What's your AUTHORITY?

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Even the apostles didn't always agree... reading through the NT shows lots of controversy between the apostles. I think understanding that will help for us to see that even in the best possible situation, disagreements and understandings are going to be present, on doctrine, and application of the principles of the word of God.
For me.... Hebrews 6:1 is the standard that disciples of Jesus Christ can stand on, and hold fast to.

On what did the apostle NOT agree?

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

On what did the apostle NOT agree?

As I mentioned before, they had disagreements at the council in Jerusalem, and then the disagreement that was quite sharp between Paul and Barnabas in Acts 15.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

The situation exists for three reasons which conspire together to produce the current condition:
1. A long period of apostasy where truth has to be rediscovered. Many come from various religious backgrounds, and many things need to be unlearned. Many have learned and studied the teachings of various people with various points of view. All this creates a milieu in which apostolic, bible truth is hard to discover without risk of being tainted by a priori assumptions.
2. Teachers have not taught a genuinely apostolic hermeneutic, nor has there been a serious, concerted effort to find it, in general. Some say it cannot be found. Some have other agendas. Some aren't sure how to go about it. Some are searching and making progress, but we haven't fully restored an apostolic hermeneutic to general teaching yet.
3.Americans, in particular, are nowadays suffering from a serious lack of basic thinking and reasoning skills. People are more emotional and heuristic these days, generally speaking. In other words, irrational ("unreasonable") and not prone to sequential thinking processes. Public school methods (developed by the Soviets and imported to the US via the NEA, for example) do not promote logical awareness. Mass media contributes to a passivity in acquiring "knowledge" resulting in a general inability to "prove all things." Fluoride might play a part as well...

So shall we begin by rebuilding the roof, when the frame might not sustain it?

Or maybe rebuild the walls, when the foundation has been eroding? Should we not, rather,
read the blueprints: surely they'll tell us what to do.

"...built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being
the chief corner stone...".

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

We don't really know what caused Paul and Barnabas to separate about John Mark, but there it was, a disagreement, and contention.

But that was not a disagreement about doctrine or the practice of Christianity. It was a disagreement about whether Mark would accompany Paul, or not. It was not an issue of the faith and practice of that faith, an issue of doctrine or worship, or an issue of how to understand the Word of God.

Paul and Barnabus disagreed at the Jerusalem with Peter in Acts 15.

I already addressed that. The dispute was that many Pharisees believed the gentiles must become Jews. Peter already knew the score back in Acts 10 and 11. The apostles and elders examined the Pharisees' doctrine, and found it lacking in scriptural authority. They then sent letters throughout the churches with the correction of that false doctrine. They did not conclude "well, people have differing opinions and so we must agree to disagree." They corrected falsehood with correct doctrine, and enjoined all Christians everywhere to get with it and get in line with the truth.

So then, it appears the apostles were not disunited in doctrine, faith, or practice. The only "differences of opinion" were either non-doctrinal issues, or heresies (which were rebuked and corrected). Heretics that deviated from apostolic doctrine and practice were to be shunned.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

So shall we begin by rebuilding the roof, when the frame might not sustain it?

Or maybe rebuild the walls, when the foundation has been eroding? Should we not, rather,
read the blueprints: surely they'll tell us what to do.

"...built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being
the chief corner stone...".

Obviously one should start at the beginning.

Jesus taught, was crucified, and resurrected. His resurrection validates his teaching. His teaching is known to us by the apostolic record. Who he is, what he did, and why, are revealed to us in the NT writings (the apostolic record).

Knowing that, how do we proceed? What do you suggest?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I think it comes down personally with what the Lord has shown, and revealed to you through your study of the Word, as to what you will be accountable for.

"He whom much has been given, much is required."

How is it to be judged? How can one know if they have been shown something by the Lord, and not by last night's pizza sauce?

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Obviously one should start at the beginning.
Jesus taught, was crucified, and resurrected. His resurrection validates his teaching. His teaching is known to us by the apostolic record. Who he is, what he did, and why, are revealed to us in the NT writings (the apostolic record).
Knowing that, how do we proceed? What do you suggest?

It has to begin with seeking the will of the Lord. If He is not in it, it is moot.

We must confess our faults before the Lord, and the faults of the church.

