True Christians

[Rick W]

This is the big one! You hear that, Elizabeth?
I'm coming to join ya, honey!

:o
:-D

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Yeah, and wrong to boot. :D

No way.

 

[RadicalReformer]

Not all Baptists are Christians, not all Episcopals are Christians, not all Anabaptists were Christians, and not all Catholics are Christians.

Membership in a local assembly called a church does not make one a Christian.

 

[francisdesales]

Not all Baptists are Christians, not all Episcopals are Christians, not all Anabaptists were Christians, and not all Catholics are Christians.

Membership in a local assembly called a church does not make one a Christian.

Seems like you are defining what Christianity is...

Can you give me some Scriptural support that excludes "some" Catholics, "some" Baptists, "some" Anabaptists, and so forth? Sounds like your standards are highly subjective and one could argue that maybe you aren't a Christian...

Rather than worrying about labels, how about just worrying about your walk in Christ?

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

while I recognize the NEED to base our understanding on scripture, EVERYTHING that we are ABLE to understand does not NEED a specific STATEMENT in order to be valid.

Let me offer this and I believe it will support the previous concern:

Not everyone that SAYS that they are a 'Christian' IS a 'Christian'. Now I CAN offer scripture that PLAINLY STATES this. So, in this respect, not EVERYONE that 'claims' to be a follow of Christ in ANY particular denomination IS a 'Christian'. Unless Christian simply IS a 'label'.

But, IF a Christian IS to be considered those that believe in and FOLLOW Christ, it is apparent that not ALL that profess to BE 'Christians' actually BELIEVE and FOLLOW. This IS scriptural. That it is offered that there will be MANY that will approach Christ with the offering: "Look at all the wonderous deeds we have done in your name......." And Christ's reply: "Go away from me for I don't even know you.......'' This in itself is PURE indication that those that MADE the statement would OBVIOUSLY consider themselves Christians. Yet Christ states that He doesn't EVEN KNOW them. For WHO else would DO in the NAME of Christ OTHER THAN those that would PROFESS to be 'Christians'?

So, your NEED to hear scripture that supports the offering that there ARE many in the DIFFERENT denominations that are NOT truly following Christ is one of those types of comments that could only be offered to create debate. For while there is NO actual STATEMENT in The Word concerning DENOMINATIONS, (there WERE no 'denominations' at the time of Christ or the apostles. Neither Baptists, Methodist, Catholics, etc.......), the understanding IS offered in that NOT ALL that SAY they ARE Christians TRULY ARE.

From my observation when we compare what people DO and what they SAY, VERY few that I have encountered are ANYTHING other than 'talkers' of WHO they are. When we compare they STATEMENTS to their actual DEEDS, most fall rediculously SHORT of their STATEMENTS in deed.

I don't believe that ANYONE is ignorant to the fact that there are MORE 'in the world' than those that have allowed Christ into their hearts. And in this respect, it is easy to SEE that God is NOT going to destroy a WORLD FULL of those that LOVE Him and follow HIS will. Yet there is NO indication whatsoever that 'religion' will fade up to the time of the end. A 'falling away' is NOT a 'falling away' of RELIGION. It is a 'falling away from the TRUTH'. For there are many 'religions' that are as strong as ever and many that are being created before our very eyes. That offers NOTHING concerning TRUTH. My 'point': there are MANY right this very moment, (maybe a more appropriate statement would be MOST), that STATE that they love God and follow His will that do ANYTHING but DO what they SAY. And this being the case, there are obviously MANY in ALL the denominations that are NOT truly saved but JUST 'stating it'.

And we DON'T need a particular scripture to UNDERSTAND this.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

while I recognize the NEED to base our understanding on scripture, EVERYTHING that we are ABLE to understand does not NEED a specific STATEMENT in order to be valid.

Ah, you mean like Trinity, Purgatory and the Assumption of Mary into heaven???!!!

Well, that's good to hear that we do agree on this concept.

Let me offer this and I believe it will support the previous concern:

Not everyone that SAYS that they are a 'Christian' IS a 'Christian'. Now I CAN offer scripture that PLAINLY STATES this. So, in this respect, not EVERYONE that 'claims' to be a follow of Christ in ANY particular denomination IS a 'Christian'. Unless Christian simply IS a 'label'.

Being a "Christian" is based more on what people believe, not on how they act. Christ gave us the parables of the tares and the wheat, the catch of the many fish, as examples that the Christian Church was NOT full of "pure and holy" people. The problem I see of some here as that they would judge who is a Christian based upon their walk. Unfortunately, NONE of us is in the position to judge another's walk. We can barely judge our OWN walk. Rather than worry about such subjective indicators, Christ seemed to be rather straight forward. Those who believe His doctrine are Christians. The community of Christians were those who followed the teachings of the Apostles. Naturallly, these men and women were exhorted to put their belief into practice (which was an innovative concept for Greeks, who didn't necessarily believe that belief and practice were related).

Theoretically, the Christian WOULD walk from faith to faith. However, experience shows, even in Scriptures, that people are at different stages of their walk. Some are like the prodigal son, who have temporarily faltered. Are we to judge that these people are "no longer Christians"? This "elder brother" syndrome is frowned upon. We are to pray for these people, exhort them to come back. Not boot them out. They are STILL our brothers and sisters in Christ, who need our prayers and support to return to the Father's loving arms. This, along with the parables of Christ, do not support the idea that only the holy ones are "true Christians".

Frankly, NONE of us are in the position to judge WHO God has selected as the elect for heaven. Some may take unexpected walks in their spiritual life. Who can say. Thus, I question the idea that another can say "you aren't a true Christian" based on one's current walk. Such people worry more about judging others than themselves.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

while I recognize the NEED to base our understanding on scripture, EVERYTHING that we are ABLE to understand does not NEED a specific STATEMENT in order to be valid.

