HERESY AND DEFENSES

Since there are specific false teachings which still reappear today from time to time and at the same time have been Ruled Heresies by Authorized Councils and Synods of the True Assemblies United centuries ago, let us look at a few.

THE EARLY ASSEMBLIES

Gentiles and the Mosaic Law
JUDAIZERS 1st Century A.D.

Response of the Assemblies to Gnosticism
HERESY
MARCIONISM

FIRST CREED FOR DEFENSE OF ORTHODOXY
THE APOSTLES' CREED about 150 A.D.

Pagan practices brought into the Assemblies.
HERESY
MONTANISM

CONCERNING THE TRI-UNE G-DHEAD
HERESY
MONARCHIANISM

SECOND CREED FOR DEFENSE OF ORTHODOXY
THE NICENE CREED 325 A.D.

CONCERNING THE PERSON OF MOSHIACH (CHRIST)
DEFENSE
DEFINITION OF CHALCEDON 451 A.D.

SALVATION ISSUES

The Grace of G-d vs. the "Free Will" of man
HERESY
PELAGIANISM 5th Century A.D.

THE REFORMATION

HERESY
ARMINIANISM AND SEMI-ARMINIANISM

DEFENSE OF ORTHODOXY

People are often led to believe that the Reformers preached some "brand-new interpretation" of Scripture. They may have been taught that these "interpretations" are: "Lutheranism"[1], "Calvinism", "Hyper-Calvinism" or some other misnomer.
The Reformers (Luther, Calvin and Zwingli) did not come up with any "new ideas" however. All of them only sought to return to the Original Teachings of the True Assemblies only.[2]
To do so, the Reformers drew specifically on Synods and Councils that had been previously called in the First 5 Centuries of the Church. At that time there was not a single man who was "pope" in the First 5 Centuries, neither were there "separate beliefs", "separate sects" or "Denominations"[3] as we have today.
Instead, in the early Church, the True Assemblies acted together and in unison as "One Church" by means of Bishops (Pastors) who had been Appointed in each major city to convene and Rule upon true versus false teaching when it became necessary. The entire Church composed of every Church in every city in the First 5 centuries were all in Agreement on major issues. There was true consensus. There were no "Denominations" whatsoever.
Luther, Calvin and Zwingli drew directly upon the teachings of the First 5 centuries of the Church. Since Augustine was and still remains the foremost theologian of the Church in its First 5 centuries, and is still considered to be so even today, the Reformers drew heavily upon his teachings. Augustine, in turn, to confirm the Truth, as did others before him, drew upon writings of the early Assemblies that may no longer exist today. Teachings which had been previously passed down, and Agreed upon and Ratified by all the True Assemblies as a whole; that is, all the True Assemblies in total Agreement: when the Church was indeed One Church United in the Faith.
Since the Reformers specifically drew on the Teachings of Original Christianity, such terms as "Lutheranism" or "Calvinism" are therefore not just a little misleading. None of the Reformers sought to bring about "a new Church" at all, but based their writings on beliefs held by the early Assemblies themselves.

DEFENSES DERIVED FROM THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS OF THE EARLY CHURCH

THE SYNOD OF DORT

THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION

MORE FOLLOWING SOON!

PEOPLE OF G-D MINISTRIES

� Copyright 2001-2003 People of G-d Ministries Inc. All Rights Reserved. No reproduction or redistribution without the Prior Written Consent and Approval of People of G-d.

FOOTNOTES

[1]Martin Luther specifically did not seek nor want a Denomination named after him. "Lutheranism" today in some cases does not represent the original teachings of Martin Luther.
[2]Christians often say they wish there was "one Church" again. Some even claim they are in conformity to the early Assemblies today. Most of these do not however, hold the Original Teachings OF the True Assemblies that the Church in the First 5 centuries held. Many of them exactly the opposite!
Returning to "One Church" again can only be accomplioshed by seeking and returning to Original Christianity as represented by the First 5 centuries of the True Church when the Church ACTUALLY WAS "One True Church"! This was before there was a "pope".
[3]It must be borne in mind that in the First 5 centuries of the Church, Greek was still in common use in the Roman Empire and environs. Latin was in use, but people still read, spoke, wrote and understood Greek. Since Greek is the original language of the New Testament, they were very aquainted with the Greek terms and usages and sentence structures of the New Testament, therefore they could come to agreement very quickly and be United in what it actually said.
For any "sect" to "break off" and become a "separate denomination" would be unthinkable, let alone be called "part of the Church".
Every Bishop (Pastor) over every major city who was Appointed was very competent in the original Greek of the New Testament. There was no Hebrew Old Testament at all being used. The Hebrew Masoretic Text (MT) was not assembled until the Middle Ages (about 400 years later) by rabbinical authorities. The early Church used the LXX (Greek Septuagint) only as the Old Testament just as had Believing Jews in the First Century before it (the LXX) was banned by rabbinical authorities in the Second century about the time of the Bar Kosiba (Kochba) Revolt.
It should be remembered that "Excommunication" in the early Assemblies was not persecution or confiscation of property by the Religious Arm such as what it later became under Romanism. Only the denial of the L-RDs' Supper (Communion) and its' Fellowship with Assembly members until that one or ones fully repented. If they did, they were free to rejoin the Assemblies.
Those Believers living in a lifestyle of carnality or disruptive teachings would have been put out of the Churches altogether to maintain His Peace in Unity.

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws