Heresy: A Loaded Word

[doireallyneed1]

Why are there so many different religions?

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 Hey I think this is something we all wonder and think about. Before I became a Christian I realized they can all be split into two different religions. Christianity and a religion of works. When I say works I mean any religion that tries to earn God's approval of them. They try to do this by everything they do whether it be charity, being nice, trying not to be sinful. The problem is that we can never measure up to God's perfect standard.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 And as a matter of fact the wages of sin is death which striaght up means that because of our sin, even one, we actually deserve hell. Hard to swallow I know. Many people think they are "good" but they don't realize that any lies, lust, selfishness, hate, bitterness deserves hell. A religion of works falls into believing they are good enough which is actually pride, the worst sin of all. So without Christ this is where each human stands,completely lost, hell bound.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 One last thing. But Christians do not trust in ourselves. You might have heard John 3:16 that says God loved the world he gave his only son that whoever believe in Him would have everlasting life. He sees our position and out of love desires to save us from ourselves. 2nd Corinthians says what he does. "For our sake he made him to be sin, who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. Basically on the cross he takes our sin and places hisPerfection onUS

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 So in summary lol...Christians trust in Christ and are saved from their own sin and aquire God's perfection and accept God's love poured out on the cross. Any other religion strives to be holy on their own and believes they have gained God's approval and actually either fall into depression for not being able to keep up or pride thinking they are good enough for God, both depression and pride leaving you hugging your sin and never knowing it, still hell bound whereas Christ saves

[doireallyneed1]

@SeventyTimesSeven490,

What is the source of all those other Faiths?

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 I could have answered this in my own words but I think this is more clear and if anything I can clarify.Romans 1:19-21 contains the biblical explanation for why there are so many religions. The truth of God is seen and known by every human being because God has made it so. Instead of accepting the truth about God and submitting to it, most human beings reject it and seek their own way to understand God. But this leads not to enlightenment regarding God, but to futility of thinkin

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 Many people do not want to believe in a God who demands righteousness and morality, so they invent a God who makes no such requirements. Many people do not want to believe in a God who declares it impossible for people to earn their own way to heaven. So they invent a God who accepts people into heaven if they have completed certain steps, followed certain rules, and/or obeyed certain laws, at least to the best of their ability.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 Many people do not want a relationship with a God who is sovereign and omnipotent. So they imagine God as being more of a mystical force than a personal and sovereign ruler. There are many reasons that there are so many other faiths. In addition to people and their rejection of God there is Satan who is the father of lies and will try with anything at all to keep you bound to your sin. And if that means screwing with ones head and deceiving them he is all for it.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 I hope that helped if you have any other questions just keep them coming :)

[doireallyneed1]

@SeventyTimesSeven490,

What happens to the followers of these other Faiths when they die? How can they be held to account for believing what their parents, teachers and community have taught them is true?

What if they have never heard the Good News?

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 All people are accountable to God whether or not they have “heard about Him.” The Bible tells us that God has clearly revealed Himself in nature (Romans 1:20) and in the hearts of people (Ecclesiastes 3:11). The problem is that the human race is sinful; we all reject this knowledge of God and rebel against Him (Romans 1:21-23). If it were not for God's grace, we would be given over to the sinful desires of our hearts, allowing us to discover how miserable life is without Him.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 In reality, it is not that some people have not heard about God. Rather, the problem is that they have rejected what they have heard and what is readily seen in nature. Deuteronomy 4:29 proclaims, “But if from there you seek the LORD your God, you will find him if you look for him with all your heart and with all your soul.” This verse teaches an important principle—everyone who truly seeks after God will find Him. If a person truly desires to know God,God will make Himself known

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 The problem is “there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God” (Romans 3:11). People reject the knowledge of God that is present in nature and in their own hearts, and instead decide to worship a “god” of their own creation. It is foolish to debate the fairness of God sending someone to hell who never had the opportunity to hear the gospel of Christ. People are responsible to God for what God has already revealed to them. The Bible says that people reject this knowledge.

[doireallyneed1]

Lynn was born in rural Oregan to a Christian society and was taught that if she accepted Christ into her heart then she would go to Heaven.

