Should Churches be non-denominational?

[dadof10]

Trust in priestcraft has eliminated any possibility of a direct link with God. It is now seen as impossible unless for the decorated pope of vatican selection. God speaks to no one else, they say of any cult leader.

As I pointed out to Cornelius, the Catholic Church does not teach that God only speaks to the pope. He couldn't prove it and neither can you. Now YOU are propagating this lie. Will you also lose credibility, or will you take back your falsehood?

 

[dadof10]

without getting to a jw debate, which i was once, i think the problem that we have is no two readers of the bible are going to see the exact same intrepreations, outside of mormonism and jw's. all of the christian doctrine has(not the bible itself) flaws, we could pick on rc,lutherans and my church the christian and missionary alliance, let's rather examine our own lives and be willing to go where christ leads us, and let him correct us in our interpretation. i disagree with my much of the rc doctrine, but i have seen some faithful,god fearing people in that demonation.

i could easily blast the protestant,evengelical and others on the celibration of easter(not communion). simple to do look up astart, the babylonian god of fertility then look at what have our kids do each easter.

we could do that with any holiday.

jason

If two born-again Christians read Scripture, pray for guidance and come to EXACT OPPOSITE interpretations, how do we objectively decide which interpretation is true? Sola-Scriptura is un-Biblical and illogical.

 

[jasoncran]

we sometimes dont see or arent allways ready to see the truth at the same times, ie the gifts of holy ghost, the bapist say no, but the pentacostal say yes, the former says the time has past for those things, yet who is right? the latter but one doesnt need the gifts to get into heaven, only christ.

that's where i come from sometimes the lord has to work on our hearts to change us. were you born again and fully matured at the same time? no, i wasnt. as we read more and learn more and more revaltion on christ will come. you dont get more saved but just more sanctified and mature in christ.

jason

 

[dadof10]

we sometimes dont see or arent allways ready to see the truth at the same times, ie the gifts of holy ghost, the bapist say no, but the pentacostal say yes, the former says the time has past for those things, yet who is right? the latter but one doesnt need the gifts to get into heaven, only christ.

that's where i come from sometimes the lord has to work on our hearts to change us. were you born again and fully matured at the same time? no, i wasnt. as we read more and learn more and more revaltion on christ will come. you dont get more saved but just more sanctified and mature in christ.

jason

Scripture is inerrant, our interpretation is not. How do you know how "mature" your interpretation is if there is no objectively true interpretation? And how can there be an objectively true interpretation unless there is an authority, appointed by God and guided by the Holy Spirit to be the arbiter of interpretation? If there is no final authority, there is only chaos...or thousands of different denominations...Same thing, really.

 

[jasoncran]

there is but who is right totally you or i, think about it all the commentators and "trained" pastors. people do make mistakes yes, and are err. i read the bible for myself and i wont ever pretend to know it all, i do believe in teachers of the word, but some churches are in err in doctrine unknowingly, so what then only your version is correct or mine, that leads us back to where i stated earlier, show me any two christians that will exaclty agree on everything on the bible since it is written, exaclty every jot and tittle of everything.

hard to find, does that mean that are less of a christian to disagree? i think we (our minds) get in the way of what the lord says and he must teach us himself the correct way, but that is a process.

are your interpretations of the word correct, and those who disagree wrong? i'm not talking bout minor things but the larger things, and i do beleive in biblical innerrency.

look at how agree or disagree on this forum on the same verse! now some are way out there others aren't.

 

[dadof10]

there is but who is right totally you or i, think about it all the commentators and "trained" pastors. people do make mistakes yes, and are err. i read the bible for myself and i wont ever pretend to know it all, i do believe in teachers of the word, but some churches are in err in doctrine unknowingly, so what then only your version is correct or mine, that leads us back to where i stated earlier, show me any two christians that will exaclty agree on everything on the bible since it is written, exaclty every jot and tittle of everything.

I don't claim inerrancy in interpretation for myself either. The answer is that Jesus never set His Church up to be a loose group of people who read and interpret Scripture for themselves and come to CONFLICTING CONCLUSIONS on matters of doctrine. He set up His Church to the ARBITER of Truth.

hard to find, does that mean that are less of a christian to disagree? i think we (our minds) get in the way of what the lord says and he must teach us himself the correct way, but that is a process.

You have said above "some churches are in err in doctrine unknowingly" and "he must teach us himself the correct way". How do you know YOU are not in error about ALL of the doctrines you hold? How do you know YOUR way is "the correct way"?

are your interpretations of the word correct, and those who disagree wrong? i'm not talking bout minor things but the larger things, and i do beleive in biblical innerrency.

No. Those who disagree with the Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit in matters of faith and morals, are in error. Jesus didn't come to write a book, He came to found a Church. Where is this Church today?

look at how agree or disagree on this forum on the same verse! now some are way out there others aren't.

In their minds YOU are the one who is "way out there". Which one of you is correct and why? You all point to Scripture and interpret it subjectively. I read Scripture and there is absolutely NO mention of a doctrinal dispute arising due to conflicting Scripture interpretations. Maybe because the early Church didn't believe in sola-Scriptura either???

 

[Cornelius]

I was not asking for the definition to be coy. I was asking for clarification. If you don't want to answer, don't. I don't see how "God's Rest" has anything to do with the OP.

Then I will not tell you what worldly ways means.

1) "Good fruit" has a broad meaning in Scripture.

Not so.The fruit is Christ.

2) “Good fruit†applies to PROPHETS, not churches. It applies to INDIVIDUALS, not groups, and, in context, has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth revealed by the Church, only the INDIVIDUAL who is prophesying TO OR IN the Church.

Not so: the true church is made up of individuals, who has to bear fruit, thus the church has fruit.

1) The "good fruit" (however you personally define it) that is born by the Catholic Church FAR outweighs the bad.

The true church has no bad fruit.

