Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by billwald, Jan 5, 2012.
DO denominations which create new doctrines worship a false god?
Only if the new doctrines deal with the God they claim to worship! If they are doctrines that distort and deny the true nature of the God of the Bible then they are indeed guilty of idolatry.
Bill, can you give us an example of new doctrines? Such as....
Yea, where are you going with this Bill?
Yes Bill, I was going to ask the same thing.
My usual rant. <G> Moses/God teaches in Deut 13 that Torah is God's canon and any "new" teaching constitutes leading the people to a false god. Romney and the guy from Nevada are teaching a false god.
But if Torah is God's Word and the truth, then the entire NT must also be judged by the Deut 13 standard. If anything in the NT contradicts Torah then it is teaching a false god. It annoys me when Christians use the NT to judge the validity of the Torah and the rest of the OT.
The covenants are cumulative. The new does not replace the old. The new can give new commentary on the old but the new can not contradict the old. Jesus never contradicted anything in the OT. His criticism was limited to contemporary teaching and practice.
Further, Jesus "knew" his OT in Hebrew and Aramaic and apparently taught from the Greek translation made by the 70.
I think much of the KJV was based on Tyndall and Tyndall was based on the Vulgate?
So when Jaigner's thread gives a sales pitch for http://www.cbeinternational.org/?q=content/i-believe-male-headship
and that essay makes no reference to the OT and proclaims
"A basic rule of sound hermeneutics requires that no biblical term or concept be infused with meanings foreign to it. For this reason, the meaning of head in the New Testament must be defined from within the New Testament itself. It cannot be assumed that the value of head in the English language as authority, leader or master carries over automatically into the New Testament's use of the same word head."
what we have is the blind leading the blind. The NT can't be the sole source of a new and binding DOCTRINE.
Yes I agree.....its a backward hermeneutic. NT trumps old testament. This always confounds me.
Here is my point, If you attempt to understand the Bible beginning from the New Testament and work backwards into the Old Testament you will have begun with a wrong hermeneutic.
From the same source: