End of the Church Age? From corporate to individualism

[Cornelius]

By the way there is only ONE church and there can always only be ONE church. But this church is not represented by ANY one denomination, even those like the RCC that falsely claim to be THE church. They too have far too many error, to make such a claim.

Just the fact that somebody formed a group and called it something, takes then outside the true church.
The true church has always walked outside denominations. It started in the time of Paul already, that denominations started to form:



1Co 1:12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? (denominations) was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?

So here we can see that they started dividing into denominations (the "Paulists" and the "Apolloists" and the "Cephasts") and Paul was rebuking them for it. But we went that way anyway.

 

[stranger]

Cornelius wrote:

Its not locations that divided the church, but doctrine.

What you are referring to , is simply the church (called out ones) that gathered in different cities. That did not divide them, they were still ONE.

Today its doctrine that divides and not location.

Hello Cornelius,

I'm not commenting about what causes division in the Church -- but ask which 'church' was the believer 'automatically part of?'

You have essentially answered --- whatever city the believer lived in.. eg Corinth. I suggest that since Church = ecclesia = assembly of saints. A believer separated from the church was not in/part of the assembly of the saints.

blessings

 

[Cornelius]

Cornelius wrote:

Its not locations that divided the church, but doctrine.

What you are referring to , is simply the church (called out ones) that gathered in different cities. That did not divide them, they were still ONE.

Today its doctrine that divides and not location.

Hello Cornelius,

I'm not commenting about what causes division in the Church -- but ask which 'church' was the believer 'automatically part of?'

You have essentially answered --- whatever city the believer lived in.. eg Corinth. I suggest that since Church = ecclesia = assembly of saints. A believer separated from the church was not in/part of the assembly of the saints.

blessings

There is no answer to your question, because you cannot ask "which church" (which would mean that you have a choice of churches) , because there has always only been the "called out ones ", meaning the body of Christ.

The word we translate as church simple means, the called out ones.. There is no "the" in the church.

People who do not understand this, "go" to church. They also think that their denomination could be "THE" church, like the RCC believes. Not possible.

A believer when they leave the world and repent, automatically is then part of the called out ones. They then make the mistake of looking for A church. There is no such thing in the Bible. "a" church, would mean that more than one church is possible. Its not.



C

 

[turnorburn]

Back when the church was thriving adding new members every day they went into
hiding the catacombs as an example.

I see that happening again, over the last few decades splinter groups cults if you
will made mockery out of Christianity by teaching outrageous doctrines, take
heavens gate and the hale bop comet..

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/halebopp/hg/index.htm

Then one cult possibly the worst mass murder suicide pact was Jim Jones and
the Guyana massacre.. I found out through a reliable source the man was a
warlock totally possessed.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/dc_jones.htm

Whatever the reason the new world order will be on the lookout for Christians
holding bible studies in there homes, California two weeks ago a Pastor and
his wife were sited warned if you will to have a permit or else.


turnorburn

 

[Cornelius]

We must not always look too far away from home. Cults are out there, but I am talking about those that we do not consider cults. In Paul's eyes, today's denominations would be unacceptable.

 

[Cornelius]

Whatever the reason the new world order will be on the lookout for Christians
holding bible studies in there homes, California two weeks ago a Pastor and
his wife were sited warned if you will to have a permit or else.


turnorburn

Do you have a link for this? This would be a good example for what is coming to all the world.

 

[stranger]

Hello Cornelius,

I'm not commenting about what causes division in the Church -- but ask which 'church' was the believer 'automatically part of?'

You have essentially answered --- whatever city the believer lived in.. eg Corinth. I suggest that since Church = ecclesia = assembly of saints. A believer separated from the church was not in/part of the assembly of the saints.

blessings

There is no answer to your question, because you cannot ask "which church" (which would mean that you have a choice of churches) , because there has always only been the "called out ones ", meaning the body of Christ.

The word we translate as church simple means, the called out ones.. There is no "the" in the church.

People who do not understand this, "go" to church. They also think that their denomination could be "THE" church, like the RCC believes. Not possible.

A believer when they leave the world and repent, automatically is then part of the called out ones. They then make the mistake of looking for A church. There is no such thing in the Bible. "a" church, would mean that more than one church is possible. Its not.

Hello Cornelius,

I will offer one answer to the question which Church for a believer in the city of Corinth in the 1st century. The assembly at Corinth where the believers broke bread together and probably drank from the same cup. Jesus did the same thing earlier with the disciples. What are you saying? That the early church did not meet together for prayer, teaching, worship? I must be misreading what you are affirming.

Let's forget the denominations and the later historical developments and see what happened in eg Corinth or any other city where there were called out ones.

blessings

 

[francisdesales]

What I'm seeing is people against joining a church, attempting to convince others to be of the same mind and in essence propagating the very apostasy that is claimed to be happening instead of putting forth the effort to do anything about the problems they profess.
It's like claiming a car is a piece of junk all the while using a sledge hammer on the engine.

