Former Christian
Member
Jasoncran
where?
FC
where?
FC
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Former Christian
Member
StoveBolts
“I'll not capitalize churches for to do so is to reference the Ekklesia. So please know that when I write churches, it is in reference to man's ideas of what the Ekklesia should look like.”
You still believe that Church and ekklesia are fundamentally the same thing. I no longer do. It does no good to not capitalize the word Church, because in Christianity it has a distinct meaning that refers to a Church that has both a universal and a local aspect. The ekklesia in the NT have no universal aspect because each ekklesia is intended to be a local expression of what is truly universal. One way the universal is described is the Body of Christ. Another is the Temple or residence of God. Another is the Kingdom of the Son.
“While it is true that there is much man made religion within the churches, I don't think it's fair to proverbially throw out the baby with the bath water as there are a lot of members within the churches that belong to the Church.”
It is difficult to respond to this since our understanding of the terminology is different. It’s very evident in that last statement. Remember, I don’t believe that “The Church” or “the Church” is an expression of anything but the organizational mind of man.
I believe that there are those who are in Christ in all of the denominations of Christianity. In that sense they are members of Churches in Christianity. But I’m not throwing out the baby with the bathwater. If you’re referring to the ones who are in Christ as the baby, which is what it seems, consider what I just said. If you’re referring to churches or “the Church” as the baby, then that baby needs to be thrown out so the ones who are in Christ can see and experience the ekklesia as the NT writers intended.
“As true followers of Christ, I'm finding out that we ought not throw our dirty laundry around to openly and I'm reminded of Noah's nakedness. Some things are just best unsaid to other people.”
Sorry if you consider some things I consider to be true to be dirty laundry. Denominationalism and the idea of Churches that is fundamental to denominationalism in Christianity is much more and much worse than dirty laundry to me. You speak quite differently from members of Churches of Christ that I know. They agree fundamentally with what I believe about Christianity, even though they continue to use the terminology that Christianity uses. The Restoration Movement as I understand it has a definite understanding of churches that not only differs from the rest of Christianity, but attempts to restore these Christianity Churches to the ideal of what Restorationism thinks a true church is. I tell those I know that understanding the difference between what a Church is and what an ekklesia is, is crucial. But in that their understanding of the matter is similar to yours. They just have another definition of Church or church instead of using what the NT already defines as ekklesia.
“Paul writes to the Corinthians that we ought to stay where we have been saved, and when I question the why, I conclude that perhaps we are the ones who are able to make a difference where we're at. If we leave the environment where we are saved, then we are no better off than the prodigal son who took his inheritance and spent it far off, when it could have been used to better the current situation.”
Again, I’m sorry you feel that I’m like the prodigal son. By your estimation, I still should be a mean fundamentalist Baptist with the same Calvinistic ideas as Savedbygrace. I’d rather be an Atheist, sorry to say, now that I know what it is in relation to what the NT says. And besides, it was I who was asked to leave. So the possibility of being an influence there was nil. Denominationalists are very hard to convince of anything they don’t already believe. Until they finally open their mind to be taught by Jesus Christ alone. And can realize that Biblical interpretation is no way to understand the Bible.
“While the church as a whole isn't perfect, I'm certainly not running from it. No, I am trying to make a difference within it. Because it's not my say who's part of the Church, even within my own church.”
The “church as a whole” isn’t perfect because it’s a man-made entity that isn’t ruled by Jesus Christ. It’s ruled by men plain and simple. If the evidence for the supernatural was only Christianity, it would be proof that the supernatural doesn’t exist. The fact that I’m on this forum proves that I haven’t run away from Christianity. Wouldn’t be much sense to be here if that’s what I‘ve done. Even though the ekklesia exists in every city wherein those who are in Christ reside, it isn’t practically expressed in the city I’m in. Only the Churches or denominations of Christianity is expressed here. So I attend one of those Churches that is closest in expression to what the NT describes. Not the Church itself, but the Liturgical function, the Worship Service. Not my say who’s part of that Church either. But it does give me a way to have a community of sorts. The closest that can be had in any denomination without being part and parcel of the denomination itself.
As far as you making a difference from within, good luck with that. It’ll work out perhaps so long as they think you’re one of them. Paul said he did that, be all things to all people that he might save some. I find that hard to believe seeing how staunch he generally was. But maybe he was a better actor than I am. Or maybe he didn’t have to act. He did seem to identify himself with the Jews when with the Jews and with the Gentiles when with the Gentiles. Too fine a line for me to walk with any integrity. My view of Christianity and the ekklesia and how they differ prevents me from identifying with Christianity. But not with being friends with some who are a part of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, other religions, and various Atheistic philosophies.
I have a good friend who’s a Sikh, a really nice guy. Good family man and all the usual things that make a person a nice person in the natural realm. He wears a turban and ring around one wrist that identifies him outwardly as a Sikh. Just happens he’s not a Christian. He puts some Christians to shame as far as how he treats people and even some of his beliefs. But we do believe in a lot of things in common. And our friendship is based on what we have in common rather than what we don’t. And it seems that belief in Jesus Christ as the only way to be saved is one of the few things that we don’t have in common. That relationship would probably be enough to confirm me as a non-believer in the eyes of some Christians. And considering some of the Christians I’ve known, dirty laundry in the face that airs itself.
