The Dreaded “D” Word


In our day some Christians downplay and even despise doctrine. Caeli’s post helps us to think clearly about it.

MODCONSPIRACY


By observation from several professing Christians I have encountered in WP, I have come to the conclusion that devil, death, and deceiver pale in comparison with “doctrine” to be cringed when spoken of. I do not question some have truly given their lives to Jesus. However, it is headscratching when these “Born again” believers ascribe sticking to sound doctrine as being Pharisaical.

It is quite ironic really since the very people who call those who urge people to return to sound doctrine which is actually a biblical prescription of accountability, mirror the reaction of the Pharisees to the blind man who was healed,

“To this they replied, “You were steeped in sin at birth; how dare you lecture us!” And they threw him out.”

John 9:34

The common script actually sounds more like this,“How dare you judge me as if you yourself don’t sin?” See the astounding commonality? Others…

View original post 393 more words

40 thoughts on “The Dreaded “D” Word

  1. Doctrine is certainly a dirty word amongst many evangelicals these days, as evidenced by the posts we see here at WordPress (which are mostly of the milk/pablum variety that we should have been weaned from after the first couple of years of accepting Christ) and by the shows broadcast on TBN. The other side of the coin is that many of us who emphasize right doctrine/truth and discernment are often somewhat lacking in the grace department. Guilty as charged! I’ll claim the title of worst offender! The church definitely needs both sensibilities but it appears the grace folks have taken over. By the way, Maria, I often admire the way you try to balance truth with grace. You’re a good example for us!!!

    Liked by 5 people

  2. I agree wholeheartedly with the last couple of sentences. I have emailed Maria before about her gentleness which is something I definitely need to work on.

    We can try to be gracious to the best of our ability on WP but what we cannot avoid is that correction especially when it comes to doctrine is most often not easily taken and even worsened by the fact that our identity is reduced and becomes one with the screen. The other side of the coin is complete avoidance of doctrinal debate which equates to nothing less than compromise. In this matter, graciousness is in the eye of the beholder contingent on one’s maturity in Christ.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Good mornin Caeli,
      I read your article, and I agree with you that doctrine is vital.
      But as we previously discussed regarding “repentance,” it does not mean to turn from sin when we’re talking salvation. It means a change of mind.
      The problem with false religion is, they pervert doctrine. And make it mean something erroneous.
      Such as false doctrine’s definition of “repentance” and faith for salvation… means “turn from sin” + have faith in Christ to be saved.
      That doctrine will send a person to hell if they genuinely believe that.

      So I totally agree, true doctrine is vital. While false doctrine is damning.

      Like

      • I agreed to your definition Lee, change of mind. Since we are stuck in the sin body for the mean time even when our spirits desire to carry out God’s righteousness, we can try to avoid sin but we sin regardless and therefore, continual repentance is necessary. It is not “works” but rather a response to the Holy Spirit’s conviction and as scripture says in 1 John 1:9, He is faithful and will cleanse us from all our unrighteousness.

        There are more damning doctrine circulating than sound doctrine as prophesied to us that will occur in the last days, these times we happen to be living in and this is why believers should step in boldness to counteract the false doctrine.

        Liked by 3 people

        • That’s all I was trying to do, was to counteract the false doctrine of works salvation that says one must repent of sins to be saved.

          Just as you pointed out, (similar to Romans 7) paraphrased…I don’t want to sin, but I keep sinning because of the power of sin that resides in my unredeemed flesh.

          No one can claim they don’t sin, and equally errantly…add their efforts of restraining their flesh to Christ’s atonement.

          A big reason repent of sins is embraced for salvation, is because of the wording in false bible versions.
          The king James has doctrine correct. There, you’ll frequently find God having repented. And of course He wasn’t turning from sin. He has no sin.
          Read Jonah 3.10 in the king James, that’s a perfect example…”And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.”
          As a bonus in that verse…it clearly expresses that turning from evil ways…is works.
          And no one is justified by their works.

          We apparently differ on the meaning of 1 John 1.9, but I’m not going to divert to that topic. No problem.

