Was Jesus against organized religion?

[Cornelius]

You answered the first part, but not the second. If you and another Christian who is revealed Truth through the "Holy Spirit" disagree on a doctrine, which "Holy Spirit" is right?

The one who is in agreement with the Bible.

Every single Protestant denomination "agrees with the Bible", as do JW's, Mormons and every "milkmaid with a Bible".

Even the RCC "agrees with the Bible" but they too do not in what they teach, their FRUIT is not showing., Its lacking just like the Protestant and JW and Mormons etc.

I agree with the Bible, just not your interpretation.

Yes, but you do agree with your denominations interpretation. If you did not, you would not be there.

The foolish, false doctrine that the HS guides each individual believer to "all Truth" is not taught in Scripture, is not logical, and in practice, does not work. It sure SOUNDS good, though.

Funny thing is that my version of the Bible says the opposite :Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth:............
which version (dare I ask) are you using ?

[/quote]
It is actually taught in Scripture:Joh 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: [/quote]

"My sheep hear my voice..." means the HS guides each individual believer to all truth??? Did God tell you this personally? If someone disagrees with this interpretation is he "in error"?

Did your denomination teach you something else ? If somebody disagrees with them , are they in error ?
What does hearing the voice of God means to you?

You're dodging the question. Is your only authority for doctrinal Truth your own personal, subjective Biblical interpretation? Do you accept any authority outside yourself?

Of course not, the Bible clearly says that the Lord gave us Apostles, Pastors, Prophets, Evangelist, and Teachers in the body of Christ. He gives us elders as well. I submit to them. I submit to God's leadership in the church.

A guess that rules out Peter, Paul, James, Matthew, Mark and Jesus, among others. Again, you are dodging. Are the people who disagree with you "in error"?

How can it rule out Peter, Paul , James , Matthew , Mark and Jesus, when they were only adhering to the Word of God?

No people who disagree with the Word of God are in error. You are welcome to disagree with me, if I am disagreeing with the Word of God, because then I would be in error.

Which church? If some members disagree with others on a point of doctrine, which HS guided group is right and how do you decide. Again, this sounds great in theory, but breaks down in practice.

The church. The called out ones.

I said in a previous post:

"My point is that God commutes Truth to His people THROUGH the Church, not through subjective Bible interpretation and "following Christ within".

But the Bible point still is that the truth is communicated via the Holy Spirit. All who come together because of this Truth, are called out of the world, and are called the church.

I don't see how these are different, but if you do, I'll clear it up. The Catholic Church is kept from teaching error in matters of faith and morals by the Holy Spirit.

Now you have to take me for an illiterate idiot here. I can tell you I love history and have done my bit of reading. If you however have never sat down with a unbiased history book, that was not written by somebody from your denomination, I suggest you do that, before making statements like this one above to anybody who has even had half an education.

It is Her mission throughout time to pass on this Truth to the faithful.

You have to be kidding me............

That's what I mean by "God commutes Truth to His people THROUGH the Church". The HS teaches THROUGH His Church, which is EXACTLY what happened in Acts 15. There was a doctrinal dispute, members of the Church in Antioch sent representatives to Jerusalem for an AUTHORITATIVE ANSWER. The leaders of the Church held a council, discussed the issue, then RELIED ON THE GUIDANCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT to come to a final decision. This decision was then BINDING ON ALL THE FAITHFUL, not just the Church at Antioch. This is EXACTLY how the Catholic Church operates to this day. This is the Biblical model for settling doctrinal disputes.

The Protestant model is not even close. As near as I can tell, If a church has a doctrinal dispute, one camp reads Scripture, claims guidance by the HS, and starts their own rival congregation. This is the opposite of Acts 15 and the opposite of unity.

Since the RCC has miserably failed, I cannot even see you looking at the Protestants . Your house is in disarray . I am not defending the protestant movement, even thought they have had points of light coming through sometimes. Even some light is to be found in the Catholic history, but in general, we must all come out of religion,.

 

[dadof10]

You answered the first part, but not the second. If you and another Christian who is revealed Truth through the "Holy Spirit" disagree on a doctrine, which "Holy Spirit" is right?

The one who is in agreement with the Bible.

Let’s cut to the salient points.

