Do I Have To Go To Church?

[amadeus]

How in the world does that say you can worship God any way that you like, which was I was arguing against? It doesn't.

All I did was post the verses showing that a person can worship who they will. I drew no conclusions and made no statements. I thought you were the one who insisted on the Bible alone?

 

[amadeus]

How is this relevant?

You said that he @mjrhealth never dealt with that verse. I posted a link to his post where he did deal with it. So what you said was not true. You should be more careful about making untrue statements. The verse cited tells you why.

 

[FHII]

Yes, you're generally accurate. I wanted to put in there what is it you're getting at. Also don't want others taking off with your comment and thinking the text isn't for Jews.

Alright... I can accept that. Good call... The Roman Epistle is primarily to the gentiles as it explains some things to them concerning their acceptance into God's fold. But there isn't two sets of rules. In Christ there is neither Greek or Jew.

For those who may not have followed Mjrhealth and my conversation, here's the short sumnary and the reason for what I said:

Mjrhealth noted that Jesus taught on hilltops, beaches, bars and such. I noted while that is true, he daily taught in the Temple (which is like what a Church is today). His rebuttal was that it didn't count because it was a Jewish obliguation and we weren't Jewish. My response was that if you are going to point out that Jesus taught in all these other places, you shouldn't leave out the temple. And furthermore, I pointed out what was written in Romans 10:14-17 was to the gentiles, so you can't dismiss it as a Jewish thing we (as gentiles) aren't bound to.its says faith comes by hearing and you can't hear without a preacher. It's true for gentiles and Jews alike.

 

[mjrhealth]

And again, you engage in ad hominem because you can't interact with the actual arguments. You have shown you know your position is faulty and are too prideful to admit it.

See big words again, cant help yourself, as pointed out by another, we are the church, it isnt a building and Christ would have that no man rule and reign over that who belong to Him, but men would have it otherwise, and so many people sitting in church filing the pews, like the foolish virgins when that door is shut, will be left out, because they wont let Jesus be Lord over them, they prefered another,

Luk 22:25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
Luk 22:26 But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

and again

Col_1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

God bles

 

[101G]

Addressing the OP only, not having read all the post. but consider this. we are the church, Christ body, is christ divided, or seperated from one another?. and the scripture is clear, Hebrews 10:25 "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching".

1 Corinthians 12:12 "For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.
1 Corinthians 12:13 "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
1 Corinthians 12:14 "For the body is not one member, but many.
1 Corinthians 12:15 "If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
1 Corinthians 12:16 "And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
1 Corinthians 12:17 "If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
1 Corinthians 12:18 "But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
1 Corinthians 12:19 "And if they were all one member, where were the body?
1 Corinthians 12:20 "But now are they many members, yet but one body.
1 Corinthians 12:21 "And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
1 Corinthians 12:22 "Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
1 Corinthians 12:23 "And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
1 Corinthians 12:24 "For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
1 Corinthians 12:25 "That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
1 Corinthians 12:26 "And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
1 Corinthians 12:27 "Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
1 Corinthians 12:28 "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
1 Corinthians 12:29 "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
1 Corinthians 12:30 "Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
1 Corinthians 12:31 "But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

so wherever you gather, at a building or at a home, YOU are the church.

PICJAG.

 

[FHII]

It may seem the right thing to do but in fact there is no mention of 'going to church' in the bible and that is because we are the church. Scripture talks of meeting together but that would have been in homes or in the market place or anywhere else really, as they didn't have specific buildings.

It's true that they met in various places and didn't have a "church building". But they still went to Church. Whatever the appointed as the meeting place was the Church. Before I offer my reasoning, let's consider why they didn't have a Church building. It's an obvious answer if you know your history. They were too few in number, didn't have the funding and were too persecuted to have one. That's simple enough to understand.

Today, you can still have Church in a grove, on a hilltop, on a beach, in someone's home or in a bar (attendance may be better in the latter!). As I stated, Jesus had daily services in a temple. (That alone is enough to counter the theory that there wasn't a Church building... Jesus taught in a temple!)

But here's the thing... Let's say they held it in private homes. Consider there verses:

1 Corinthians 11:18 KJV
For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.

There are three phrases I want to discuss. The first is in bold. "When ye come together". This is saints (Christians) being "the Church". Yes, the believers are "the Church". There is no denying that.

The second is in italics: "... In the church...". We have the Church (believers) coming together in the church. Paul called it the church! It was a location. Maybe a private house. Nothing other can be seen from this other than they were meeting in one place. The came together in one location. Let's just say it was a private home... Fine. It was called "the church".

The 3rd phrase is"I hear that there are divisions". Well, Paul was not pleased with it, and this report was the means to set some ground rules and doctrines which govern behavior in church.

So, before I go on, this one verse established or starts to establish various things: 1. The body of believers are to come together in physically; 2. They met at a certain location which was called the church (meaning it was a location, not just a spiritual presence around the region) and 3. The were about to be rules established for when physical bodies gathered.

In all of this, it was not questioned as to whether they should go. The assumption is that they would. He did not say"If you come together.. ".

Now, about the "private home" idea...

1 Corinthians 11:20 KJV
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.

Again, they were coming together. Now these Corinthians were abusing the occasion, as the next verse details. I will skip that for now...