Lin was born in rural Cambodia and was raised a Bhuddist and although he may have heard stories about other belief systems he sees no reason to reject his heritage.

cont'd - - -

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 Because of their rejection of the truth and what God has revealed God is just in sending them to hell. God will do His absolute best to seek the lost but unfortunately the truth of the matter is that many people are deceived with lies. The best thing I can really say is for you to give your heart to Christ so that you can help eliminate the problem of deadly ignorance that many people unfortunately have by preaching the gospel to the lost, and deceived :) Only Christ can save.

[doireallyneed1]

@SeventyTimesSeven490,

I look at the World and see that the difference between those that are saved and those that are not is largely geographical. I cannot see grace in these divisions. It seems horribly unjust that someone could be accused and held accountable because of where they were born.

Consider this example:

cont'd - - -

[doireallyneed1]

@SeventyTimesSeven490,

Did God favour Lynn by causing her to born into a situation that made it easy for her to find Christ while doing the opposite for Lin?

Did God not love Lin enough to provide him with the means to live a holy life?

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1

Let me explain to you this truth and ask you a question before I attempt to answer yours because I think it will help. Adam and Eve represented all humanity in the garden and sinned against God. Romans tells us the wages of sin is death. Adam and Eve represented us therefore unfortunately we all deserve hell on account of our sin. With that in mind I ask you, is it "just" for God to save anyone apart from his love, mercy, and grace we never deserved?

[doireallyneed1]

@SeventyTimesSeven490,

It saddens me deeply to imagine a Father that withholds his love and spills his wrath on some of his children while filling others with grace. It seems unjust that some might be delivered to grace based on where they born more than anything else.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 God will love who he loves and his grace rains on the just and the unjust. What I was getting at is that the reality is that none of us deserve salvation. When we think God owes us salvation we get the thought that God is unjust. The unjustice is that in sin we have all rebelled against a loving God. We all have grace in just living. God has given us the gift of life, the gift of life. He gracefully gives us a chance of being reconciled to himself through Christ.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to be heartless, it's just the truth that we don't deserve anything but hell. The reason is not that it is unjust, because God is perfect and just. We feel like we deserve grace because God is love and that's what we expect, not because God is unjust. And tho it's hard to understand God gives all a chance to be with him. Romans tells us that his divine nature has shown since creation and that men in rebellion reject the truth.

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1 The bible also tells us that anyone who genuinely seeks God will find him. And I know of testimonies where the person had been deceived and genuinely asked God to give him the truth and God revealed his son to him. God loves all, is always just, and gives everyone a chance to be eternally with him. We are all filled with grace. The best way to deal with the problem is to be part of the solution and tell all the truth of Christ so that they can be set free and experience his love

[SeventyTimesSeven490]

@doireallyneed1

Really good questions! But I would like you to answer mine first please so that I can answer yours with more depth.

[Gorbyclrap]

For a second there i thought it said Hershey...oh well its still good

[readerwriter]

Rape? Are you serious? Rape is real, t your dogma is spiritual politics. Show some respect to human feelings and leave out the politics.

[TheKJVberean]

Ha, this is coming from someone who believes in 5 heretical points of calvinism. Who also names his kids after calvin who obviously was a heretic for many reason, one being calvin taught that Jesus descended into hell to complete the plan of redemption and that it was a "greater and more excellent price" than the cross. John Calvin was an unsaved heretical tyrant.

[AcaiBunch]

Dr Albert Mohler wrote an article on the First, Second and Third doctrinal issues. Very well done.

[NancyAM87]

anyone know where i can find this entire sermon?

[leahbleahb]

@NancyAM87 the mars hill church website has a 'media' section.. you can probably find it there. just google 'mars hill church'

[QuakeCityRockers]

I Just dropped into this but Justification by faith alone in the imputed righteousness of the active and passive obedience of Christ is the most central doctrine of the bible sinse it concerns how one is right with God for all eternaty. With that said Federal Vision and New Perspective on Paul and those who support them are Heretics!!! Stay away from Doug Wilson and John Piper

[MrAndruzki]

Just Curious. How does John Piper disagree with justification by faith alone in the imputed righteousness of Christ.  From what I have heard of him, he loves that doctrine.

[thefederalvision]

He does, and so does the Federal Vision. QuakeCityRockers is probably one of those guys from the TrinityFoundation. Dr. Robbins, from TF, throws around the word "heretic" pretty easily.