Person 1;
A) Is a “born again†believer (whatever that means to you).
B) “Bears fruit†(whatever that term means to you).
C) “Agrees with the Bible†(whatever that means to you).
D) Reads whatever version of Scripture you feel is most accurate or faithful to the Truth.
E) Prays for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and feels like he/she is being personally guided by Him.
F) Through reading of Scripture and prayer, he/she is “given the Truth†on a point of doctrine by the HS.

Person 2;
A) Is a “born again†believer (whatever that means to you).
B) “Bears fruit†(whatever that term means to you).
C) “Agrees with the Bible†(whatever that means to you).
D) Reads whatever version of Scripture you feel is most accurate or faithful to the Truth.
E) Prays for the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and feels like he/she is being personally guided by Him.
F) Through reading of Scripture and prayer, he/she is “given the Truth†on a point of doctrine by the HS.

Person 1 and Person 2 come to completely contradictory conclusions on the same point of doctrine.

Since I’m sure you’ll agree that the Holy Spirit wouldn’t teach error, which person truly is being “guided†by the Spirit and which one is honestly mistaken? How are they to know? How are YOU to tell if you are being “guided†or simply coming to your own subjective conclusion based on outside influences and past experiences?

We have a Biblical alternative to the above, Acts 15, which shows the operation of the Holy Spirit through the “sensus fideliumâ€Â, the calling of a council, the discussion of the disputed doctrine within the framework of Revealed Truth (including Scripture), an authoritative decision being made by the council members, and that decision being handed on as binding on all the faithful. This is the Biblical model for doctrinal discernment, and this is how the Holy Spirit works THROUGH THE CHURCH when the faithful are confused on a point of doctrine. Please note, in Acts 15 EVEN PAUL recognized the authority of the Jerusalem council, as he was right in the middle of the controversy at Antioch and was sent to Jerusalem. Why didn’t Paul simply “search the Scripturesâ€Â, pray for guidance and make a declaration that was binding on the Church at Antioch? I guess things weren’t done that way, and in the Church that Christ founded and guides, still isn't….

 

[Adullam]

That which truly originates from God thrives under persecution. The church is persecution proof. The early church was marked by persecution....first from the Jews and then by the Romans. So the church was not tempted to take power for itself as it was in disfavour with the powers that be. This in turn favoured true growth. Now the enemy has learned to not persecute the church but get it drunk with power....this scheme has succeeded in bringing down the church to the carnal level of human empowerment. God's way is the way of humility and powerlessness in this world. How very opposite!!!

The true church seeks powerlessness according to this world...not power. Humans crave power and position....so man organizes the religion in such a way as to aggrandize himself...not God. He wears fancy robes and calls himself by fancy titles..... your worship, your honour, your holiness, your grace, reverend, etc...Jesus condemned this self- aggrandizement. The true church gets it's power only from God. Any syncretism will be rejected and discarded. Any compromise with the world will be eschewed as well. We are here to please our Master...not ourselves.

Love not the world or the things of the world; if one does, God's love is not in Him. What is highly esteemed among men is abomination to God. Those who seek their own will never submit to what seems so rigourist to them. But the love of God constrains us!

 

[francisdesales]

in general, we must all come out of religion,.

Where is that in Scriptures??? Where is this vaunted "doctrine" located and taught by the Church???

What we see from this denominational movement, the "come out of religion" movement, is the demand for a "perfect church" in this day and age, right now. It is failure to recognize something critical to Christian living : Christian living is a journey of spiritual growth. This is part of the great Tradition from the beginning. However you want to break it down, there has always been a "beginner", "proficient", and "mystic" level within those who follow Christ...

We all begin as "beginners" in the faith, "pistics". Obviously, there are inherent weaknesses in those who are beginners... They often rely on teachings, traditions and authority for their sense of Christian identity. They have reverance for the past. They cherish familiar patterns and formulas (rituals) of worship and prayer. However, there is no reason to despise the "pistics", as C and A are arguing. Truth be told, they might want to consider some Scriptures...

Paul recognizes that the simple faithful are weak in faith and susceptible to scandal. However, he regards them as "the brother for whom Christ died" - they, TOO have been immersed into the death and resurrection of Christ through their baptisms...

But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. (1 Cor 8:9-13)

Clearly, Paul doesn't take the attitude found here with "getting out of religion", but rather, to realize that there are weak in the community who need the advice and example of fellow practicers of the faith who are more advanced.