I admit that after 30 years of Christianity I am against going to "church" I have not been able to sit in one lately, because I have not found any that stick to the Word only, they all stick to their denominational views above the Word. That is of course the reason they became a denomination in the first place. The Baptists do not agree with the Presbyterians, and the Charismatics do not agree with anybody else, the Catholics think they are correct, because they are the oldest mistake and so it carries on and on.

In other words, only you are able to "correctly" figure out the Word of God, thus, you must not join such people who "twist" the Word...

Such an attitude lacks true humility, in my opinion...

Read the Scriptures and tell me how often the Church was in total agreement on the "Word", however you define that... Your reasoning for not joining A church is poor, at best. It seems quite evident to me that God desires us to belong to a community of believers. Which one? God will lead you, if you submit to Him, rather than your own opinions.

Sorry, C, you are not the point of reference on what is the correct interpretation of the Word of God.

Regards

 

[Cornelius]

In other words, only you are able to "correctly" figure out the Word of God, thus, you must not join such people who "twist" the Word...

1Co 8:2 If any man thinketh that he knoweth anything, he knoweth not yet as he ought to know;

but God can reveal to truth to anybody who has humility enough to push aside his own doctrine and ask God to point out his errors to him.

Such an attitude lacks true humility, in my opinion...

In fact, you cannot receive truth without humility. God will not give it, He will resist you.1Pe 5:5 ............ for God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble.

Read the Scriptures and tell me how often the Church was in total agreement on the "Word", however you define that... Your reasoning for not joining A church is poor, at best. It seems quite evident to me that God desires us to belong to a community of believers. Which one? God will lead you, if you submit to Him, rather than your own opinions.

Who said I am not belonging to a community of believers?

Sorry, C, you are not the point of reference on what is the correct interpretation of the Word of God.

Which Word of God are referring to now ? In the other thread you said the Bible is not the Word of God.

 

[Cornelius]

Stranger, you are misreading my posts

C

 

[Imagican]

stranger,

I don't know why you have referenced the 'church' at Corinth. Of all the churches Paul addressed in epistle, THIS ONE was, by FAR, the one that was ERRING the MOST. While Paul was able to offer MEAT in a number of his epistles, he OPENLY stated to those in Corinth that they were STILL struggling with MILK. And that was TWO THOUSAND years ago.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

Which Word of God are referring to now ? In the other thread you said the Bible is not the Word of God.

By stating that internal evidence alone does not tell us Philemon is part of the Word of God does not mean that I think the Bible is not the Word of God. I have stated a number of times in that thread that I use OTHER means for determining that the Bible is the Word of God. Otherwise, you have a circular argument, since Philemon does not claim to be the Word of God.

 

[Cornelius]

Which Word of God are referring to now ? In the other thread you said the Bible is not the Word of God.

Apparently, you either are having a difficult time with reading comprehension - or you are just a flat out liar.

By stating that internal evidence alone does not tell us Philemon is part of the Word of God does not mean that I think the Bible is not the Word of God. I have stated a number of times in that thread that I use OTHER means for determining that the Bible is the Word of God. Otherwise, you have a circular argument, since Philemon does not claim to be the Word of God.

If you believed the Bible is the Word of God, you would not have a problem with it being the highest authority. But you do not believe its the highest authority now do you ?

C

 

[Cornelius]

Oh and the numeric pattern runs perfectly through Philemon as well

C

 

[Free]

Many of us personally believe this is a false teaching that only leads to further division within God's ekklesia.

There are several major problems with a response to the above post, which I will break down:

Just something to think about re ekklesia: If it can be divided, it is not truly the ekklesia.

To say that "If it can be divided, it is not truly the ekklesia," is patently false. This is seen in the fact that Paul, despite stating that divisions existed, never stated that those churches were therefore not a part of the ekklesia. Logically speaking, your conclusion does not follow. There is a whole lot more to prove before such a statement can be made.

In truth the "called out ones" have left 1) the world 2) the apostate church 3) doctrines of man.

They have moved into 1)holiness 2) agreement with the Word alone.

The obvious implication is that those who are still in "the apostate church" are not called out, not saved.

Aside from that, the first glaring error here is that the claim that the church is apostate. That has not at all been even remotely proved, nor can it be. The second glaring error is that man can leave “doctrines of manâ€Â. Whether in the church or out of it, one forms doctrines based on what they read. To say that those who have left the church, such as yourself, are in agreement with the Word while those in the church are not, is nonsense.

So they cannot be divided and still be in agreement with the Word.

Again, this is not what Scripture shows.

Those who disagree with some aspect of the Word, is not truly "called out".

This is fallacious since it presupposes that all those who leave the church, who are called out, are in full agreement with the Word. But this is clearly false since you will have just as many varieties of beliefs among those not in the church as there is among those in the church.

The greater danger in leaving the church is the rise of aberrant, errant, dangerous teachings. You now have any number of individuals and groups making up whatever doctrine they choose with no accountability to a governing body.

To prove my point all I need is to point out the differences in beliefs between you and Imagican, to pick only two.

We are either walking with the doctrine of our church, or we are walking with God and His Word.

We cannot do both and still claim to be "called out"

Again, this is poor reasoning.