Ah, you mean like Trinity, Purgatory and the Assumption of Mary into heaven???!!!

No, that's not what 'I' meant.

While these may well exist in the minds and hearts of those that so choose to 'believe' in them, I was not refering to such fuzzy or inconsistent concepts. What we were discussing were the very basics of Christianity as offered THROUGH scripture. There BEING no specific statements concerning 'denominations' which did NOT exist at the time of the WRITING of scripture, we DO NOT have a single LINE that states ANYTHING about such a concept of this word. But we do have MUCH offered concerning those that would COME and alter that which was FIRST given by the apostles through Gospel or epistle.

Well, that's good to hear that we do agree on this concept.

Sort of, I guess.

Let me offer this and I believe it will support the previous concern:

Not everyone that SAYS that they are a 'Christian' IS a 'Christian'. Now I CAN offer scripture that PLAINLY STATES this. So, in this respect, not EVERYONE that 'claims' to be a follow of Christ in ANY particular denomination IS a 'Christian'. Unless Christian simply IS a 'label'.

Being a "Christian" is based more on what people believe, not on how they act. Christ gave us the parables of the tares and the wheat, the catch of the many fish, as examples that the Christian Church was NOT full of "pure and holy" people. The problem I see of some here as that they would judge who is a Christian based upon their walk. Unfortunately, NONE of us is in the position to judge another's walk. We can barely judge our OWN walk. Rather than worry about such subjective indicators, Christ seemed to be rather straight forward. Those who believe His doctrine are Christians. The community of Christians were those who followed the teachings of the Apostles. Naturallly, these men and women were exhorted to put their belief into practice (which was an innovative concept for Greeks, who didn't necessarily believe that belief and practice were related).

While what you offer Is 'partial truth', it is NOT complete. For Christ DID offer that those that believe, but what was also offered was that NOT those that HEAR ONLY but those that FOLLOW. For one can CERTAINLY 'believe' much that they DO NOT follow. I am an American, but I do NOT follow much that is TAUGHT in this country so far as it's policies and politics. See what I mean?

Fran YOU KNOW that it's NOT ENOUGH to simply SAY that you 'believe'. It's MORE what you DO of what you believe than what you SAY. For God is able to KNOW the HEARTS of those that TRULY believe. And there is no hiding this from Him.

We WILL be KNOWN by the 'fruit' that is APPARENT in the 'walk' of those TRULY on THE 'path'.

Theoretically, the Christian WOULD walk from faith to faith. However, experience shows, even in Scriptures, that people are at different stages of their walk. Some are like the prodigal son, who have temporarily faltered. Are we to judge that these people are "no longer Christians"? This "elder brother" syndrome is frowned upon. We are to pray for these people, exhort them to come back. Not boot them out. They are STILL our brothers and sisters in Christ, who need our prayers and support to return to the Father's loving arms. This, along with the parables of Christ, do not support the idea that only the holy ones are "true Christians".

All I can offer is this: IF those that are truly following in Word and DEED are NOT able to discern their brothers and sisters in Christ, then WE would be NO DIFFFERENT than 'the world'.

I offer NO such sentiment as 'booting ANYONE out'. What I DO offer is that we ARE to BE separate from 'the world'. I am UNAWARE of 'parables' that would contradict ANYTHING offered ANYWHERE in scripture. We ARE to BE Holy as Christ IS Holy. i find it amusing that you seek to find words that would contradict such as I have offered here. For IF we are NO DIFFERENT than the REST of 'the world', how DO we distinguish ourselves FROM 'the world'?

Frankly, NONE of us are in the position to judge WHO God has selected as the elect for heaven. Some may take unexpected walks in their spiritual life. Who can say. Thus, I question the idea that another can say "you aren't a true Christian" based on one's current walk. Such people worry more about judging others than themselves.

I have made NO effort to JUDGE or SELECT anyone. That is NOT for me to decide. But we were given information to use in discernment. Otherwise words offered for our understanding would SERVE 'no pupose. I choose to accept what has been offered and simply follow as I am able.

Now, considering how """"I"""" have been JUDGED by those in matters such as 'trinity', and MANY others........I find it TOTALLY amusing that YOU would offer such a comment. For I have been told by you and others that my walk is UNABLE to even be close to complete without BEING a member of a certain denomination.

And fran, you would be HARD PRESSED to judge me as HARSHLY or intensely as I DO MYSELF. The words that I offer should openly SHOW that i consider myself to BE utterly unworthy of the gift that has been offered. If not for a loving and gracious Father I would be worthy of NOTHING but death most final. But FOR the sake of a loving and gracious God I DO 'judge myself' constantly concerning the words that He has offered in understanding.

and we were NEVER told that we are unable to 'judge others', what we have been offered is to BEWARE of HOW we judge those around us. For AS we judge THEM so TOO will WE be JUDGED. There is a definite DIFFERENCE in such understanding. And I TRY my best to judge myself AS i judge others.

So, with these things in mind, I believe that there MUST have been information offered for US to discern WHO are and WHO are NOT our brothers and sisters IN CHRIST. We are certainly to LOVE all, but also to be ABLE to discern WHO does and WHO does NOT follow in truth. TOO much has been offered in Word for us NOT to be ABLE to discern. Otherwise, we wouldn't even KNOW who to support such as Saints, or WHO we are to 'gather WIth'. So, your words that would offer that we are UNABLE to discern the truth in WHO is or who isn't a 'Christian' could hardly BE considered sound doctrine.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

What we were discussing were the very basics of Christianity as offered THROUGH scripture. There BEING no specific statements concerning 'denominations' which did NOT exist at the time of the WRITING of scripture, we DO NOT have a single LINE that states ANYTHING about such a concept of this word. But we do have MUCH offered concerning those that would COME and alter that which was FIRST given by the apostles through Gospel or epistle.