In Paul's mind, these weak "children of the faith" qualify as the test of the community's spiritual ability - as judges to shame the proud and those who think they are spiritual (1 Cor 6:4) and as a concrete test of the real love and concern of the community

Howbeit [there is] not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat [it] as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. (1 Cor 8: 7-13)

Note that attitude Paul takes. Does Paul suggest expelling the weak? Does Paul suggest that the "spiritual" LEAVE the Church??? Not at all. Paul says he will act in love and will not offend, even if it means giving up his freedom. We don't see that attitude among the "get out of religion" cast...

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. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: 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. For our comely [parts] have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that [part] which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but [that] the members should have the same care one for another. (1 Cor 12: 22-25).

Again, we see the attitude of the more spiritually mature attitude of someone who ACTUALLY is moved by the Spirit of God, rather than the spiritually proud. Note the care that Paul has for the spiritually "young" - something "we" should take to heart, since the church, by and far, has ALWAYS consisted of mostly the spiritually young.

What is unfortunate is that their very dismissiveness of others of the faith is proof positive of the reality of their pride and lack of spiritual advancement... One truly in love with Christ does not belittle others who hold to creeds and rituals, recognizing that these hold importance for people on the various stages of their journey in Christ. Not only is this a sweeping generalization (faulty logic), it is the opposite of what the Bible calls us to do - to be patient with others, to love and give in self-sacrifice to others in need, whether spiritual or physical.

Regards

 

[Joe67]

We have a Biblical alternative to the above, Acts 15, which shows the operation of the Holy Spirit through the “sensus fideliumâ€Â, the calling of a council, the discussion of the disputed doctrine within the framework of Revealed Truth (including Scripture), an authoritative decision being made by the council members, and that decision being handed on as binding on all the faithful. This is the Biblical model for doctrinal discernment, and this is how the Holy Spirit works THROUGH THE CHURCH when the faithful are confused on a point of doctrine. Please note, in Acts 15 EVEN PAUL recognized the authority of the Jerusalem council, as he was right in the middle of the controversy at Antioch and was sent to Jerusalem. Why didn’t Paul simply “search the Scripturesâ€Â, pray for guidance and make a declaration that was binding on the Church at Antioch? I guess things weren’t done that way, and in the Church that Christ founded and guides, still isn't….

do10,

The overall external actions of the believers in Jesus that are mentioned in the above paragraph are true. The actions of most of the same believers before Acts 15 and after Acts 15, as recorded in the Scriptural history that I hear, both broaden and deepen the story and thereby the judgment of thought as to the meaning of the Acts 15 event and written statement issued thereby.

It does not seem good to examine the above paragraph point by point, for that would just lead to an argument and history is well established as to the differences that have issued in connection with the above mentioned council of Acts 15.

It is not humanly fair to disagree and not accept some dialogue as a result. If we dialogue further on this, then for the peace of the forum we should not have more than 2 or 3 responses each.

I am satisfied to let it drop as it is. I have commended the validity of the history and that it is very important to see the basic truth that you have presented in the above paragraph. i.e., Paul did not engage in this activity merely as an individual, but as a member of the Body of believers and at the Body's desire. The overruling power of grace in him led him to go beyond his own personal righteousness to bring the different parts of the Body of Jesus Christ together in peace.

Let us, in maturity, be sacrificed for the Body of Christ, to the glory of Christ. May God, the Father, be glorified in his holy child, Jesus, as every knee bows and every tongue confesses that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of God, the Father.

Joe

 

[Adullam]

in general, we must all come out of religion,.

Where is that in Scriptures??? Where is this vaunted "doctrine" located and taught by the Church???

What we see from this denominational movement, the "come out of religion" movement, is the demand for a "perfect church" in this day and age, right now. It is failure to recognize something critical to Christian living : Christian living is a journey of spiritual growth. This is part of the great Tradition from the beginning. However you want to break it down, there has always been a "beginner", "proficient", and "mystic" level within those who follow Christ...

We all begin as "beginners" in the faith, "pistics". Obviously, there are inherent weaknesses in those who are beginners... They often rely on teachings, traditions and authority for their sense of Christian identity. They have reverance for the past. They cherish familiar patterns and formulas (rituals) of worship and prayer. However, there is no reason to despise the "pistics", as C and A are arguing. Truth be told, they might want to consider some Scriptures...

