Author Topic: If they say they're the one church . . .  (Read 2465 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
If they say they're the one church . . .
« on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 16:54:20 »
You know how this ends,  . . . it's not.

In a nutshell, this is the problem of Protestantism.

The issue of which church is right was a central issue (maybe THE central issue) in Christianity for 1500 years.  The original council of Nicaea clarified the heresy called Arianism which is based on the beliefs of a guy named Arius.  Arius lost and was booted out of the church.  Arius as a dying request asked to be let back into the ONE church.  Note Arius did not try to uproot the church or form a new church (although his followers would do the former).

The ecumenical councils -- seven of them-- would deal with various heresies to make sure the ONE church was teaching the same thing.

Note that no one was forming a new church which did not either try to dislodge the old church or get the old church to agree with them . . . until the Reformation (let's ignore the Anglican church for the sake of simplicity).

Rather than act like men and argue with the old church, they scattered and formed their own churches.  Now, sola scriptura, which no one used for 1500 years, would be the criteria in determining who was right.  But . . . no one could agree with how the Bible should be interpreted (which for the entirety of Christianity prior was the job of the church).

So, those with disagreements continued to form their own churches.  Some, like Zwingli, even fought over it (which at least was an attempt to resolve the problem).   So, dozens of denominations were formed.  As a few generations went by, descendants would discover that fighting, say, over foot washing is not worth it. But the tradition was formed and they weren't about to leave it even though they no longer support the distinctives of their denominations.  Therefore, someone got the idea that, hey, other (usually unspecified) denominations are almost as good (or even better) than ours, so they are part of the true church too.

As hundreds of Protestant denoms form, rather than be embarrassed about this, they thought it was much more convenient to say there is no one true church, but there are many that are in this church--those in our church and those in others. 

Eventually, they start this bad cliche that those who claim to be the one church aren't like us and therefore are heretics, cults, etc.  When in fact *they* are the ones who rather than solve the problem of bad doctrine, choose to scurry away into thousands of sects then try to justify their wimpiness with this bad cliche.

The one church is 1) founded by Jesus (Matt 16:18) 2) undivided (because Christ cannot be divided  3) supports the decisions of the 7 ecumenical councils  4) does not change things unilaterally and 5)  does not deny the nature of church by defining it as some gathering of Christians who never meet.  (There are churches today who meet this criteria, but that's for another time.)

Thanks for reading.  I once believed this cliche myself, so it bothers me more now.  So, please excuse my snarkiness.


Offline chosenone

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30932
  • Manna: 538
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #1 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:00:45 »
I have no interest whatsoever in who thinks they are right and who thinks others are wrong. The church is not a denomination, or a building or a religion. The church is US, his children, true believers who meet in church buildings, in schools, in huts, in homes, in church halls, in community centres, in the open air or anyhwere else they choose. A group of believers, like in the early church, bound together with one aim and purpose, to follow Jesus Christ.

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #2 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:09:00 »
Many people (Catholics) like to think that everyone who isn't a Catholic is a Protestant---the same kind of thinking that everyone who is not Jew is a Gentile. That is not an applicable similarity.

Pigeon-holing is bad form. We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. The born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.
« Last Edit: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:18:34 by Lively Stone »

Offline chosenone

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30932
  • Manna: 538
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #3 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:12:05 »
Many people (Catholics) like to think that everyone who isn't a Catholic is a Protestant---just like everyone who is not  Jew is a Gentile.

Pigeon-holing is bad form. We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. the born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.

  Thats true. I never ever refer to myelf as protestant or any other such label. I will always just say Christian. I have been to churches of several different denominations in my Christian life. I am not bothered about such things, but will go where I feel God wants me to be.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #4 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:22:19 »
Well, I have an interest in whose right or whose wrong, and frankly, chosenone, you probably do too..  Otherwise, you'd be a relativist and I doubt you are.

Chosenone replies with the cousin of "if they say they're the one true church . . . ,"  anyone who believes in Jesus is in the church.

