How does one distinguish brothers in Christ?

[Rubia Warren]

If salvation is left up to God, how then, do people distinguish whether someone is a fellow brother or sister in Christ?

[Secretary of Education - Colin the Cat]

another question would be did the disciples know Judas was going to betray Jesus?

A similar question to yours. How do we REALLY know other than by their actions?

Mat 12:34b For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.

[Rubia Warren]

03-03-2003 @ 12:20 PM
Bill the Cat:

another question would be did the disciples know Judas was going to betray Jesus?

A similar question to yours. How do we REALLY know other than by their actions?

Mat 12:34b For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart.
Kind of. Well, those are good questions, too, but I am thinking along the lines of what beliefs they have- beliefs that many consider core, fundamental beliefs, such as the trinity, along with others.

[Secretary of Education - Colin the Cat]

I think the classic creeds of Christendom define what doctrines are Christian and which are not. www.creeds.net

[GrayPilgrim]

Unless I am mistaken, La Rubia is mostly interested in the issue of beleif in the Trinity and salvation, as she comes from a Oneness background. Did I hit the nail on the head? I will reserve my answer until I am sure that this is her main concern.

GP

[Freak]

LaRubia--

God's Word tells us:

My children, I will be with you only a little longer. You will look for me, and just as I told the Jews, so I tell you now: Where I am going, you cannot come.
"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

[Rubia Warren]

03-03-2003 @ 03:52 PM
GrayPilgrim:

Unless I am mistaken, La Rubia is mostly interested in the issue of beleif in the Trinity and salvation, as she comes from a Oneness background. Did I hit the nail on the head? I will reserve my answer until I am sure that this is her main concern.

GP
Yes, that would be my motivation for the question, but I also mean other doctrines and beliefs as well (other than the nature of God).
I have seen people on this board, and others as well make comments about certain people that they don't believe is a brother, certain groups they don't recognize as "christian". At the same time, people will "tolerate" a certain group, while completely going after another something fierce. It seems a bit inconsistent at times.
What determines whether or not a person is saved and part of the body of Christ?

[Secretary of Education - Colin the Cat]

03-03-2003 @ 07:03 PM
La Rubia:


Yes, that would be my motivation for the question, but I also mean other doctrines and beliefs as well (other than the nature of God).
I have seen people on this board, and others as well make comments about certain people that they don't believe is a brother, certain groups they don't recognize as "christian". At the same time, people will "tolerate" a certain group, while completely going after another something fierce. It seems a bit inconsistent at times.
What determines whether or not a person is saved and part of the body of Christ?

Belief in the true Jesus of the Bible.

If you want a list, then I would say:

1. Monotheism (Trinitarian)
2. The incarnation
3. Jesus' Death, burial, and Resurrection
4. Eternal Salvation in Christ

I LOVE THE BANANA!!
:yipee: :yipee: :yipee: :yipee: :yipee: :yipee:

[PRAISE]

Actually, one of the ways that I have come across other believers is to carry around a pocket edition of the Bible in your back pocket! ( I DO read it in my break, too!) I have come across several beilevers who have noticed me reading my Bible!

PRAISE:hi:

[Jaltus]

I would tend to agree with Bill.

After all, Romans 10:9

"That if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."

What else can "Lord" mean but God?

[Richard Romano]

03-04-2003 @ 02:13 AM
La Rubia:

If salvation is left up to God, how then, do people distinguish whether someone is a fellow brother or sister in Christ?

Jesus made it clear that "by their fruits, you shall know them."

Only God can judge the heart, ultimately we leave that to Him..He who is infinitely just and righteous.

blessings,

Richard

[Woman]

Forgive a naive question here. And if it's the wrong place to ask it, direct me elsewhere. But why, if Christ's main message is to love one another, would any follower/believer be concerned with whether this Christian here or that Christian over there interprets the scriptures differently? (I mean outside of Christ being God's son, sent to die for mankind's salvation)

It seems there are fewer and fewer things upon which Christians agree and that there is as much contention between as outside of the Body of Christ. What is the motivation for further pitting one group against another?