Nothing is said about denominations? Is that what your above statement is attempting to say? Forgive me, but I am having a hard time following your writing in this case...

Not everyone that SAYS that they are a 'Christian' IS a 'Christian'. Now I CAN offer scripture that PLAINLY STATES this. So, in this respect, not EVERYONE that 'claims' to be a follow of Christ in ANY particular denomination IS a 'Christian'. Unless Christian simply IS a 'label'.

I agree with that, and have said as much previously. Mormons and JV's claim to be Christian, but they are not. Is this based upon the individual's acts or their beliefs? Naturally, it is the later. So what IS a Christian? Read the Nicene Creed and you will find what Christians believe, in a nutshell.

While what you offer Is 'partial truth', it is NOT complete. For Christ DID offer that those that believe, but what was also offered was that NOT those that HEAR ONLY but those that FOLLOW.
For one can CERTAINLY 'believe' much that they DO NOT follow. I am an American, but I do NOT follow much that is TAUGHT in this country so far as it's policies and politics. See what I mean?

What makes you American, then? How you act?

Fran YOU KNOW that it's NOT ENOUGH to simply SAY that you 'believe'. It's MORE what you DO of what you believe than what you SAY. For God is able to KNOW the HEARTS of those that TRULY believe. And there is no hiding this from Him.

I am not talking about whether one is a good Christian or not. I am speaking of whether one is a Christian PERIOD. Since our walks are at different stages, one cannot judge whether one is "Christian" merely by their walk BECAUSE that would imply that Christians must be perfect all the time. Otherwise, God has cast them out for their imperfect walk... One is not a Christian when they fail or sin. Or when they have doubts.

Please. That is not what Christians believe. This idea of the perfect and holy Church shall not be fulfilled until the second coming. This perfect Church in this world merely leads people to judge others based on their actions - while ignoring the beam in their own eye.

Now really, do you believe all that?

We WILL be KNOWN by the 'fruit' that is APPARENT in the 'walk' of those TRULY on THE 'path'.

And at what point shall we measure the fruit, my friend? Every other Monday? Perhaps Sunday at 4 PM? Will that be Eastern Standard Time or Pacific? If I bear good fruit at 4 PM EST but not at 4 PM PST, am I no longer Christian?

See where this is going? It is silly and wrong. God judges our walk over the course of our lives. It should bear fruit - but we don't cast people out for not bearing fruit today because we don't know the season God intends for us to bear fruit! We are all different "trees" and we will generate fruit at our own time. "By their fruit they shall be known" doesn't mean we judge other Christians every day.

I offer NO such sentiment as 'booting ANYONE out'. What I DO offer is that we ARE to BE separate from 'the world'. I am UNAWARE of 'parables' that would contradict ANYTHING offered ANYWHERE in scripture. We ARE to BE Holy as Christ IS Holy. i find it amusing that you seek to find words that would contradict such as I have offered here. For IF we are NO DIFFERENT than the REST of 'the world', how DO we distinguish ourselves FROM 'the world'?

I don't contradict Scriptures. We are to be holy - but WHEN and HOW FAST? Are you to judge my walk? I think not.

By our beliefs in what Christ has done and our faith in action based on the hope that awaits us. You would prefer to judge others based on your standards, and so if someone has not lived up to YOUR standards (however in God's name you arrived at them, we'll leave unaddressed), they are no longer Christians?

I have made NO effort to JUDGE or SELECT anyone. That is NOT for me to decide.

Ah, so you are now changing your mind... If people are not bearing fruit at "Imagican"s speed", they are not worthy of the name Christian. But you naturally don't see this as "judging" or "selecting"... :-?

Now, considering how """"I"""" have been JUDGED by those in matters such as 'trinity', and MANY others........I find it TOTALLY amusing that YOU would offer such a comment. For I have been told by you and others that my walk is UNABLE to even be close to complete without BEING a member of a certain denomination.

Why is it amusing? I consistently follow Scriptures, defining Christianity on orthodox beliefs - which lead to orthodox practices. I have not judged your walk, but your beliefs. I don't judge your walk, I am in no position to do so. NOR have I EVER said that only Christians will go to heaven, my friend.

And fran, you would be HARD PRESSED to judge me as HARSHLY or intensely as I DO MYSELF.

Don't try to turn the tables on me - I have not judged whether your actions bear fruit in God's eyes or not. You profess your un-Christian beliefs. You yourself. Knowing what Christians actually believe, I am in a position to say that some of your beliefs are not Christian. Your efforts in seeking God, however, are beyond what I have ever said about you. You may have un-Christian beliefs, but that doesn't mean you aren't seeking out God or that you cannot go to heaven. That is beyond me to judge.

So, with these things in mind, I believe that there MUST have been information offered for US to discern WHO are and WHO are NOT our brothers and sisters IN CHRIST. We are certainly to LOVE all, but also to be ABLE to discern WHO does and WHO does NOT follow in truth.

And since we cannot know the heart of another, we turn to their outward profession of faith, their orthodox practices and beliefs. Sure, Mormons can say they believe in a Trinity, but when you ask them the meaning of that, it is clear that they do not believe in the Christian definition. They believe something else. Thus, we are in a position to judge that these are not "brothers in Christ", although we are still to love them, pray for them, and evangelize for their conversion to the fullness of truth that God wants each of us to have.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

The bible is the book of the Catholic Church. The Church came into existance before the bible.
Trying to interpret the Church's book without the guiding authority of the Church can result in skewed ideas of faith and what God wants of us.