Paul recognizes that the simple faithful are weak in faith and susceptible to scandal. However, he regards them as "the brother for whom Christ died" - they, TOO have been immersed into the death and resurrection of Christ through their baptisms...

But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. (1 Cor 8:9-13)

Clearly, Paul doesn't take the attitude found here with "getting out of religion", but rather, to realize that there are weak in the community who need the advice and example of fellow practicers of the faith who are more advanced.

In Paul's mind, these weak "children of the faith" qualify as the test of the community's spiritual ability - as judges to shame the proud and those who think they are spiritual (1 Cor 6:4) and as a concrete test of the real love and concern of the community

Howbeit [there is] not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat [it] as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. (1 Cor 8: 7-13)

Note that attitude Paul takes. Does Paul suggest expelling the weak? Does Paul suggest that the "spiritual" LEAVE the Church??? Not at all. Paul says he will act in love and will not offend, even if it means giving up his freedom. We don't see that attitude among the "get out of religion" cast...

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. Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary: 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. For our comely [parts] have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that [part] which lacked: That there should be no schism in the body; but [that] the members should have the same care one for another. (1 Cor 12: 22-25).

Again, we see the attitude of the more spiritually mature attitude of someone who ACTUALLY is moved by the Spirit of God, rather than the spiritually proud. Note the care that Paul has for the spiritually "young" - something "we" should take to heart, since the church, by and far, has ALWAYS consisted of mostly the spiritually young.

What is unfortunate is that their very dismissiveness of others of the faith is proof positive of the reality of their pride and lack of spiritual advancement... One truly in love with Christ does not belittle others who hold to creeds and rituals, recognizing that these hold importance for people on the various stages of their journey in Christ. Not only is this a sweeping generalization (faulty logic), it is the opposite of what the Bible calls us to do - to be patient with others, to love and give in self-sacrifice to others in need, whether spiritual or physical.

Regards

It is a common error to ascribe the denunciation of an organization with the condemnation of the people who are trapped in it. This could be described as knee-jerk liberalism! ;) Neither Cornelius or I are in any way denigrating those who begin their spiritual journeys by sojourning in a denomination at some point. Both Cornelius and I attended institutional churches...until we grew out of them. We can dislike the trap a person is caught in without disliking the person. Quite the opposite...we rescue people who have been wounded and disillusioned in the man- made sects. We speak agaisnt what harms the brethren. This is love in action. We are our brother's keepers.

One does not have to go through this institutional stage, however, as new believers are better off with the community of brethren from the beginning. There are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to the denoms. It is like a cancer that eats away at the revelation and divine wisdom we have received. The love of many waxes cold. Often it becomes very difficult for some to shake off the accumulated baggage of decades of churchianity. It seems that some have been spoiled from advancement in the faith....or they never had a genuine call of God....only God knows.

What I gather is the above post is speaking of the denominations as hospitals and a refuge for the babes in Christ. I agree with that! This is likewise my viewpoint. Many in the denoms have only the best intentions. But one must eventually come out of the hospital; one must eventually outgrow the crib. The hospitals will seek to keep you sick for the sake of their own existence. Always learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. They will often discourage you from personal health and growth. So the limitation of the denoms is revealed. Again, one does not have to begin in a denom.....it is just that there are so many of these and they are made so visible (through religious identification with steeples, crosses, and misleading titles) that many will become entangled in one. Most will have at least passed through a number of denoms on their journey to finding the brotherhood of faith. These find that truth or the church cannot be found in the yellow pages but must be sought for with discernment and the help of the Lord. Finding the brethren is a very joyous time. Perhaps the very difficulty in finding fellowship of this sort makes us appreciate this all the more!

 

[Adullam]

Here is a paradox. Most Christians will receive those who have received a charter from the government, and then hired professionals to staff whatever ministry they feel is necessary. These are respected and toasted as pioneers in the work

But if a brother opens his own home to help the needy and to further the work of Christ, he is seen as marginal at best. Often he will be seen as a heretic. (This has been my own experience together with the observation of this with others for the past 30 years)

This is the history of the church in a nutshell. Men love human organization. They don't understand inspiration from heaven...they are very wary of it. Even apparent believers!

Even a miligram of discernment would reveal the way of Christ. It is the way of powerlessness and obscurity. Is God's way conformity to this world? Why would I even have to ask the previous question on a Christian forum?

