Church of Christ: Cult,sect or true

[Guest yod]

Luther and Kittel are examples of those who twisted and perverted theology and Scripture to fit their own agenda.

And I suppose this is my point. Scripture can't be twisted without help from theology.

Micah 6:8

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

Uh, yeah that is a theological statement.

maybe so...but theology is still not mentioned.

Theology is that which explains the person and nature of God. Essentially, when the Bible is telling us about God, THAT is theology.

I think you are operating from a false premise of what theology is.

I know what you're saying and don't disagree with that broadest of definitions. I still say that every place there is a problem of misunderstanding, error, or manipulation it is caused by a theological philosophy changing the simple Word of God.

And given the choice between a humble man that can't explain theology and a brilliant theologian who is not humble...I'll take the humble man anyday.

[Guest shiloh357]

Are you saying that there is no false doctrine?

False docrtrine is of human origin. It is, technically speaking, not doctrine at all.

Doctrine is mans idea of what scripture is saying.

No, it is not. The Deity of Jesus is a doctrine. It is a teaching of Scripture and not the product of human imagination or nor is it human in origin. No biblical doctrine is the product of the ideas, imagination, motivation or impulse of man.

It is not scripture itself, something to follow, but what scripture means to them, which could be a correct understand of scripture or not. Doctrine only defines the belief of a person or a group of people.

No, that is not true. That is the the wrong definition of doctrine. Doctrine is properly defined as those teachings of Scripture that provide a foundation for practical Christian living. Doctrine comes from the Bible. You cannot separate the two.

[OneLight]

Are you saying that there is no false doctrine?

False docrtrine is of human origin. It is, technically speaking, not doctrine at all.

Doctrine is mans idea of what scripture is saying.

No, it is not. The Deity of Jesus is a doctrine. It is a teaching of Scripture and not the product of human imagination or nor is it human in origin. No biblical doctrine is the product of the ideas, imagination, motivation or impulse of man.

It is not scripture itself, something to follow, but what scripture means to them, which could be a correct understand of scripture or not. Doctrine only defines the belief of a person or a group of people.

No, that is not true. That is the the wrong definition of doctrine. Doctrine is properly defined as those teachings of Scripture that provide a foundation for practical Christian living. Doctrine comes from the Bible. You cannot separate the two.

Well, there is the possibility the dictionary is wrong and you are right ...

doc⋅trine

[Guest shiloh357]

Luther and Kittel are examples of those who twisted and perverted theology and Scripture to fit their own agenda.

And I suppose this is my point. Scripture can't be twisted without help from theology.

Theology doesn't twist Scripture. Sinners do.

QUOTE

Micah 6:8

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.

Uh, yeah that is a theological statement.

maybe so...but theology is still not mentioned.

irrelevant. It is still a theological statement. Theology is derived from the Bible. It is not antagonistic to it.

I still say that every place there is a problem of misunderstanding, error, or manipulation it is caused by a theological philosophy changing the simple Word of God.

More accurately, it is caused by a person mishandling Scripture. Theology is not philosophy per se.

[Guest shiloh357]

Are you saying that there is no false doctrine?

False docrtrine is of human origin. It is, technically speaking, not doctrine at all.

Doctrine is mans idea of what scripture is saying.

No, it is not. The Deity of Jesus is a doctrine. It is a teaching of Scripture and not the product of human imagination or nor is it human in origin. No biblical doctrine is the product of the ideas, imagination, motivation or impulse of man.

It is not scripture itself, something to follow, but what scripture means to them, which could be a correct understand of scripture or not. Doctrine only defines the belief of a person or a group of people.

No, that is not true. That is the the wrong definition of doctrine. Doctrine is properly defined as those teachings of Scripture that provide a foundation for practical Christian living. Doctrine comes from the Bible. You cannot separate the two.

Well, there is the possibility the dictionary is wrong and you are right ...

doc⋅trine

[Guest yod]

irrelevant. It is still a theological statement

I know you are but what am I?

:::sticks fingers in ears and sticks out tongue:::: :24:

[OneLight]

Are you saying that there is no false doctrine?

False docrtrine is of human origin. It is, technically speaking, not doctrine at all.

Doctrine is mans idea of what scripture is saying.

No, it is not. The Deity of Jesus is a doctrine. It is a teaching of Scripture and not the product of human imagination or nor is it human in origin. No biblical doctrine is the product of the ideas, imagination, motivation or impulse of man.

It is not scripture itself, something to follow, but what scripture means to them, which could be a correct understand of scripture or not. Doctrine only defines the belief of a person or a group of people.

No, that is not true. That is the the wrong definition of doctrine. Doctrine is properly defined as those teachings of Scripture that provide a foundation for practical Christian living. Doctrine comes from the Bible. You cannot separate the two.

Well, there is the possibility the dictionary is wrong and you are right ...

doc⋅trine

[Guest shiloh357]

Of course you would find it ironic, but then again, I do not base my faith on scripture from the dictionary either

I didn't say you based on your faith on it, but I find it helpful to note that you cannot provide a scriptural example of biblical doctrine defined as human teaching.

Tell me then Bro, why is there so many different doctrines?

Different doctrines? They're aren't. What you have are different applications of doctrines. There is only one Bible and one set of doctrines contained in it.

Which one is correct? The Roman Catholic Church, the Baptist, the Assembly of God, the Lutheran, the Seven Day Adventist, the Anabaptist, the Congregationalist, the Methodists, the Presbyterians?

Those groups do not represent different doctrines, but different applications of the only set of doctrines that exist.

These are just to mention a few, which they all very. So, which one has the true doctrine?

Again, you are operating from a wrong premise of what doctrine is. You are treating biblical doctrine as a human teaching and it isn't. Your question is flawed because it is based on a flawed premise.

[Guest shiloh357]

irrelevant. It is still a theological statement

I know you are but what am I?

:::sticks fingers in ears and sticks out tongue:::: :24:

[OneLight]

Of course you would find it ironic, but then again, I do not base my faith on scripture from the dictionary either

I didn't say you based on your faith on it, but I find it helpful to note that you cannot provide a scriptural example of biblical doctrine defined as human teaching.

2 Peter 2:1

[ Destructive Doctrines ] But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.

Tell me then Bro, why is there so many different doctrines?

Different doctrines? They're aren't. What you have are different applications of doctrines. There is only one Bible and one set of doctrines contained in it.

Wow, I never thought you would agree with the doctrine of the Mormons or the Jehovah Witnesses or the Roman Catholic Churches. You do surprise me, Bro.

Which one is correct? The Roman Catholic Church, the Baptist, the Assembly of God, the Lutheran, the Seven Day Adventist, the Anabaptist, the Congregationalist, the Methodists, the Presbyterians?

Those groups do not represent different doctrines, but different applications of the only set of doctrines that exist.

Such tunnel vision is not healthy

These are just to mention a few, which they all very. So, which one has the true doctrine?

Again, you are operating from a wrong premise of what doctrine is. You are treating biblical doctrine as a human teaching and it isn't. Your question is flawed because it is based on a flawed premise.

The only reason why you take offense with me is that I see "doctrine" differently then you do. If I were to just use your definition, then I would agree. If use what the definition really means, then I can not. I choose to use the fullness of the word. Doctrine is what people hold to that describes their belief system. One doctrine I know you do not believe in is that one must be baptized in order to have salvation. That is the doctrine of some churches, derived from their understanding of scripture, yet false, derived from man.