And I suppose that you are UNAWARE that following MEN can lead to even greater 'askewedness', (he he he)?

The Church DID exist 'pre-Bible'. But NOT 'pre-apostle'. Therefore we KNOW that MUCH of what GUIDED the Church BEFORE the Bible was compiled WAS the writtings of the apostles. And we STILL have those TODAY preserved IN The Bible.

I don't really BELIEVE that the CC had ANY choice in the matter of the Bible. It was 'inspired BY God' and they were JUST the 'tool' that He used to produce it. In this respect, the Bible is NOT 'the book of the CC'. It is a book designed for THE Church, the Body of Christ.

And the LAST statement, I won't even comment on. That is simply an attempt to 'start' something that we have been TOLD not to.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

[quote="A-Christian":a693c]The bible is the book of the Catholic Church. The Church came into existance before the bible.
Trying to interpret the Church's book without the guiding authority of the Church can result in skewed ideas of faith and what God wants of us.

Yup. Its like having the Constitution without a Supreme Court. Imagine everyone having a pocket sized Constitution, no Supreme Court, then trying to govern themselves. It would be anarchy!.

Wait as minute: Over 20,000 protestant denominations, all claiming to follow the Bible, and all having opposing doctrines: Anarchy! LOL.

(No offense to my non-Catholic Christian brothers.)[/quote:a693c]

CC,

Do you have any understanding of Jewish law? Ever heard of the Talmud? If one reads just a TAD of it's contents it is APPARENT immediately that THEY, (the Jewish religious leaders), FELT the same way that you do. What were Christ's words concerning such LAWS that the 'religious order' created such as the 'washing of hands', etc.......?

That is NO different that what you have attempted to offer. That a 'particular' SET of people are the ONLY ones able to be trusted to KNOW what is offered in The Word. That it takes THESE to RUN the Church.

The funny part of this equation is that it is NOT up to US to RUN the Church. For Christ is the HEAD of The Church. IF on is OF The Spirit, It IS able to convict those who submit to IT. It's when we offer up our FAITH to MEN that things get rather 'sticky'. When we submit to the authority of MEN that we loose track of what we have been offered in guidance and simply 'go with the flow'.

And CC, what happens when a 'bad seed' becomes TRUSTED by those that BELIEVE that he IS the authority. And ALLOW such a 'one' to create or alter that which IS truth into 'something else'? HOW does YOUR 'kind' of 'church' protect itself from this POSSIBILITY?

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

CC,

Do you have any understanding of Jewish law? Ever heard of the Talmud? If one reads just a TAD of it's contents it is APPARENT immediately that THEY, (the Jewish religious leaders), FELT the same way that you do. What were Christ's words concerning such LAWS that the 'religious order' created such as the 'washing of hands', etc.......?

Jesus didn't advocate doing away with ALL Jewish authority. Only those traditions that were moving people from God's will. External-only rituals that did not come from the heart. Following the letter of the law while ignoring the needs of the people. Christ didn't advocate overthrowing the Sandhedrin's authority.

That is NO different that what you have attempted to offer. That a 'particular' SET of people are the ONLY ones able to be trusted to KNOW what is offered in The Word. That it takes THESE to RUN the Church.

Take your complaints to the Lord, Imagican. Clearly, the bible tells us to take problems "to the Church" when a Christian refuses the chastisement of two brothers. It is the Bible that advocates excommunication of brothers who are either false teachers or morally corrupt within the community.

The funny part of this equation is that it is NOT up to US to RUN the Church. For Christ is the HEAD of The Church.

Christ, as the "master", left "servants" in charge while away. Jesus taught such parables to remind the Apostles the heirarchy that the Church would have to serve the community. Christ is the Head who has given other men authority to "feed my sheep".

And CC, what happens when a 'bad seed' becomes TRUSTED by those that BELIEVE that he IS the authority. And ALLOW such a 'one' to create or alter that which IS truth into 'something else'? HOW does YOUR 'kind' of 'church' protect itself from this POSSIBILITY?

Whatever the answer, it is nowhere part of Scriptures that the individual holds the leaders accountable to the individual's various opinions. That is not the authoritative structure of the Church of Christ, even if it happens to be the Western world's governmental pattern of rule. Rather than trying to apply man's ways onto God, perhaps it might be useful to consider the qualities God wants from us, humility and obedience. Let God's Spirit worry about such matters.

Or do you lack faith that God can protect His Church?

Regards

 

[Imagican]

Fran,

Since the 'temple' is NOW within, I believe that the word 'church' has 'taken on' a different MEANING than that ORIGINALLY offered. That there were those that began to TEACH that the 'temple and church' WERE the same. They are NOT.

The TEMPLE is WHERE one would GO to worship. The Church was NOTHING MORE than the BODY of those that 'worship God' through His Son. That MANY have LOST this understanding does NOT negate that it was ONCE so.

God was PLENTY able to SEE the direction that MEN had taken in the PAST as far as HIS TEMPLE was concerned. There was NO reason for HIM to believe that it would EVER be ANY different so long as this world CONTINUES as it ALWAYS has. There is NO WAY that God would have LEFT the 'leadership' of HIS TEMPLE in the hands of MEN. That is WHY The Spirit was LEFT BEHIND.

While SOME may WELL NEED the LEADERSHIP of others to make them FEEL like they WISH to FEEL, we have the scriptures that PLAINLY offer that the leaders ARE to BE submissive to the Spirit as WELL as their FLOCK. And ANYTIME that we witness PRIDE in the attitudes of those that ARE those that 'consider' themselves LEADERS, we can SEE that this is FALSE 'pride' and certainly not that which was MEANT to BE.