The church is NOT and never in history (as I tried to explain in a few paragraphs) defined in this way.  Simply put, to use your criteria, where in the Bible does it say this?  Why did Arius beg to be let back into the church? 

As it's simpliest meaning,  church is  a gathering of believers.  Those who believe the same thing don't necessarily gather.  Churches gather not just to worship (although this is important) but to decide right practices and beliefs. (We see this in Matt 18:17 and Acts 15)   Some churches meet as a church as directed by 1st Council of Nicaea to deal with issues that come up.  Others meet when they feel like it, if ever, and never deal with pesky doctrinal issues  Which is really a church--a gathering?

Chosenone may be describing those in the Book of Life, but that is not the same thing as the church.  Nevertheless, I am thankful that she bought it up. 
 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #4 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:22:19 »



Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #5 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:31:23 »
We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. The born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.

Lively Stone,

Due respect:  what does born again mean?  Does the meaning of these words change over time?  How come no one used this term 100 years ago?  50 years ago? 

Someone has to define this stuff so heresies don't seep into the church.  Has it happened before? You bet, but we had a way of dealing with it--gathering in council as they did in Acts 15.  Protestants don't have a way of combatting heresy and therefore, ultimately cannot be trusted with maintaining the truth. 


Offline chosenone

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30932
  • Manna: 538
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #6 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:31:49 »
Well, I have an interest in whose right or whose wrong, and frankly, chosenone, you probably do too..  Otherwise, you'd be a relativist and I doubt you are.

Chosenone replies with the cousin of "if they say they're the one true church . . . ,"  anyone who believes in Jesus is in the church.

The church is NOT and never in history (as I tried to explain in a few paragraphs) defined in this way.  Simply put, to use your criteria, where in the Bible does it say this?  Why did Arius beg to be let back into the church? 

As it's simpliest meaning,  church is  a gathering of believers.  Those who believe the same thing don't necessarily gather.  Churches gather not just to worship (although this is important) but to decide right practices and beliefs. (We see this in Matt 18:17 and Acts 15)   Some churches meet as a church as directed by 1st Council of Nicaea to deal with issues that come up.  Others meet when they feel like it, if ever, and never deal with pesky doctrinal issues  Which is really a church--a gathering?

Chosenone may be describing those in the Book of Life, but that is not the same thing as the church.  Nevertheless, I am thankful that she bought it up. 
 


 Yes it is a gathering of people who follow Jesus Christ. It doesnt need to be any more complicated than that.

Offline chosenone

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 30932
  • Manna: 538
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #7 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:33:39 »
We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. The born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.

Lively Stone,

Due respect:  what does born again mean?  Does the meaning of these words change over time?  How come no one used this term 100 years ago?  50 years ago? 

Someone has to define this stuff so heresies don't seep into the church.  Has it happened before? You bet, but we had a way of dealing with it--gathering in council as they did in Acts 15.  Protestants don't have a way of combatting heresy and therefore, ultimately cannot be trusted with maintaining the truth. 




 Now there was a certain man among the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler (a leader, an authority) among the Jews,
 
2 Who came to Jesus at night and said to Him, Rabbi, we know and are certain that You have come from God [as] a Teacher; for no one can do these signs (these wonderworks, these miracles—and produce the proofs) that You do unless God is with him.
 
3 Jesus answered him, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, that unless a person is born again (anew, from above), he cannot ever see (know, be acquainted with, and experience) the kingdom of God.
 
4 Nicodemus said to Him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter his mother’s womb again and be born?
 
5 Jesus answered, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, unless a man is born of water and [[a]even] the Spirit, he cannot [ever] enter the kingdom of God.
 
6 What is born of [from] the flesh is flesh [of the physical is physical]; and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.
 