1 Corinthians 11:22 KJV
What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.

1 Corinthians 11:34 KJV
And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.

What I put in bold is what I want to get at. The physical place they gathered at may have been a private home, but it ceased being one when The Church (the believers) gathered. It was no longer a house or a home. It was officially a church building and there were rules to follow. If it was "Bob's house, it was no longer "Bob's house" for that two or three or twelve hours. It was the Church building because the Church was there. And Bob lost all ability to take a break and have himself a sandwich with a glass of wine.

People are getting hung up on the whole "a building isn't the Church" thing. I agree! It's not but they have to assemble somewhere. Today, many Nations (not all) are blessed that they can go somewhere to worship. Yet, they despise the idea.

I am very sympathetic to the notion that organized religion isn't following the Bible. I get that...But this whole notion that a building is unbiblical is foolish. It's foolish for historical reasons and these verses clearly show that there is a "church location" in which even if it's a private home, it ceased to be one during the gathering.

 

[Pearl]

The Church met together. Not in 'churches' any more that the Church meets in churches today. The people are the Church not the buildings. So yes they did meet together as my post stated.

 

[FHII]

The Church met together. Not in 'churches' any more that the Church meets in churches today. The people are the Church not the buildings. So yes they did meet together as my post stated.

The Church meets in a church. That's what Paul said! Yes, it can be a private home, a Grove or a bar. It can also be a temple. Jesus or Paul or Peter spoke, Church as in session.

And there were rules to follow and there was a government involved. Stick around, and I will give evidence.

 

[mjrhealth]

Yet, they despise the idea.

Not the idea, it is "church" that is the problem, Do you know who in your church are believers an which are not, can you tell the wolf in sheeps clothing from the sheep, or the wheat from the tares... because Jesus said they would both grow together than they would be separated because we cant tell, and who do wish to rule and reign over you, Christ or your pastor, and what truth do you want, the one from Christ or that from your teachers, and what church do you want top be joined to our Lords or mens, Which religion is your flavour they are all divided and all preach a different gospel, and in whom is you faith, Christ or men

 

[amadeus]

so wherever you gather, at a building or at a home, YOU are the church.

PICJAG.

IF you are a member of the Body of Christ!

 

[FHII]

Clearly you have no desire to learn the truth. You are stuck worshipping your own version of Jesus, and you clearly do not study, nor want to study, the Word of God.

Reformed, I like you and agree with you. I know Mjrhealth isn't innocent either... But this type of posting should stop.

 

[reformed1689]

Reformed, I like you and agree with you. I know Mjrhealth isn't innocent either... But this type of posting should stop.

We are to rebuke false teaching, so why should that type of post stop?

 

[reformed1689]

See big words again, cant help yourself, as pointed out by another, we are the church, it isnt a building and Christ would have that no man rule and reign over that who belong to Him, but men would have it otherwise, and so many people sitting in church filing the pews, like the foolish virgins when that door is shut, will be left out, because they wont let Jesus be Lord over them, they prefered another,

Luk 22:25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
Luk 22:26 But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

and again

Col_1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

God bles

And what were the big words here? More false accusation because you have no Scriptural argument against what I actually stated. All you do is take Scripture out of context.

 

[reformed1689]

You said that he @mjrhealth never dealt with that verse. I posted a link to his post where he did deal with it. So what you said was not true. You should be more careful about making untrue statements. The verse cited tells you why.

No, you cited a post where he did NOT deal with Hebrews at all. Rather, he posted another passage without dealing with the Hebrews passage. So no, what I said was absolutely true and not a false statement.

 

[reformed1689]

All I did was post the verses showing that a person can worship who they will. I drew no conclusions and made no statements. I thought you were the one who insisted on the Bible alone?

First, That was not the argument. The argument that we are allowed to worship God anyway we like and that He accepts it, that is not scriptural.

And sola scriptura is not the same thing as solo scriptura.

 

[mjrhealth]

First, That was not the argument. The argument that we are allowed to worship God anyway we like and that He accepts it, that is not scriptural.

And sola scriptura is not the same thing as solo scriptura.

Actually you do, the cathoilcs do it there way, the protestants another, the SDA another , all divided in there religions,

 

[amadeus]

No, you cited a post where he did NOT deal with Hebrews at all. Rather, he posted another passage without dealing with the Hebrews passage. So no, what I said was absolutely true and not a false statement.

Communication!
"und nicht verlassen unsere Versammlung, wie etliche pflegen, sondern einander ermahnen; und das so viel mehr, soviel ihr sehet, daß sich der Tag naht."

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Clearly you have no desire to learn the truth. You are stuck worshipping your own version of Jesus, and you clearly do not study, nor want to study, the Word of God.

Agreed.

 

[reformed1689]

Communication!
"und nicht verlassen unsere Versammlung, wie etliche pflegen, sondern einander ermahnen; und das so viel mehr, soviel ihr sehet, daß sich der Tag naht."

Not sure how posting the verse in German changes anything I said....

 

[amadeus]

First, That was not the argument. The argument that we are allowed to worship God anyway we like and that He accepts it, that is not scriptural.

But this is scriptural:

"But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him." John 4:24

And therein, although you may not see it or understand it or accept it, is nonetheless that which you say is not there. If it is done according what God put in a man's heart and that is what the man "likes" it is good!

Take it up your disagreement with God!

And sola scriptura is not the same thing as solo scriptura.

You brought it up...why? God help the poor pew sitter who has not a clue. Is he as a result of his ignorance lost? Oh, no, it makes no difference whether he know it or not since he is either elect or not. Ignorance matters not at all! So what is the point of even bringing it up?