Hard to take them seriously...

[QuakeCityRockers]

No I'm not a Trinity Foundation guy. Better. I'm a Westminster Sem Cali guy! R Scott Clark and the rest of the Faculty with the help of others like Guy Waters took your filthy palagian moralistic Romanist theology apart. Ummm The NAPARC churches has spoken against your people so deal with them I stand behind the church.

[thefederalvision]

Quake,

Greetings to Westminster West! Is Dr. Peter Jones still there? He's a very good friend.

You speak of the NAPARC churches as The Church? Hm... interesting.

I, nor much of the FV, identify ourselves with many of those reports. Yes, the NAPARC took down some heretics...but they were "straw heretics." I'm right behind you in just about everything those reports say.

Filthy? (that helps...)

Moralistic? ...not quite

Romanst? Absolutely not!

Theology? Yes! :)

[janeym]

@MrAndruzki He loooooves that doctrine. hahaha!

[thefederalvision]

QuakeCityRockers, FV (not sure about NPP - NOT the same thing), does not deny justification by faith alone, or imputation of Christ's Active and Passive obedience. Get your facts man. Read the joint statement on federal-vision [dot] com. It's all right there, signed by the various CREC pastors.

And btw, the only thing as bad as a heretic is a divisive man...

[lydmarol11]

remember, a lot of what people are calling micro evolution is manipulated by man. There is a desire to dismiss God & create confusion and doubt about His word. (I know the bird/wing fish/fin was bad example- that would be more macro) but when all powerful and all knowing God created a world he said was good, did it just take him a long time to decide how he wanted us??? That God sounds weak.

[lydmarol11]

Sounds like a lot of you don't believe God is all powerful and choose not to take the Bible as God's word, rather you follow men and what men think they know but can't prove. Micro evolution is not happening, birds still have wings and fish still have fins and absolutely nothing is happening to the human race to make us better than when God said he created us in His image.

[theshowmecanuck]

Evolution and the bible are NOT mutually exclusive. I am really at odds with Christians who think they are sooooo good at being Christians that they think they know how God works, inside and out, and take things too literally as a consequence. The world was made in six days.... that is put that way so we know what sequence things came. But each day could be a billion years to us. And evolution could be the tool God used to get us where we are today. I think evolution and God go good together.

[thekingmaker10]

I agree that the "days" discussed in Genesis could very well mean something other than our 24 hour days.

An important point to remember about macro-evolution is that it remains a theory, which is much different than a law. Gravity is scientific law because it has been proven. This is why its called the "law" of gravity. Macro-evolution on the other hand is theory, because it has not been proven. Thus we have the "theory" of evolution.

[sweetcat23]

Thats what im saying. I talked to a guy who thinks the world was made in 168hrs. I think the bible leaves out the explanation to this, multi-cell orgs, & dinosaurs to avoid confusion and lets itself prove its truths, through humans striving for more advanced science (<-example of human evolution). Its almost like we were made with intelligence so we can advance mentally, prove the bible's truths & spread the word. Scientists think theyre disproving god, but theyre only proving how complex he is.

[jrmrprkr]

all you have to do to be saved is to

believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and trust him as your righteousness.

you don't have to change/reform your life, you live by grace through faith in him.

a changed life may be an evidence of salvaiton but its not guaranteed.

[TheJohnDoran]

I feel ashamed as an atheist to say that this guy is actually influencing me.

[thekingmaker10]

I promise that you are not alone. Its amazing, but many agnositics and even atheists seem to be quite moved when they see and hear TRUE christianity, rather than the perverted teachings of "so-called" christians who bend and twist the word to fit their agenda. If you ever want to really have your eyes opened like you could never imagine, listen to some of the messages on youtube from Ravi Zacharias. He is the best at making things universally understandable to believers and non-believers alike.

[TheJohnDoran]

It's not that I don't understand.

I understand christianity perfectly well.

I just disagree with so much of it.

I was baptised as a baby.

I cannot put into words how much it annoys me to see religion being forced on young children who cannot understand it like it was on me.

[thekingmaker10]

To that, I would just point out that lots of things are forced on children that they don't understand, or are incapable of making informed decisions on. A prime example is how people pierce the ears of children before they are even old enough to speak. I just don't think its really a huge deal. If that kid wants to let the piercing grow in when they mature, so be it. In the same way, you are welcome to renounce your baptism, or simply cease involvement with the church.