7 Marvel not [do not be surprised, astonished] at My telling you, You must all be born anew (from above).
 



 
« Last Edit: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:36:58 by chosenone »

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #8 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:37:18 »

 Yes it is a gathering of people who follow Jesus Christ. It doesnt need to be any more complicated than that.
So, Mormons and JWs gather in Christ's name too.  Are they Christians?  Even in the Bible Matt 18:17 and Acts 15) we see examples of those claiming to be Christians but aren't--and in John's letters, he warns even to avoid heretics. 


Simplicity is not equal to truth.


(edited to add a plural to John's letter)
« Last Edit: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:55:29 by trifecta »

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #9 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:52:05 »
Chosenone,

Thanks for the quote, it was good to read it again. 

Let me ask, Mormons and JWs (and many others) when pressed will say they are born again as
defined by John 3:5, but

Just because someone *says* they are born again, doesn't mean they are. Therefore, we must
come up with some kind of definition/explanation.  Protestantism doesn't have a means of doing that.
(Sidebar: it's kind of strange they don't, because Protestantism was formed because they insist they are more correct).

Calling oneself "just a Christian" does even less to define one's beliefs.   Sorry, I was once fooled by this too.



Offline MeMyself

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15980
  • Manna: 382
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #10 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 17:59:33 »
Chosenone,

Thanks for the quote, it was good to read it again. 

Let me ask, Mormons and JWs (and many others) when pressed will say they are born again as
defined by John 3:5, but

Just because someone *says* they are born again, doesn't mean they are. Therefore, we must
come up with some kind of definition/explanation.  Protestantism doesn't have a means of doing that.

How about the one Christ told us about.

We will know them by their fruit. What fruit? Of the Spirit.
Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control


(Sidebar: it's kind of strange they don't, because Protestantism was formed because they insist they are more correct).

Calling oneself "just a Christian" does even less to define one's beliefs.   Sorry, I was once fooled by this too.

But, if one calls oneself  a "Catholic" they are automatically to be trusted and assumed to be a child of God?  Is that it?

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #11 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 18:18:24 »
Good questions MeMyself,


Just because someone *says* they are born again, doesn't mean they are. Therefore, we must
come up with some kind of definition/explanation.  Protestantism doesn't have a means of doing that.

How about the one Christ told us about.

We will know them by their fruit. What fruit? Of the Spirit.
Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control


This are how Christians are revealed to the world (hopefully).  It doesn't answer the question of Who is a Christian?  or who has the truth?

Quote
(Sidebar: it's kind of strange they don't, because Protestantism was formed because they insist they are more correct).

Calling oneself "just a Christian" does even less to define one's beliefs.   Sorry, I was once fooled by this too.

But, if one calls oneself  a "Catholic" they are automatically to be trusted and assumed to be a child of God?  Is that it?

Are they assumed NOT to be a child of God?

 You are correct in that just subscribing to the right group doesn't automatically make one a true member of it.  This is what the parable of wheat and the tares is about.

Whether they believe what they are taught is another issue.  So, to answer your question, no, that's not it.

(Since it came up, I am not Catholic, but Orthodox).   For what it's worth, there are many Catholics and Protestants whom I trust and are good examples of Christ, but that doesn't mean their doctrine is right.

Offline MeMyself

  • Lee's Inner Circle Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15980
  • Manna: 382
  • Gender: Female
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #12 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 18:29:53 »
Good questions MeMyself,


Just because someone *says* they are born again, doesn't mean they are. Therefore, we must
come up with some kind of definition/explanation.  Protestantism doesn't have a means of doing that.

How about the one Christ told us about.

We will know them by their fruit. What fruit? Of the Spirit.
Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control


This are how Christians are revealed to the world (hopefully).  It doesn't answer the question of Who is a Christian?  or who has the truth?

WHo is a Christian?  Anyone who confesses Christ as Lord! No matter where they worship! The truth isn't limited to one group and not another..the Truth of Christ as the way to the Father is for any and all who will believe.



But, if one calls oneself  a "Catholic" they are automatically to be trusted and assumed to be a child of God?  Is that it?