          And I state very boldly, Christians should always turn away from sin in the power of the Spirit. It’s God’s will 100% of the time for His children. 😃

          Like

          • King James Only-ism which obviously you hold to is a false doctrine. For you to assert all the other versions are not trustworthy equates to you practically damning people who read the NKJV, ESV, NASB, CSB, MEV etc. when these translations updated words and expressions that have changed through time so we can undertand it clearly.

            If you simply say you prefer the KJV, fine. But to tell people King James is the only translation to be read? You can easily mistake a discussion/debate to mean strife with that version. Who knows what else?

            I don’t agree with the gender neutral revisions in newer translations but I will not go as far as telling people to read only the King James like you do. For all we know, you could be reading a newer translation for a parallel. I understand the language in the KJV but it is not my preferred translation.

            I know you hold tightly to your belief so if you want to keep asserting, I have already stated my thoughts on the matter.

            Liked by 4 people

            • I just want to clarify what I believe about that.
              I used to use the modern versions, the NASB being my former main version.

              I’m not going to convince you, I’m just informing you that I wasn’t always KJV.

              And I don’t believe that people who use other versions aren’t saved. I have been blessed by several people who use other versions.
              I no longer use other versions because of their wording that is anti Christ.

              And I do not use any other versions in addition to my KJV.

              Hopefully that clears things up. 😃

              Like

              • Well, I look at it this way. If you believe the other translations are corrupt, it could only mean everyone else has been corrupted doctrinally since they are reading “anti Christ” wording. In a nutshell, you are saying new versions are demonic and if a person reads such a thing, it would make them damned. You worded it differently so as not to offend but I get what you mean. I’m not offended though just so you know.

                Anyway, have a pleasant weekend!

                Liked by 3 people

                • While I do appreciate the KJV I do prefer the NASB as the most literal. But I wouldn’t say NASB is perfect (nor my own translation as I have to update it multiple times to account for the Grammar, syntax and smoothing it out for the English).
                  I know there’s different kinds of guys who are KJVO, some seeing 1611 was an act of divine inspiration and others because of textual issues yet still others because of translation purposes. Lee I’m not trying to be polemical, but may I ask what led you to KJVO?

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Maria, in the entirety of our conversation, I was only trying to help you from a heart of kindness. Never was I intending to be insulting towards you.

                  Like

                • Lee, here I was commenting to you about what you’re implying about contemporary translators when you describe their work as “anti Christ.”

                  I think you believe what you’re saying about being kind to me, but do you want to share the substance of your emails to me? What you believe about me?

                  Liked by 1 person

                • You can reveal whatever you like about the emails. I emailed you so as to not put you on the spot publicly, as a courtesy to you. If you’ll re read them, you’ll see that I told you that I believe that you’re a kind person, and my intent wasn’t to insult you.
                  My concern in my message to you was that I wanted you to be saved.
                  As I discussed the hazards of Calvinism, (which I too once believed).
                  If you’re trusting only in the Lord Jesus Christ’s finished work, you are saved.
                  My concern for you, was that you were trusting in the reformed perspective of repentance of sins in addition to faith for salvation.
                  If you’re saved, that’s wonderful, and I misunderstood your beliefs.
                  And if I offended you, please forgive me.
                  But my only concern was for you…not to insult you.

                  Like

                • No ma’am, I don’t believe that you believe in attaining to sinless perfection.
                  I was referring to a person believing that one must try to repent of sins in addition to faith to get saved.

                  Like

                • Lee, Jesus found me in my sins and gave me new birth through His Word, the Gospel. I believed and repented. That’s not works. I didn’t say, Lord, I’ve tried to obey you, here’s what I’ve done, but said, Lord, I messed up my life, would you fix it?

                  Liked by 1 person

      • Wow Lee, you claimed that for you debate is bad because of your KJV yet you don’t have a problem coming to someone else’s post and debate. It is not a good thing to contradict yourself. If debating is wrong for then what are you doing?

        Liked by 4 people

        • Was I being argumentative?
          Didn’t I purposefully not discuss our differences on 1 John 1.9?

          That comment I made was associated to a previous discussion I had with her about the meaning of repentance. I was only clarifying that she meant repentance in the way that she’d previously stated it to mean. Lest someone misunderstand what she was relating in this article.