[thekingmaker10]

Also, as to understanding christianity perfectly well, I somehow doubt that you do. I have no doubt that you understand what has been taught to you perfectly well, I just doubt that is was true christianity. I am not saying it is impossible, but I have never met anyone who understood TRUE christianity, and disagreed with it. This is mainly because there isn't a whole lot to agree OR disagree with in true christianity.

[TheJohnDoran]

christianity hates people who are gay or are not virgins when they marry.

I disagree with that.

Also there is a reason your religion is the largest in the world (or second?).

It's because there was once a sad day when your stupid people were able to kill innocent people purely for disagreeing with you.

Thank god (or the empty space where he should be) that day is over.

[awhclark]

I am a Christian, I had 2 kids and was unmarried when I became a Christian. I was 25 when I was saved. I felt nothing but love and respect from Christians. By the way you obviously do not know what a Christian is if that is how you define them. A Christian is to be Christ like...Who did Christ love? Everyone, especially those with afflictions..

[TheJohnDoran]

right,

a) You're wrong christianity has murdered and killed thousands of innocent people through history.

b) You think gay people are affllicted?

[thekingmaker10]

a. Christianity has not murdered, people "claiming" to be christianity have murdered.

b. Homosexuality was defined as a mental disorder by psychologists until just a few years ago when they changed the definition, not because it was wrong, but only because homosexuals were offended by it.

More importantly though, whether you call it an affliction, or personal tastes, or whatever, the point is that true christianity does not teach hatred for gays, or for anyone else.

[TheJohnDoran]

Actually as somebody who had christianity forced upon for 14 years of my life, by many different christians. I would argue that you're wrong.

Also, you can deny and talk crap all you want.

People who read the bible and were influenced by it murdered loads of innocent in your gods name.

Now,

Christianity and the christian bible teaches hate towards gays.

It teaches that 2 men sleeping together is wrong.

I would argue that if you follow this preacher, you believe in redemption.

Not christianity.

[thekingmaker10]

I am not interested in "talking crap" as you put it. My only interest is in the truth.

If you really study history, you will find that more often than not, the atrocities you are attributing to christianity were actually done for money (ie: conquering people & tkaing their wealth), and they perpetrators only claimed to be killing in God's name as an excuse.

If the Bible says not to sleep with another man, why would you think that means you should hate?

[TheJohnDoran]

oh for christs sake.

No, the people committing the murders were not after money.

They were after followers, they did nothing to these villages, they stole no money, they purely wanted their devotion to the christian church.

They tried to convert people with words and for those that resisted they tortured if they did not convert then they would have been killed.

Christianity has converted millions of people at gun point.

Why do you think your faith is so big?

Because it killed to be.

[thekingmaker10]

First, you are looking at it so shallowly. Only a cursory reading of history would tell you that most of these atrocities were not motivated by greed. One example, the spanish conquistadors of central & south america. They claimed everything they did was in the name of the church to spread the religion to the savages. Meanwhile, they stole their gold and their lands in the process. You see? Religion was the excuse, but greed was the reason.

[thekingmaker10]

Secondly, in the rare instances where the reasons were purely religious, (ie: witch burings), the religion being cited was christianity, but that was NOT true christianity.

Think, the KKK claims to be christians, but Martin Luther King was a christian minister and led his movement in churches. Obviously, only one of them could be true christianity, and it wasn't the KKK. The same holds true for all who murder in the name of christianity; they are not the TRUE christians.

[TheJohnDoran]

oh isn't that lovely and convenient.

Can you actually hear yourself?

Oh, we're not the bad christians, we don't take the blame for what the bad people do.

We're just the good guys.

[thekingmaker10]

Logically, can Christians take the blame for everything anyone does in the name of Christianity?

Is it fair for you to take the blame if I rob a bank and say I did it in your name?

If you really want to know the truth you have to research it and not just believe what you hear.

I used to think the same way you do, in blaming christianity for everything bad everyone claiming to be a christian ever did.

That changed when I saw how far those people were from what Christ actually taught.

[TheJohnDoran]

lol.

