If you liked the film The Butterfly Circus shared with you the other day, then you’ll love this:
.
“You are a miracle of God for someone else’s salvation …” – great quote full of truth.
Now go and make disciples!
If you liked the film The Butterfly Circus shared with you the other day, then you’ll love this:
.
“You are a miracle of God for someone else’s salvation …” – great quote full of truth.
Now go and make disciples!
I created a bit of confusion with my previous post. 
The list of “non-negotiables” shared there is not totally made up of things I consider “test of fellowship” issues – those are mostly doctrines I believe in strongly and will defend strongly.
But there are some doctrines that should cause us to draw a line in the sand – doctrines that should determine whether we fellowship others or not, and by “fellowship”, I mean accept them as a brother or sister in Christ.
From my study of the Scriptures, these “Big Three” are it:
These are salvation issues, and when heresies cropped up in the New Testament, these were doctrines those heresies distorted or contradicted.
I was raised within a faith tradition that taught if you go to a different kind of church you are probably doomed to hell, if you don’t understanding certain things at the moment of your baptism you are probably doomed to hell, if you don’t worship a certain way you are probably doomed to hell, and if you neglect to organize your church a certain way you are probably doomed to hell.
Don’t get me wrong – I love my faith tradition and will never leave it – but I’ve dwelled in the scriptures for a few years now and do not believe I should have ever been taught those things.
So many of the things our tradition has made fellowship issues over the years are every bit as ridiculous as anything in that video I showed the other day, because they are extrapolations from scripture – not clear commands.
I really appreciate what Monte Cox said a few years ago at the Pepperdine Bible Lectures: “I’m not comfortable drawing lines in the sand where God has not clearly drawn them – I’m too conservative for that.”
I’m with Monte – I’m just not willing to draw lines where God hasn’t clearly done so Himself.
Tyler Ellis made a great point (as usual) in his comment under the previous post. 
He said:
It concerns me any time someone makes a requirement of fellowship what God has not made a requirement of salvation.
There’s great wisdom in thinking this way.
Obviously there are doctrines we as church leaders must see and teach as ‘essential’. Many of the New Testament letters were written specifically to refute heresies that cropped up in the early church – most related to false teachers licensing early Christians to live in sin or teachings that distorted the identity of Jesus.
Jude urged readers to “contend for the faith” (Jude 1:3) – something he obviously took very seriously.
Get this: we should take it seriously too!
But what we shouldn’t do is place extrapolated teachings related to a specific faith tradition on the same level as clear, specific commands, prohibitions, and realities found in Scripture.
After thinking a bit, I thought it might be healthy to write down my own list of non-negotiables.
These are not necessarily tests of fellowship in my mind (some of them are), but they are doctrines I believe worthy of defense:
It could very well be I’m leaving something out, but from where I sit right now everything else I can think of – doctrinally, organizationally, or otherwise – is up for grabs.
As another commenter stated in the previous thread, “One man’s state is another man’s national” (watch the video in the previous post if you don’t understand that statement), so you may very will disagree with what’s written here, but I believe church leaders have a responsibility to teach and to defend these things … but here’s the problem. You’ll need to date this list, because in a few years it may look different for me.
What about you – do you have your own non-negotiables? What’s on your list?