It is a wise saying that the word Christian makes a better adjective than a noun. :yes

 

[Free]

And yet, there are organized churches that do the same thing as you, so your point is moot.

 

[Joe67]

Adullam,

Consider the two families of the offspring of Jacob.

When they broke apart, a different order of worship was established among the northern tribes, called Ephraim, Israel, Samaria.

The religious leaders were accepted on a different basis than at Jerusalem.

God had ordained the division. He had authorized it through the prophet Ahijah, but Solomon was not reconciled to the judgment of God.

The worship of Jesus today is in this divided state.

Mic 1:5
5 For the transgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? and what are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem? KJV

Consider the message of the Lord in Ezekiel 23, it is similar to Revelation 17.

The visible believers in the Lord Jesus are in the same position with God as the visible believers in the Lord in the previous ministration through Moses.

Joe

 

[francisdesales]

It is a common error to ascribe the denunciation of an organization with the condemnation of the people who are trapped in it. This could be described as knee-jerk liberalism! ;) Neither Cornelius or I are in any way denigrating those who begin their spiritual journeys by sojourning in a denomination at some point. Both Cornelius and I attended institutional churches...until we grew out of them. We can dislike the trap a person is caught in without disliking the person. Quite the opposite...we rescue people who have been wounded and disillusioned in the man- made sects. We speak agaisnt what harms the brethren. This is love in action. We are our brother's keepers.

The problem is that the Bible NOWHERE speaks of "growing out of" anything external. You claim to have the mind of Christ, but reinvent Christ???

The spiritually adept CONTINUE to break bread with the neophytes...The growth continues inside, not like graduating to college... Reform takes place WITHIN the community. Not from your little ivy tower.

One does not have to go through this institutional stage however, as new believers are better off with the community of brethren from the beginning.

Another false dichotomy...

People in an institutional organization are indeed WITH a community of brothers... If you didn't get that in the Catholic Church, blame yourself. There are tons of ministry that one can partake in and fellowship with others. The problem is that you were expecting to be fed as an infant while you were ready for solid food. Rather than searching for solid food where you lived, you bailed out.

There are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to the denoms.

And there are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to religious pride.

What I gather is the above post is speaking of the denominations as hospitals and a refuge for the babes in Christ. I agree with that! This is likewise my viewpoint. Many in the denoms have only the best intentions. But one must eventually come out of the hospital; one must eventually outgrow the crib. The hospitals will seek to keep you sick for the sake of their own existence.

Yet again, you show your true intentions by implying that hospitals keep us there for their own existence, rather than presume they truly are trying to make one well. Obviously, only you have true and loving intentions of heart....

Sounds like a lot of anger at any sort of organization, religious or otherwise...

Finding the brethren is a very joyous time. Perhaps the very difficulty in finding fellowship of this sort makes us appreciate this all the more!

I find joy in my brother Catholics and separated brothers who promote the same faith as I do. I find it heartening that we of the "organized religions" are out there marching for the unborn. It is a joy to find that despite doctrinal differences, we are walking the walk - DESPITE our supposed separation from Christ because we hold to a Creed... I note that rarely do I find apostolic action from these "church of one" people. In their condemnation of the plight of man and anyone not deemed as holy as they are, they forget the injunction of Christ to reach out and spread the Gospel to people OUTSIDE of their immediate social structure.

I see you make no effort to actually respond to my Biblical citations from Paul. Just the usual stereotypes of sweeping generalizations of "denoms"

 

[Adullam]

Adullam,

Consider the two families of the offspring of Jacob.

When they broke apart, a different order of worship was established among the northern tribes, called Ephraim, Israel, Samaria.

The religious leaders were accepted on a different basis than at Jerusalem.

God had ordained the division. He had authorized it through the prophet Ahijah, but Solomon was not reconciled to the judgment of God.

The worship of Jesus today is in this divided state.

Mic 1:5
5 For the transgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? and what are the high places of Judah? are they not Jerusalem? KJV

Consider the message of the Lord in Ezekiel 23, it is similar to Revelation 17.

The visible believers in the Lord Jesus are in the same position with God as the visible believers in the Lord in the previous ministration through Moses.