3) There is not ONE PERSON (including you) or one community of believers (including yours) that is perfect, so if Jesus meant that a "prophet" must be perfect to be a "true" prophet, there is no such thing as one. You are ONLY looking for "bad fruit" and ignoring "good fruit" in order to justify a preconceived notion.

I am only looking for the manifestation of Christ. There is no other "fruit"

4) Jesus said “by their fruit you shall know THEMâ€Â, not THEIR CHURCH.

"THEM" forms the church, .....THEY do not have A church.

If "good fruit" is how we determine where the "True Church", which teaches "true doctrine" is, what about the JW's? They are morally upstanding citizens, and as far as I can tell, and bear only "good fruit/works/walk". Do they teach true doctrine? Same thing with the Mormons. What about the Buddhists? I know PLENTY of small Protestant churches who have Godly pastors and members and have only born "good fruit", mainly because they are only a few years old, instead of 400 or 2000. Are they ALL teaching Truth EVEN WHEN THEY DIRECTLY CONTRADICT YOU AND EACH OTHER?

True fruit is manifesting Christ.

So, when these "good fruit" bearing churches DISAGREE ON A DOCTRINE, which one is right?

The one who agrees with the Bible.

Do you see the folly of using Jesus' words "good fruit" in an attempt to recognize which CHURCH teaches Truth?

Yes, that is why I am against the denominations.

He is telling His disciples that if a PROPHET comes to them, look to HIS PERSONAL "fruit". This verse has NOTHING to do with discerning true PUBLIC doctrine.

Can bad fruit have true doctrine ?

When you said the Holy Spirit speaks directly to you in the context of revealed doctrine, in another thread. Why would anyone who is receiving direct revelation from God on doctrinal matters, need to submit to another authority on those same matters?

Because the Bible tells us to do this.

Even when they disagree with the "Holy Spirit" within you?

Yes, if they can show me I am wrong and out of line with the Bible, then I must submit to them

What a coincidence. Same relationship I have with the Catholic Church.

No, I do not have this relationship with an institution like you do.I have it with a Biblical eldership.As you say, you have it with the Catholic Church.

Are you JW? Mormon? Baptist? Maybe you are all of them, a Jehovah's Mormon fundamentalist evangelical. You can’t possibly think your group of “believers†is the ONLY one bearing “good fruitâ€Â, and all who disagree with you DOCTRINALLY aren’t?

We do not have a name. We have been here since the time of Jesus and we still do not have a building.We are all over the planet, but we have no leader but Jesus who is the Head. We are the church.

Your subjective judgment carries no weight and your preconceived notion of “invisible church†is un-Scriptural. I am very curious as to how you handle doctrinal disputes within your concept of “churchâ€Â, though.

We do not have disputes.

Where are these “apostles, pastors, teachers, prophets and evangelists that I submit to�

They are everywhere.

Are you a member of the hierarchy?

No I am not.

When a decision is made, and it is the opposite of the decision of the “spirit†within you, which “spirit†do you submit to?

The one that agrees with the Bible.

Can you give me a few examples of decisions that have been reached by your “councils�

We have no councils.

When you reach a decision in South Africa, is it binding on Adullum’s community in Canada, even if they don’t send representatives?

We never make such decisions. Jesus told us what to do in the beginning and that is what we do.

 

[shad]

I was not asking for the definition to be coy. I was asking for clarification. If you don't want to answer, don't. I don't see how "God's Rest" has anything to do with the OP.

Then I will not tell you what worldly ways means.




[quote:16a4f9z5]
1) "Good fruit" has a broad meaning in Scripture.

Not so.The fruit is Christ.

2) “Good fruit†applies to PROPHETS, not churches. It applies to INDIVIDUALS, not groups, and, in context, has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth revealed by the Church, only the INDIVIDUAL who is prophesying TO OR IN the Church.

Not so: the true church is made up of individuals, who has to bear fruit, thus the church has fruit.

1) The "good fruit" (however you personally define it) that is born by the Catholic Church FAR outweighs the bad.

The true church has no bad fruit.

3) There is not ONE PERSON (including you) or one community of believers (including yours) that is perfect, so if Jesus meant that a "prophet" must be perfect to be a "true" prophet, there is no such thing as one. You are ONLY looking for "bad fruit" and ignoring "good fruit" in order to justify a preconceived notion.

I am only looking for the manifestation of Christ. There is no other "fruit"

4) Jesus said “by their fruit you shall know THEMâ€Â, not THEIR CHURCH.

"THEM" forms the church, .....THEY do not have A church.

If "good fruit" is how we determine where the "True Church", which teaches "true doctrine" is, what about the JW's? They are morally upstanding citizens, and as far as I can tell, and bear only "good fruit/works/walk". Do they teach true doctrine? Same thing with the Mormons. What about the Buddhists? I know PLENTY of small Protestant churches who have Godly pastors and members and have only born "good fruit", mainly because they are only a few years old, instead of 400 or 2000. Are they ALL teaching Truth EVEN WHEN THEY DIRECTLY CONTRADICT YOU AND EACH OTHER?

True fruit is manifesting Christ.

So, when these "good fruit" bearing churches DISAGREE ON A DOCTRINE, which one is right?

The one who agrees with the Bible.

Do you see the folly of using Jesus' words "good fruit" in an attempt to recognize which CHURCH teaches Truth?

Yes, that is why I am against the denominations.

He is telling His disciples that if a PROPHET comes to them, look to HIS PERSONAL "fruit". This verse has NOTHING to do with discerning true PUBLIC doctrine.

Can bad fruit have true doctrine ?

When you said the Holy Spirit speaks directly to you in the context of revealed doctrine, in another thread. Why would anyone who is receiving direct revelation from God on doctrinal matters, need to submit to another authority on those same matters?

Because the Bible tells us to do this.

Even when they disagree with the "Holy Spirit" within you?

Yes, if they can show me I am wrong and out of line with the Bible, then I must submit to them

What a coincidence. Same relationship I have with the Catholic Church.