I love being told not to believe what I hear by a guy who believes in a big invisible man in the sky and has no proof of this man's existence.

[thekingmaker10]

I don't claim to be an expert, but I am a fan of science and I can tell you this much, something had to set everything in motion. The big bang and evolution do not explain origin. You can believe in all of that stuff, as I do, but at the end of the day, something had to start it all, because it is scientifically impossible for something to create itself. Therefore, call it God or something else if you prefer, but there is SOMETHING supernatural (ie: beyond science) that must have started it all.

[TheJohnDoran]

hmm.

I'm in a similar position except that saying.

"well god did it" is too easy.

If god did it then there must be a way to make something from noting.

[sweetcat23]

See, the way I see it is that god exists beyond earth, space, and time (like extradimensional). We cant comprehend God because logic says "nothing exists unless man creates it". Since we are only confined to our minds which subconcsiously percieve reality through our senses due to cause and effect(which only exists in time), its impossible to think beyond time, our senses(which tell us we exist), and "reality" unless we were out of body, but itd be too late to accept god by then ;)

[thekingmaker10]

There obviously is A way to make something from nothing, or else there could be no universe, but there is no SCIENTIFIC way to do so. And of course, when you take away the natural, you are only left with the supernatural. This is not an argument for Christianity, Islam, Judiaism or any other particular faith, but only for SOME kind of being that exists beyond the realm of science. Then its just a matter of seeking truth, to determine which (if any) faith tradition seems logical for such a being.

[RJORRIS]

Some people, like yourself, have come to the correct conclusion about God creating everything, the difference is that we believe God wrote the Bible and therefore what he says is true, not to mention the fact that the Bible has never been proven wrong. Not to mention that about 100 Bible prophecies have happened and come true in the last couple hundred years, google it if you'd like. But if you study the Bible you'll find humans have only existed for a few thousand years, no evolution.

[sweetcat23]

Do you believe that the world is billions of years old? Science can prove it, and so does the bible. The old hebrew word for Day was yom which could mean 12hrs-Unlmtd hrs. When it was translated in english, (and people didnt have science like now) people thought the world was made in 168 hours. "Day" 5- Animals were created (dinosaurs). "Day" 6- Humans. That was billions of years ago. Science proves that beings evolve over time, look at prehist animals. Religion& Science prove eachother..

[thekingmaker10]

My friend, you have mistaken me for a nonbeliever apparently. The only point of my post was to demonstrate why there must be at least some kind of supernatural being, who, at a minimum, set the universe in motion.

In an earlier post, I explained that the reason I believe the Bible is its historicity.

Also, the evolution I was referring to was micro-evolution, which we know to be true because we see it, not macro-evolution, which is a theory with more holes than swiss cheese.

God Bless.

[RJORRIS]

My bad bro, Your comment just came off the wrong way to me, lol, there are alot of unbelievers that comment on here and every once in a while I reply to them to try to reason with them, lol.

[thekingmaker10]

It's all good. I know it can be tough to talk to the "un" or "dis" believers. The nonbelievers are pretty reasonable, but the disbelievers are nearly impossible. Sometimes they will outrightly deny the obvious just to avoid admitting even the slightest possibility of God's existence.

[sweetcat23]

I was actually adressing someone who said humans are only thousands of years old with no evolution, even though science states matter changes over time. (and leaving a general comment).The fact that humans can no longer mate with close family due to birth defects shows that genetic changes take place in humans, and if people deny it, theyre behind in times. And yeah, that way would only be beyond this world i.e. supernatural.

[thekingmaker10]

There is an even easier example of micro-evolution that we can observe. Just look at a really old bed in one of those historical houses and see how much shorter it is than the ones we use today. That is because the average male was about 5'1" only 150 - 200 years ago. Abraham Lincoln was like a circus freak at 6'3" compared to the people around him.

This is in contrast to macro-evolution, which is a theory with more holes than swiss cheese, with no proof and almost no evidence to support it.

[thekingmaker10]

As I feared then, you do not understand true christianity perfectly well as you claim, or even anything close. True christianity teaches hate for no one and love for all. Those who preach hatred are not preaching true christianity. Also, the reason christians outnumber any other faith group stems from its historicity. The true faith shines through and endures the test of time. Where it was forced on people (ie: England) it dies, but where people are free to choose (ie: USA) it thrives.