[Socrates]

Woman:
Forgive a naive question here. And if it's the wrong place to ask it, direct me elsewhere. But why, if Christ's main message is to love one another,Aye, there's the rub. This was based on what He called the SECOND greatest commandment: "love your neighbour as yourself". But the GREATEST commandment is to love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength. So teaching something contrary to the true nature of God would fail this, and that includes any denial of the Deity of Christ and Trinitarianism in general. would any follower/believer be concerned with whether this Christian here or that Christian over there interprets the scriptures differently? (I mean outside of Christ being God's son, sent to die for mankind's salvation)As others have said, there are certain non-negotiable fundamentals, including the vicarious atonement, virginal conception and bodily resurrection. And it must include a proper belief in what "God's Son" means, including have the very nature of God.
It seems there are fewer and fewer things upon which Christians agree and that there is as much contention between as outside of the Body of Christ. What is the motivation for further pitting one group against another?While the above doctrines are a watershed, for a Christian GROUP, it must also include belief in the inerrancy and supreme authority of Scripture on everything it touches. After all, the above doctrines are found ultimately in Scripture, so if Scripture is thought to affirm error, then none of the above fundamentals are safe. Francis Schaeffer's book The Great Evangelical Disaster explains this excellently, and also has good Bible-based thoughts about the need for love and confrontation with compromise. He also clearly differentiates between essentials of Christianity and denominational distinctives which are NOT a ground for rejecting people as non-Christian.

Woman's signature line:
Eve took the fall...The Bible consistently teaches that it was ADAM's sin that brought death and suffering into the world (Genesis 3:19, Romans 5:12-19, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22,26,45).

[Woman]

Socrates - Thank you for the thoughtful answers. I have just checked out Francis Schaeffer's book, The Great Evangelical Disaster, and while it sounds a little too conservative for my usual taste, the reviews and exerpts I was able to find indicate it is well written. I realized as I was browsing that I've actually read two of his other books, Addicted to Mediocrity and Genesis in Time and Space, though it's been several years ago.

Another question that you reminded me of. One of the beliefs of true Chritianity that you mentioned is the virgin conception. I guess I wonder why Christ never talked about that. He must have been aware of it. I can't imagine a mother not sharing that information with a favored son. Any thoughts?

[Socrates]

"Woman" wrote graciously:
Socrates - Thank you for the thoughtful answers. I have just checked out Francis Schaeffer's book, The Great Evangelical Disaster, and while it sounds a little too conservative for my usual taste, the reviews and exerpts I was able to find indicate it is well written. I realized as I was browsing that I've actually read two of his other books, Addicted to Mediocrity and Genesis in Time and Space, though it's been several years ago.I think he was a first rate Christian commentator on what was wrong with the world -- and how evangelicals had generally missed the boat on loving confrontation with it. He also identified the centrality of Scripture as real propositional revelation.

Another question that you reminded me of. One of the beliefs of true Chritianity that you mentioned is the virgin conception. I guess I wonder why Christ never talked about that. He must have been aware of it. For sure, but why was there any need to mention it? Or more importantly, why would the four Gospel writers have any need to record it, considering that they had so much to choose from, and writing material was scarce?I can't imagine a mother not sharing that information with a favored son. Any thoughts?I'm sure she did, and she probably did with Luke too, but most of the time "Mary treasured all these things and pondered them in her heart" (Luke 2:19, similarly 2:51).

We really can't read too much into silence. But this AiG article The Virginal Conception of Christ (http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4262apol_v2-1994.asp) http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4262apol_v2-1994.asp has a section "The alleged silence of Mark, John and Paul does not disprove the doctrine", which might be helpful.

[Woman]

ME: One of the beliefs of true Chritianity that you mentioned is the virgin conception. I guess I wonder why Christ never talked about that. He must have been aware of it. I can't imagine a mother not sharing that information with a favored son. Any thoughts?