No, I do not have this relationship with an institution like you do.I have it with a Biblical eldership.As you say, you have it with the Catholic Church.

Are you JW? Mormon? Baptist? Maybe you are all of them, a Jehovah's Mormon fundamentalist evangelical. You can’t possibly think your group of “believers†is the ONLY one bearing “good fruitâ€Â, and all who disagree with you DOCTRINALLY aren’t?

We do not have a name. We have been here since the time of Jesus and we still do not have a building.We are all over the planet, but we have no leader but Jesus who is the Head. We are the church.

Your subjective judgment carries no weight and your preconceived notion of “invisible church†is un-Scriptural. I am very curious as to how you handle doctrinal disputes within your concept of “churchâ€Â, though.

We do not have disputes.

Where are these “apostles, pastors, teachers, prophets and evangelists that I submit to�

They are everywhere.

Are you a member of the hierarchy?

No I am not.

When a decision is made, and it is the opposite of the decision of the “spirit†within you, which “spirit†do you submit to?

The one that agrees with the Bible.

Can you give me a few examples of decisions that have been reached by your “councils�

We have no councils.

When you reach a decision in South Africa, is it binding on Adullum’s community in Canada, even if they don’t send representatives?

We never make such decisions. Jesus told us what to do in the beginning and that is what we do.[/quote:16a4f9z5]


an excellent answers C. :yes

 

[jasoncran]

dadof10, btw do you attend any church? one can verify the witness of the spirit in others, but you said that you dont have the bible downpacked, either. so that' where i will leave.

 

[dadof10]

I was not asking for the definition to be coy. I was asking for clarification. If you don't want to answer, don't. I don't see how "God's Rest" has anything to do with the OP.

Then I will not tell you what worldly ways means.

[quote:149sd1m2]
1) "Good fruit" has a broad meaning in Scripture.

Not so.The fruit is Christ.[/quote:149sd1m2]

I thought it meant "fruit/walk/works"? The good works that Christians do is one of the meanings. There are others:

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law. (Galatians (RSV) 5)

"For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Hebrews (RSV) 12)

"Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (Hebrews (RSV) 13)

As you can plainly see, the metaphor "fruit" means almost anything that issues from something else.

[quote:149sd1m2]2) “Good fruit†applies to PROPHETS, not churches. It applies to INDIVIDUALS, not groups, and, in context, has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth revealed by the Church, only the INDIVIDUAL who is prophesying TO OR IN the Church.

Not so: the true church is made up of individuals, who has to bear fruit, thus the church has fruit.[/quote:149sd1m2]

I never claimed the word "fruit" doesn't apply to the church, or individuals. This one verse, which you are attempting to use against the Catholic Church, ONLY APPLIES TO PROPHETS.

Jesus says ""Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits."

He uses the word "prophets" for a reason, otherwise He would have used the word "believer", or "elder" or "hierarchy". There is no reason to stretch the word "prophets" to mean (in your convoluted view) the Catholic Church. "Prophets" means PROPHETS, not "this is how you decide where the true church is".

Answer the question. What is the "fruit" of Prophets? Let me help you out so you will actually learn something from this. Isn't their "fruit" their PROPHESIES???? What Jesus is saying is that if a person's prophesies are accurate, then he is a "true prophet".

[quote:149sd1m2]
1) The "good fruit" (however you personally define it) that is born by the Catholic Church FAR outweighs the bad.

The true church has no bad fruit.[/quote:149sd1m2]

I'm confused. I thought "fruit" has a narrow definition within Scripture, meaning "Christ"? Do you mean that "true church" members don't commit sin?

[quote:149sd1m2]3) There is not ONE PERSON (including you) or one community of believers (including yours) that is perfect, so if Jesus meant that a "prophet" must be perfect to be a "true" prophet, there is no such thing as one. You are ONLY looking for "bad fruit" and ignoring "good fruit" in order to justify a preconceived notion.

I am only looking for the manifestation of Christ. There is no other "fruit"
[/quote:149sd1m2]

Do ALL people in the "true church" manifest Christ at EVERY MOMENT OF EVERY DAY, WITHOUT FAIL AND NEVER SIN? Is this what you mean? If members of the "true church" sin, what does that mean for the "church"?

[quote:149sd1m2]4) Jesus said “by their fruit you shall know THEMâ€Â, not THEIR CHURCH.

"THEM" forms the church, .....THEY do not have A church.[/quote:149sd1m2]

I'm getting dizzy.

[quote:149sd1m2]If "good fruit" is how we determine where the "True Church", which teaches "true doctrine" is, what about the JW's? They are morally upstanding citizens, and as far as I can tell, and bear only "good fruit/works/walk". Do they teach true doctrine? Same thing with the Mormons. What about the Buddhists? I know PLENTY of small Protestant churches who have Godly pastors and members and have only born "good fruit", mainly because they are only a few years old, instead of 400 or 2000. Are they ALL teaching Truth EVEN WHEN THEY DIRECTLY CONTRADICT YOU AND EACH OTHER?

True fruit is manifesting Christ.[/quote:149sd1m2]

So when these churches "manifest Christ", their doctrines are true??? How does that work?

[quote:149sd1m2]So, when these "good fruit" bearing churches DISAGREE ON A DOCTRINE, which one is right?

The one who agrees with the Bible.[/quote:149sd1m2]


You mean the one who agrees with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

[quote:149sd1m2]Do you see the folly of using Jesus' words "good fruit" in an attempt to recognize which CHURCH teaches Truth?

Yes, that is why I am against the denominations.[/quote:149sd1m2]


I suppose you have completely given up trying to defend your position. Re-read the above and correct the answer, or explain how you can agree that it's folly to use Matt. 7:15ff to recognize the "true church", which is THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMING IN YOUR LAST POST. You are making no sense.

[quote:149sd1m2]He is telling His disciples that if a PROPHET comes to them, look to HIS PERSONAL "fruit". This verse has NOTHING to do with discerning true PUBLIC doctrine.

