Cardinal Doctrines, and the next most important doctrines are...?

[Carbon]

Agreed ... I cause myself to do nothing in order to be saved, but I do things as an effect of my salvation. The things I do as an effect I have addressed.
It is getting into semantics. I DO THINGS ... I think you are getting into the WHY I do things.

Wait a minute now. You Do things? Why haven't you ever mentioned this before?

 

[fastfredy0]

Wait a minute now. You Do things? Why haven't you ever mentioned this before?

I am not sure what is behind the question so my response may be off...

Of course I do things. A hammer does things too.
I was getting into the cause of me doing things. We believe it is all God's work when it comes to our salvation but when it comes to other things we tend to think we are the First Cause.
I believe God is the cause of all things. I don't believe in a God who does not actively sustain universe. I believe He is constantly causing everything. If he was to vanish, so would the universe. I suppose He causes things to recur over and over again so our simple minds can collect the observations and use them to our benefit. But He could just as easily enable us to walk on water or be nourished by eating rocks.

I can give verses to back it up the general thesis (not specific illustrations like we can eat rocks (giggle). It's a minority opinion.

 

[Mr GLee]

I would say yes.
For example a person can admit they are a sinner in need of salvation....and call on the name of Jesus not knowing Jesus is God come in the flesh.
At a later date when this doctrine is presented....the Word was God and with God, and became flesh along with the many other verses that indicate Jesus is the creator God the concept should be a no-brainer. If one later hears the biblical doctrine of the divinity of Christ and refuses to believe it...then they are extremely deceived or were never saved to begin with.

If someone is preaching a gospel where Jesus was simply a mere man and not God....there is no salvation in that message as a mere finite man could not pay the ransom for the eternal consequences the bible speaks of.

I would offer we miraculously can preach. Christ alone is the one good teacher that works within dying mankind .

Its by hearing the gospel as Christ Spirit of faith applies the power..

Isaiah 29:18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.

Christ's labor of love working in us .We are empowered to believe.

Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Romans 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law (gospel) shall also perish without law: (gospel) and as many as have sinned in the law (gospel) shall be judged by the law;( gospel )

In that way the law or gospel is the power of Christ living in believers.

Roma 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

 

[CrowCross]

I would offer we miraculously can preach. Christ alone is the one good teacher that works within dying mankind .

Its by hearing the gospel as Christ Spirit of faith applies the power..

Isaiah 29:18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.

Christ's labor of love working in us .We are empowered to believe.

Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Romans 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law (gospel) shall also perish without law: (gospel) and as many as have sinned in the law (gospel) shall be judged by the law;( gospel )

In that way the law or gospel is the power of Christ living in believers.

Roma 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Then Jesus said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to Me unless the Father has granted it to him.” John 6:65.

 

[Binyawmene]

Of course I do things. A hammer does things too.

Not sure a hammer is a good analogy because its passive.

Take another example of the "hand in the glove." The hand is the Holy Spirit and the glove is you. Like when you are "in" the Holy Spirit, or the glove is "in" the hand. The hand has the power to be active, moving and doing all the leading while the glove is totally passive. Do you take the Holy Spirit for a walk, or do you lead the Holy Spirit? I suppose only thing different is that the Holy Spirit can be grieve, and never forces and only promote you to be led by him.

 

[Binyawmene]

I believe John 20:31, 1 John 2:22, 1 John 4:3 and 1 John 5:13 support the idea that one must believe Christ is divine.

Amen. You believe Jesus is the Divine Messiah.

And also, 1 John 5:1 Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.

 

[Arial]

What hill is worth dying on, here? Are the cardinal doctrines absolute but only what is orthodox —pretty much common to all (or most) Christian churches for the last however many hundred years?

List what you take for cardinal doctrines, and maybe more to the point, what you think is absolute. And why do you think so?

Consider, for example, the Reformed doctrine of the Sovereignty of God. Not many disagree —in words, at least— that God is sovereign. So are we going to say that whatever anyone means by Sovereignty of God is ok? Or are we to pursue it to "what it really means", before considering it a hill to die on?


Does 'cardinal doctrine' mean that one cannot be saved if denying any of them?

Can one be saved that has not denied, but is not aware of one or more of the cardinal doctrines?