A LEADER of the 'Church' is HE that 'SERVES' the MOST. He that is ABLE to submit to The Spirit the MOST. He that sacrifices the MOST of him or herself. Christ's example is ENOUGH to SHOW HOW His Church IS to be LED. And I have seen LITTLE if ANY of His example offered in 'the churches' of OUR time.

You CERTAINLY have the RIGHT to believe as YOU see fit. But to encourage others in that which you CANNOT offer PROOF of other than what you CHOOSE to accept is certainly irresponsible in that EACH is answerable to their OWN judgement. And ANYTHING that WE offer that is able to influence them SHOULD be offered in a convincing of trust IN The Spirit. What we NEED to DO is to encourage ANYONE to develope a PERSONAL relationship with God THROUGH His Son and allow The Spirit to GUIDE them. For when it all comes down to the END, it IS each of us that will STAND before the judgement seat. And ONLY Christ will BE there to BE our 'mediator'. We will NOT stand in GROUPS with our LEADERS there to represent us. But we will EACH stand alone WITH Christ. So it would stand to REASON that we follow in SPIRIT rather than in FLESH led by FLESHLY LEADERS.

Some may well NEED others to lead them. But we can CLEARLY SEE that there was NO SUCH example offered by the apostles. The Spirit is mentioned over and over as THE GUIDE. NOT Paul, NOT Peter, but after these offered witness, it was the SPIRIT that brought TRUE understanding to those that were WILLING to submit to IT. And these offered OVER AND OVER that they were LED BY THE SPIRIT and NO MEN. We TOO are ABLE to come to the SAME understanding as offered THROUGH The Spirit. Anyone that denies THIS denies the POWER of God.

I would offer NO influence toward ANY particular denomination. I would offer encouragement to any and ALL willing to LISTEN that we ARE to submit to the Spirit and that denomination is ONLY able to separate and NOT able to unite IN SPIRIT. I would encourage ALL to read, study and PRAY for guidance. NOT to simply step into a 'man-made' temple once a week and simply SIT AND LISTEN to what OTHERS have to offer. But to SEEK what is offered THEMSELVES. To TRUST in God and NOT men. To ALLOW themselves TO BE holy and let the WORLD seek it's own.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

Since the 'temple' is NOW within,

And within the Community first. This constant claim to "possess the Spirit" is taken out of context of Paul's intent. We possess the Spirit individually WHEN we obey the commandments, not on a daily basis. It is the Church as an integrated whole that possesses the Spirit eternally and always.

I believe that the word 'church' has 'taken on' a different MEANING than that ORIGINALLY offered. That there were those that began to TEACH that the 'temple and church' WERE the same. They are NOT.

The Temple is the Community of Believers, as is the Church. A visible community of persons that share the same faith in God.

God was PLENTY able to SEE the direction that MEN had taken in the PAST as far as HIS TEMPLE was concerned. There was NO reason for HIM to believe that it would EVER be ANY different so long as this world CONTINUES as it ALWAYS has. There is NO WAY that God would have LEFT the 'leadership' of HIS TEMPLE in the hands of MEN. That is WHY The Spirit was LEFT BEHIND.

And the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth BECAUSE of this Spirit.

While SOME may WELL NEED the LEADERSHIP of others to make them FEEL like they WISH to FEEL, we have the scriptures that PLAINLY offer that the leaders ARE to BE submissive to the Spirit as WELL as their FLOCK.

Can you cite me Scriptures that tell me that the leaders of the Church are to be submissive to their flock??? They are to have a humble attitude and not lord it over them, but to be submissive to the flock? Where is that?

ANYTIME that we witness PRIDE in the attitudes of those that ARE those that 'consider' themselves LEADERS, we can SEE that this is FALSE 'pride' and certainly not that which was MEANT to BE.

I see. Imagican expects to see a perfect Church here on earth. Can you point to me WHEN this perfect Church existed even in Scriptures???

A LEADER of the 'Church' is HE that 'SERVES' the MOST.

Again, where does it say that in Scriptures? We know this is an attitude that men SHOULD have who are in position of power. However, where does Paul go around looking for the one who "serves the most" before he lays hands upon them to make them a leader of the community? Again, another false presumption.

He that is ABLE to submit to The Spirit the MOST. He that sacrifices the MOST of him or herself. Christ's example is ENOUGH to SHOW HOW His Church IS to be LED. And I have seen LITTLE if ANY of His example offered in 'the churches' of OUR time.

And yet again, where does the Bible state these as REQUIREMENTS of a leader. They are the ideal that one is to strive for. But where does the Bible state that leaders were ousted who were not "sacrificing enough"?

You CERTAINLY have the RIGHT to believe as YOU see fit. But to encourage others in that which you CANNOT offer PROOF of other than what you CHOOSE to accept is certainly irresponsible in that EACH is answerable to their OWN judgement.

Dude, you got a lot of nerve to lecture me after you gave me that non-Scripturally supported "offering". You build upon sand and then expect me to follow that??? I have the pillar and foundation of the Truth to follow and you give me pet theories unsupported by Scriptures?

Come back when you can support your theories from Scriptures.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

I was tempted to offer MUCH scripture to back up my offerings but do NOT believe this is necessary for those that ALREADY understand WHAT the leadership of Christ's Church SHOULD BE. Suffice is to offer this in summary:

[25] But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
[26] But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
[27] And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
[28] Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many

I BELIEVE in these words is PROOF of what I offered. That those that would be the LEADERS of the flock would be those that SERVE it rather than LORD over it. For there IS but ONE Lord OVER The Church and that being Christ Jesus.