Joe

I see it more as the house of Saul and the house of David. Those who were fleeing from Saul went to the cave of......ADULLAM! (this sounds strangely familiar) ;)

 

[Adullam]

It is a common error to ascribe the denunciation of an organization with the condemnation of the people who are trapped in it. This could be described as knee-jerk liberalism! ;) Neither Cornelius or I are in any way denigrating those who begin their spiritual journeys by sojourning in a denomination at some point. Both Cornelius and I attended institutional churches...until we grew out of them. We can dislike the trap a person is caught in without disliking the person. Quite the opposite...we rescue people who have been wounded and disillusioned in the man- made sects. We speak agaisnt what harms the brethren. This is love in action. We are our brother's keepers.

The problem is that the Bible NOWHERE speaks of "growing out of" anything external. You claim to have the mind of Christ, but reinvent Christ???

The spiritually adept CONTINUE to break bread with the neophytes...The growth continues inside, not like graduating to college... Reform takes place WITHIN the community. Not from your little ivy tower.

Now you look to the bible? We are presently in a time where the system is in babylonian captivity. There are many biblical references about the last times we have entered into. These exhort God's people to come out...as God has always called His people to do. The very word ecclesia means to "call out". IT is a true shame to not see this and miss the glory of this. That is why I speak so insistently about it. The walls of Jerusalem and the watchrowers (not an ivory tower) are a shambles (in the Spirit) They need to be rebuilt...after beeing leveled first. This is God's way...to tear down before rebuilding. We can be a part of the return from exile....the preparation of the Bride to meet her Husband and King. :yes

One does not have to go through this institutional stage however, as new believers are better off with the community of brethren from the beginning.

Another false dichotomy...

People in an institutional organization are indeed WITH a community of brothers... If you didn't get that in the Catholic Church, blame yourself. There are tons of ministry that one can partake in and fellowship with others. The problem is that you were expecting to be fed as an infant while you were ready for solid food. Rather than searching for solid food where you lived, you bailed out.

Is that what happened? ;) We were called out by the Lord to break bread from house to house. This we have been doing now these past 20 years.

There are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to the denoms.

And there are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to religious pride.

I'll say!

What I gather is the above post is speaking of the denominations as hospitals and a refuge for the babes in Christ. I agree with that! This is likewise my viewpoint. Many in the denoms have only the best intentions. But one must eventually come out of the hospital; one must eventually outgrow the crib. The hospitals will seek to keep you sick for the sake of their own existence.

Yet again, you show your true intentions by implying that hospitals keep us there for their own existence, rather than presume they truly are trying to make one well. Obviously, only you have true and loving intentions of heart....

Sounds like a lot of anger at any sort of organization, religious or otherwise...

That is the truth that I speak. Whenever men live off the flock, it is a conflict of interest to want them to move on. John the Baptist had the correct attitude. He knew the flock was not his own. If you had any experience in leadership you would know what I am talking about.

Finding the brethren is a very joyous time. Perhaps the very difficulty in finding fellowship of this sort makes us appreciate this all the more!

I find joy in my brother Catholics and separated brothers who promote the same faith as I do. I find it heartening that we of the "organized religions" are out there marching for the unborn. It is a joy to find that despite doctrinal differences, we are walking the walk - DESPITE our supposed separation from Christ because we hold to a Creed... I note that rarely do I find apostolic action from these "church of one" people. In their condemnation of the plight of man and anyone not deemed as holy as they are, they forget the injunction of Christ to reach out and spread the Gospel to people OUTSIDE of their immediate social structure.

I see you make no effort to actually respond to my Biblical citations from Paul. Just the usual stereotypes of sweeping generalizations of "denoms"

Picketing is not the work of apostles. It is the work of...protestants! ;) The catholic church has a whole wing that espouses liberation theology. I know you are a liberal. You see social action and the betterment of this life as a top priority.

Jesus and His followers saw not the betterment of this life as a goal, but the entrance into the kingdom as the priority. A cursory reading of the gospels will confirm that. If we seek first the kingdom...then God will look after our other problems. That is the truth. Trying to make a difference in the flesh is a goal of humanists. But you have shown that you are a humanist as well. So you will feel happy with this!

 

[Adullam]

It is a common error to ascribe the denunciation of an organization with the condemnation of the people who are trapped in it. This could be described as knee-jerk liberalism! ;) Neither Cornelius or I are in any way denigrating those who begin their spiritual journeys by sojourning in a denomination at some point. Both Cornelius and I attended institutional churches...until we grew out of them. We can dislike the trap a person is caught in without disliking the person. Quite the opposite...we rescue people who have been wounded and disillusioned in the man- made sects. We speak agaisnt what harms the brethren. This is love in action. We are our brother's keepers.