Can bad fruit have true doctrine ?[/quote:149sd1m2]

WHAT??? Do you mean can the leaders of the Church that teaches Truth in matters of faith and morals, sin? Of course they can. Contrary to how you view yourself, ALL PEOPLE SIN. That fact has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth. As in the examples I gave above, people within denominations (JW's, Mormons) can be nothing but upstanding citizens, "manifesting Christ", bearing "good fruit" and doing "good works" (again, however you personally define these terms), yet teach major errors. Matt. 7:15ff has NOTHING TO DO with discerning Truth, only discerning who is a TRUE PROPHET.

[quote:149sd1m2]When you said the Holy Spirit speaks directly to you in the context of revealed doctrine, in another thread. Why would anyone who is receiving direct revelation from God on doctrinal matters, need to submit to another authority on those same matters?

Because the Bible tells us to do this.[/quote:149sd1m2]

[quote:149sd1m2]
Even when they disagree with the "Holy Spirit" within you?

Yes, if they can show me I am wrong and out of line with the Bible, then I must submit to them[/quote:149sd1m2]

Has this ever happened?

[quote:149sd1m2]What a coincidence. Same relationship I have with the Catholic Church.

No, I do not have this relationship with an institution like you do.I have it with a Biblical eldership.As you say, you have it with the Catholic Church.[/quote:149sd1m2]

I obviously don't have it with an "institution", but the people within it. People can't have a personal relationship with an institution. Are you just trying to be confrontational?

[quote:149sd1m2]
Are you JW? Mormon? Baptist? Maybe you are all of them, a Jehovah's Mormon fundamentalist evangelical. You can’t possibly think your group of “believers†is the ONLY one bearing “good fruitâ€Â, and all who disagree with you DOCTRINALLY aren’t?

We do not have a name. We have been here since the time of Jesus and we still do not have a building.We are all over the planet, but we have no leader but Jesus who is the Head. We are the church.[/quote:149sd1m2]

Well...Let's see if you are "the church" according to Acts 15.

[quote:149sd1m2]Your subjective judgment carries no weight and your preconceived notion of “invisible church†is un-Scriptural. I am very curious as to how you handle doctrinal disputes within your concept of “churchâ€Â, though.

We do not have disputes.[/quote:149sd1m2]


Disputes, like the Church at Antioch had? How can you claim to have no doctrinal disputes, yet claim to be the church of Acts 15?

[quote:149sd1m2]Where are these “apostles, pastors, teachers, prophets and evangelists that I submit to�

They are everywhere.[/quote:149sd1m2]

Humm.... No disputes and no centralized authority...0-2 in the "which church models Acts 15 more closely" competition.

[quote:149sd1m2]
Are you a member of the hierarchy?

No I am not.[/quote:149sd1m2]

Do you HAVE a hierarchy? If not...0-3

[quote:149sd1m2]When a decision is made, and it is the opposite of the decision of the “spirit†within you, which “spirit†do you submit to?

The one that agrees with the Bible.[/quote:149sd1m2]

How can the "spirit within" you disagree with the Bible? Maybe you are MISTAKEN when the "spirit" speaks directly to you on matters of faith?

[quote:149sd1m2]
Can you give me a few examples of decisions that have been reached by your “councils�

We have no councils.[/quote:149sd1m2]

OK...0-4. The early Church held a council in Acts 15.

[quote:149sd1m2]When you reach a decision in South Africa, is it binding on Adullum’s community in Canada, even if they don’t send representatives?

We never make such decisions. Jesus told us what to do in the beginning and that is what we do.[/quote:149sd1m2]

0-5. If you did what Jesus told you to do "in the beginning", you would have an authoritative VISIBLE hierarchy, that made decisions BINDING on the entire Church. But you don't, and therefore are not the church of Acts 15.

 

[dadof10]

dadof10, btw do you attend any church? one can verify the witness of the spirit in others, but you said that you dont have the bible downpacked, either. so that' where i will leave.

I attend the Catholic Church. Jesus came to found a Church, not write a set of books and letters. Certainly we can look to the witness of others and read the Bible, but we must listen to the Church that Christ founded when it comes to doctrinal Truth.

 

[francisdesales]

0-5.

Kind of like the Kansas City Chiefs of churches...!

If you did what Jesus told you to do "in the beginning", you would have an authoritative VISIBLE hierarchy, that made decisions BINDING on the entire Church. But you don't, and therefore are not the church of Acts 15.

Why listen to someone else when you can just stay home and watch football on Sundays and claim the Spirit of God gave you permission to root for the Chiefs and eat chicken wings?! Jesus knew human physchology, and thus, the necessity of having an external authority to one's own opinions to help one grow in virtue.

Is it me or are we getting more and more of these self-proclaimed prophets of holiness?

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

dadof10, btw do you attend any church? one can verify the witness of the spirit in others, but you said that you dont have the bible downpacked, either. so that' where i will leave.

Is it a requirment of holiness that one "have the bible downpacked {downpat}"???

There are countless people in history who were quite holy and could not read at all...
And we are aware of people who DO know the bible quite well - and are atheists...

God desires that we seek Him out and obey His will. This does not necessarily mean "having the Bible downpacked {downpat}".

Regards

 

[jasoncran]

dadof10, btw do you attend any church? one can verify the witness of the spirit in others, but you said that you dont have the bible downpacked, either. so that' where i will leave.

Is it a requirment of holiness that one "have the bible downpacked {downpat}"???

There are countless people in history who were quite holy and could not read at all...
And we are aware of people who DO know the bible quite well - and are atheists...

God desires that we seek Him out and obey His will. This does not necessarily mean "having the Bible downpacked {downpat}".

