Is it OK to question church doctrine?

[Dino246]

Perhaps you should start by giving some scriptures that will prove your statements are founded upon the scripture, instead of man made assumptions.

I just did. Apparently, either you aren't sufficiently familiar with the content of Scripture to recognize what I'm saying, or you're too lazy to go and read it for yourself.

 

[oyster67]

Is it okay to question church doctrine? Yes

Amen. I would say that it might even be required of us to "be Berean".

Jude
1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort [you] that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

What? You can't read for yourself? Do you think I am obligated to quote Scripture verbatim in order to back up my statements?

Where is that requirement stated in Scripture?

This is a "discussion" forum on matters of the scriptures. The title of the forum itself should convey to you that scripture should be discussed, not your personal assumptions.

 

[notuptome]

Amen. I would say that it might even be required of us to "be Berean".

Jude
1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort [you] that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Yes we are to test all things. We test them by the scriptures. Eph 5:21

If they are found to be biblical then we are obligated to submit ourselves them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[CS1]

We know from the history of the church that the first churches after Christ were called Tne Way, and those churches were very different from our church today. We also know there was a tremendous change in the accepted way church members were to live after Constantine called the Nicene Council. Since that time the leadership of the church changed, and so did the church.

Is it OK to check on these changes and compare them with scripture or should be simply know that good men have done this already and go by what they decided?

We are faced with another change in the church brought on by the deep sea scrolls. They opened up knowledge of the times before Christ that had been lost over time, bringing about better understanding of the old testament. Some scholars have used this information as a better understanding of Christ. It is called the roots movement and accused of being a movement to advocate going back to how the world was before Christ came rather than a movement to better understand Christ. We know Christ changed some things, do they accept that or is it a movement to not accept Christ. One part of this discussion would be to look at the facts of this and determine what is correct.

Do you think it is best to leave everything alone, trust how it has been for years or is it best to go to scripture with our questions?

the word " Doctrine" means teachings. which we as Christians get from the Word of God. IF you teaching in not from the word of God and not founded in truth and harmony with the bible as a whole which every believer can receive from the Holy Spirit more than enough for righteous living and appropriate worship.

 

[Dino246]

This is a "discussion" forum on matters of the scriptures. The title of the forum itself should convey to you that scripture should be discussed, not your personal assumptions.

Is that Scripture, or your personal assumption?

 

[Blik]

Is that Scripture, or your personal assumption?

As individuals who make up the church, I think we need to allow a certain amount of personal assumptions.

The Pharisees went way too far with making rules, establishing an additional scripture with rules to follow. We must be sure we are not doing the same.

In the true church Christ established, Christ and His salvation was the basic "rule". After that the most important commandment was love. Love has acceptance of differences within the body of Christ.

Our problem then, is deciding what differences Christ allows.

 

[Magenta]

Agreed...
I just want to add that while indeed Eve was meant to help Adam in life, "helpmate" is a somewhat bad translation, it gives the impression of a second fiddle. This is not with intent to correct you, I simply wanted to leave this out there for native English speakers...
In my native language it was translated "a friend fit for him" so Eve was a matching friend to Adam, on his level. He couldn't have intelligent conversation with bugs. Same as our friends help us and are there for us, that's pretty much what friends do, but we don't call them helpers we consider them our equals.

In Genesis 2:18, the Hebrew expression ezer kenegdo appears, meaning "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports." There is no indication of inferiority or of a secondary position in an hierarchical separation of the male and female "spheres" of responsibility, authority, or social position.

The word ezer is used twice in the Old Testament to refer to the female and 14 times to refer to God.
For example, in the Psalms when David says, "The Lord is my Helper," he uses the word ezer.

Click

and click again.

 

[SoulWeaver]

In Genesis 2:18, the Hebrew expression ezer kenegdo appears, meaning "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports." There is no indication of inferiority or of a secondary position in an hierarchical separation of the male and female "spheres" of responsibility, authority, or social position.

The word ezer is used twice in the Old Testament to refer to the female and 14 times to refer to God.
For example, in the Psalms when David says, "The Lord is my Helper," he uses the word ezer.

Click

and click again.

Most instructive, appreciate the read.
It's interesting that the root ezer means "strength". Earth, which is also female, was said to "yield strength" to Cain before he cursed the land through spilling Abel's blood. Eve and her daughters are the ones that bleed to this day, not men, I think this is the same reality just expressed on another level. There's more depth to this, I'm sure...

Genesis 4:12 When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength [koach];...

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Is that Scripture, or your personal assumption?

To get you answer for that you would have to ask a staff member.

 

[Dino246]

To get you answer for that you would have to ask a staff member.

Is it your opinion that when someone makes reference to a passage of Scripture, that they should quote that passage?

If yes, why is that?

Again, if yes, would you refuse to respond to a post where Scripture is referenced but not quoted?

 

[Graceguy]

IF you don't me see what GOD says about it
EZEKIEL 18:24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, [and] doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked [man] doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

EZEKIEL 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
EZEKIEL 18:26 When a righteous [man] turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.
HEBREWS 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
HEBREWS 10:27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

GOD does not change

I

The church should only practice in the worship service what is documented in the scriptures, and that consists of only four things; acapella singing (making melody in your heart), praying, preaching, and the contribution collection.

WOW !! There’s an artful plucking from the Gospel tree that conveniently satisfies a personal/doctrinal point of view. Just sayin’.

 

[laymen]

We know from the history of the church that the first churches after Christ were called Tne Way, and those churches were very different from our church today. We also know there was a tremendous change in the accepted way church members were to live after Constantine called the Nicene Council. Since that time the leadership of the church changed, and so did the church.