Ask the Lord to restore the TRUE Ministry: "...some apostles; and some, prophets; and some,
evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers. " Without the Ministry, the Church will remain
stagnant, and not grow; therefore, the Ministry must first be restored.

I will now defer to you and to them who are called.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Honestly, I have been thinking that most "apostolics" do not have any solid framework within which to learn scripture and determine doctrine and practice. The responses so far seem to bear that out.

What I mean is this: OPs have not defined any reasonable, systematic, consistent method for determine faith and practice. Instead, we are, as a movement, highly inconsistent in our approach to scripture and the faith. Inconsistent not only with one another, but with ourselves, even.

Thus we have the following results:

Practically no unity in faith except in literally one or two, maybe three beliefs.

No unity in regards to several important practices (including "standards").

Unity in large measure regarding certain practices, but no rational and scripturally consistent explanation for why it is so. (In other words, traditions we keep without really knowing or understanding where they come from or why we keep them.)

Lots of private conjecture being propagated as doctrine, as binding, as obligatory, as truth, without any solid scriptural basis and usually in opposition to all the other private conjectures floating around.

"Just trust me, I'm the pastor" attitudes.

A lack of united front against heresies. We don't really have a clear and consistent mechanism for even identifying heresies in our own midst, let alone "out there", much less presenting a consistent witness to the truth.

A general across the board inability to maintain a rational examination of doctrine and practice, due to everybody coming at it from a completely different, unharmonized paradigm, point of view, worldview, etc. In other words, we make communication almost impossible because nobody is starting on the same page. We have no common framework within which to discuss or debate, examine, prove, etc. One's refutation is unheeded because the other can't even recognize the argument, for example. People disagree with each other without really understanding how and why they disagree.

And so many different views, doctrines, opinions, everyone screaming to be heard and believed, nobody in agreement... why, isn't that called confusion? And God is not the author of confusion...

So I submit we ought to get crackin' and figure out a reasonable, biblical, and apostolic approach to scripture, that can be taught to others. If the approach or method is correct, then the results ought to be consistent... and consistency is sorely lacking these days.

I now see what you're saying. I've developed what I call an "Apostolic Order of Redemption". In this ordo salutis I have 12 primary doctrines. No doubt each primary teaching can be broken down into even deeper, more specific sub-categories. However, this is what the Spirit led me to develop after much time praying and studying about the exact thing you're talking about. I'll share it with you here....

1. Corporate Election (God's choice of a people to be saved in Christ Jesus)

2. Predestination (God's predetermined glory for His covenant people)

3. Atonement (Christ's work of satisfying the laws condemnation for all who are saved in Christ Jesus)

4. Propitiation (Christ's satisfying God's wrath against sin for all those who are saved in Christ Jesus)

5. Prevenient Grace (The Holy Spirit's drawing of the lost to Christ Jesus)

6. Conversion (faith, repentance & water baptism, identifying with Christ's death and burial)

7. Justification (imputed righteousness received by faith)

8. Regeneration (being born of the Spirit as a result of the baptism of the Holy Ghost)

9. Adoption (membership in God's family)

10. Sanctification (taking part in the divine nature and being conformed into the image and likeness of Christ)

11. Death (the intermediate state wherein the soul is present with the Lord in Heaven awaiting resurrection & glorification)

12. Resurrection & Glorification (receiving a resurrected and glorified body fashioned perfectly after the image of Christ)

[Aquila]

When it comes to Acts 2:38, I've broken it down like this:

1.) Repentance/faith - Justification
2.) Water baptism in Jesus name - Identification
3.) Spirit baptism - Regeneration

[Aquila]

I like to think of my understanding of Apostolic doctrine as being "systematic". I'll share the story, I was inspired by a friend of mine who was Baptist. He embraced a rather strong Calvinistic approach and presented me with a detailed Ordo Salutis. He asked me, "So, as an Apostolic, what do you believe?" I was troubled because I could only talk Oneness and Acts 2:38 (the bare bones basics). So, I got to praying about it. I wanted to know where clearly biblical doctrines like justification, sanctification, regeneration, atonement, and propitiation fit into my Apostolic understanding. After my prayer and began studying. Throughout the next couple weeks, God seemed to open my eyes to various things that began to open my eyes and give me a more systematic approach. So, what I presented here is what I got.