That MEN would choose to create a 'different' church comes as NO surprise for we are CLEARLY able to SEE that this is EXACTLY what happened with the Jews and THEIR religious leaders. They became so CAUGHT UP in the LEADERSHIP that they lost track of the SHEPPARDING.

And it seems UTTERLY in vain that we could POSSIBLY THINK that what has NEVER worked since the beginning could be patterned after the SAME example of FAILURE and do ANYTHING but succeed in the SAME 'failure'.

Christ came and offered something DIFFERENT. That, instead of being LEADERS so far as law and ritual are concerned, those that follow HIM in Word and FAITH and DEED would be EXAMPLES and lead in THIS MANNER than simply placing themselves ABOVE others for the sake of POWER to LORD OVER them.

And not only were the words above offered by Christ, but we have the ACTUAL example that He LIVED. Washing the feet of His deciples, DYING for those that were His ENEMIES, statements like, "Let He who is without sin cast the first stone, FORGIVENESS rather than condemnation, the examples are many and diverse, but ALL show EXAMPLE of HOW His Church is to BE guided. And NONE of what is offered in scripture points to ANY such POWER structure as the church YOU would defend or offer to others.

Ours is but to offer WITNESS and testimony in the HOPES that it is able to enter the hearts of those that DO NOT KNOW Christ. ANY such 'man-made' structure that teaches IT is able to DO anything FOR Christ is utter absurdity. For WE are able to DO NOTHING worthy other than offer our testimony and witness. The EXAMPLE is of UTMOST importance as compared to an attempt to create a 'worldly structure' that has NEVER been able to succeed from the beginning. It SEEMS as though history itself would dictate that we MUST 'let go' of the DESIRE to LORD over our brothers and sisters and become their SERVANTS in order to SHOW the example that was offered by Christ.

You ask for scripture to 'back up' these claims? I offer you The Bible. Instead of picking and choosing the words which I could offer, I would offer scripture as a WHOLE instead. An understanding of LOVE would be the FIRST step in obtaining the understanding offered within. And ONCE one is ABLE to come to an understanding of LOVE, then the example offered becomes PERFECTLY clear. Christ did NOT come to BE a PHYSICAL king. That is for a Later date. His Kingdom that exists NOW is Spiritual and within. What lesson HE offered was LOVE and forgiveness. That we ARE to BE as HE was. That we are to SERVE those that we love and offer example that the WAY of this world is askew in that it ONLY is able to recognize LOVE OF SELF. and herein lies the concept that is ABLE to plainly show that ANY church that offers up itself in ANYTHING but sacrifice is of MAN MADE integrity and ONLY able to fulfill the LUSTS OF MEN.

For they will NOT hold to 'sound doctrine' having their hearts darkened they will NOT understand that which has been offered in TRUTH, but choose instead to CONTINUE in their darkness as they have since the BEGINNING. And attempting to drag OTHERS down into the same confusion is the NATURE of the carnal minded man. NOT satisfied with their OWN destruction but willing it upon their brothers and sisters as well.

These ARE 'righteous words' fran whether you are ABLE to accept them or not. For we ARE to be in submission to The Spirit and It IS able to guide us either corporately or individually. But ONLY if one is willing to have FAITH. Only if one is willing to accept what has been offered through Gospel and epistle and THEN allow The Spirit to GUIDE them.

And JUST as YOU would offer that the 'church fathers' WERE guided BY The Spirit in their 'creation' of what YOU claim IS 'the church', so TOO is the Spirit STILL able to guide those that Love God and His Son. And this is ABLE to be offered TOTALLY outside of ANY 'man-made' church. For The Church IS The Body of Christ and those that would attempt to 'take away' from this offering are ONLY able to DO SO in the hearts of those that choose to worship MEN rather than God through His Son.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

I was tempted to offer MUCH scripture to back up my offerings but do NOT believe this is necessary for those that ALREADY understand WHAT the leadership of Christ's Church SHOULD BE. Suffice is to offer this in summary:

[25] But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
[26] But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
[27] And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant:
[28] Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many

That does not prove your point at all. I even discussed this passage in my last post - and still maintain you are incorrect.

We know what the leadership "should" be. But these are not absolute "requirments" They are ideals. Leaders are to be humble and not lord it over their flock. But that has NOTHING to do with being "submissive" to the flock. That is your addition to Scriptures, one I find nowhere.

Perhaps you are confused with what you are "offering".

Submissive means inclined or ready to submit; unresistingly or humbly obedient: submissive servants.

Some synonyms are tractable, compliant, pliant, amenable

Sorry, but the leaders are not to follow the flock, awaiting their orders, being compliant with what every individual's opinion of bible reading comes up with. The Scriptures themselves give a different picture:

But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Mat 18:16-17

Who is compliant and amendable to whom, Imagican???

I think you are trying to interject your 21st century worldly opinions onto the Scriptures of 2000 years ago.

Let me offer you this, from Scriptures, and maybe it may clarify for you the correct position between leader and flock...

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight [thereof], not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over [God's] heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. 1 Peter 5:1-3

The leaders are exhorted to be humble (but that is not an absolute requirment) and lead not by constraint, but willingly. They are to be examples to the flock. But nowhere do I find that the leaders are to submissively await the rulings of the flock...

The rest is an "offering" based on this false understanding, so I won't bother addressing it point by point.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

I fear that through the wisdom of men you have been LED to accept what they offer. You offer that the Word DOES say what I have pointed out but these words are JUST suggestions and NOT absolute. It must be NICE to be able to pick and choose those that YOU would BELIEVE 'are' absolute, and utterly discard as invalid those that YOU would choose to BELIEVE ARE NOT 'absolute'. And ALL of this that which is TAUGHT by 'certain men'. NOT as 'offered in scripture', but as INTERPRETED by SOME to mean what YOU choose to BELIEVE.