          Like

          • I’m shaking my head because you continue to this day to misunderstand the word debate. Stop defining words in the outdated translation because a lot of the meaning of the Kings James English has changed. Debate simply means to present your arguments for why you believe what you believe. You sir are debating your stands on repentance. There’s nothing wrong with debating one’s arguments in a respectful way but I would suggest to either update your blog and take out your statement that you don’t debate or stay away from giving people your point of view because that’s debating or in others words arguing your belief’s on any Biblical topic. The best thing Lee is to be true to your word.

            Liked by 3 people

      • Tom, I accept your apology though I have long forgotten it. We stand on the same team and as evidenced in Maria’s post with apologists we see to be sound and being drawn away by the working of the spirit of the Antichrist, now is the time that calls for cohesion. Bless you, brother.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. Repentance means “changing one’s mind” and that is true. God changed His mind and staid His hand of judgement on a repentant people. What is it to repent? To turn from sin because the person has changed his mind about it. Uh-oh. “That’s ‘works’!” No, its a gift given by God: “Repentance is a grace of God’s Spirit whereby a sinner is inwardly humbled and visibly reformed.” ~ Thomas Watson. For those who do not believe repentance is vital to coming to Christ for salvation then read your Bible! Look up verses concerning repentance and salvation together. Like this verse:

    2 Corinthians 7:10 (NKJV)
    10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.

    To repent, in relation to salvation, is to change your mind in regard to Jesus Christ….If repentance wasn’t necessary for salvation, why then did Jesus command that repentance be preached to all nations (Luke 24:47)?
    Why Repentance is Needed for Salvation https://xmassh8trsblog.wordpress.com/2017/05/29/why-repentance-is-needed-for-salvation/

    As for KJVOnlyism, the crux of that false doctrine is predicated on lies about Westcott and Hort and misquoting them to make them appear more evil than they ever were (that’s slander and slanderers do not enter God’s Kingdom). It was started by a cult leader. Psalm 12 is misinterpreted to make its case that the KJV is the ONLY preserved Word of God. Even the original translators would condemn the idolatry of KJVOnlyism. Gail Riplinger, a woman who has no theology degrees, though she would have you believe she does by her “Dr.” title, has been divorced a couple of times and is currently living in adultery, has deceived the KJVO camp that all modern translations are per-versions. True scholars, who know their Greek and Aramaic, have tried to warn people not to fall for her un-scholarly bunk.

    It would be best to research a particular stand BEFORE taking up its cause and spreading the damnable lies/heresies. And STOP LISTENING TO STEVEN ANDERSON’s preaching! His fruit is hate-filled! Caps for emphasis-yes, I’m shouting! That’s what watchmen do sometimes in warning of danger.

    Have a blessed day, everyone! \o/

    Liked by 3 people

    • Dear Sherry, a watchmen! Thank you for giving a solid Biblical response to both fallacies: KJVOnlyism and faith without repentance. I’ve been reading the comments here to my husband and he asked me to let you know that he appreciates this comment a lot.

      Awhile back, I was a KJVOnly person and followed a blogger who fought for this mistaken cause. A blogging pastor confronted me about this and suggested a book which I read. It helped me greatly, especially in seeing that contemporary translations exalt the Lord Jesus Christ and why we need them.

      I’m so happy to have your insights from serious study.

      Liked by 3 people

      • YW! All praises to our Beloved Lord! \o/

        I also was almost convinced about the KJVO belief. It didn’t quite set right with me but because I desire truth I went about researching it before agreeing with it. I like the KJV but I use the NKJV because I believe it exalts our God, who is not a man, by capitalizing the “He” and “Him” and “His,” and also helps me to distinguish between a prophet speaking his own words among the words of God in the prophetical books. Did I tell you that I read Nehemiah 8:8? That is a great example of bringing God’s Word up-to-date so the listeners can understand it in their own “modern-day” language. Its time to put a stop to demonizing new translations just because they are “new.”

        Liked by 1 person

  4. uh, Lee…you say Maria is not saved because she believes in Calvinism? Calvinism is just a name given to the biblical teaching of election found in Scripture. You, sir, are in dire need of a love for doctrine! And the doctrine of salvation should be the first one you look into!

    Liked by 1 person

Please share your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s