Is it OK to check on these changes and compare them with scripture or should be simply know that good men have done this already and go by what they decided?

We are faced with another change in the church brought on by the deep sea scrolls. They opened up knowledge of the times before Christ that had been lost over time, bringing about better understanding of the old testament. Some scholars have used this information as a better understanding of Christ. It is called the roots movement and accused of being a movement to advocate going back to how the world was before Christ came rather than a movement to better understand Christ. We know Christ changed some things, do they accept that or is it a movement to not accept Christ. One part of this discussion would be to look at the facts of this and determine what is correct.

Do you think it is best to leave everything alone, trust how it has been for years or is it best to go to scripture with our questions?

Paul said follow me as I follow Christ. So Yes, Its OK to test things. If they don't follow Christ then we should not follow.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

That God regards women equal with men is shown all through scripture. In the book of Judges, women stepped up to take the lead with the Lord's blessing when it was needed. The culture of the ancient world was not kind to women, but when God ruled a nation there was kindness to women. Paul allowed women to take a leading role in his work when it was good for his work.

When the world was operating in an ideal way, then the teamwork of a marriage was like the team work of a team of horses. One of the horses is always the leader, the other works side by side pulling its own weight under this leadership. Both roles are equally important. If needed, the help mate takes the lead.

What you have stated is true, but the question

Is it your opinion that when someone makes reference to a passage of Scripture, that they should quote that passage?

If yes, why is that?

Again, if yes, would you refuse to respond to a post where Scripture is referenced but not quoted?

You can claim that I am ignorant of a knowledge of the scriptures, if you like, but the way you word your comments, I have no idea what scriptures you are referencing.

 

[Dino246]

You can claim that I am ignorant of a knowledge of the scriptures, if you like, but the way you word your comments, I have no idea what scriptures you are referencing.

Here were my comments from an earlier post: "See Acts 15 for that; the gentiles coming to Christ were given specific restrictions; everything else was permissible. Paul himself says "everything is permissible"."

Acts 15. How hard is that to look up?

Paul says, "everything is permissible". Admittedly, that's harder to find than "Acts 15", but it's still quite easy if you use BibleGateway or a similar site that allows multi-term concordance searches. It's 1 Corinthians 6:12. Paul says essentially the same thing in 1 Corinthians 10:23.

 

[ForestGreenCook]

Here were my comments from an earlier post: "See Acts 15 for that; the gentiles coming to Christ were given specific restrictions; everything else was permissible. Paul himself says "everything is permissible"."

Acts 15. How hard is that to look up?

Paul says, "everything is permissible". Admittedly, that's harder to find than "Acts 15", but it's still quite easy if you use BibleGateway or a similar site that allows multi-term concordance searches. It's 1 Corinthians 6:12. Paul says essentially the same thing in 1 Corinthians 10:23.

Are you telling me that things that are not good are permissible? Are you telling me that things that do not edify are permissible?

By the way, "permissible" is not used in the KJV.

 

[Dino246]

Are you telling me that things that are not good are permissible? Are you telling me that things that do not edify are permissible?

I'm telling you what Paul wrote.

By the way, "permissible" is not used in the KJV.

That doesn't concern me as I'm not a KJV-onlyist, and I won't pander to those who are. You choose your translation, and with it you choose the responsibility to do the homework that your chosen translation requires.

 

[awelight]

Goodness... you don't read too well! My mind is made up by the text, not "perceived social standards and humanistic logic".


How sad that you think you know what I think. How sad that you didn't pay anywhere near close-enough attention to my post. How sad that instead of thinking through my reasoning, you dismiss it out of hand and throw accusations at me.

And yet, how typical of people with your mindset.

How extremely deceptive you are being. I quoted you exactly and your quote is telling. I never said anything about ""Yes: a positive change, back to the equality of genders that Jesus intended for His followers. Nineteen centuries of oppression need to come to an end"
YOU DID!!!!!

You obviously feel that the church was under nineteen centuries of oppression or why else would you have said this. Our conversation is not about the world system which has oppressed women. We were discussing the assembly meetings and in that context you gave that statement. You also indicated, within the context, that you believe women leaders and preachers are a positive change because you stated that to.

I believe what the Word of God has said and is still saying on this matter. If you believe that Scripture teaches otherwise, then please give the verses that show your view is justified and quit using humanistic and socially based arguments. 5,000 churches may have or allow women pastors but this does not mean they are Scripturally correct.

The Apostle Paul's writings to not allow women to speak in the assembly meeting and forbidding them to be elders/preachers was given under Divine inspiration... at what point did God change his mind? Women are in every way equal to men as one of God's creations. Men are not always smarter than women nor or women always smarter than men. However, when God sets down offices and rules a certain way, we as believers better get on the right side of His plan. Regular believers can't all be Pastors. God chooses them for His service. Believers are not all spiritually mature. Some are babes, some young children and still others young adults. NONE of these realities make anyone inferior to the other by gender or physical age; just in spiritual maturity and in God appointed service.

 

[awelight]

That God regards women equal with men is shown all through scripture. In the book of Judges, women stepped up to take the lead with the Lord's blessing when it was needed. The culture of the ancient world was not kind to women, but when God ruled a nation there was kindness to women. Paul allowed women to take a leading role in his work when it was good for his work.

When the world was operating in an ideal way, then the teamwork of a marriage was like the team work of a team of horses. One of the horses is always the leader, the other works side by side pulling its own weight under this leadership. Both roles are equally important. If needed, the help mate takes the lead.

Never stated any belief in men being superior to women or in any being yoked unfairly. Just stating what Scripture says.

 

[awelight]

Is that Scripture, or your personal assumption?

C'mon now, let's play nice.