Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

DaveW

Separation over doctrine.

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

The original, sound Baptist Churches were turned from the way by false doctrine of every nature , just a little bit at a time until they were apostate. For me there is no secondary issue, it is truth or a lie, can't be both and will not be tolerated by me.

To "pick and choose"which lie to accept is walking on very dangerous ground. 

Ephesians 4:14 (KJV) That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

Exactly what I mean by "eat the meat and spit out the bones" and "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater." We cannot compromise when it comes to the truth of God's Word especially on the gospel and soteriology! Calvinism and Lordship Salvation are false and from the pit of hell. They are false gospels that will not save and cannot save!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Understood.  I, on the other hand, will continue to hold that Calvinistic/Reformed soteriology is false doctrine; and I WILL separate over it - at least over the two points of regeneration before faith and of limited atonement.

 

14 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Secondary issue, as we should only separate over issues such as "is Jesus God, Did he physically resurrect, is the Bible inspired?"

 

13 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

The way of eternal life is hardly a secondary issue.

 

1Ti 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Sounds like true salvation (and the means thereof) is somewhat important...almost as though it's the whole reason for everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2020 at 2:50 AM, DaChaser said:

I am just saying that one can be saved and be either a calvinist or not, and while cam make for inyeresting discussions, not an issue to divide over! To me, thnose issues are like Deity of Jesus, Trinity, Bible inspration etc!

Excuse the words of a young woman coming in here, but I think the question is...What kind of beliefs do you want your children to have? What kind of friends? God doesn't ask us to seperate over things just because. He is quite practical and logical, and he knows that we become what we hang around. It pays to ask the same questions the Lord would to himself (if that were possible)..."Now what will happen if I don't tell my children to stay away from this and this and this? Not good. Better include that in the rules".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

The way of eternal life is hardly a secondary issue.

 

I am a 5 point calinist, but will not deny that one not holding to that cannot be saved!

14 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

The original, sound Baptist Churches were turned from the way by false doctrine of every nature , just a little bit at a time until they were apostate. For me there is no secondary issue, it is truth or a lie, can't be both and will not be tolerated by me.

To "pick and choose"which lie to accept is walking on very dangerous ground. 

Ephesians 4:14 (KJV) That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

We must agree on the Fundamentals of the faith, but free to disagree on secondary issues! Must hold to Second Coming, but can be various timing, such as Post/pre/A Mil!

4 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

 

 

1Ti 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Sounds like true salvation (and the means thereof) is somewhat important...almost as though it's the whole reason for everything.

We can agree to disagree on if its calvinistic or not is my point! That would not be something to divide over!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LYDIA WESTERN said:

Excuse the words of a young woman coming in here, but I think the question is...What kind of beliefs do you want your children to have? What kind of friends? God doesn't ask us to seperate over things just because. He is quite practical and logical, and he knows that we become what we hang around. It pays to ask the same questions the Lord would to himself (if that were possible)..."Now what will happen if I don't tell my children to stay away from this and this and this? Not good. Better include that in the rules".

The redeemed of the Lord would include those holding to calvinism, not to it, spiritual gifts, none today, and various modes of baptism and second coming views!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

I am a 5 point calinist, but will not deny that one not holding to that cannot be saved!

Brother DaChaser,

As I stated earlier in this thread discussion, I hold that Calvinistic/Reformed soteriology is false doctrine; however, I would agree that many who hold to that doctrine are indeed saved through faith in Christ alone, and are thus my brethren in Christ.  (Even so, I have called you "Brother" above.)
 

19 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Secondary issue, as we should only separate over issues such as "is Jesus God, Did he physically resurrect, is the Bible inspired?"

Having acknowledged the above, I would now ask the question -- WHO defines what is a "secondary issue" that is not worthy of separation?  For that matter, where do we get the idea that even "secondary issues" themselves are not worthy of separation?  I myself would contend that God Himself in His Own Word has taught us the doctrine of separation; therefore, we MUST glean the answers for these question from the Biblical doctrine on the matter.  Does God's Own Word teach us that we should ONLY separate over the "fundamentals of the faith," and that there are ONLY five of those?  Or is that a man-made paradigm?  I myself would contend that it is indeed a man-made paradigm.  Yes, I WOULD separate over "the fundamentals of the faith."  Yet I would contend that there are a few more than five "fundamentals of the faith."  Furthermore, I would contend that the Biblical doctrine of separation teaches separation over MORE than just the "fundamentals of the faith."