The problem is that the Bible NOWHERE speaks of "growing out of" anything external. You claim to have the mind of Christ, but reinvent Christ???

The spiritually adept CONTINUE to break bread with the neophytes...The growth continues inside, not like graduating to college... Reform takes place WITHIN the community. Not from your little ivy tower.

Now you look to the bible? We are presently in a time where the system is in babylonian captivity. There are many biblical references about the last times we have entered into. These exhort God's people to come out...as God has always called His people to do. The very word ecclesia means to "call out". IT is a true shame to not see this and miss the glory of this. That is why I speak so insistently about it. The walls of Jerusalem and the watchrowers (not an ivory tower) are a shambles (in the Spirit) They need to be rebuilt...after beeing leveled first. This is God's way...to tear down before rebuilding. We can be a part of the return from exile....the preparation of the Bride to meet her Husband and King. :yes

One does not have to go through this institutional stage however, as new believers are better off with the community of brethren from the beginning.

Another false dichotomy...

People in an institutional organization are indeed WITH a community of brothers... If you didn't get that in the Catholic Church, blame yourself. There are tons of ministry that one can partake in and fellowship with others. The problem is that you were expecting to be fed as an infant while you were ready for solid food. Rather than searching for solid food where you lived, you bailed out.

Is that what happened? ;) We were called out by the Lord to break bread from house to house. This we have been doing now these past 20 years.

There are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to the denoms.

And there are many dangers associated with prolonged exposure to religious pride.

I'll say!

What I gather is the above post is speaking of the denominations as hospitals and a refuge for the babes in Christ. I agree with that! This is likewise my viewpoint. Many in the denoms have only the best intentions. But one must eventually come out of the hospital; one must eventually outgrow the crib. The hospitals will seek to keep you sick for the sake of their own existence.

Yet again, you show your true intentions by implying that hospitals keep us there for their own existence, rather than presume they truly are trying to make one well. Obviously, only you have true and loving intentions of heart....

Sounds like a lot of anger at any sort of organization, religious or otherwise...

That is the truth that I speak. Whenever men live off the flock, it is a conflict of interest to want them to move on. John the Baptist had the correct attitude. He knew the flock was not his own. If you had any experience in leadership you would know what I am talking about.

Finding the brethren is a very joyous time. Perhaps the very difficulty in finding fellowship of this sort makes us appreciate this all the more!

I find joy in my brother Catholics and separated brothers who promote the same faith as I do. I find it heartening that we of the "organized religions" are out there marching for the unborn. It is a joy to find that despite doctrinal differences, we are walking the walk - DESPITE our supposed separation from Christ because we hold to a Creed... I note that rarely do I find apostolic action from these "church of one" people. In their condemnation of the plight of man and anyone not deemed as holy as they are, they forget the injunction of Christ to reach out and spread the Gospel to people OUTSIDE of their immediate social structure.

I see you make no effort to actually respond to my Biblical citations from Paul. Just the usual stereotypes of sweeping generalizations of "denoms"

Picketing is not the work of apostles. It is the work of...protestants! ;) The catholic church has a whole wing that espouses liberation theology. I know you are a liberal. You see social action and the betterment of this life as a top priority.

Jesus and His followers saw not the betterment of this life as a goal, but the entrance into the kingdom as the priority. A cursory reading of the gospels will confirm that. If we seek first the kingdom...then God will look after our other problems. That is the truth. Trying to make a difference in the flesh is a goal of humanists. But you have shown that you are a humanist as well. So you will feel happy with this!

 

[dadof10]

do10,

The overall external actions of the believers in Jesus that are mentioned in the above paragraph are true. The actions of most of the same believers before Acts 15 and after Acts 15, as recorded in the Scriptural history that I hear, both broaden and deepen the story and thereby the judgment of thought as to the meaning of the Acts 15 event and written statement issued thereby.

It does not seem good to examine the above paragraph point by point, for that would just lead to an argument and history is well established as to the differences that have issued in connection with the above mentioned council of Acts 15.

I don't know of any different interpretations of Acts 15. It's pretty straight forward. What "differences" "have been issued"?