How about this: these words WERE offered in reference to THE CHURCH:

[29] Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
[30] If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
[31] For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
[32] And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
[33] For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

[1] Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
[2] Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
[3] Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
[4] Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
[5] And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
[6] And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
[7] But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
[8] For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
[9] To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
[10] To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
[11] But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
[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.
[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.
[14] For the body is not one member, but many.
[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?
[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?
[17] If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
[18] But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
[19] And if they were all one member, where were the body?
[20] But now are they many members, yet but one body.
[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.
[22] Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
[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.
[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:
[25] That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
[26] And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
[27] Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
[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.
[29] Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
[30] Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
[31] But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Please read what is offered in these LAST four verses. NOTE the ORDER by which the GIFTS are OFFERED: FIRST APOSTLES, these were apointed FIRST to 'spread the Good News'. To FORM The BODY of Christ, (The Church), they were empowered to START The Church. Then comes PROPHETS, (those able to DISCERN the Words offered BY the apostles, then come TEACHERS, not THERE for the sake of discernment so much as the OFFERING of The Word as it stands. then, (NOTE AGAIN that it SPECIFICALLY offers the WORDS 'after that' SIGNIFYING ORDER; from that which is MOST important to that which is LEAST), MIRACLES, then HEALING, HELPERS, and here's the PART that pertains to our conversation: Governments, and lastly tongues.

And HERE is the clencher; the LAST statement of Paul: [31] But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

This offers PERFECTLY CLEARLY to those that are WILLING to accept it that we are to COVET the BEST GIFTS. Now, if we were offered the gifts in ORDER of importance, that would SHOW that those FIRST mentioned ARE the BEST gifts. Funny, but GOVERNMENT is mentioned SECOND LAST TO TONGUES. Couple THIS offering with that which preceeds it STATING that ALL the members are EQUAL in importance, that PLAINLY offers that NOT A SINGLE MEMBER IS 'GREATER' than ANY OTHER.

yet YOU would have me believe and accept that there ARE 'special members'. Those that have been gifted to RULE OVER The Church. But the scriptures PLAINLY offer that Christ IS The Head and NO OTHER. It is CHRIST'S Church and NOT that which is ABLE to BE controlled or RULED OVER by MEN.

Fran, EACH of us is ABLE to come to the TRUTH through the GUIDANCE of The Spirit. That It is ABLE to offer through myriad means does NOT offer that it is to be GARNERED and isolated TO a 'certain GROUP of MEN'. It is offer to ALL and THAT IS scriptural. That some LACK the confidence to develope a relationship THROUGH The Spirit does NOT NEGATE the FACT that it IS possible for ALL who COME TO CHRIST TO DO SO.

i have offered NO such MODERN thinking as you would accuse. While neither YOU nor I am able to COMPLETELY understand the culture of the TIME in which these words that we read was offered, that DOES NOT mean that I am UNABLE to discern the MESSAGE that is offered in them.

Christ offered on numerous occasion and we have the words of John as well that the religious leaders durring HIS time were HYPOCRITES. SAying ONE thing and DOING another. Now, IF these had veered SO FAR from the TRUTH, then HOW can you offer that Christ wasn't pointing out that HE was here to offer a BETTER WAY? That ONCE The Spirit was GIVEN to mankind, that man was NO LONGER in NEED of those to LORD over them as in the past. That ONCE the temple was DESTROYED, it WAS rebuilt ANEW but in it's ressurection, it BECAME a SPIRITUAL TEMPLE instead of PHYSICAL. That the KINGDOM of God was ABLE to DWELL within the HEARTS of those that accept Him and LOVE Him.

I know that these words must seem UTTERLY foreign. And I KNOW how difficult it IS to accept that which contradicts what we have LEARNED to BELIEVE. But I have offered NOTHING that goes AGAINST scripture. ONLY in acceptance of ALL it rather than PICKING and choosing that which supports MY beliefs.

You are certainly able to FORCE me to 'do more work' in my offerings by your insistance that I BACK UP each of my statements with scripture. But you will shortly FIND that it only destroys YOUR argument WHEN I DO go back and offer EXACTLY what I have stated.

I assume when I discuss such issues with those that CALL themselves Christian that at least MOST would be versed IN scripture to START with. While I'm SURE that we have brothers and sisters among us that AREN'T, when we offer UNDERSTANDING of issues such as the one we discuss here, it is PRUDENT that we BE understanders and HAVE learning of scripture INSTEAD of simply offering 'beliefs' taught to us by OTHERS. I AM A READER AND STUDIER OF THE WORD. I have NOT allowed the biased beliefs of others to TAINT what is offered up in scripture and Spirit.

That you have a 'pre-concieved notion' that I CAN'T be a Follower of Christ for my LACK OF FAITH in the dogma and doctrine of YOUR church does NOT negate the FACT that Christ LIVES in my heart and my understanding IS as offered through scripture and Spirit. And I can ASSURE you, that those that ARE led by The Spirit ARE able to recognize 'their own'.

True Christians. This issue is as difficult to discuss as Christianity itself. For there ARE SO MANY that have SO MANY 'different' ideas of Christ and His Word that it's OBVIOUS that even the basic concept of WHO follows Him verses WHO doesn't can't be agreed upon from the onset.