Regards

i wasnt meaning that he assumes that we will always be open and soft hearted to the lord ,we like sheep need to guided sometimes but sheep easily stray from the flock . we all have the tendency to rebel and not want to see the truth. no matter what denomation we are from.

i was raised as a jw, got saved yrs later and was raised as young christian as a pentacostal, i see errors there with that doctrine(notice i said doctrine)

if one has jesus truly in your heart you will want to read the bible and live it out, thus getting the "word" applied and therby"down pacted" a procees indeed.

i can go to most chruches albiet catholiscm and the like aren not my style but i know of some beleiveing catholics. i'm not into rituals on order like the catholics do it nor am i into the other extreme where pentacostals forget there must be some order to worship , and the service doesnt have to be three whole hours!

i now attend the christian and missionary alliance.

jason

 

[dadof10]

0-5.

Kind of like the Kansas City Chiefs of churches...!

Or the never-to-be-owned-by-a-conservative St. Louis Rams. At least the Chiefs came close last week against a good team. Are you a Chiefs fan?

Why listen to someone else when you can just stay home and watch football on Sundays and claim the Spirit of God gave you permission to root for the Chiefs and eat chicken wings?! Jesus knew human physchology, and thus, the necessity of having an external authority to one's own opinions to help one grow in virtue.

Is it me or are we getting more and more of these self-proclaimed prophets of holiness?

Regards

Yes, it seems like it, here on these forums anyway. I can see the appeal, not the Truth, but the appeal.

 

[Cornelius]

I was not asking for the definition to be coy. I was asking for clarification. If you don't want to answer, don't. I don't see how "God's Rest" has anything to do with the OP.

Then I will not tell you what worldly ways means.

I have linked the REST with WORLDLY WAYS for a reason. They are opposites to each other. (Read Hebrews) its called "dead works". So if you cannot see the connection, then that is why you are asking "what are the worldly ways"



[quote:1ez5otql][quote:1ez5otql]
1) "Good fruit" has a broad meaning in Scripture.

Not so.The fruit is Christ.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I thought it meant "fruit/walk/works"? The good works that Christians do is one of the meanings. There are others:

"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law. (Galatians (RSV) 5)

"For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it. (Hebrews (RSV) 12)

"Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name. 16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God. (Hebrews (RSV) 13)

As you can plainly see, the metaphor "fruit" means almost anything that issues from something else.

No, the fruit is Christ. Its always about Jesus, never about us. If you bring your own good works, you are bringing the offering of Cain and it will be rejected.

[quote:1ez5otql]2) “Good fruit†applies to PROPHETS, not churches. It applies to INDIVIDUALS, not groups, and, in context, has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth revealed by the Church, only the INDIVIDUAL who is prophesying TO OR IN the Church.

Not so: the true church is made up of individuals, who has to bear fruit, thus the church has fruit.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I never claimed the word "fruit" doesn't apply to the church, or individuals. This one verse, which you are attempting to use against the Catholic Church, ONLY APPLIES TO PROPHETS.

Jesus says ""Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits."

He uses the word "prophets" for a reason, otherwise He would have used the word "believer", or "elder" or "hierarchy". There is no reason to stretch the word "prophets" to mean (in your convoluted view) the Catholic Church. "Prophets" means PROPHETS, not "this is how you decide where the true church is".

Answer the question. What is the "fruit" of Prophets? Let me help you out so you will actually learn something from this. Isn't their "fruit" their PROPHESIES???? What Jesus is saying is that if a person's prophesies are accurate, then he is a "true prophet".

No Jesus is saying if their FRUIT shows Christ, they are true prophets. Jesus was speaking to intelligent people who knew that FRUIT would not be limited to "prophets" only. We all carry the words of the gospel and are prophetic in our walk. When you open your mouth to teach, to must speak the oracles of God.

[quote:1ez5otql]
1) The "good fruit" (however you personally define it) that is born by the Catholic Church FAR outweighs the bad.

The true church has no bad fruit.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I'm confused. I thought "fruit" has a narrow definition within Scripture, meaning "Christ"? Do you mean that "true church" members don't commit sin?
The true church walk in the light they have.

[quote:1ez5otql]3) There is not ONE PERSON (including you) or one community of believers (including yours) that is perfect, so if Jesus meant that a "prophet" must be perfect to be a "true" prophet, there is no such thing as one. You are ONLY looking for "bad fruit" and ignoring "good fruit" in order to justify a preconceived notion.

I am only looking for the manifestation of Christ. There is no other "fruit"
[/quote:1ez5otql]

Do ALL people in the "true church" manifest Christ at EVERY MOMENT OF EVERY DAY, WITHOUT FAIL AND NEVER SIN? Is this what you mean? If members of the "true church" sin, what does that mean for the "church"?

You are confused because you have not learned what the difference is between faith and manifestation.You cannot tell me what this means: Calling things which are not as if they were. and "Seeing the end from the beginning" Only after you understand this, would we be able to talk more on this subject.

[quote:1ez5otql]4) Jesus said “by their fruit you shall know THEMâ€Â, not THEIR CHURCH.

"THEM" forms the church, .....THEY do not have A church.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I'm getting dizzy.

This is actually THE point, so you should read it carefully.

[quote:1ez5otql]If "good fruit" is how we determine where the "True Church", which teaches "true doctrine" is, what about the JW's? They are morally upstanding citizens, and as far as I can tell, and bear only "good fruit/works/walk". Do they teach true doctrine? Same thing with the Mormons. What about the Buddhists? I know PLENTY of small Protestant churches who have Godly pastors and members and have only born "good fruit", mainly because they are only a few years old, instead of 400 or 2000. Are they ALL teaching Truth EVEN WHEN THEY DIRECTLY CONTRADICT YOU AND EACH OTHER?

True fruit is manifesting Christ.[/quote:1ez5otql]

So when these churches "manifest Christ", their doctrines are true??? How does that work?

No not plural churcheS ......only church. And ..........you cannot manifest Christ with the wrong doctrine. That is impossible.He IS the Word. He IS the TRUTH, so how on earth can anybody with a wrong doctrine manifest the Truth? Its an oxymoron. !!

[quote:1ez5otql]So, when these "good fruit" bearing churches DISAGREE ON A DOCTRINE, which one is right?