It is not humanly fair to disagree and not accept some dialogue as a result. If we dialogue further on this, then for the peace of the forum we should not have more than 2 or 3 responses each.

I apologize but I don't remember engaging you on this topic. if you don't want to continue, don't.

I am satisfied to let it drop as it is.

OK.

 

[Joe67]

dadof10,

I was not clear in my last post. What I thought to say was, that since I had posted something that moved to a different understanding of the council of Acts 15 than you had presented, that I should accept some dialogue explaining my statement; while not desiring further dialogue, since I feel that historically the issues at stake have been acted out again and again with varying degrees of understanding.

40+ years ago I thought there was only one true understanding of Acts 15. Now the Lord has given me to see that there are 2, yes even 3, pictures bound up in the event(s) of that council.

So, when others have different understandings wherein they live the life that is in Jesus our Lord, now I am more at peace in this manifold wisdom.

Joe

 

[Adullam]

Organized religion has no humanity in it. It is human-proof. People come and go, but the building remains. It is small wonder then that people have taken to calling a building "the church." Go to a church website and you will invariably see a structure presented there. No one bats an eye at this flagrant misidentification. :crazy

The Holy Spirit does not fit into a structure made with hands. Jesus de-sacrilized the place of worship in favour of making disciples themselves the temple of the Holy Spirit. Institutions are both instituted and run by men. They belong to the political structuring found in society. They are of this world. So the religious institution lacks both humanity and divinity. Just what keeps people so attached to the forms? Could it be the triumph of the lust of the eyes over faith, the victory of the temporal over the eternal?

The contrast with a simple community church that meets in homes is startling. The fellowship there is based on a specific fraternity of people....not an association with a building. The church here is BASED on community and relationship. Together they look to the Lord to be guided directly from Him. Christ is the Head of the church.

So the apostolic church that meets in simplicity has a real opportunity to reflect both the humanity and the divinity of Jesus Christ.

If a simple church does not live up to it's mandate it will die of itself, having no ecclesiastical nor institutional pseudo-power to keep it going after it fails the Lord.

 

[Sparkey]

Greetings,

If your point is that the Holy Spirit was sent to men and women on Pentecost, hence "we" are the church, is counterpoint allowed? I don't want to be misunderstood as one who is oppositional to the truth of what you say but may a brother try to bring the balance?

~Sparrow

 

[Adullam]

Greetings,

If your point is that the Holy Spirit was sent to men and women on Pentecost, hence "we" are the church, is counterpoint allowed? I don't want to be misunderstood as one who is oppositional to the truth of what you say but may a brother try to bring the balance?

~Sparrow

How do you mean? say on!!

 

[dadof10]

40+ years ago I thought there was only one true understanding of Acts 15. Now the Lord has given me to see that there are 2, yes even 3, pictures bound up in the event(s) of that council.

So, when others have different understandings wherein they live the life that is in Jesus our Lord, now I am more at peace in this manifold wisdom.

I don't understand your reluctance to discuss. If you would like to post what "the Lord has given" you, go ahead and I'll see if it corresponds with common sense. If not, maybe what "the Lord has given" you doesn't actually make sense and, therefore, didn't come from "the Lord".

I find it helpful to get council when I interpret Scripture, that way I know if what I personally think conflicts with revealed Truth. I'd be happy to let you bounce your interpretation off me and let you know if it's actually from the Holy Spirit or not.

 

[whirlwind]

40+ years ago I thought there was only one true understanding of Acts 15. Now the Lord has given me to see that there are 2, yes even 3, pictures bound up in the event(s) of that council.

So, when others have different understandings wherein they live the life that is in Jesus our Lord, now I am more at peace in this manifold wisdom.

I don't understand your reluctance to discuss. If you would like to post what "the Lord has given" you, go ahead and I'll see if it corresponds with common sense. If not, maybe what "the Lord has given" you doesn't actually make sense and, therefore, didn't come from "the Lord".

I find it helpful to get council when I interpret Scripture, that way I know if what I personally think conflicts with revealed Truth. I'd be happy to let you bounce your interpretation off me and let you know if it's actually from the Holy Spirit or not.

I don't think you meant it the way it sounded but..... :shocked!

Are you the Holy Spirit? Are you the authority on the Holy Spirit? Do all revelations go through you before others should recognize they are of the Holy Spirit? Are you the arbiter of "revealed truth?"

Again...I don't think you meant it to sound this way?