Featured How far do you take SEPARATION doctrine?

Sorry DHK I meant to be quoting Evan. That's what I get for doing this on my phone and not a computer

 

Would say that we must seperate over core/essential doctrines of the faith, but remain graceful in those other issues that we just honestly disagree the scriptures are teaching us!

Would ou seperate if a church did not hold to LS, or if they were arminian?

 

Abortion isn't part of the Gospel.

 

Perhaps your pastor already has a lot of discernment.

 

I did not realize Baptist Churches were joined to non-Baptist Churches. Why should they be?

 

Extreme ideas and practices of separation are rather silly. I know Protestants, including Baptists, think they are so different from each other and from Roman Catholics, but they are not. They share much the same soteriology, especially as concerns the atonement, as all the Western churches do. Concerning the atonement, there is not a dime's worth of difference between them.

 

I believe we are talking more or ecclesiastical separation.
If you are a pastor who would you invite to preach in your pulpit?
Is it someone that believes so differently that it may sway new believers to leave your church, cause a church split, etc.
A charsimatic speaking on tongues? A Presbyterian emphasizing covenants and perhaps baptismal regeneration (as Calvin believed), a Baptist KJVO who says that the King James is better than the Greek and Hebrew, etc.
What kind of smorgasbord doctrine do you, as the shepherd of you flock, allow your flock to feed on? Do you feed them weeds, even noxious ones? Weeds that will poison them? Or just the pure milk and then meat of the Word of God, as a shepherd should. Guard the pulpit carefully.

 

If the conversation is more about ecclesiastical separation, then your point is more valid.

 

That is what it was about. I have already posted in this thread concerning ecclesiastical separation. That is what the OP is about:

What makes you think it has nothing to do with church separation?

 

A divisive attitude by the leadership of a church can make a relatively non-essential issue become an essential issue that divides a church. So any issue or any difference can be made essential to fellowship if a divisive attitude is present by leadership or by members.

However, there are things that the Scriptures place emphasis upon that ought to be issues that divide brethren from brethren. In 1 Cor. 5:11 it is a "brother" that is to be separated from who is characterized by the issues listed. In 2 Thes. 3:6 it is a "brother" who is to be withdrawn from which habitually continues in defiance against apostolic commands. In Matthew 18:15-20 it is a "brother" who is to be confronted and separated from or treated like a "heathen" or a "publican" in regard to fellowship.

There are issues that the scriptures clearly and explicitly demand are "must" issues (Jn. 3:3; 4:24; Rom. 13:5; 1 Tim. 3:7; etc.) or issues that are absolutely essential (Lk. 13:3,6; Gal. 1:8-9; 1 Jn. 1:1-6; etc.) which separation from a "brother" is necessary so that his leaven of false doctrine does not leaven the whole church (Rom. 16:17-18).

The gospel and gospel ordinances are definitely issues for breaking fellowship with other churches (Gal. 1:8-9). For two to walk together there must be essential issues of fellowship they share in common with each other (Eph. 4:4-7; Heb. 6:1-2; 1 Tim. 3:15-4:6; etc.).

We are not to fellowship with the world (system of thought and deeds that oppose God) and when churches embrace such a system into their beliefs and practices they too become objects that must be separated from or else your church will be leavened by that type of fellowship.

 

I didn't read the entire thread, just some posts later in the thread.

 

Pro 23:31 Look not thou upon the wine when it is red, when it giveth his colour in the cup, when it moveth itself aright.