The one who agrees with the Bible.[/quote:1ez5otql]


You mean the one who agrees with YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

No. only the one that agree with the Bible.There is only ONE correct Truth........Jesus Christ. We have to agree with Him

[quote:1ez5otql]Do you see the folly of using Jesus' words "good fruit" in an attempt to recognize which CHURCH teaches Truth?

Yes, that is why I am against the denominations.[/quote:1ez5otql]


I suppose you have completely given up trying to defend your position. Re-read the above and correct the answer, or explain how you can agree that it's folly to use Matt. 7:15ff to recognize the "true church", which is THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMING IN YOUR LAST POST. You are making no sense.

My opinion is still the same: Ye shall know them by their fruit.

[quote:1ez5otql]He is telling His disciples that if a PROPHET comes to them, look to HIS PERSONAL "fruit". This verse has NOTHING to do with discerning true PUBLIC doctrine.

Can bad fruit have true doctrine ?[/quote:1ez5otql]

WHAT??? Do you mean can the leaders of the Church that teaches Truth in matters of faith and morals, sin? Of course they can. Contrary to how you view yourself, ALL PEOPLE SIN. That fact has NOTHING to do with discerning Truth. As in the examples I gave above, people within denominations (JW's, Mormons) can be nothing but upstanding citizens, "manifesting Christ", bearing "good fruit" and doing "good works" (again, however you personally define these terms), yet teach major errors. Matt. 7:15ff has NOTHING TO DO with discerning Truth, only discerning who is a TRUE PROPHET.

Your confusion comes from how you see fruit as to sin or not to sin. That is why I asked you about the REST , which you told me, you cannot see the reason for it in this discussion. So again, I must ask you: What does the REST in Hebrews mean ? Once you get insight, you will understand Fruit.

[quote:1ez5otql]When you said the Holy Spirit speaks directly to you in the context of revealed doctrine, in another thread. Why would anyone who is receiving direct revelation from God on doctrinal matters, need to submit to another authority on those same matters?

Because the Bible tells us to do this.[/quote:1ez5otql]

[quote:1ez5otql]
Even when they disagree with the "Holy Spirit" within you?

Yes, if they can show me I am wrong and out of line with the Bible, then I must submit to them[/quote:1ez5otql]

Has this ever happened?

Yes , many times. I use to be totally wrong in my thinking. I love correction.If they can show my how my thinking differs from Scripture, then Scripture wins.

[quote:1ez5otql]What a coincidence. Same relationship I have with the Catholic Church.

No, I do not have this relationship with an institution like you do.I have it with a Biblical eldership.As you say, you have it with the Catholic Church.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I obviously don't have it with an "institution", but the people within it. People can't have a personal relationship with an institution. Are you just trying to be confrontational?

I am never confrontational for the sake of being so, but I cannot change my views to suit others.

[quote:1ez5otql]
Are you JW? Mormon? Baptist? Maybe you are all of them, a Jehovah's Mormon fundamentalist evangelical. You can’t possibly think your group of “believers†is the ONLY one bearing “good fruitâ€Â, and all who disagree with you DOCTRINALLY aren’t?

We do not have a name. We have been here since the time of Jesus and we still do not have a building.We are all over the planet, but we have no leader but Jesus who is the Head. We are the church.[/quote:1ez5otql]

Well...Let's see if you are "the church" according to Acts 15.
You are welcome

[quote:1ez5otql]Your subjective judgment carries no weight and your preconceived notion of “invisible church†is un-Scriptural. I am very curious as to how you handle doctrinal disputes within your concept of “churchâ€Â, though.

We do not have disputes.[/quote:1ez5otql]


Disputes, like the Church at Antioch had? How can you claim to have no doctrinal disputes, yet claim to be the church of Acts 15?

Yes, because the Apostles in the time when the Bible was written, sorted it all out for us. We have no more doctrine to add to what they said. We add nothing and take nothing away.

[quote:1ez5otql]Where are these “apostles, pastors, teachers, prophets and evangelists that I submit to�

They are everywhere.[/quote:1ez5otql]

Humm.... No disputes and no centralized authority...0-2 in the "which church models Acts 15 more closely" competition.

Cannot make you feel better about us not having disputes.We have authority :Jesus is the Head.The we have apostles, pastors, teachers , prophets and evangelists. So the "central" authority is all there.

[quote:1ez5otql]
Are you a member of the hierarchy?

No I am not.[/quote:1ez5otql]

Do you HAVE a hierarchy? If not...0-3

Of course we have leadership: But they serve and they do not lord it over the flock.The lording is called the Nicolaitan error, which Jesus also hated. Adullam posted a very good post on this error a page or two back,

[quote:1ez5otql]When a decision is made, and it is the opposite of the decision of the “spirit†within you, which “spirit†do you submit to?

The one that agrees with the Bible.[/quote:1ez5otql]

How can the "spirit within" you disagree with the Bible? Maybe you are MISTAKEN when the "spirit" speaks directly to you on matters of faith?

I would be mistaken, when I hear things that are not in the Bible. If the Holy Spirit speaks to me in revelation and its seems "new" to my understanding, I double check it with my elders before I take it into my heart as doctrine.I have many councilors.

[quote:1ez5otql]
Can you give me a few examples of decisions that have been reached by your “councils�

We have no councils.[/quote:1ez5otql]

OK...0-4. The early Church held a council in Acts 15.

That is so, they took care of it for us. No more things to be added. Its done.

[quote:1ez5otql]When you reach a decision in South Africa, is it binding on Adullum’s community in Canada, even if they don’t send representatives?

We never make such decisions. Jesus told us what to do in the beginning and that is what we do.[/quote:1ez5otql]

0-5. If you did what Jesus told you to do "in the beginning", you would have an authoritative VISIBLE hierarchy, that made decisions BINDING on the entire Church. But you don't, and therefore are not the church of Acts 15.[/quote:1ez5otql]

I can see my elders They are real people, so I do not understand what you call "visible". But they cannot make decisions "binding on the church". The Bible is the only authority we have and nobody can move outside of it and still be in the church.