SOCRATES: For sure, but why was there any need to mention it? Or more importantly, why would the four Gospel writers have any need to record it, considering that they had so much to choose from, and writing material was scarce?

ME: I can't imagine a mother not sharing that information with a favored son. Any thoughts?

SOCRATES: I'm sure she did, and she probably did with Luke too, but most of the time "Mary treasured all these things and pondered them in her heart" (Luke 2:19, similarly 2:51).

We really can't read too much into silence. But this AiG article The Virginal Conception of Christ http://www.answersingenesis.org/doc...pol_v2-1994.asp has a section "The alleged silence of Mark, John and Paul does not disprove the doctrine", which might be helpful.

ME: I understand and agree with your reasoning there. I mean, there are more things that we don't know about Christ than we DO know. Most of his life is shrouded in complete darkness. My point is not to say that, since neither Christ nor 3 or 4 of the gospel authors felt the virginal conception was important/necessary enough to relate, it didn't happen, but rather, how and why did it become a primary Christian belief...one which you believe to be a prerequsite for salvation?

[Rubia Warren]

While I understand that the doctrine of the trinity is a very important one to trinitarians... I still do not get why trinitarians push the trinity so much when distinguishing others in the body of Christ. I do not see anything in scriptures which says or even implies that you must confess the trinity for salvation.
The apologetics websites really floor me- some are very good, don't get me wrong. But many will viciously go after certain groups, calling them heretical, and cults, yet they let other ones slide. Mostly, they go after Mormons, JWs, and Modalists. Maybe I have just missed something.

[Socrates]

La Rubia:While I understand that the doctrine of the trinity is a very important one to trinitarians... I still do not get why trinitarians push the trinity so much when distinguishing others in the body of Christ. I do not see anything in scriptures which says or even implies that you must confess the trinity for salvation.The WORD Trinity isn't in the Bible, but the Bible is full of places where the DOCTRINE is taught. The evidence is even stronger in the light of the context of Jewish Wisdom theology. So cultwatch organisations and the Evangelical Theological Society are correct to regard the Trinity as a crucial issue.

There are also numerous places where doctrines essential for salvation depend on a Trinitarian understanding, e.g.
Christ being mediator between God and man, so is both God and Man.
Christ as vicarious substitute to bear our sins: this means he must be of the same nature of us (fully man), but to bear God's wrath must be God (Isaiah 53, Hebrews 2).
Christ is our advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1), so must be a distinct person. But he sits at the right hand of the Father, which for an ancient king was a position of equality, so Jesus is a Divine Person.

La Rubia continues:

The apologetics websites really floor me- some are very good, don't get me wrong. But many will viciously go after certain groups, calling them heretical, and cults, yet they let other ones slide. Mostly, they go after Mormons, JWs, and Modalists. Maybe I have just missed something. Yes, maybe, like being more specific. It's hard to judge vague comments about unnamed apologetic sites. But yes, these groups ARE heretical cults, and this is just a statement of fact. But it is reasonable to hate the heresy but love the heretic.

[Socrates]

I wrote:
We really can't read too much into silence. But this AiG article The Virginal Conception of Christ http://www.answersingenesis.org/doc...pol_v2-1994.asp has a section "The alleged silence of Mark, John and Paul does not disprove the doctrine", which might be helpful.
Woman replied:
I understand and agree with your reasoning there. I mean, there are more things that we don't know about Christ than we DO know. Most of his life is shrouded in complete darkness.Indeed so, but what IS known is enough for salvation -- that's what John says at the end of his Gospel. My point is not to say that, since neither Christ nor 3 or 4 of the gospel authors felt the virginal conception was important/necessary enough to relate, it didn't happen, but rather, how and why did it become a primary Christian belief...one which you believe to be a prerequsite for salvation?More like, a pre-requisite for Christianity. The main thing is the Resurrection, so if that can be believed, then a special conception ought to be no problem. Therefore while for salvation, I'd halt at the Deity of Christ, and that He died for our sins and rose, I would expect a genuine Christian to come to accept the Virginal Conception. Conversely, those who have problems with the Virginal Conception almost invariably have problems with the Resurrection as well. Therefore, apart from a babe in Christ, I would have doubts about someone's salvation if they denied the Virginal Conception.