Here are what some consider as Cardinal Doctrines, my comments in italics:

1) The Trinity – There is one God in three persons. Of course, but what does that mean?​

​

2) The Person of Jesus Christ – Jesus is fully man and fully God for all eternity. Was Jesus fully man in eternity past? Is he even now human in the same sense that we will be, in heaven? Is Jesus being fully human in Heaven mean the same thing that being fully human on earth means?​

​

3) Salvation – It is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.​

​

4) The Scripture – It is entirely inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life.​

​

5) The Second Coming of Christ – Jesus Christ is coming back to earth to rule and judge.​

(list from Doctrines of the Christian Faith | Biblical Christianity)

That's pretty much what I was raised on, but have come to see that it may have been assembled in the last 200 years or so. Is that an essential list —that is, is it possible to disbelieve one or more of these and still be saved? Or does 'essential' mean that they are hills to die on, but not necessarily that one cannot be saved that disagrees, or maybe is unaware of, one of these.

I am left a little out on the margins here, because while I agree all those are essential, I don't think that they all are necessary for someone to understand, to be saved. And there seems to be a lot missing from the list, and a couple of things not even a hill to die on. Even raised semi-Wesleyan/Arminian, I was taught, for example, sovereignty as absolute (at least in words).

My list goes more like this:

1) There is one God, creator of all else. (This fact includes all others concerning God. For example, this implies that there can be no other self-existent fact.)​

​

2) God created for his own purposes, and submitted his creation to frustration​

​

3) The man, Jesus Christ, is God​

​

4) Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone​

​

5) God's purpose for creation is to make a people for himself, who will live with him and he with them.​

​

But I don't claim that anyone cannot be saved until they agree with all those.

​

And, Christ, one needs to understand what it means to be in Adam and our inherited sin nature.

I believe the first and foremost non-negotiable in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity and the fully God, fully human person of Jesus. Without that, the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and return of Christ is meaningless. To agree to it without those doctrines is mere verbal consent. If Jesus is not both God and man he could not affect redemption of anyone. If he was only a man, only a teacher, only a prophet, he himself would have a sin nature, and could substitute his life for no one's life. Not even his own. Of course, standing right next to that is the doctrine the fall of all mankind in Adam.

 

[Carbon]

I believe the first and foremost non-negotiable in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity and the fully God, fully human person of Jesus.

I agree.
Amen!

 

[fastfredy0]

I suppose only thing different is that the Holy Spirit can be grieve, and never forces and only promote you to be led by him.

I liked your analogy. I also agree with the statement above, but maybe for different reasons. The Spirit never forces a person the reason being that God has determined your desires and thus you do what you want, and what you want to do was determined by God by "programming" your desires. Example: you didn't chose to have a 'sin nature'.

Aside: God does force you at times. Example: Jonah didn't want to go to Ninivah (Sp?), but God forced his hand.
Aside 2: The Spirit never grieves as in at times He is saddened and at other times He is not saddened. That would contradict His immutability. "Grieve" would be a anthropormorphism.

 

[makesends]

I believe the first and foremost non-negotiable in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity and the fully God, fully human person of Jesus. Without that, the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and return of Christ is meaningless. To agree to it without those doctrines is mere verbal consent. If Jesus is not both God and man he could not affect redemption of anyone. If he was only a man, only a teacher, only a prophet, he himself would have a sin nature, and could substitute his life for no one's life. Not even his own. Of course, standing right next to that is the doctrine the fall of all mankind in Adam.

Non-negotiable, yes, but are you saying that someone who is saved cannot continue to disbelieve in them?

 

[CrowCross]

I believe the first and foremost non-negotiable in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity and the fully God, fully human person of Jesus. Without that, the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and return of Christ is meaningless. To agree to it without those doctrines is mere verbal consent. If Jesus is not both God and man he could not affect redemption of anyone. If he was only a man, only a teacher, only a prophet, he himself would have a sin nature, and could substitute his life for no one's life. Not even his own. Of course, standing right next to that is the doctrine the fall of all mankind in Adam.

Excellent response.

As you said....If Jesus is not both God and man he could not affect redemption of anyone.

 

[makesends]

I believe the first and foremost non-negotiable in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity and the fully God, fully human person of Jesus. Without that, the crucifixion, resurrection, ascension, and return of Christ is meaningless. To agree to it without those doctrines is mere verbal consent. If Jesus is not both God and man he could not affect redemption of anyone. If he was only a man, only a teacher, only a prophet, he himself would have a sin nature, and could substitute his life for no one's life. Not even his own. Of course, standing right next to that is the doctrine the fall of all mankind in Adam.

But the argument of some is that he was an angel only (Gabriel, I think they say), and not God. Thus a sinless substitute. Can you show the reasoning, or scripture, as to why even an angel could not do it, but only God himself?

 

[Binyawmene]

I also agree with the statement above, but maybe for different reasons.

Yeah, we are probably speaking pass each other. I was more focused on regeneration being monergistic in nature. And no "grieving the Spirit" and "you do things" is involved. Being born again is the work of God alone.