The church has always just been the "called out ones" . Its very simple. It just IS. All believers who "come out of the world" and repent of their dead works and worldly ways and thinking, move into the REST of God (Hebrews) and so join the true church. Their hearts result in Fruit which is the "membership sign" of the true church.The fruit shows that the Seed (Word of God in Matthews, which is Christ) was sown in the good soil. It produces thirty, sixty or a hundred fold of Christ in the heart of the "good soil"

 

[francisdesales]

i wasnt meaning that he assumes that we will always be open and soft hearted to the lord ,we like sheep need to guided sometimes but sheep easily stray from the flock . we all have the tendency to rebel and not want to see the truth. no matter what denomation we are from.

We Catholics believe this recognition of humanity is WHY Christ established such an organization with heirarchy and authority within it. It is virtually impossible to bring about the virtue of humility and obedience without it...

i was raised as a jw, got saved yrs later and was raised as young christian as a pentacostal, i see errors there with that doctrine(notice i said doctrine)

if one has jesus truly in your heart you will want to read the bible and live it out, thus getting the "word" applied and therby"down pacted" a procees indeed.

And as you know, reading the bible is not enough - we must take it into our lives. But this can be PRESENTED to us in many ways. In Medieval times, the churches had many stained-glass windows that would portray the life of Christ in various Gospel settings. Traveling bands would perform skits of various Gospel scenes. People would hear and LIVE the Gospel without ever reading a page of the Bible, often much better than many of us so-called "scholars" who think we got the Bible "down-pat"...

It is meaningless to read the Bible unless you/I apply it to our lives. But we can hear the Gospel in many different forms - watching other holy people in action, hearing and participating in liturgy, watching movies, reading books other than the Bible that portray Christian virtue, etc....

We can be fed in many ways, the Bible is just the PRIME way, not the only way.

i can go to most chruches albiet catholiscm and the like aren not my style but i know of some beleiveing catholics. i'm not into rituals on order like the catholics do it nor am i into the other extreme where pentacostals forget there must be some order to worship , and the service doesnt have to be three whole hours!

[/quote]

There is a point to rituals, and I would probably be off topic in detailing it.

A picture is worth a thousand words and feelings, though. The sense of holiness that I experience during some of these rituals is worth more than reading the Bible for an hour... In addition, I am worshiping God in communion with fellow humans, as part of the People of God. It takes on even more meaning than just sitting in my room and reading Luke... They each have their usefulness and purpose.

Regards

 

[Adullam]

i wasnt meaning that he assumes that we will always be open and soft hearted to the lord ,we like sheep need to guided sometimes but sheep easily stray from the flock . we all have the tendency to rebel and not want to see the truth. no matter what denomation we are from.

We Catholics believe this recognition of humanity is WHY Christ established such an organization with heirarchy and authority within it. It is virtually impossible to bring about the virtue of humility and obedience without it...


The trouble is...humility and obedience to what? We can't seek these for their own sake. Tyrants have exploited these qualities in others throughout history. It is always a danger sign to hear of the call to obedience towards anyone but the Lord Himself. Nazism also produced many heroes to their faith...but for which cause. The children raised in controlling cults are very well behaved, both humble and obedient...exemplary!....that is until they grow up enough to realize that they are being manipulated by men. Therefore even admirable qualities such as humility and obedience must be subordinated to the truth.

i was raised as a jw, got saved yrs later and was raised as young christian as a pentacostal, i see errors there with that doctrine(notice i said doctrine)

if one has jesus truly in your heart you will want to read the bible and live it out, thus getting the "word" applied and therby"down pacted" a procees indeed.

And as you know, reading the bible is not enough - we must take it into our lives. But this can be PRESENTED to us in many ways. In Medieval times, the churches had many stained-glass windows that would portray the life of Christ in various Gospel settings. Traveling bands would perform skits of various Gospel scenes. People would hear and LIVE the Gospel without ever reading a page of the Bible, often much better than many of us so-called "scholars" who think we got the Bible "down-pat"...

It is meaningless to read the Bible unless you/I apply it to our lives. But we can hear the Gospel in many different forms - watching other holy people in action, hearing and participating in liturgy, watching movies, reading books other than the Bible that portray Christian virtue, etc....

We can be fed in many ways, the Bible is just the PRIME way, not the only way.

I thought you claimed that meeting or learning outside the RCC ritual was akin to eating chicken wings and basically a waste of time!

i can go to most chruches albiet catholiscm and the like aren not my style but i know of some beleiveing catholics. i'm not into rituals on order like the catholics do it nor am i into the other extreme where pentacostals forget there must be some order to worship , and the service doesnt have to be three whole hours!

There is a point to rituals, and I would probably be off topic in detailing it.

A picture is worth a thousand words and feelings, though. The sense of holiness that I experience during some of these rituals is worth more than reading the Bible for an hour... In addition, I am worshiping God in communion with fellow humans, as part of the People of God. It takes on even more meaning than just sitting in my room and reading Luke... They each have their usefulness and purpose.

Regards[/quote]

Your comments here again reveal only what men can do WITHOUT the power from on high. It is natural for the natural man to need pictures, and other representations in order to feel closer to the Deity. However, when one actually connects with the Lord, all the representations are no longer required. It is akin to the perfect swallowing up the imperfect. The old being transformed into the new. Loss being swallowed up in victory. Imagine staring at the picture of somone who is standing right before you! Why not focus on the living? That is, unless one is blind to the spiritual realm. The essence of all religions is to seek to represent God. The NT experience of the Holy Spirit is the actual presence of the Lord. In real time and experience. Those of us who fellowship in the light are now unable to sit through a mere conjuring representation of the holy presence. We walk in it. Why else would God forbid His image to be conjured on earth? He is here!

