Church

[epostle1]

Do we know of any organized Christian church that has not moved in the same direction as the Catholics did? Someone came of her, but usually [always?] the new group that often started on a good pathway found itself very close to the old mother church. Do we not meet people today who attend no physical assembly because they have so often found it to be more of the same-o same-o? Undoubtedly some may have found exceptions, but usually [always?] they are temporary exceptions that once given a death or two among the older more serious believers end up in another boat going the same mistaken direction.

"Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up by revelation; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain" (Gal. 2:1-2).

Despite Paul's reception of a marvelous supernatural manifestation of Jesus Christ, he still feels the need to go up to Jerusalem to confer with the Apostles on the doctrine he is preaching. This suggests that the apostolic hierarchy is functioning as a sort of "gatekeeper" over what is "authentic" Christian doctrine; incidentally, this is the same idea that presupposes the calling of the Council of Jerusalem for the Apostles and bishops to solve the problem posed by Gentiles and the law. Protestants will most likely admit as much, but where they will fall short is in admitting that not only the Apostles but their successors continued to exercise this function, in which case we are talking about a permanent hierarchy, and hence an institution. As we shall see when we get to the letters of St. John the Apostle, this function of the hierarchy as "gatekeepers" of doctrine and discipline is still intact long after the original generation of Apostles had died. Paul's words to Timothy in 2 Tim. 2:1-2, examined below, are also relevant here.

"There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all" (Eph. 4:4-6).

Here Paul compares the oneness of the Church with the oneness of God, and says that there similarly must be only one faith and one baptism; how ironic, because the role of faith and the nature of baptism in particular are two extremely contentious points in Protestant theology. A loose communion of churches which bitterly disagree on the nature of faith and baptism, among others, cannot be the "one Body" with "one faith" and "one baptism" spoken of by Paul. And why do these Protestant sects disagree? Is it not because they are physically diverse communities with no formal unity? Formal disunity begets doctrinal disunity; conversely, the doctrinal unity that Paul teaches presupposes a formal, physical unity that goes beyond an invisible confederation of different groups. This is also the most commonly cited text in patristic writings when the unity of the Church is stressed.
The invisible Church of Luther is neither biblical nor historical.

 

[amadeus]

@kepha31

The Church is not invisible to those with "eyes to see" and it is biblical. As to being to historical, what would that mean? Do we need a history book outside of the written Bible? Do we need a guide outside of the Holy Spirit? God is providing ministers as per Ephesians 4 to perfect the saints of God.

I don't belong to any loose communion of churches disagreeing over this and that. I belong to the Lord and His Church. I believe that others here do as well. Catholics may also be included.

For me the Protestants and Catholics are coming together in the feet of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream in their efforts to blend together through ecumenism, but clay and iron won't mix. Both will be crushed by the stone cut out of the mountain without hands.

 

[epostle1]

@kepha31

The Church is not invisible to those with "eyes to see" and it is biblical. As to being to historical, what would that mean? Do we need a history book outside of the written Bible? Do we need a guide outside of the Holy Spirit? God is providing ministers as per Ephesians 4 to perfect the saints of God.

The study of history, especially early church history, is forbidden in your church? That would explain a lot. Do you at least read a newspaper?

I don't belong to any loose communion of churches disagreeing over this and that. I belong to the Lord and His Church. I believe that others here do as well. Catholics may also be included.

Wonderful. Catholics believe the Church is spiritual AND physical. A purely invisible church is not biblical and not it historical until Luther came along and invented it due to the damage sola scriptura had caused.

For me the Protestants and Catholics are coming together in the feet of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream in their efforts to blend together through ecumenism, but clay and iron won't mix. Both will be crushed by the stone cut out of the mountain without hands.

False ecumenism is giving up key elements of an identity of ones faith to crowd please. Truth doesn't "blend together" with falsehoods. But I favor ecumenical efforts when Protestants and Catholics work together for the common good, such as a soup kitchen or a clothing drive. How you get Nebuchadnezzar out of that is anybody's guess.

You must live in a scary world. There are no monsters under the bed or in the closet.

 

[epostle1]

Of all those who follow the Lord Jesus and, in His name, are close to the poor and the suffering, trying to offer some relief, comfort and peace... “All of those who do these things, which the Lord sent us to do are the Church”. Thus we understand that the visible reality of the Church cannot be measured, it cannot be known in all its fullness: how can one know of all the good that is done?... “So many acts of love, so much faithfulness in families, so much work in educating children, to carry on, to transmit the faith, so much suffering in the sick who offer their suffering to the Lord. We cannot measure this! It is so great, so great!” How can one know of all the wonderful things that, through us, Christ is able to operate in the hearts and lives of each person? You see: the reality of the visible Church goes beyond our control, beyond our strength, and it is a mysterious reality because it comes from God.