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just thinking that maybe I should give some examples of doctrines that I view as "fundamental," more than the commonly listed five:

1.  The Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (and the 1,000 year reign thereafter).
2.  Biblical Creationism (as per seven literal days, by the power of God's Word).
3.  Believer's Baptism by immersion.
etc.

Certainly, others may not agree with me concerning the fundamental importance of these doctrines (and of those that fall within the "etc.").  However, I am not responsible to make separation decisions FOR them (although I may make separation decisions FROM them).  Rather, I am responsible before the Lord my God to make separation decision for myself and those whom I have been appointed to lead and to teach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother DaChaser,

As I stated earlier in this thread discussion, I hold that Calvinistic/Reformed soteriology is false doctrine; however, I would agree that many who hold to that doctrine are indeed saved through faith in Christ alone, and are thus my brethren in Christ.  (Even so, I have called you "Brother" above.)
 

Having acknowledged the above, I would now ask the question -- WHO defines what is a "secondary issue" that is not worthy of separation?  For that matter, where do we get the idea that even "secondary issues" themselves are not worthy of separation?  I myself would contend that God Himself in His Own Word has taught us the doctrine of separation; therefore, we MUST glean the answers for these question from the Biblical doctrine on the matter.  Does God's Own Word teach us that we should ONLY separate over the "fundamentals of the faith," and that there are ONLY five of those?  Or is that a man-made paradigm?  I myself would contend that it is indeed a man-made paradigm.  Yes, I WOULD separate over "the fundamentals of the faith."  Yet I would contend that there are a few more than five "fundamentals of the faith."  Furthermore, I would contend that the Biblical doctrine of separation teaches separation over MORE than just the "fundamentals of the faith."

I appreciate this last paragraph and have often wondered this myself, I have asked a few people who have stated the "secondary issues" talking point similar questions and I have never been satisfied with the answer, no one seems to want to explain how you define a primary and secondary doctrine. 

I have also struggled with trying to figure out what issues to separate over, I don't think it's reasonable to think that someone must agree 100% with me, But I also think there is more to separate over than what is considered "The Fundamentals". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Was just thinking that maybe I should give some examples of doctrines that I view as "fundamental," more than the commonly listed five:

1.  The Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (and the 1,000 year reign thereafter).
2.  Biblical Creationism (as per seven literal days, by the power of God's Word).
3.  Believer's Baptism by immersion.
etc.

Certainly, others may not agree with me concerning the fundamental importance of these doctrines (and of those that fall within the "etc.").  However, I am not responsible to make separation decisions FOR them (although I may make separation decisions FROM them).  Rather, I am responsible before the Lord my God to make separation decision for myself and those whom I have been appointed to lead and to teach.

Think that many of us will have a different list on what should be dividing over, but important thing is to be true to what you believe God has given to you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DaChaser said:

Think that many of us will have a different list on what should be dividing over, but important thing is to be true to what you believe God has given to you!

Calvinism must be avoided, period! It is heresy, a false gospel that is damning many many people to hell!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gracelife said:

Calvinism must be avoided, period! It is heresy, a false gospel that is damning many many people to hell!!!

Ive noticed that young pele who grow up in calvinist homes very very often struggle with whether they are saved or not. Also, people like David Brainard had some very aweful, heart-rending struggles until he finally came to rest. He said that he couldnt u derstand how a merciful could be just in damning some to hell, and concequently him. He thought he was probablg damned. Its laborious to read pages and pages of this before finally getting to the salvation bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gal 1:6-9 KJV

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Sounds to me as though the gospel is kind of important and more than worthy to separate over.

...but that's my opinion and Paul's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, gracelife said:

Calvinism must be avoided, period! It is heresy, a false gospel that is damning many many people to hell!!!

Would reallu disagree with you on this, as much of the "soul winning" ministries and missions were by calvinists!

14 hours ago, LYDIA WESTERN said:

Ive noticed that young pele who grow up in calvinist homes very very often struggle with whether they are saved or not. Also, people like David Brainard had some very aweful, heart-rending struggles until he finally came to rest. He said that he couldnt u derstand how a merciful could be just in damning some to hell, and concequently him. He thought he was probablg damned. Its laborious to read pages and pages of this before finally getting to the salvation bit.

I am a calvinist, and was much more taken by the truth that God would even choose to save a lost sinner like me, as none of us deserve his saving grace!

9 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Gal 1:6-9 KJV

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Sounds to me as though the gospel is kind of important and more than worthy to separate over.

...but that's my opinion and Paul's.

True, but Calsvinists and Arminians teach the same Gospel, just disagree on underrstanding it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

What do you mean by identifiers?