But we do have this: There is NO LIGHT in the hearts of those that DO NOT KNOW CHRIST. And that LIGHT within those that DO is LOVE. And ANYTHING or ANYONE that would lead their brothers and sisters in ANY direction than in an UNDERSTANDING of WHAT God IS 'cannot' be OF The Spirit. For the example is CLEAR. The LOVE that IS God is apparent in the hearts of those that LOVE God and their neighbors. REGARDLESS of their BELIEFS, there can be NO 'truth' in the beliefs of those that are UNABLE to offer the LOVE that has been given THEM through The Spirit. And NO MAN on this planet is ABLE to SHOW another WHAT God IS. That IS only able to BE performed by God Himself THROUGH His Son and Spirit.

The Church does NOT bring ITSELF into the lives of others. Those that ARE 'born again' BECOME parts of the Body and ARE the MEMBERS of the ONE True Church. And this CANNOT be obtained EXCEPT in Spirit. No amount of pagentry or man made ritual is able to bring us ONE STEP CLOSER TO GOD. For we are NOT able to WORK our way INTO His Grace. It is a GIFT of God and NOT of mankind. Not ABLE to be CONTAINED within the confines of the HEARTS or BUILDINGS of those that would ATTEMPT to DO SO.

It is God that has offered us forgiveness through the BLOOD of His precious Son and NOT 'a church' or 'men' that would offer it up SO. Choosing to worship THEMSELVES over the Creator and have OTHERS follow THEM to the SAME distruction. That IS the nature of man and the nature of this world and the example is apparent in the story of 'The Garden'. not OUR will be done, but THY will be done is the TRUTH of our sonship towards GOD through His ONLY Begotten Son Jesus Christ.

Blessings, my brother

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

I fear that through the wisdom of men you have been LED to accept what they offer. You offer that the Word DOES say what I have pointed out but these words are JUST suggestions and NOT absolute.

The words you offer do not suggest that the leaders are to submit to the flock. You have not shown that in any of our conversations. Being humble does NOT mean that the humble leader will await the flock to decide what he should do. The humble leader is not submissive to the flock, according to Matthew 18. The words you offer are strickly your opinion based upon your ideas given to you by the world, (democratic government is to be applied to religion) not backed up by the Word of God.

[29] Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
[30] If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
[31] For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
[32] And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
[33] For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I don't see that as saying that the leaders of the Church are to submit to the flock...

To prophesy does not mean that the leaders are now to change their teachings to suit the "prophet". The leaders are to preach the Gospel, even if an angel of light - or a self-proclaimed expert on God - comes forth.

[1] Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
[2] Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
[3] Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
[4] Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
[5] And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord.
[6] And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
[7] But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.
[8] For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;
[9] To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;
[10] To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues:
[11] But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
[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.
[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.
[14] For the body is not one member, but many.
[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?
[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?
[17] If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
[18] But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
[19] And if they were all one member, where were the body?
[20] But now are they many members, yet but one body.
[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.
[22] Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
[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.
[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:
[25] That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
[26] And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
[27] Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
[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.
[29] Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?
[30] Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
[31] But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

OK, quoting 1 Cor 12 is not going to make your point of view, either, since Scriptures clearly says that the Spirit gives the CHURCH these gifts for the sake of the CHURCH, not the individual. Thus, the Church is like a body with many parts. Not all "flocks" are leaders...

This doesn't prove your point, either...

I will await a Scripture that tells me that the flock is to hold the leaders accountable, where the leaders are to await the flock's decision, where the leaders are to submit to the flock. Until then, what you offer is against God's Word and I do not intend on reading it.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

fran,

I could quote scripture all day and IF you choose to ignore it there is NO point. I can offer scripture, (MANY), that state that MANY had GONE out from the TRUTH THEN to form their OWN religious governments,,,,,THEN, at the time of the apostles. But IF you had been a MEMBER of one of these EVEN THEN, you would argue just as you are now in defense of what you CHOSE to believe.

The words that I have quoted offer that NOT A SINGLE PIECE of the Body is ANY MORE IMPORTANT than any other. That SOME may WELL THINK that they are, but without EACH the Body is NOT A BODY.

What you have 'bought into' is a belief that there IS an ALL IMPORTANT HEAD and this Head is NOT Christ but a MAN. And it seems to be ALL important that you 'push' this belief upon each topic of every conversation.

I HAVE offered scripture over and over that plainly shows that there is but ONE Head of Christ's Chruch and that is CHRIST ALONE. That ALL others that would BE members of HIS church would be SERVANTS and NOT the leaders that YOU profess to follow. That such organization was offered BY MEN long AFTER the death of Christ and His apostles.

Now you have offered NOTHING so far as scripture except PERSONAL interpretation as it has been TAUGHT to you. Please offer WHERE you came upon YOUR understanding of the religeous GOVERNMENT that you profess to believe in and FOLLOW. Where in scripture does IT exist? I have CLEARLY shown what the Bible offers in reference to leadership. You refute it but have YET to offer ANY scriptural evidence to the contrary.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

...What you have 'bought into' is a belief that there IS an ALL IMPORTANT HEAD and this Head is NOT Christ but a MAN....

That is totally untrue, and you know it is, and therefore you have told a lie. The Church teaches, and the Catechism makes clear, that Christ is the head of His Body, the Church. The pope is merely the prime minister to the King, who is Christ.

But since you put YOUR interpretations above all else, it is YOU who makes a man the head - you have made YOURSELF the oracle of God, because you think your interpretation are the correct ones. We don't do that: We hear those who Christ appointed

 

[Imagican]

Ok CC, you 'bit into this one'. Now I ask YOU to show ANY evidence that there was EVER meant to BE a 'prime minister' of Christ. Show me ONE tit of evidence that this was EVER offered through Gospel or epistle. Show me WHERE there is ANYTHING offered in 'religious government' concerning ANYONE above a Bishop.

I'll be waiting.......................................................................................................

MEC