Are they assumed NOT to be a child of God?

 You are correct in that just subscribing to the right group doesn't automatically make one a true member of it.  This is what the parable of wheat and the tares is about.

Whether they believe what they are taught is another issue.  So, to answer your question, no, that's not it.

(Since it came up, I am not Catholic, but Orthodox).   For what it's worth, there are many Catholics and Protestants whom I trust and are good examples of Christ, but that doesn't mean their doctrine is right.

[/quote]

Doctrines do not have to be in lock step with one another to be unified in Christ.
God tells us to offer grace over these kinds of matters, and not to judge or cause our brother to stumble.

Offline trifecta

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 794
  • Manna: 24
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #13 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 18:46:20 »


This are how Christians are revealed to the world (hopefully).  It doesn't answer the question of Who is a Christian?  or who has the truth?

WHo is a Christian?  Anyone who confesses Christ as Lord! No matter where they worship! The truth isn't limited to one group and not another..the Truth of Christ as the way to the Father is for any and all who will believe.


Mormons, JWs, Gnostics, and many liberal groups say they are Christians, but are they?  These are issues
the church needs to decide.  The truth is important.

Quote from: memyself

Doctrines do not have to be in lock step with one another to be unified in Christ.

Did I say we did?  We do have to agree that, say, Jesus actually rose from the dead, was born of a virgin etc.
Yes, we must be lockstep on that. 

As for more minor stuff, yeah, we define that stuff do.  There is even a name for it--a theologoumenon. (Okay, it's not the most user friendly word.)  We can disagree on this stuff--an individual opinion, not a matter of doctrine.


Quote

God tells us to offer grace over these kinds of matters, and not to judge or cause our brother to stumble.

Again, it depends.  Not eating meat is one thing, believing the resurrection is symbolic is another.


Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #14 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 19:40:08 »
We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. The born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.

Lively Stone,

Due respect:  what does born again mean?  Does the meaning of these words change over time?  How come no one used this term 100 years ago?  50 years ago? 

Someone has to define this stuff so heresies don't seep into the church.  Has it happened before? You bet, but we had a way of dealing with it--gathering in council as they did in Acts 15.  Protestants don't have a way of combatting heresy and therefore, ultimately cannot be trusted with maintaining the truth.

What do you think being born again means? It's a plain and simple thing. Jesus explained it well. It is being born anew spiritually by receiving Jesus' salvation that He bought for us on the cross. We repent of our sin and turn around and walk in His ways. We invite Him into our lives and He literally comes to live in us.

All Christians have a way of combating heresy: the word of God as taught by Him through God-anointed teachers and leaders. He says so. We have safety in the churches where he is Lord.

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #15 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 19:49:27 »

 Yes it is a gathering of people who follow Jesus Christ. It doesnt need to be any more complicated than that.
So, Mormons and JWs gather in Christ's name too.  Are they Christians?  Even in the Bible Matt 18:17 and Acts 15) we see examples of those claiming to be Christians but aren't--and in John's letters, he warns even to avoid heretics. 


Simplicity is not equal to truth.


(edited to add a plural to John's letter)

We need to be careful that we are Christians, and allow Holy Spirit to show us what is right and what is wrong---something so many people are not doing and going wrong.

Lively Stone

  • Guest
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #16 on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 - 19:51:20 »
Chosenone,

Thanks for the quote, it was good to read it again. 

Let me ask, Mormons and JWs (and many others) when pressed will say they are born again as
defined by John 3:5, but

Just because someone *says* they are born again, doesn't mean they are. Therefore, we must
come up with some kind of definition/explanation.  Protestantism doesn't have a means of doing that.
(Sidebar: it's kind of strange they don't, because Protestantism was formed because they insist they are more correct).

Calling oneself "just a Christian" does even less to define one's beliefs.   Sorry, I was once fooled by this too.

What is more definitive than what Jesus has said? Why do you need more assurance than He has given you? Are you fearful? Not confident?