2. To understand the relationship, in the Church, between her visible and spiritual reality, there is no other way but to look to Christ, whose Body is the Church and from which the Church is generated, in an act of infinite love . Even in Christ, in fact, through the mystery of the Incarnation, we recognize a human nature and a divine nature, united in the same person in a wonderful and indissoluble way. This applies in a similar manner to the Church. Just as in Christ, human nature serves the divine in accordance with the fulfillment of Salvation, so, in a similar way, does the visible reality serve the spiritual reality of the Church. The Church, therefore, is also a mystery, in which what is not seen is more important than what is seen, and can only be recognized with the eyes of faith .
Pope Francis

http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/10/29/pope_at_audience_the_church_visible_and_spiritual/1109660

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not that again...
Child, are you still resorting to what is seen rather than what is unseen of God?

Just giving you a little Scripture lesson on what the Church actually is because you don't seem to be able to grasp the concept.

 

[amadeus]

The study of history, especially early church history, is forbidden in your church? That would explain a lot. Do you at least read a newspaper?

My church, as you call it, strives to let the Holy Spirit lead the way. They do fail but not so much as those who start out with a pre-set program for worship services as do most Protestants and Catholics. The program excludes God unless God is willing to follow man's program. How does that work? It works like the Israelites who decided they wanted a king even though the prophet and God were against it. God allows men to go their own way for a bit, but eventually men will have to pay the piper.

My friend, even a newspaper is not the monument to truth that your mention of it might suggest. It is easy to lie by suppressing the more important known but unpopular [to the controllers of newspaper content] events and putting the ones you support in larger print on the front page.

As to history books, I have nothing against them, but they tend to be painted with a brush controlled by the powers that be, whether they reflect the truth or not. Even a very honest historian is often hindered by the system and what other people have witnessed with their own eyes. What the honest historian must use for the most part comes from someone else who may not be as honest as he is. Of course, some historians are themselves not too honest so you do understand the problem, right?

Wonderful. Catholics believe the Church is spiritual AND physical. A purely invisible church is not biblical and not it historical until Luther came along and invented it due to the damage sola scriptura had caused.

Luther undoubtedly made some serious mistakes but, as I see it, he really manifested a better intent to improve the situation and make it more like Jesus than those who determined the focus of the Catholic church. The church did work to improve their own image but was not much of that done only after they realized that a lot of people were agreeing with the criticisms of Luther and leaving her behind?

If Luther did damage, consider how much damage others had done to cause him to move away from where he had stood for many years. Without a doubt God did not want a further split to occur among believers, but the cause was effectively the same as it was in the day of Solomon when Solomon's ways caused God to give a large part of the kingdom to Jeroboam.

False ecumenism is giving up key elements of an identity of ones faith to crowd please. Truth doesn't "blend together" with falsehoods. But I favor ecumenical efforts when Protestants and Catholics work together for the common good, such as a soup kitchen or a clothing drive. How you get Nebuchadnezzar out of that is anybody's guess.

The Catholic Church favors ecumenism when the results favor the ways of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church approves of agreements made with Protestants when it move the Protestant toward the Catholic way. What should be occurring is a movement of all participants toward God. Both participants really miss that point in their compromises. As I said, clay and iron don't mix. You should read the Book of Daniel sometime. Read with the right Spirit it can be most enlightening.

You must live in a scary world. There are no monsters under the bed or in the closet.

"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matt 10:28

Of course some act as if they are more afraid of going against their church than going against God. If the shoe fits...

 

[ScottA]

Just giving you a little Scripture lesson on what the Church actually is because you don't seem to be able to grasp the concept.

Is it warm in here? Oh...yeah, that's the furnace.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Is it warm in here? Oh...yeah, that's the furnace.

I HOPE it's just the furnace - for YOUR sake . . .

 

[tabletalk]

My church, as you call it, strives to let the Holy Spirit lead the way. They do fail but not so much as those who start out with a pre-set program for worship services as do most Protestants and Catholics. The program excludes God unless God is willing to follow man's program. How does that work? It works like the Israelites who decided they wanted a king even though the prophet and God were against it. God allows men to go their own way for a bit, but eventually men will have to pay the piper.

My friend, even a newspaper is not the monument to truth that your mention of it might suggest. It is easy to lie by suppressing the more important known but unpopular [to the controllers of newspaper content] events and putting the ones you support in larger print on the front page.

As to history books, I have nothing against them, but they tend to be painted with a brush controlled by the powers that be, whether they reflect the truth or not. Even a very honest historian is often hindered by the system and what other people have witnessed with their own eyes. What the honest historian must use for the most part comes from someone else who may not be as trustworthy as he is. Of course, some historians are themselves not too trustworthy so you do understand the problem, right?