1. God's will made us born again: (James 1:18)
2. God given it to us: (1 Peter 1:3)
3. Not a perishable seed (1 Peter 1:23, John 6:63)
4. Not a written letter (Romans 2:28, 7:6, 2 Corinthians 3:6-8)
5. Not a second physical birth (John 3:3-6)
6. You don't inherit it, not your own will, or another man's will (John 1:13)
7. Not by our own righteousness (Titus 3:5)
8. Not performed by human hands (Colossians 2:11)​

You can only enter into the kingdom of God by WATER AND SPIRIT (John 3:5) and not through FLESH AND BLOOD (1 Corinthians 15:50) or the physical birth. However, I do believe the "Deity of Christ" ('the Divine Messiah,' so to speak) is an essential doctrine of the Christian faith. A non-regenerate people cannot say, "Jesus is LORD" (John 8:24, 1 Corinthians 12:3, Romans 10:9, Philippians 2:11) unless the people become regenerated and has the Holy Spirit living in their lives. From my position, believing in the Deity of Christ through the doctrines like the Trinity/Hypostatic Union isn't the cause of regeneration, but the result of one who is already regenerated. And I based this on the Scriptural examples:

1. showing righteousness (1 John 2:29)
2. showing love (1 John 4:7)
3. not repeating sins (1 John 3:9, 5:18)
4. overcoming the world through faith (1 John 5:4)
5. believes Jesus is the Christ (1 John 5:1)​

 

[Arial]

But the argument of some is that he was an angel only (Gabriel, I think they say), and not God. Thus a sinless substitute. Can you show the reasoning, or scripture, as to why even an angel could not do it, but only God himself?

Because angels are also creatures. They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it. Angels simply do not have enough value, as creatures, for their death to atone for our sinfulness of being sinful creatures in Adam and also our personal sins, past present and future.

"In the beginning was God and the Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:1-4) 14? "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Angels are not God. They are his servants.

 

[Arial]

Non-negotiable, yes, but are you saying that someone who is saved cannot continue to disbelieve in them?

There are those who have no understanding of it; there are those who have never had the deity of Christ taught or have not heard it. (A shameful neglect of many of our churches today, and the "shepherds" that stand in our pullpits, and has given rise to a growth in unitarianism. Those institutions do teach about it, but against it. And because they use Scripture but not the whole counsel of God, many are easily deceived.); and there are those who have not been taught of the Trinity but sort of see it themselves at least in the sense that Jesus is other than a creature. And then there are those who are adamantly and loudly opposed to the deity of Christ and fight the idea, willing to die on that hill.

God looks at our hearts and he is the judge in the matter. But I firmly believe, as a monergist, that when God brings his people to Christ, he is faithful to give them what they need, in their hearts if not in their knowledge and understanding. And to grow them as he sees fit for his purposes.

 

[makesends]

Because angels are also creatures. They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it. Angels simply do not have enough value, as creatures, for their death to atone for our sinfulness of being sinful creatures in Adam and also our personal sins, past present and future.

"In the beginning was God and the Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:1-4) 14? "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Angels are not God. They are his servants.

Amen THAT! Well done. Winner! A mere creature cannot accomplish this.

"They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it." Further, though it says that God raised Jesus from the dead, and not to say that God would not be willing to raise such a being from the dead, but we see that the contract between the members of the trinity was for this very thing, and all time and creation centers around it. This is no small deal where some mere "great being" receives all glory, power and praise, when God is a jealous God, and giving such praise and ascribing such glory to mere creatures is prohibited by God throughout history.

 

[CrowCross]

Amen THAT! Well done. Winner! A mere creature cannot accomplish this.

"They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it." Further, though it says that God raised Jesus from the dead, and not to say that God would not be willing to raise such a being from the dead, but we see that the contract between the members of the trinity was for this very thing, and all time and creation centers around it. This is no small deal where some mere "great being" receives all glory, power and praise, when God is a jealous God, and giving such praise and ascribing such glory to mere creatures is prohibited by God throughout history.

I agree. BTW Arials post was well done.

To add...

This is what God the LORD says—He who created the heavens and stretched them out....
I am the LORD; that is My name! I will not yield My glory to another or My praise to idols. Isaiah 42:8

As we know, God didn't yield His glory to Jesus....as Jesus already had the glory of God from before the world began.

The only time Jesus didn't have the glory was during his incarnation in which He appeared in the kenosis as a servant to God the Father. (Phil 2:7)
With the exception of the Mt. of Transfiguration event.

