Revelation 20:14,15

@sonship said on page 8 in reply to me saying his church was cultish ... (I just noticed this)

You've never been able to pin-point an erroneous teaching.

The statement of belief about the trinity (which is the topic of my “calling out sonship on the trinity” thread) is gross error.

Claiming that for a person for be a Christian they must believe in the trinity doctrine of the triune god is gross error. It is also cultish.

Edit; is it error sonship???

@divegeester

Claiming that for a person for be a Christian they must believe in the trinity doctrine of the triune god is gross error. It is also cultish.

The word "doctrine" is not in the paragraph you used. And I pointed out that you exploited the prose.

And you say you believe in the Father and in the Son and in the Holy Spirit. So you say. You just don't like the word Trinity and you unsuccessfully try to mount a case that all those who do use the phrase Trinity - believe in Tritheism - three Gods.

Your accusation doesn't hold.
And you exploited the writings to attempt to make your accusation against the local churches.

Now watch you EVADE this simple question.

Which one of the divine "We" in John 14:23 is not God ?

The Father or the Son?

If neither then both of the We of John 14:23 refer to God.

Jesus answered and said to him, IF anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him. (John 14:23)

The Triune God is biblical.
The Trinity properly presented is biblical.

Teaching that Jesus gives up the office of the Son of God is heresy.

@sonship

This was so good, I hate to have DIvegeester hijack the subject away from this great insight into the OP. He's always gravitating back to his talking points on just about every thread.

Sodom is set forth as an example of such great wickedness that condign temporal judgment was decreed, and yet, according to Christ, they were not beyond repentance. Must not this be assumed as to other sinners of ancient times seeing that sin was not so deep as to call for even such severe temporal judgment? We are not entitled to assume that one is lost for ever because he may have forfeited his life prematurely by sin, else Paul could not have said that the death by Satan of the wicked brother at Corinth would have served to the salvation of his spirit in the day of the Lord Jesus (1 Cor. 5:5)


[ The Last Assize, G.H. Lang. Schoettle Publishing, pgs 77,78 ]

@sonship

The word "doctrine" is not in the paragraph you used.

Is this extent of your defence of my calling the statement of belief of your church “error”?

What would you like me to call “it” and I will rephrase the question so you can tap-dance around it again.

There is nothing else of related substance in your post.

@sonship said
@divegeester
The Triune God is biblical.
The Trinity properly presented is biblical.

I’m not arguing about that I’m calling your church cultish and specifically because of the statement of belief regarding the trinity. I say it the “statement” is error.

Tell me sonship, is the statement error or is it truth?

@sonship said
@sonship
This was so good, I hate to have DIvegeester hijack the subject away from this great insight into the OP.

Ok I agree.

Then please answer the question put to you in the op am on page 24 of Thread 179424

Thanks 🙂

@divegeester

Tell me sonship, is the statement error or is it truth?

I already told you that I stand with the statement on your fabulous "Calling Out Sonship ... " thread.

I told you how I think you are exploiting the paragraph.
I told you my qualifications in the way I think what is conveyed means.

I explained that I think it is not reasonable that it meant the first day someone is saved she is conversant in so many matters with assurance and explanatory ability.

And the misunderstanding of that I think, is guarded against in the pamphlet's emphasis on Romans 10:9 - believe in the heart and confess with the mouth Jesus is Lord - raised by God from the dead.

I showed you more concise sections of the SAME document which left no doubt at to what the "hope" of the co-workers was.

And I get tired of going over the same, same, same ground with you.

By some exploitation and clever lawyering a somewhat conceivable case of sectarianism might be made. But that is only be purposely ignoring many other things clearly stated in the publication.

And nowhere did it say "You cannot be saved unless you believe in the DOCTRINE of the Trinity. " One could agree intellectually with any of a number of doctrines and never ask Christ to come into their heart to know the PERSON of God.

@divegeester

Claiming that for a person for be a Christian they must believe in the trinity doctrine of the triune god is gross error. It is also cultish.

Edit; is it error sonship???

When I came to my first meeting of the church in New York, no one carefully examined me on how I talked about doctrinal issues on the Trinity.

They practiced the receiving of believers according to Paul's instruction - Whom the Lord has received, the local church should receive.

The only question should be Do we sense that Jesus has received this person. If we realize that Jesus has received this person then we the practical assembly should receive this person."

Paul wrote:

"Therefore receive one another, as Christ also received you to the glory of God." (Romans 15:7)

That is what the local churches practice. And it has afforded us a way OUT of the denominational conundrum.

I have never met a more inclusive, broad hearted, accepting practice of Christian unity.

The booklet The Belief and Practices of the Local Churches has its backround. It was intended as a counter argument against critics who portrayed the churches as NOT EVEN CHRISTIAN BROTHERS. They said we were not even Christians.

So some understandable emphasis was on the common faith of the historic church was believed by us as is believed by all Christians.

My opinion is that the part on What one must believe to be saved did not insist that from the moment one comes to Jesus one should be fully familiar and conversant on all those issues.

I think you wrongly exploited the paragraph to portray it as hyper sectarian. But this could only be done by purposely ignoring other sections of the same pamphlet which emphasized the bare basics of entering into salvation.

COMPARE:

In order to be saved, one must have a living faith in the Person and work of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Every genuinely saved one has what the Bible calls the “common faith” (Titus 1:4), which includes what we must believe in order to be saved: we must believe that the Bible is the complete divine revelation wholly inspired by God; that there is a unique Triune God, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit; that Jesus Christ is the Son of God incarnated to be a man; that Christ died on the cross for our sins, shedding His blood for our redemption; that on the third day He was bodily raised from the dead; that He has been exalted to the right hand of God and made the Lord of all; and that He is coming again for His own and to set up His kingdom on earth.”

This is your favorite paragraph from the book. It might be the only one you've studied in the whole publication.

COMPARE with this under Concerning Salvation:

In order to be saved, one must have a living contact with Jesus Christ. Therefore, in bringing unbelievers to salvation, we emphasize prayer and calling on the name of the Lord. According to Romans 10:9 and 10, if a man is to be saved, he must believe in his heart and confess with his mouth.

Once a person has been saved, he may have both the assurance of salvation and the security of salvation. Once we are saved, we are saved forever.

FURTHERMORE Our Hope was expressed as in believers' encrease in the spiritual life of Christ, not a mere encrease in knowledge - EVEN correct doctrinal knowledge.

Our Hope

The local churches hope that as many as are ordained by God to eternal life will believe in the Lord Jesus. The local churches hope that all regenerated Christians will seek the growth in life, not the mere increase of knowledge. The local churches hope that all seeking Christians will see the …

It’s really interesting that here we have sonship complaining that my posts about him avoiding answering questions in another thread are derailing this one ... but...when I agree with him and request that we both post in the “calling out sonship” thread, he immediately posts two “hairdrier” posts, back to back in here.

Now why would he do that do we think...

@divegeester

BY writing "hairdryer" that somehow proves you've gotten anywhere at all in false accusations against the local churches ... Still no pinpointing of a wrong Christian teaching with any effectiveness.

Only appeal to emotion and the gimmick of repetition as if repetition proves avoidance of your monotony means you have some successful argument.