And it was perfectly reasonable for the early church to formulate creeds that include the beginning of His humanity, which reflect the importance of the Virginal Conception.

[Rubia Warren]

Today @ 07:06 AM
Socrates:

La Rubia:While I understand that the doctrine of the trinity is a very important one to trinitarians... I still do not get why trinitarians push the trinity so much when distinguishing others in the body of Christ. I do not see anything in scriptures which says or even implies that you must confess the trinity for salvation.The WORD Trinity isn't in the Bible, but the Bible is full of places where the DOCTRINE is taught. The evidence is even stronger in the light of the context of Jewish Wisdom theology. So cultwatch organisations and the Evangelical Theological Society are correct to regard the Trinity as a crucial issue.

There are also numerous places where doctrines essential for salvation depend on a Trinitarian understanding, e.g.
Christ being mediator between God and man, so is both God and Man.
Christ as vicarious substitute to bear our sins: this means he must be of the same nature of us (fully man), but to bear God's wrath must be God (Isaiah 53, Hebrews 2).
Christ is our advocate with the Father (1 John 2:1), so must be a distinct person. But he sits at the right hand of the Father, which for an ancient king was a position of equality, so Jesus is a Divine Person.

La Rubia continues:

The apologetics websites really floor me- some are very good, don't get me wrong. But many will viciously go after certain groups, calling them heretical, and cults, yet they let other ones slide. Mostly, they go after Mormons, JWs, and Modalists. Maybe I have just missed something. Yes, maybe, like being more specific. It's hard to judge vague comments about unnamed apologetic sites. But yes, these groups ARE heretical cults, and this is just a statement of fact. But it is reasonable to hate the heresy but love the heretic.
*prepares to get nailed to the wall*
I will not get specific, as I have no beef with any particular site, I just find it odd that many people will spend so much time rooting up heresy, and it almost always involves the trinity, yet do not bother to list anything about the catholic church which may be in error.
You and I will have to just agree to disagree regarding the trinity, thanks for loving me anyway *sarcasm*.

[Socrates]

La Rubia
I will not get specific, as I have no beef with any particular site, I just find it odd that many people will spend so much time rooting up heresy, and it almost always involves the trinity,Yep, because it's one of the most fundamental doctrines of the faith, as I showed. ... yet do not bother to list anything about the catholic church which may be in error. They don't? The leading counter-cult organisation, The Christian Research Institute, was very balanced about the errors in Romanism, but avoiding the sensationalist slanders of the Chick Tracts and Hyslop's The Two Bayblons. Anyway, the tu quoque argument is irrelevant to the truth or falsity of the Trinity.
You and I will have to just agree to disagree regarding the trinity, thanks for loving me anyway No problem.
*sarcasm*.Oh, like that, is it? Well, it's interesting how many of the cults, including the Oneness Pentecostals as well as the others you mentioned, are happy to label the Trinity as a "doctrine of demons".

[Rubia Warren]

Socrates:Oh, like that, is it? Well, it's interesting how many of the cults, including the Oneness Pentecostals as well as the others you mentioned, are happy to label the Trinity as a "doctrine of demons".
Aw, Socrates, put yer fangs away, not all Oneness pentecostals are like the ones you read about, and we don't all attend UPCI churches. And I have never heard oneness people say that the trinity is a doctrine of demons- perhaps some do, by my experience has been quite the opposite.
I will check out the Christian Research Institute a little more.


"Anyway, the tu quoque argument is irrelevant to the truth or falsity of the Trinity."
Too true. I never said it was.... just noted some inconsistency, that was all.