Luther undoubtedly made some serious mistakes but he really manifested a better intent to really improve the situation and make it more like Jesus than those who determined the focus of the Catholic church. The church did work to improve their image but was not much of that done only after they realized that a lot of people were agreeing with the criticisms of Luther and leaving her behind?

If Luther did damage, consider how much damage others had done to cause him to move away from where he had stood for many years. Without a doubt God did not want a further split to occur among believers, but cause was effectively as it was in the day of Solomon when Solomon's ways caused God to give a large part of the kingdom to Jeroboam.



The Catholic Church favor ecumenism when the results favor the ways of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church approves of agreements made with Protestants when it move the Protestant toward the Catholic way, when what should be occurring is a movement of all participants toward God. As I said, clay and iron don't mix. You should read the Book of Daniel sometime. Read with the right Spirit it can be most enlightening.



"And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." Matt 10:28

Of course some act as if they are more afraid of going against their church than going against God. If the shoe fits...

You said: "...a pre-set program for worship services as do most Protestants and Catholics. The program excludes God unless God is willing to follow man's program."

Would you think a church should follow, approximately, what the very early church did? Such as:

From Acts 2:
40. "And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation.” 41. Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. 43 Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, 45. and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.

46. So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, 47. praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved."

This looks like the start of the church and the pattern is: the apostles' doctrine (teaching/preaching), fellowship (Christian fellowship, not merely a social club), breaking of bread (communion?) and prayer (corporate). They all believed. But, shortly it seems, the church stopped being communal with common goods and possessions.

Is this a man-centered program? Or, maybe churches around the world are trying to honor God by meeting for worship and praising Him, singing to Him, confessing sin to Him, communing with Him and hearing the Word preached?
I think a lot of churches do this. Lot's of them don't.

 

[amadeus]

@tabletalk
People like to be comfortable physically... but also spiritually. They usually choose to sit on a rough rock rather than on the low down ground. They usually choose to sit on a wooden bench rather than the rough rock. They choose the cushioned easy chair rather than that rock. When I was a kid I remember going to a camp meeting with my grandmother which was actually held outdoors in stuffy smelly tent during Oklahoma's summer heat and sat on rough wooden benches, but people tolerated the physical discomfort to get something more from God.

In the last few years I attended two camp meetings held in a nice air-conditioned building with very comfortable cushioned seats. My pastor, age 92 was there and recalled when as a young boy in 1936 he attending a camp meeting in a tent and at night he shared a pup tent with another boy with only a blanket separating them from the rough ground. Now a few people have rooms with nice beds within air-conditioned buildings on the camp ground. Those not in that group have to pay cost of a motel room for several nights. Any one who cannot afford the cost, does not go to the meeting. Sleeping in a tent on the ground is not even a considered option. No one sleeps in a tent at camp meeting today. See any problem there?

Man has made his adjustments to fit his tender backside physically, but perhaps spiritually as well to fit what...?

Testimonies in most places are only allowed when the pastor or minister "in charge" decides it is time for those so inclined to stand and tell how God has helped them. There can be no burning testimony given outside of the pastor's time frame.

No room for a passing itinerant preacher to preach unless he has talked to the pastor about it and had it cleared and put into the program ahead of time. If it happens to be the angel Gabriel with a message direct from God, unless he has proper credentials acceptable to the pastor he probably cannot be worked in until later... but more likely never.

Songs are sung, but only at designated times as previously arranged through the pastor or the minister in charge of the program for that service. If the program is full try for another day. That the Holy Spirit is touching someone's heart right now to sing a certain song onto God is not ever on the program.

The preacher has his message all prepared with a few written notes or even with a full sheet of paper. He's been working on it for a couple of days to make it fit the description given about it in the previous week's church bulletin. He did not check in with God this morning to see if God might some special message for the people today. Special messages from God must also fit into the program. If not then not.

 

[tabletalk]

@tabletalk
People like to be comfortable physically... but also spiritually. They usually choose to sit on a rough rock rather than on the low down ground. They usually choose to sit on a wooden bench rather than the rough rock. They choose the cushioned easy chair rather than that rock. When I was a kid I remember going to a camp meeting with my grandmother which was actually held outdoors in stuffy smelly tent during Oklahoma's summer heat and sat on rough wooden benches, but people tolerated the physical discomfort to get something more from God.