[HypoTheLlamas]

@TheJohnDoran Thats pretty cool.

[timeforcute]

@TheJohnDoran Careful, Jesus just might brainwash you.

[mrburrus1]

@TheJohnDoran I hope and pray that you one day fully believe.

[kjbrimm]

@TheJohnDoran I pray that he is still blessing you. There is lots of other Good pastors to listen to on youtube!

[lanakila08]

@TheJohnDoran

I feel content as an atheist to say this guy's just as observably crazy as the rest of the religious community (rather sexist too, if you see some of his other videos).

[lockdown260]

@lanakila08 Of course because anyone who disagrees with your religious worldview has to be crazy.

Sarcasm aside, it's pretty ignorant to just paint all of your ideological competition as crazy as if you somehow have have the proof to prove anything the religious community says wrong. Fallacies don't win the minds of the intelligent.

[Orhuxley]

Heresy is in the eye of the beholder. That's why christians have thousands of denominations.

[dannyboi104]

Here's the truth. Being baptised is not requited to go to heaven. Remember when John said, "I baptise with water, but [Jesus] will come and baptise with fire and the holy spirit? Clearly in Acts 10:44-48, while Peter was speaking, all who were listening, without being baptised, reveived the holy spirit. THEN they all got baptised. Why? As a symbolical representation of being dead & born again. You see, receiving the holy spirit is evidence of salvation! (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 1:13; 1 John 3:24)

[thekingmaker10]

You touch ona key point here. People confuse ritual (water) baptism with the baptism with the holy spirit. One is a necessary part of salvation and the other is merely a symbolic gesture expressing outwardly the other. Being baptized by a pastor/priest/elder/etc. in water should be a very proud day for any christian, but they should realize that this ceremony is only a symbol of what has already taken place in their heart; baptism with the holy spirit given them by Jesus when they accepted him.

[nigelium]

I more-so believe in what you are saying. :)

[thekingmaker10]

And you know what? I commend those christians who insist upon water-baptism, because I believe they really just want to be certain to follow Jesus' teachings to the letter, but I just think they "can't see the forest because of the trees getting in the way" if you know what I mean. Jesus' message was about ABANDONING a "rules-based" system by accepting that we can't "earn" salvation by completing ceremonies and rituals, and rather accepting salvation for what it is, a gift from a loving father.

[Paleolutheran]

But dannyboi, Pastor Driscoll also made mention of baptism, which some would consider a very key and central issue. After all, is there not a passage which says "one Lord, one faith, one baptism?" Instead I hear all sorts of people making baptism a work they do in obedience, or some who re-baptize themselves (and one who said he did it to himself!). How is baptism, that is one of the institutions of Our Lord not central?! Practices betray a doctrinal slant/position.

[Paleolutheran]

My question is what is a "secondary" issue? For those who baptize infants and believe it conveys grace on those who are fallen, it becomes a "primary" issue. So, where in Scripture is this breakdown REALLY shown? I think Paul would take issue with this breakdown.

[onlyonesuperdude]

does baptism save? if i were to believe on the LORD Jesus Christ and get baptized, then i am following what the Bible prescribes. if i get baptized w/o believeing on the LORD Jesus Christ, does the baptism itself save me? i would have to say no, it was just an action i did thinking it would save me. if padeos baptize babies, i am not going to call them heretics as long as they dont say that the baby is saved due to the baptism. does that make any sense?

in Christ,

[Paleolutheran]

No. 1 Peter 3:21 attaches salvation to baptism. Those who baptize adults only don't show up until the Anabaptists, and most of the Reformers would have nothing to do with them. Maybe, just maybe, faith isn't intellectual, as St. James records when dealing with the faith of demons...I don't know, I just read the book and out pops those passages I rarely hear discussed well in the Greek.

If you are baptized and don't believe, then you've condemned yourself by taking what you don't use.

[onlyonesuperdude]

when i think of passages that speak of primary importance i think of what Paul said in 1 Cor 15:3-11, which is the Gospel. if it is not something required to believe in the Gospel, it is a secondary issue. baptism (padeo, credo, sprinkle, immersion) is a secondary issue, i do believe since it does not have to deal with the death, burial, and ressurection of Christ

[onlyonesuperdude]

(unless u want to say that immersion represents that, but i dont agree with credos that make baptism a primary issue).  as long as u dont say baptisim saves people, that is fine and there can be disagreement.