Some of this might have been dealt with already but I haven't had the time to keep up. As it is, this post was done over a couple of days so it might not be put together well. But the points are made and should be comprehensible.

 

[Imagican]

IF a 'group' of believers believes in FALSE DOCTRINE, then they are NOT members of the Body of Christ. It's really that simple. And ANYONE that KNOWS God and His Son KNOWS this without ANY doubt in their hearts or minds.

So, Free, which GROUP do you follow that follows in TRUTH?

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Simple question;

Are the churches that you attend and worship withing DOING 'wondersous THINGS in the name of Chirst?'

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Cornelius]

To say that "If it can be divided, it is not truly the ekklesia," is patently false. This is seen in the fact that Paul, despite stating that divisions existed, never stated that those churches were therefore not a part of the ekklesia. Logically speaking, your conclusion does not follow. There is a whole lot more to prove before such a statement can be made.

1)You cannot seriously be thinking that just because believers were in different cities that they were actually divided? The Bible identifies groups of believers, all from the SAME "called out ones" , coming together in different locations like Ephesus and Jerusalem. What gives you the idea that they were divided in their doctrine?
2) And Paul said that the ekklesia cannot be divided in doctrine, because the body of Christ cannot be divided. So denominations are wrong.1Co 1:12 Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos: and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. (These are all examples of the classic start of denominations )
1Co 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?


Answer: No Christ is not divided, denominations are man made divisions .

 

[Cornelius]

Aside from that, the first glaring error here is that the claim that the church is apostate.

Do you have a church that is run by the five fold ministry, that operates in miracles, that raises the dead and heal the sick ? Does your church believe that the apostles are not here today anymore? Tongues, did they pass away? Do you believe in once saved always saved? Does your church teach that the curse will only be removed in heaven. Are you being taught that healing will only be perfected in heaven? Will you manifest Christ on this planet ? or are you waiting for heaven. Do you believe that we can be perfected by God on this planet? or again........only in heaven. Has your blessing been postponed into.........heaven ? Do you walk in power today or are you waiting for .............heaven? Do you prophecy or listen to prophecy , do you dream dreams and see visions?

I can carry on, because the church is believing another gospel today and do not even realize they are apostate.

That has not at all been even remotely proved, nor can it be. The second glaring error is that man can leave “doctrines of manâ€Â. Whether in the church or out of it, one forms doctrines based on what they read. To say that those who have left the church, such as yourself, are in agreement with the Word while those in the church are not, is nonsense.

I am stunned. You do not believe you can leave the doctrines of man? So you base all your hope and your eternity into the hands of men.
For instance, you will not be able to live according to the gospel if you are locked into the RCC. Maybe you know this , I am now not so sure that you do. But if you are in the RCC you will be asked to pray to Mary, and obviously you will then follow the doctrine of men and not of God. So tell me, how does one live as a Catholic and still not get involved idolatry ? That is just one simple example.


You wrote that we CAN be divided and still walk in agreement with the Word.But the Bible says you cannot:Amo 3:3 Shall two walk together, except they have agreed?

This is fallacious since it presupposes that all those who leave the church, who are called out, are in full agreement with the Word. But this is clearly false since you will have just as many varieties of beliefs among those not in the church as there is among those in the church.

You are thinking that its impossible for God to bring revelation of truth to those who want it.

The greater danger in leaving the church is the rise of aberrant, errant, dangerous teachings. You now have any number of individuals and groups making up whatever doctrine they choose with no accountability to a governing body.

That cannot happen when we truly follow the Bible. Its when MEN come and want to RULE that we move into error. Jesus hated the Nicolaitan error, because its the great evil in the body of Christ , even today.

To prove my point all I need is to point out the differences in beliefs between you and Imagican, to pick only two.

Leaving the church and leaving doctrine are two different matters. Being called out, does not only mean we leave the building behind, but it also means we must leave our pet doctrines behind too. Many walk outside the denominations these days and are just carrying on with what they did in the buildings. (I am not talking about Imagican, I know little of what he believes) I do know many people though, that has left the church, just to move again into the same error. They just call it by a different name.

So I am not talking about the act of leaving , but also the leaving of false doctrines.

Only God can truly open eyes, not men.

[/quote]

 

[stranger]

stranger,

I don't know why you have referenced the 'church' at Corinth. Of all the churches Paul addressed in epistle, THIS ONE was, by FAR, the one that was ERRING the MOST. While Paul was able to offer MEAT in a number of his epistles, he OPENLY stated to those in Corinth that they were STILL struggling with MILK. And that was TWO THOUSAND years ago.

Blessings,

MEC

Hello MEC,

Galatians were bewitched about the Gospel itself - that's also a pretty major error. The Church in Corinth is an apostolic Church (Paul laid the foundation). If you choose any modern Church you have to first verify that it is apostolic. Paul's letter to that same Church talks about being members of the body of Christ (1 Cor 12). The illustration about the members being the body of Christ is first physical then spiritual. Being physical (like Jesus coming in the flesh) does not detract from being in the Spirit, while some members were obviously living according to the flesh in disobedience.

blessings