In the last few years I attended two camp meetings held in a nice air-conditioned building with very comfortable cushioned seats. My pastor, age 92 was there and recalled when as a young boy in 1936 he attending a camp meeting in a tent and at night he shared a pup tent with another boy with only a blanket separating them from the rough ground. Now a few people have rooms with nice beds within air-conditioned buildings on the camp ground. Those not in that group have to pay cost of a motel room for several nights. Any one who cannot afford the cost, does not go to the meeting. Sleeping in a tent on the ground is not even a considered option. No one sleeps in a tent at camp meeting today. See any problem there?

Man has made his adjustments to fit his tender backside physically, but perhaps spiritually as well to fit what...?

Testimonies in most places are only allowed when the pastor or minister "in charge" decides it is time for those so inclined to stand and tell how God has helped them. There can be no burning testimony given outside of the pastor's time frame.

No room for a passing itinerant preacher to preach unless he has talked to the pastor about it and had it cleared and put into the program ahead of time. If it happens to be the angel Gabriel with a message direct from God, unless he has proper credentials acceptable to the pastor he probably cannot be worked in until later... but more likely never.

Songs are sung, but only at designated times as previously arranged through the pastor or the minister in charge of the program for that service. If the program is full try for another day. That the Holy Spirit is touching someone's heart right now to sing a certain song onto God is not ever on the program.

The preacher has his message all prepared with a few written notes or even with a full sheet of paper. He's been working on it for a couple of days to make it fit the description given about it in the previous week's church bulletin. He did not check in with God this morning to see if God might some special message for the people today. Special messages from God must also fit into the program. If not then not.

Sounds like you prefer chaos instead of order.
Sounds like you hate the Church of God.

 

[BreadOfLife]

My church, as you call it, strives to let the Holy Spirit lead the way.

And what happens when 2 or more people disagree with the rest and claim that the Holy Spirit guided them down a different road.
WHO is right??

 

[amadeus]

Sounds like you prefer chaos instead of order.
Sounds like you hate the Church of God.

No, what I am seeking really is God's order. He does have one clearly outlined in the scriptures for those who are really seeking it.

I do not have it.

I see problems as everyone sees problems, but the solutions are not mine, but God's. Man generally looks to himself for solutions instead of to God so he gets what he is looking for his own flawed solutions and his own flawed results.

 

[amadeus]

And what happens when 2 or more people disagree with the rest and claim that the Holy Spirit guided them down a different road.
WHO is right??

Only God is always right. The Holy Spirit does not contradict God. Men contradict God because while they may listen to Holy Spirit in part, in another part they listen to themselves. The reason there are so many disagreements among believers is that they keep refusing to come together in His Name. Many of them do not understand what that means. But... some do. Do you not believe that God is capable of leading people who have submitted themselves to Him?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Only God is always right. The Holy Spirit does not contradict God. Men contradict God because while they may listen to Holy Spirit in part, in another part they listen to themselves. The reason there are so many disagreements among believers is that they keep refusing to come together in His Name. Many of them do not understand what that means. But... some do. Do you not believe that God is capable of leading people who have submitted themselves to Him?

And there you have the poisonous fruit of Protestantism.

God doesn't reveal His truth to each individual devoid of a Church. Jesus left us with the Authority of His Church to teach the world (Matt. 28:16-20) - that whoever accepted or rejected what that Church taught accepted or rejected God Himself.

 

[ScottA]

And there you have the poisonous fruit of Protestantism.

God doesn't reveal His truth to each individual devoid of a Church. Jesus left us with the Authority of His Church to teach the world (Matt. 28:16-20) - that whoever accepted or rejected what that Church taught accepted or rejected God Himself.

I already gave you all the scriptures that prove that position wrong: https://www.christianityboard.com/threads/catholics.23561/page-123#post-342640

But here you are again beating on just one side of the drum, taking away from the word of God.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And there you have the poisonous fruit of Protestantism.

I already gave you all the scriptures that prove that position wrong: https://www.christianityboard.com/threads/catholics.23561/page-123#post-342640

But here you are again beating on just one side of the drum, taking away from the word of God.

None of what you posted in post #2448 proves me "wrong" at all.
It only bolsters the Catholic position as to what the Church is.

 

[ScottA]

None of what you posted in post #2448 proves me "wrong" at all.
It only bolsters the Catholic position as to what the Church is.

The jury is in...you just don't know it yet. And you didn't fair so well.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The jury is in...you just don't know it yet. And you didn't fair so well.

Actually - the jury is out - and there is still time for you to come home to Christ's Church instead of living in rebellion against Him.

 

[ScottA]

Actually - the jury is out - and there is still time for you to come home to Christ's Church instead of living in rebellion against Him.

I could say the same to you.

But you speak as one who does not know that "the kingdom of God is within you", and you would have me "look here" and "look there" - but I know better than to listen to your kind...for He is in me, and I am in Him (already).