 

[makesends]

Because angels are also creatures. They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it. Angels simply do not have enough value, as creatures, for their death to atone for our sinfulness of being sinful creatures in Adam and also our personal sins, past present and future.

"In the beginning was God and the Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men." (John 1:1-4) 14? "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us."

Angels are not God. They are his servants.

And, for some of those who might read this, angels cannot "BECOME" God. If something can become god, they are not then, God, because they are still not self-existing (if for no other obvious reasons).

But God can (and did) become creature, the firstborn. @Mr GLee , this does not mean that Jesus had to later become born again. I hope, from this principle if not from a few others, that you can understand why I say that.

 

[Arial]

Amen THAT! Well done. Winner! A mere creature cannot accomplish this.

"They are not life and do not have life in themselves. Therefore they cannot give it." Further, though it says that God raised Jesus from the dead, and not to say that God would not be willing to raise such a being from the dead, but we see that the contract between the members of the trinity was for this very thing, and all time and creation centers around it. This is no small deal where some mere "great being" receives all glory, power and praise, when God is a jealous God, and giving such praise and ascribing such glory to mere creatures is prohibited by God throughout history.

Also, God never provided any redemption for angels that fell (which is maybe why the rest of them keep their station ). If we stick with the theory of the heresy that an angel became human as Jesus, in order to work redemption for angels, an angel would have to become an angel. And if Jesus was always an angel come in the flesh, why wouldn't that also redeem fallen angels?

In addition, when Gabriel (who is supposedly Jesus in JW) was speaking to Mary he did not say I will overshadow you and you will conceive a child, but that the Holy Spirit would.

 

[David1701]

What hill is worth dying on, here? Are the cardinal doctrines absolute but only what is orthodox —pretty much common to all (or most) Christian churches for the last however many hundred years?

List what you take for cardinal doctrines, and maybe more to the point, what you think is absolute. And why do you think so?

Consider, for example, the Reformed doctrine of the Sovereignty of God. Not many disagree —in words, at least— that God is sovereign. So are we going to say that whatever anyone means by Sovereignty of God is ok? Or are we to pursue it to "what it really means", before considering it a hill to die on?


Does 'cardinal doctrine' mean that one cannot be saved if denying any of them?

Can one be saved that has not denied, but is not aware of one or more of the cardinal doctrines?


Here are what some consider as Cardinal Doctrines, my comments in italics:

1) The Trinity – There is one God in three persons. Of course, but what does that mean?​

​

2) The Person of Jesus Christ – Jesus is fully man and fully God for all eternity. Was Jesus fully man in eternity past? Is he even now human in the same sense that we will be, in heaven? Is Jesus being fully human in Heaven mean the same thing that being fully human on earth means?​

​

3) Salvation – It is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.​

​

4) The Scripture – It is entirely inerrant and sufficient for all Christian life.​

​

5) The Second Coming of Christ – Jesus Christ is coming back to earth to rule and judge.​

(list from Doctrines of the Christian Faith | Biblical Christianity)

That's pretty much what I was raised on, but have come to see that it may have been assembled in the last 200 years or so. Is that an essential list —that is, is it possible to disbelieve one or more of these and still be saved? Or does 'essential' mean that they are hills to die on, but not necessarily that one cannot be saved that disagrees, or maybe is unaware of, one of these.

I am left a little out on the margins here, because while I agree all those are essential, I don't think that they all are necessary for someone to understand, to be saved. And there seems to be a lot missing from the list, and a couple of things not even a hill to die on. Even raised semi-Wesleyan/Arminian, I was taught, for example, sovereignty as absolute (at least in words).

My list goes more like this:

1) There is one God, creator of all else. (This fact includes all others concerning God. For example, this implies that there can be no other self-existent fact.)​

​

2) God created for his own purposes, and submitted his creation to frustration​

​

3) The man, Jesus Christ, is God​

​

4) Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone​

​

5) God's purpose for creation is to make a people for himself, who will live with him and he with them.​

​

But I don't claim that anyone cannot be saved until they agree with all those.

​

And, no doubt, tomorrow I will think of others. My problem is, those are all interrelated and some perhaps even redundant. And what I mean by those 5 will necessarily include further corollary facts, 'upon which hills I am willing to die'.

Lists? Thoughts?

For a sinner to be saved, he must believe...

1) That God exists

2) That he is a sinner against God

3) That Jesus is God and man

4) That Jesus shed his blood and died on the cross to bear his (the sinner's) sins and punishment

5) He must believe that Jesus rose from the dead

6) He must not only accept that the above are facts, but he must believe in Jesus with all his heart

There are other vital doctrines, but they are not needed for initial salvation.