[Paleolutheran]

The problem is that this is the root of a disagreement. Infant baptism was practiced because the baptism was seen as the REALITY itself of uniting the child to the death and resurrection of Christ, thus creating faith by grace. That's why the kingdom of Heaven belongs to such as these, yet baptism is treated as for adults only or those who can "confess with their mouths."  Protestant theology regarding the sacraments ignores its impact on the person of Christ and instead substitutes Platonism.

[RJORRIS]

Alot of these ''secondary issues'' can simply be cleared up by just using examples and scripture from the Bible, if more ''christians'' actually read the Bible and followed what it said, then there would be little to no secondary issues. Baptism doesn't save you. But we get baptized because God commands us to and if Jesus was baptized, then how much more important is it that WE get baptized. Baptizing babies is a pointless manmade tradition, the decisoin to do it should be made by yourself.

[onlyonesuperdude]

i am starting to see that many of these secondary issues are not all cut and dry--many of Presb brothers have reason for peadobaptism and i respect their stance when scripture is provided. i can stand with them on the Gospel (like the whole come together for the Gospel conference). if these great preachers of the reformed faith can do it, i think us laymen can too =]

i am a credo, and agree with ur statment...but i dont think i need to go off on that rabbit trail here--it was just an example.

[happyslappysoong]

It is not the baptism that saves, but the relationship with Christ. Baptism is merely symbolic.

[Paleolutheran]

Not to throw rocks in glass houses, but where in Scripture is this "secondary doctrine" thing broken down? I have yet to see that with all save issues of diet or local custom, not doctrinal issues.

[dannyboi104]

See here's the issue. Technically since heresy is an opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, esp. of a church or religious system, one might even say that Jesus was a Heretic. Some of the things Jesus taught were way different then the way the religious system was. Now, is that a bad thing? No. In today's world, is Heresy okay? It depends on what level. That's why Mark basically says, "There are some forms of heresy that aren't that important, and some that are".

[dannyboi104]

We need to differentiate between what is Solid gospel truth that we need to obey and follow and what may be very important, but just aren't worth fighting over. Some Christians speak and tongues and get criticized and pastors are called Heretics for teaching such a thing. And the opposite is also true! Some Pastors teach that we can't speak in tongues and get called a Heretic.

[dannyboi104]

Now what is wrong with that? Most of the times when someone is calling another person a heretic, it translates into that person dragging people into Hell from their scripture twisting and false-doctrine teaching ways. And I think that sort of mentality is dangerous and one of the reasons you see so much fighting between Christians. It's like the whole circumcision issue. It's not doing it or not doing it that's important, but the heart and the reasoning behind it.

[dannyboi104]

The type of Heresy that we need to be-careful of, is when someone says, or teaching that to get to heaven, you need to do this or that, because believing that Jesus died for your sins and confessing that he is Lord of your life and asking and receiving forgiveness is not enough. Why? Because we're then operating under the old law again.

[dannyboi104]

Paul in Galations 5 said:

2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you.

3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law.

4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.

6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love.

[illdrums2000]

It's about measuring the tempo and temperament of the writers of the NT. Paul corrected the doctrine of many assemblies and when it came to doctrine he dealt with the Galatians with type of fear of reprobatism, in a sense, that leads the reader to believe out of all his doctrinal correcting, the issue of salvation was of utmost importance. This is one example of how we can begin to gauge what is a MANDATORY issue vs IMPORTANT but not DISQUALIFYING.

[Paleolutheran]

Of course one also must be aware of what Paul was responding to in Galatia, i.e. a Jewish Christian flair. Hence, circumcision BECAME an issue in this context. However, Paul's view of salvation cannot be disconnected from his view of Christ (both person and work), or how this is applied to people. Again, issues relating to Baptism are much bigger than types of food or eating blood, so again, I'm not necessarily disagreeing that some problems are "minor," but how do WE determine them.

[Paleolutheran]

This seems to me to be more of a human distinction than a biblical one. We don't have the authority to make what Scripture calls major into a secondary issue. Paul is not as important as Christ, and Paul did not institute baptism.