FC
“I'll not capitalize churches for to do so is to reference the Ekklesia. So please know that when I write churches, it is in reference to man's ideas of what the Ekklesia should look like.”
You still believe that Church and ekklesia are fundamentally the same thing. I no longer do. It does no good to not capitalize the word Church, because in Christianity it has a distinct meaning that refers to a Church that has both a universal and a local aspect. The ekklesia in the NT have no universal aspect because each ekklesia is intended to be a local expression of what is truly universal. One way the universal is described is the Body of Christ. Another is the Temple or residence of God. Another is the Kingdom of the Son.
“While it is true that there is much man made religion within the churches, I don't think it's fair to proverbially throw out the baby with the bath water as there are a lot of members within the churches that belong to the Church.”
It is difficult to respond to this since our understanding of the terminology is different. It’s very evident in that last statement. Remember, I don’t believe that “The Church” or “the Church” is an expression of anything but the organizational mind of man.
I believe that there are those who are in Christ in all of the denominations of Christianity. In that sense they are members of Churches in Christianity. But I’m not throwing out the baby with the bathwater. If you’re referring to the ones who are in Christ as the baby, which is what it seems, consider what I just said. If you’re referring to churches or “the Church” as the baby, then that baby needs to be thrown out so the ones who are in Christ can see and experience the ekklesia as the NT writers intended.
“As true followers of Christ, I'm finding out that we ought not throw our dirty laundry around to openly and I'm reminded of Noah's nakedness. Some things are just best unsaid to other people.”
Sorry if you consider some things I consider to be true to be dirty laundry. Denominationalism and the idea of Churches that is fundamental to denominationalism in Christianity is much more and much worse than dirty laundry to me. You speak quite differently from members of Churches of Christ that I know. They agree fundamentally with what I believe about Christianity, even though they continue to use the terminology that Christianity uses. The Restoration Movement as I understand it has a definite understanding of churches that not only differs from the rest of Christianity, but attempts to restore these Christianity Churches to the ideal of what Restorationism thinks a true church is. I tell those I know that understanding the difference between what a Church is and what an ekklesia is, is crucial. But in that their understanding of the matter is similar to yours. They just have another definition of Church or church instead of using what the NT already defines as ekklesia.
“Paul writes to the Corinthians that we ought to stay where we have been saved, and when I question the why, I conclude that perhaps we are the ones who are able to make a difference where we're at. If we leave the environment where we are saved, then we are no better off than the prodigal son who took his inheritance and spent it far off, when it could have been used to better the current situation.”
Again, I’m sorry you feel that I’m like the prodigal son. By your estimation, I still should be a mean fundamentalist Baptist with the same Calvinistic ideas as Savedbygrace. I’d rather be an Atheist, sorry to say, now that I know what it is in relation to what the NT says. And besides, it was I who was asked to leave. So the possibility of being an influence there was nil. Denominationalists are very hard to convince of anything they don’t already believe. Until they finally open their mind to be taught by Jesus Christ alone. And can realize that Biblical interpretation is no way to understand the Bible.
“While the church as a whole isn't perfect, I'm certainly not running from it. No, I am trying to make a difference within it. Because it's not my say who's part of the Church, even within my own church.”
The “church as a whole” isn’t perfect because it’s a man-made entity that isn’t ruled by Jesus Christ. It’s ruled by men plain and simple. If the evidence for the supernatural was only Christianity, it would be proof that the supernatural doesn’t exist. The fact that I’m on this forum proves that I haven’t run away from Christianity. Wouldn’t be much sense to be here if that’s what I‘ve done. Even though the ekklesia exists in every city wherein those who are in Christ reside, it isn’t practically expressed in the city I’m in. Only the Churches or denominations of Christianity is expressed here. So I attend one of those Churches that is closest in expression to what the NT describes. Not the Church itself, but the Liturgical function, the Worship Service. Not my say who’s part of that Church either. But it does give me a way to have a community of sorts. The closest that can be had in any denomination without being part and parcel of the denomination itself.
As far as you making a difference from within, good luck with that. It’ll work out perhaps so long as they think you’re one of them. Paul said he did that, be all things to all people that he might save some. I find that hard to believe seeing how staunch he generally was. But maybe he was a better actor than I am. Or maybe he didn’t have to act. He did seem to identify himself with the Jews when with the Jews and with the Gentiles when with the Gentiles. Too fine a line for me to walk with any integrity. My view of Christianity and the ekklesia and how they differ prevents me from identifying with Christianity. But not with being friends with some who are a part of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, other religions, and various Atheistic philosophies.
I have a good friend who’s a Sikh, a really nice guy. Good family man and all the usual things that make a person a nice person in the natural realm. He wears a turban and ring around one wrist that identifies him outwardly as a Sikh. Just happens he’s not a Christian. He puts some Christians to shame as far as how he treats people and even some of his beliefs. But we do believe in a lot of things in common. And our friendship is based on what we have in common rather than what we don’t. And it seems that belief in Jesus Christ as the only way to be saved is one of the few things that we don’t have in common. That relationship would probably be enough to confirm me as a non-believer in the eyes of some Christians. And considering some of the Christians I’ve known, dirty laundry in the face that airs itself.
FC
jasoncran
Member
the forum where you claimed it was deleted.