Brother DaChaser, he means that there are more possible options to "identify by" than just "Calvinistic" or "Arminian."  (Likely, Brother McWhorter made this declaration because those who hold to the Calvinistic/Reformed position so commonly indicate that if you are not Calvinistic, then you MUST be Arminian - as if there are ONLY these two options, and no others.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/22/2020 at 10:52 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brother DaChaser,

As I stated earlier in this thread discussion, I hold that Calvinistic/Reformed soteriology is false doctrine; however, I would agree that many who hold to that doctrine are indeed saved through faith in Christ alone, and are thus my brethren in Christ.  (Even so, I have called you "Brother" above.)
 

Having acknowledged the above, I would now ask the question -- WHO defines what is a "secondary issue" that is not worthy of separation?  For that matter, where do we get the idea that even "secondary issues" themselves are not worthy of separation?  I myself would contend that God Himself in His Own Word has taught us the doctrine of separation; therefore, we MUST glean the answers for these question from the Biblical doctrine on the matter.  Does God's Own Word teach us that we should ONLY separate over the "fundamentals of the faith," and that there are ONLY five of those?  Or is that a man-made paradigm?  I myself would contend that it is indeed a man-made paradigm.  Yes, I WOULD separate over "the fundamentals of the faith."  Yet I would contend that there are a few more than five "fundamentals of the faith."  Furthermore, I would contend that the Biblical doctrine of separation teaches separation over MORE than just the "fundamentals of the faith."

So, let us consider one passage from God's Own Word, wherein we are taught the principle of separation over doctrine.

1 Timothy 6:3-5 -- "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself."

Herein God's Own Word does not define the matter according to "the fundamentals of the faith," nor does God's Own Word reference a category of "secondary issues."  Rather, herein God's Own Word instructs us to engage in separation (to withdraw ourselves) if an individual is teaching contradictory to (1) the wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to (2) the doctrine which is in accord with godliness.

So then, to consider some of the examples that I mentioned above, over which I myself would engage in separation --

On 5/22/2020 at 11:03 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

1.  The Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ (and the 1,000 year reign thereafter).
2.  Biblical Creationism (as per seven literal days, by the power of God's Word).
3.  Believer's Baptism by immersion.
etc.

If an individual is teaching contrary to Biblical truth on these matters, are they teaching contrary to the wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ and/or to the doctrine which is in accord with godliness.  (Indeed, as I write this I am thinking of another example that is much in our cultural context -- If an individual holds contrary to the Biblical definition of marriage, I will engage in separation (withdraw myself) from that individual.)

Note:  If we still want to maintain the idea of "fundamental" doctrines, then I will present myself as follows -- There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical interpretation.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to a Biblical world-view.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical Christianity.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical salvation.  I will separate over them.  There a fundamental doctrines to a Biblical church.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical sanctification and to Biblical godliness.  I will separate over them.  Etc.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
Bible reference type error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

So, let us consider one passage from God's Own Word, wherein we are taught the principle of separation over doctrine.

2 Timothy 6:3-5 -- "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself."

Herein God's Own Word does not define the matter according to "the fundamentals of the faith," nor does God's Own Word reference a category of "secondary issues."  Rather, herein God's Own Word instructs us to engage in separation (to withdraw ourselves) if an individual is teaching contradictory to (1) the wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to (2) the doctrine which is in accord with godliness.

So then, to consider some of the examples that I mentioned above, over which I myself would engage in separation --

If an individual is teaching contrary to Biblical truth on these matters, are they teaching contrary to the wholesome words of our Lord Jesus Christ and/or to the doctrine which is in accord with godliness.  (Indeed, as I write this I am thinking of another example that is much in our cultural context -- If an individual holds contrary to the Biblical definition of marriage, I will engage in separation (withdraw myself) from that individual.)

Note:  If we still want to maintain the idea of "fundamental" doctrines, then I will present myself as follows -- There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical interpretation.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to a Biblical world-view.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical Christianity.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical salvation.  I will separate over them.  There a fundamental doctrines to a Biblical church.  I will separate over them.  There are fundamental doctrines to Biblical sanctification and to Biblical godliness.  I will separate over them.  Etc.

I hold that Calvinism teaches the best explanation of Sotierology proper from the scriptures, but will not divide/seperate  from someone like yourself who is saved by the same Lord i am !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

I hold that Calvinism teaches the best explanation of Sotierology proper from the scriptures, but will not divide/seperate  from someone like yourself who is saved by the same Lord i am !

