[Amadeus]

Using CC's given definition of dogma copied here from another thread I would like to ask the question: Which dogmas, if any, are ever required and if so, why, using scripture or other basis for you decision?

Below are the words from CC's post containing the definition:

CC: From a Catholic POV, which you no doubt will disagree with, a Dogma is an infallibly defined doctrine. And since the infalliblity of either a council or the pope is an act of the Holy Spirit, then it is by definition NOT of man but of God.

As I said earlier, a "doctrine" is a teaching. But occasionally great heresies arise, and the need to infallibly define a doctrine therefore also arises. When the doctrine is infallibly defined, it becomes "Dogma". One example is the Arian heresy of the 4th century. Arius believed that Jesus was a created being, not fully God. So, the council of Nicea took up the issue, and basically declared that Jesus was fully God and fully man. From that point on, the deity of Christ is Dogma, and no further debate is allowed, from our POV at least. (Oddly, this is one Dogma that most protestants accept, though they would not use the term "Dogma" to describe it.)

This issue overlaps into the issue of "infallibility". For a Dogma to BE Dogma, it must be infallibly defined. But that is an issue for another thread

It seems that using CC's definition of dogma as an infallibly defined doctrine that some protestant denominations also have some dogmas.

For example I was into oneness Jesus name pentecost for 11 years, primarily in the United Pentecostal Church (UPC). My only involvement in a church group prior to that was in Roman Catholicism.

I won't talk to harshly about the UPC because they taught me for the first time in my life to read the Bible. That habit begun with them in 1976 continues as a very important part of my life. Along with the Bible reading I was taught the following UPC dogma.

1)The UPC teaches that it is necessary to be baptized in water saying the name of Jesus in accord with Acts 2:38 in order to be saved.

2)They also teach that in order to be saved, a person must received the gift of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in an unknown tongue.

3) They also teach that there was no such thing as a trinity. Jesus is in effect, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

These three things are dogmas (in accord with CC's given definition) for those people.

I believe that some, protestant denominations treat the trinity as a dogma although I cannot be more specific on that one.

These infallibly defined dogmas among protestant denominations are often detailed in a prescribed statement of their beliefs.

Originally Posted by Amadeus

Using CC's given definition of dogma copied here from another thread I would like to ask the question: Which dogmas, if any, are ever required and if so, why, using scripture or other basis for you decision?

Below are the words from CC's post containing the definition:



It seems that using CC's definition of dogma as an infallibly defined doctrine that some protestant denominations also have some dogmas.

For example I was into oneness Jesus name pentecost for 11 years, primarily in the United Pentecostal Church (UPC). My only involvement in a church group prior to that was in Roman Catholicism.

I won't talk to harshly about the UPC because they taught me for the first time in my life to read the Bible. That habit begun with them in 1976 continues as a very important part of my life. Along with the Bible reading I was taught the following UPC dogma.

1)The UPC teaches that it is necessary to be baptized in water saying the name of Jesus in accord with Acts 2:38 in order to be saved.

2)They also teach that in order to be saved, a person must received the gift of the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in an unknown tongue.

3) They also teach that there was no such thing as a trinity. Jesus is in effect, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

These three things are dogmas (in accord with CC's given definition) for those people.

I believe that some, protestant denominations treat the trinity as a dogma although I cannot be more specific on that one.

These infallibly defined dogmas among protestant denominations are often detailed in a prescribed of their statement of beliefs.

GREAT post topic, John!

It certainly got me to thinking. I am sure I will add to what I consider are dogmas buyt here is one.

I believe a foundational teaching, that sadly has been lost by the church is that fact that Christ came to set us free from sin, and our flesh. As for scriptures that back this up, here are two. I have twenty more for those who desire them.

"Let everyone that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity."

"Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid! How can we, that are dead to sin, live any longer in it?"

[christkid777]

I am not a dogmatic person but I think if there are any dogmatic issues they would be the same answers as the ones to your previous thread. Things like one must believe in God. One must repent of all sin. One must believe Christ is the son of God and that He gave himself for us. You know the rest.

[Watchman]

Since both Catholic and Protestant 'dogma' is fallible due to the fact they were set forth by man and not God, it is fair to conclude that the term 'dogma', as defined by CC, should never be used.

[Linsinbigler]

For example, that "all Scripture is inspired by God" is a dogma. It is either a true or it is false. Most of us would agree with it (I will not go into the disagreements because there have been enough posts on that), and receive it or assume it to be a declaration of truth or true expression of faith.

[CI]

Doctrines of God and the Christ arise by teaching through the gift of the wisdom (skillfull application or use of the knowledge) of God through the Christ. All such teachings are infallible.

The wisdom of God does not come by reading scriptures, but directly from God through the Spirit/Glory/Father. And, with wisdom comes the knowledge base (understanding of God) from which any application or use can be made.

Anything from the wisdom of man is potentially fallible.


---
Grace and peace from God the Father and from the Christ unto all!

[Amadeus]

Watchman: Since both Catholic and Protestant 'dogma' is fallible due to the fact they were set forth by man and not God, it is fair to conclude that the term 'dogma', as defined by CC, should never be used.

I want to agree with you on this Watchman. Even if man is using the Bible to establish dogma, it is still man's interpretation in the eyes of anyone that disagrees. Unless... unless a man can establish dogma based on the Bible with which God does agree. I am not certain that this last is possible.

Linsibigler: For example, that "all Scripture is inspired by God" is a dogma. It is either a true or it is false. Most Christians of us would agree with it (I will not go into the disagreements because there have been enough posts on that), and receive it or assume it to be a declaration of truth or true expression of faith.

I would like to hear the argument of anyone who would disagree with the 'dogma' you have stated. I do have some reservations about the statement myself, but my own reservations are just a feeling I have that something is not quite right. Maybe it is nothing.

[Soulheart3]

Originally Posted by Amadeus

I would like to hear the argument of anyone who would disagree with the 'dogma' you have stated. I do have some reservations about the statement myself, but my own reservations are just a feeling I have that something is not quite right. Maybe it is nothing.

Maybe it IS nothing, and perhaps the Spirit is trying teach you something. The search for truth is a noble cause, as long as its seeded in love, real love, how can it be without merit?

[Amadeus]

Originally Posted by christkid777

I am not a dogmatic person but I think if there are any dogmatic issues they would be the same answers as the ones to your previous thread. Things like one must believe in God. One must repent of all sin. One must believe Christ is the son of God and that He gave himself for us. You know the rest.

In other words if it is 'essential' then one might want to establish it as dogma. The problems with deciding what is or should be essential could be as difficult as deciding what is or should be a dogma. Almost any list that any Christians come up with that includes anything more than the two great commandments mentioned by Marilyn on that other thread will find someone opposed to at least part of it.

[Amadeus]

Originally Posted by Amadeus;

I would like to hear the argument of anyone who would disagree with the 'dogma' you have stated. I do have some reservations about the statement myself, but my own reservations are just a feeling I have that something is not quite right. Maybe it is nothing.

Soulheart3: Maybe it IS nothing, and perhaps the Spirit is trying teach you something. The search for truth is a noble cause, as long as its seeded in love, real love, how can it be without merit?

Thank you! Even when I was typing those words, the though behind your words came into my mind also. I still can't put it into words, but whatever it is, if it is from God I want it! I am still open. Feed me Lord!