Trust God and His word, and rest in Him, heeding the still small voice within.

Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5210
  • Manna: 135
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #17 on: Thu Jun 06, 2013 - 16:46:39 »
We need to stop erecting barriers and fences and start realizing that what matters to God is whether or not an individual is born again. The born again follower of Jesus Christ is His disciple and is a member of His Church, His Body on Earth.

Lively Stone,

Due respect:  what does born again mean?  Does the meaning of these words change over time?  How come no one used this term 100 years ago?  50 years ago? 

Someone has to define this stuff so heresies don't seep into the church.  Has it happened before? You bet, but we had a way of dealing with it--gathering in council as they did in Acts 15.  Protestants don't have a way of combatting heresy and therefore, ultimately cannot be trusted with maintaining the truth.

What do you think being born again means? It's a plain and simple thing. Jesus explained it well. It is being born anew spiritually by receiving Jesus' salvation that He bought for us on the cross. We repent of our sin and turn around and walk in His ways. We invite Him into our lives and He literally comes to live in us.

All Christians have a way of combating heresy: the word of God as taught by Him through God-anointed teachers and leaders. He says so. We have safety in the churches where he is Lord.

Stone I have great respect for you and we are often on the same page. We are often defining being born again as believing in Christ's work on the cross and repenting of our sins. I do not believe that this defines being born again, but that we see know and understand God  from above. It means seeing God from a heavenly perspective. a relationship that is truly spiritual and not just channeled through carnal thinking. That was clear when Nicodemus said how can one go back to the womb.  God does not sit on an earthly throne, but is in heaven. we are to worship him As spirit and not through earthly establishments. No one on earth can take that place. Jesus said  to the women at the well 'the time is coming when we will not worship on a mountain nor in some established place such as Jerusalem, but the true worshipers will worship God  in spirit and in truth.

When we try to define what or who the true church is you cannot look to the establishment but knowing that our relationship is first and foremost  in the spirit just like he told the women at the well. Those who are truly born of the Spirit knows what this means. if we fail to understand this then we are not truly born again
« Last Edit: Fri Jun 07, 2013 - 22:08:46 by mclees8 »

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1639
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #18 on: Thu Jun 06, 2013 - 23:38:46 »
I was once in the true church. How do know it was the true church? Because it taught correct doctrine. How do I know it taught correct doctrine? How could the true church not be teaching correct doctrine?

Forgive if this sounds smart aleck, but that's the way the reasoning goes.

Offline mclees8

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5210
  • Manna: 135
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #19 on: Fri Jun 07, 2013 - 10:57:50 »
I was once in the true church. How do know it was the true church? Because it taught correct doctrine. How do I know it taught correct doctrine? How could the true church not be teaching correct doctrine?

Forgive if this sounds smart aleck, but that's the way the reasoning goes.

Norton we are truly in the valley of confusion. The true church has been obscured behind denominational walls. How were the early believers saved?  Because  they heard the gospel preached and believed upon Christ being the savior. They were convicted of sin and trusted that Christ Suffered died and rose again to assure that all who believe has eternal life. This is all that was required to be saved and of the Family of God. The apostles taught us correct doctrines to Live the Christian life.

Don't let the carnal mind dictate who is the church. You came into the church when you believed. Once we believe then finding the right church home or fellowship is some times not right out in front of us. This is the fault of satan and men. The right church is not the establishments that says they are the right church. When I got saved I started going to the only churches I had known as a boy because my family went to them once in  while. I to was still confused. Still My life had come crashing down and I wanted to find Who God was and what was my purpose for being here. This was even before I understood the Gospel message. The churches to day have become so dull to the fact that we think the church and yes our salvation is the right establishment that has a name on it. Baptist Methodist Lutheran . catholic. If you really want to know who the right church is search for the one that makes the spiritual relationship come alive to you. Look for the one that teaches personal relationship in the spirit. Don't settle until you have found it. All this sound difficult I know but I know how it was for me. I was not looking for the best preacher or the most church friendly groups. I wanted to know Christ and that was all that mattered. To know him truly may take a while but He rewards those who diligently seek after Him. Essentially we are saved and of the church the day we believed Jesus was Lord. That is to have peace with God knowing that if you died today you would be with Him just as it was with the thief on the cross who desperately needed t know that before he died.