The Calvinist god is NOT the God of the Bible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

I hold that Calvinism teaches the best explanation of Sotierology proper from the scriptures, but will not divide/seperate  from someone like yourself who is saved by the same Lord i am !

Indeed.  And as per my above posting, I hold that I am required by and before the Lord my God, in accord with the command of His Own Word, to separate from "any man" who teaches contrary to the "wholesome words" of our Lord Jesus Christ and "to the doctrine which is according to godliness," regardless of whether that "any man" is a fellow believer, or not.  I wonder if you have Biblical support for your position on separation, or if you have simply chosen to follow a man-made paradigm on separation.  Remember that the DOCTRINE of separation is a doctrine of God's Own Word.  Therefore, any position that we take concerning separation SHOULD have Biblical support.  Now, if your position on separation DOES have Biblical support, I request that you present the Biblical support thereof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Indeed.  And as per my above posting, I hold that I am required by and before the Lord my God, in accord with the command of His Own Word, to separate from "any man" who teaches contrary to the "wholesome words" of our Lord Jesus Christ and "to the doctrine which is according to godliness," regardless of whether that "any man" is a fellow believer, or not.  I wonder if you have Biblical support for your position on separation, or if you have simply chosen to follow a man-made paradigm on separation.  Remember that the DOCTRINE of separation is a doctrine of God's Own Word.  Therefore, any position that we take concerning separation SHOULD have Biblical support.  Now, if your position on separation DOES have Biblical support, I request that you present the Biblical support thereof.

We are told to seperate and come from among them, if they hold to doctrines n ot as per the scriptures, and I see agreement manditory of the Fundentals of the Faith, but that we can still agree to disagree on secondary issues!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, DaChaser said:

We are told to seperate and come from among them, if they hold to doctrines n ot as per the scriptures, and I see agreement manditory of the Fundentals of the Faith, but that we can still agree to disagree on secondary issues!

Calvinism is a man made paradigm that holds to doctrine that is contrary to Scripture! They eisegete Scripture by imposing their heretical doctrine into the text instead of exegeting Scripture! Calvinism is absolute heresy that is leading many many people to hell!!! The god of Calvinism is EVIL!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaChaser said:

We are told to seperate and come from among them, if they hold to doctrines n ot as per the scriptures, and I see agreement manditory of the Fundentals of the Faith, but that we can still agree to disagree on secondary issues!

Ahhh, but here is my problem with your above statement. You continue to use the two phrases, "Fundamentals of the Faith" and "secondary issues."  However, these phrases are NOT found in God's Word; therefore, we cannot acquire a direct Biblical definition for these phrases.  As such, these phrases are able to be defined according to our own preferences/agendas.  How then do we define the "line of separation" according to a BIBLICAL definition thereof?  How do we define "Fundamentals of the Faith" from GOD'S OWN WORD?  How do we define "secondary issues" from GOD'S OWN WORD?  

Now, I myself have presented an actual teaching on separation from GOD'S OWN WORD, as per 1 Timothy 6:3-5.  According to that teaching of GOD'S OWN WORD the matter for separation is NOT the "Fundamentals of the Faith" versus "secondary issues."  Rather, according to the teaching of GOD'S OWN WORD in that passage, the matter for separation is "if ANY man" (believer or unbeliever) teaches contrary "to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness."  This is how GOD THE HOLY SPIRIT HIMSELF defines the matter of doctrinal separation.  As for me, I prefer to follow God the Holy Spirit on the matter of separation rather than man-made definitions and paradigms on the matter.

By the way, the phrase, "come out from among them, and be ye separate" is found in 2 Corinthians 6:16.  The context for this verse encompasses 2 Corinthians 6:14-182 Corinthians 6:14 begins, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with UNBELIEVERS . . . ."  Even so, this passage is NOT about separation from those who teach and/or hold to false doctrine.  Rather, this passage is about separation from UNBELIEVERS simply because they are unbelievers.  The "them" of 2 Corinthians 6:16 from whom we are to "come out" and be "separate" are the UNBELIEVERS of 2 Corinthians 6:14.  Now, 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 DOES indeed apply to the Biblical doctrine of separation, but NOT concerning separation over false teaching and from false teachers (which is taught in passages such as 1 Timothy 6:3-5).

Brother DaChaser, my counsel (for what it may be worth to you) is that - if you really want to stand for Biblical truth, then you should bring forward a whole lot more actual Scripture into your communications and discussions, and that you should spend much more time actually exegeting those Scriptural passages according to their grammar and context.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...