I first left home and did the thinking for myself where I explored different denominations and doctrines. Im now at the point where I see almost every man-made doctrine/denomination a stumbling stone that mans own idea of righteousness has created. Christ first plain and simple- let all the other junk fall behind and away. If we all put Christ first- we wouldnt have these issues...sadly many "christians" would rather have history books and doctrines to suit their "salvation needs"

 

[tim_from_pa]

I won't be as "theological" answering this one

Instead of the works of the flesh (which both of you are correct in saying), the idea is to suit thier needs.One should read the bible first, and extrapolate on its meaning and look for the counterpart in this world that its talking about.Instead, people see the circumstances around them, and then try to convolute the bible to fit it.Sort of like the chicken or the egg debate.One excellent example is the throne of King David. Until Christ comes to take it, and He clearly says it, this earthly throne must be fulfilled by someone for all generations. It clearly says that.Instead, people see the "fall" of it in Palestine after Zedekiah and then say about the bible that it must mean something else. Eternal does not mean eternal any longer. Or again, they may reinterpret it to say the "office of the throne" stays with David if there is none, or whatever else they can dream up to make the bible fit the apparent circumstances.Instead, if the bible sys it will be forever, it will be forever, even if I am ignorant as to its whereabouts. A man or woman of faith would believe it still exists somewhere. Therefore, we search for biblical clues (in this case the lost tribes) and find the people that fit the description even if it sounds ridiculous.It takes guts to believe something that everyone else pokes fun at, because they rather be faithless and believe the circumstances and reinterpret God's Word to fit what they see. And to them seeing is believing.But a man of faith says believing is seeing.

 

[RichardBurger]

The reason is simple. Apostasy:Evidence of a great doctrinal apostasyThis is the background of Christ's instruction to Gentiles (through Paul) during the dispensation of grace (that's us):1 Cor 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me [Paul], as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon...1 Cor 4:14-16 For I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you. For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. [the Kingdom Gospel? No, the Grace Gospel? Yes.] Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers [of whom? All the apostles? No...] of me. For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church.1 Cor 11:1-2 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances as [who? Peter? John? James? No...] I delivered them to you.Eph 3:2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given [to who? All the apostles equally? No...] to me for you...Phil 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and observe them which walk according to the pattern you have in us...Phil 4:9 Those things which you have learned and received and heard and seen [in who? the circumcision apostles? No...] in me, practice these things, and the God of peace shall be with you.Col 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil [Gr. pleroo, complete] the word of God;2 Tim 1:13 Hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard from me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.Finally...2 Tim 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard from me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.***Looking at the record of history...did "faithful men" continue Paul's teaching? ------ Judge for yourself after examining the doctrines that cropped up soon after the apostolic era.THE LORD'S SUPPERThree of the "church fathers" --Ignatius, Justin, and Irenaeus--said the Lord’s Supper had some positive mystical influence on your spirit and physical body when you ate it. Ignatius went as far as to call the bread “The medicine of immortality and the antidote that we should not die but have life forever in Jesus Christ.” These folks weren’t into transubstantiation as we know it, but they had an early form of it (more like consubstantiation). QUESTION: Is that what Paul taught? Paul clearly taught that it’s a memorial (1 Cor 11:23-26)...an important, solemn memorial, yes, but it’s still just bread and wine with no mention of any mystical presence of the Lord. So who was right -- these early church "fathers," or Paul?SALVATION, SUFFERING AND PERSERVERENCEIgnatius longed for animals to tear him to bits because he seemed to have believed that suffering and martyrdom would prove his Christianity and ensure his salvation. He seems to have exhibited an attitude of "I must endure to the end to be saved." While Kingdom saints had to believe such dreadful truths (Matt. 24:13), Paul never did.THE MYSTERYDid Ignatius really have a grasp on the Mystery? He knew that the body of professing believers was comprised of Jews and Gentiles, but that was a fact clearly evident even to unbelievers. As to Paul's Mystery, he saw it as something else entirely:"Ye are associates in the mysteries with Paul, who was sanctified, who obtained a good report, who is worthy of all felicitation..." (Eph. 12)That's as close as can be found that Ignatius got to mentioning Paul's mystery revelation. But he did go into detail on this:"And hidden from the prince of this world were the virginity of Mary and her child-bearing and likewise also the death of the Lord---three mysteries to be cried aloud--which were wrought in the silence of God." (Eph. 19)Ignatius did not have a clue regarding the Pauline revelation, judging by what he wrote. Yet he considered the virgin birth and the death of Messiah to have been hidden from Satan. But they weren’t hidden, for both were prophesied in the O.T. What WAS hidden from Satan (and from the whole world) was the full scope of the Cross (1 Cor 2:6-8), which was not known until Christ revealed it to Paul as part of the Mystery. Timothy knew it. Titus knew it. The Ephesians knew it. But Ignatius appears to never have understood it. That scope being that through the atonement work of the cross mankind can be saved by the grace of God based on faith in what God (Jesus) did on the cross to pay for their sins.WATER BAPTISMThis early doctrinal slide is most grossly evident when one examines these writer's opinions of water baptism. Ignatius wrote:"It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or hold a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve, this is well-pleasing also to God; that everything which ye do may be sure and valid." (Smy. 8)"Let your baptism abide with you as your shield... (Poly. 6). Elsewhere he said, "...as your arm..."What Ignatius meant by "shield" is clear - it's a reference to defense, possibly spiritual armor. However, Paul gave water baptism no such significance. Ignatius is paving the way for a ritualistic, salvational approach to baptism [i.e., Rome's] which is with us to this day, especially when he says only the bishop can perform it or approve of it.Justin also said that one could believe but wasn’t actually saved until he/she was dunked. That’s a form of baptismal regeneration, from as early as 150 A.D. (some say they used the terms “baptism” and “regeneration” interchangeably). But did Paul EVER teach this? No! These Gentile philosophers sound far more familiar with Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 than with Eph 4:5.NOTE: The point of this post is that all this doctrinal confusion happened within ONE GENERATION of Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles and dispenser of the mystery. Not 100 years after his death, gross doctrinal distortion had already set in and the Church believed, and practicing a mix of two dispensations, as well as things not even found in the Bible. One thing is certain from what I’ve read -- the Asian fathers largely failed to acknowledge the uniqueness of the revelation Christ gave to Paul. Why? Because, as Paul himself wrote, Asia had already turned away from him even while he was yet alive. Those in Asia were even then “turning aside unto myths.” These church “fathers,” with their compounded mythical doctrines, are only the fruit of the apostasy that began in the first century before Paul died.2 Tim 1:1515 This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me, among whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.(NKJ)Richard

 

[desktop]

(manichunter;55301)
Why so many theologies? Why don't Christians have the same theology? What is the matter? I believe it is carnality. I believe carnality has been disguising itself as spirit, hence every man is right in his own eyes.
It's called free will, and what you are talking about is already in the bible.

 

[HammerStone]

Well said, Tim!II Peter 3:3
Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
Luke 12:51-53
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
Spoken of many times. There is a lot of strife and a lot of falling away out there. Paul cautioned us to be of one mind, but the key is that when you test someone's fruit and you know it to be wrong, you don't partake in false doctrines.What some folks don't understand is how to pick their battles. It almost always comes back to that one man/woman that has to be right.