God speed Norton.
Jesus rewards those who truly want to know Him and will not stop until they do.

Offline Josiah

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1896
  • Manna: 80
  • Gender: Male
Re: If they say they're the one church . . .
« Reply #20 on: Fri Jun 07, 2013 - 12:05:45 »
MY thoughts....


1.  IMO, Christians are PEOPLE. Thus, the "gathering" "assembly" "communion" "community" "household" "family" of such is also PEOPLE.   This means, the church is PEOPLE.   Not any denomination, cult, sect or other physical, institutional, legal/political/economic entity.


2.  To say the church is a "family" "oikos"  "Body"  "communion"  "community" does NOT indicate that ONE of several thousand earthly, physical, geopolitical, economic legal entities MUST be THE church - and all the rest are not; much less that ONE denomination is infallible, unaccountable, exempt from truthfulness, all power, lord-it-over-others-as-the-gentiles-do entity.


3.  To insist that Christians must be a geopolitical/legal/economic institution seems as silly to me as saying that a family must be so.  No.  Christians are PEOPLE.  Christians form one FAMILY - not one denomination.


4.  The Family of God, IMO, is all believers - past and present, spread out over all the centuries and continents.  It's their having the gift of faith in Christ as Savior that makes them His family.  What congregation they may or may not officially be registered at (if any), and the denomination that congregation is legally a part of (if any) has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with it.  Doesn't make congregations or denominations "bad" per se, it just doesn't mean THEY are the church rather than believers.


5.  This is NOT to say that Christians are forbidden from associating together.  Indeed, already in the NT, they did. And we see in Acts, that such associations (as Christians congregated) often took on institutional forms.  These we technically in theology call "congregations" (although the Bible uses the word "churches" for these; the word "church" in the Bible having two different definitions).  However, the INSTITUTION is not Christians, the believers congregating together as a congregation are members of the church.   There WERE congregations already in the First Century; there is ZERO evidnece that there was any denomination until the 4th Century (we'll let the OOC, EOC and RCC engage in the baseless, egotistical, power-grabbing FIGHT over which one that was; in all probablility, it was none of them but the proto to all denominations, including them). 


6.  My study of the RCC, the early LDS and of several groups most would regard as "cults" revealed the all have the same ecclesology - and it's entirely to serve its own egotistical,.power-grabbing epistemology and ambition.   Each claims that GOD founded IT (that specific institution) and THUS (in what is actually very ILLOGICAL and unbiblical) IT itself exclusively is all-powerful, infallible (in official matters, at least), unaccountable, exempt from truthfulness, when IT itself exclusively speaks GOD is speaking (and GOD must agree with it or GOD would be wrong).  The ecclesiology (the Church is an IT - and I'M IT) exists entirely to give ITSELF divine, unmitigated, unaccountable POWER over all others; POWER to designate self as infallible, POWER to appoint self as the sole individual interpreter of Scripture and the "tradition" of it itself, POWER to be the sole "authority" and "authentic" ONE, POWER to insist that when SELF speaks - GOD is speaking.   If a denomination will insist that error can exist, that accountability is important - but then EXEMPT SELF EXCLUSIVELY from either - it itself must make it itself "special."   The RCC, early LDS and all cults do that in identical ways.   With the identical same purpose and function.  And yes, it's all baseless.  Egotistical.  Divisive.  Power-grabbing.  All about lording it over others as the Gentiles do.  All about "who is the greatest." 



Thank you.


Pax


- Josiah



PS    I'm back...





.
« Last Edit: Fri Jun 07, 2013 - 12:09:42 by Josiah »

 

     
anything