This is then the point. You do not believe it is possible to walk as Jesus walked...in holy power. You believe the highest form of intimacy with God is in a representative ritual. But, the highest form of intimacy is true intimacy through the Spirit....whether in a room or walking, sitting, eating....

The greatest spiritual acts are breathing, eating, walking...when one is abiding in Christ. It is His presence that makes the church what it is. Even a small number of brethren who walk in this intimacy and power have the authority to loose and to bind. No church can control the Spirit of God. But which churches are submitted to, and led and empowered by the Holy Spirit? The legacy of the biblical text is the call to do likewise. Those of us who have experienced the power of the life to come relay and proclaim that which has become our testimony. The silence is deafening.

 

[Adullam]

dadof10, btw do you attend any church? one can verify the witness of the spirit in others, but you said that you dont have the bible downpacked, either. so that' where i will leave.

I attend the Catholic Church. Jesus came to found a Church, not write a set of books and letters. Certainly we can look to the witness of others and read the Bible, but we must listen to the Church that Christ founded when it comes to doctrinal Truth.

We must rather know the Lord. We must listen to the Lord. Those who do this are His church. This is not revealed through flesh and blood. Knowing doctrine is a very big step away from knowing He who teaches it. The biggest doctrinal truth is the grace to abide in Christ. Blindly following an edict we neither know nor understand has no merit except for the ease in which men can control an organization based on a human interpretation of said doctrines. I was only following orders!? The lamest of excuses! How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation. Christ is come. Christ is near. Open you heart and receive of the divine life from above. Trust only in the Lord and not in men.

Grace to you!

 

[francisdesales]

The trouble is...humility and obedience to what? We can't seek these for their own sake. Tyrants have exploited these qualities in others throughout history.

No one expects obedience to a tyrant. However, God does judge the heart. Why are you not submitting yourself to one that GOD has placed in authority over you/me, as Paul wrote and as Jesus said to Pilate? It is pride. That is the question YOU must ask yourself when you are called to discern. Some are called to submit, as Christ to the cross, some are called to reform, as Christ with the Pharisees... The lives of the Saints will testify that often times, submission to a tyrant, even one ensonced in ecclesiastical office, is worthy of the call to DIE TO ONESELF and is a clear sign of humility and obedience to GOD... Did Jesus suggest that the Apostles disobey the Pharisees, the hypocrites themselves (see Mat 23:3)? Where does that place your opinions? Outside of the mind of Christ, that's where...

I understand that the American/Western mindset does not like such concepts as obedience and humility, but we are speaking of spiritual matters, not your rights and freedoms under the Constitution. Also, you are sliding down the slippery slope yet again. You presume that ANYONE in power MUST use it for abusive motives. I find this an immature and naive attitude to take. We should not ASSUME any such thing in each case. This is not Christ-like in the slightest. Let's give others the benefit of the doubt... Surely, Christ did, and even amongst the "hated Pharisees", he found good men.

It is always a danger sign to hear of the call to obedience towards anyone but the Lord Himself. Nazism also produced many heroes to their faith...but for which cause. The children raised in controlling cults are very well behaved, both humble and obedient...exemplary!....that is until they grow up enough to realize that they are being manipulated by men. Therefore even admirable qualities such as humility and obedience must be subordinated to the truth.

No one is demanidng to blindly follow anyone. We are called to discern and pray, keeping in mind what God has established and set up. You well know that the Bible does not support the "I will decide when to leave the Church". We are called to assent to what the infallible Church has defined for Christians to believe. However, every word does not fall into this category. In such cases, we are called to pray and recognize that we are not to scandalize the faithful with our prideful sputterings for the sake of some sense of a need to be right or not to submit.

I thought you claimed that meeting or learning outside the RCC ritual was akin to eating chicken wings and basically a waste of time!

You thought wrong, my friend, I never made such statements that the Catholic Church has a monopoly on Truth. Many of our separated brothers have access to the Truth through the Bible and their own prayer life. I have quoted Vatican 2 recently (not sure if it was with you) that states this emphatically.

Your comments here again reveal only what men can do WITHOUT the power from on high.

Baloney... As much as you might think you have direct contact with an eternal, transcendant God, I am here to let you know that any such supposed communication, even in your bedroom in the dark of night, is mediated. It is mediated through a Man/God, Jesus Christ. This Man/God appeared in human garb, suffered human emotions and deprivations, and even died. Thus, WE ALSO come to God through the human senses, through emotions and thoughts, through "smells and bells". Your line of thought is just more of the same Gnosticism that has plagued the Church from the beginning... Read up on what Gnosticism is and sit back and reflect on it and perhaps you might find yourself recognizing your kinship...

It is natural for the natural man to need pictures, and other representations in order to feel closer to the Deity. However, when one actually connects with the Lord, all the representations are no longer required.

You are under the spell of self-delusion if you think you have a DIRECT connection to God Himself, Whom NOBODY has "seen". Our interaction and relationship with God is PURPOSELY mediated through other people - and thus, when we feed the hungry, we feed Christ Himself. So spare me the lecture about your self-proclaimed aloofness above the rest of humanity, please.

This is then the point. You do not believe it is possible to walk as Jesus walked...in holy power.

You pretend to know God, so it isn't surprising that you pretend to know my thoughts and beliefs, as well... Hold onto your lug nuts, I don't want to deflate that ego of yours too quickly...

Have I ever commented that I didn't believe it was possible to walk as Jesus did???? It is each of our calling, to be divinized in the image of our original creation, in God's image. This begins even now, in this world. Yet again, you fail to understand what Catholicism teaches or what I believe.

You believe the highest form of intimacy with God is in a representative ritual. But, the highest form of intimacy is true intimacy through the Spirit....whether in a room or walking, sitting, eating....

I remain unconvinced that Buddhism is worthy of consideration... It is just another philosophy that does not take into consideration that God has condescended Himself to become one of US, a man, to live and die among us. If you miss this, you miss the essence of Christianity.