What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

When Did The Church Begin?

Hos 1:9
Then said God, Call his name Loammi: for ye are not mypeople, and I will not be your God.

Hos 1:10
Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, thereit shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

Hos 2:23
And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art mypeople; and they shall say, Thou art my God.

Rom 9:25
As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

Rom 9:26
And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.


Osee - can you see?
 
We are all members of the “Body of Christ”.

1st Cor 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

While He was slain before the foundations of the earth, Rev, 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Yes God did fellowship with man in the garden, Genesis 2:15 And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

The fullness of time had not yet arrived.

But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

While Christ had followers as He walked on earth it was essential that he overcome death in human form.

John, 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die.

We are members of His body and serve a risen Savior. The church I think we all agree began at Pentecost.

In Christ
 
Anto9us said:
Some people (like Catholics) think Peter himself was the ROCK that the church would be built on.

But ROCK in that verse is PETRA -- a feminine noun -- as is also ekklesia, the word for church

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1577&t=KJV
Click to expand...

Anto,

Learning the NT Greek gender of a noun and accompanying definite article is like learning the gender and articles which I did in German classes in high school many moons ago. It used to confuse me as a teen that all nouns in German were associated with one of three definite articles: der, die or das (masculine, feminine, neuter).

Grammatical gender in German is the way in which German nouns are classified to grammatical genders. All German nouns are included into one of three genders: masculine, feminine or neuter, and gender differences are not relevant in the plural form of nouns.​
​
In German, it is best to memorize nouns with their accompanying definite article in order to know their gender. However, the manner a noun and its plural are constructed and its meaning can determine the gender of about 80% of nouns (source).​

It is similar with Greek and its 3 definite articles: ho, he, to (he, she, it). However, this does not refer to gender as in male vs female. The Greek logos is masculine (meaning, word) and is accompanied by the masculine definite article ho. This, however, does not make logos male. I find it best to learn Greek nouns with their accompanying articles, although the ending of the noun in the nominative case generally tells the gender.

What makes this challenging for us who speak English is that it doesn't matter which noun is used, the same definite article is used for all of them - the.

The feminine, ekklesia (church) will be accompanied by the definite article, he, and any pronoun referring back to this feminine noun would use aute (she) but in context it could be better to refer to the church as 'it'.

Does that make sense?

Oz
​
​
 
I don't refer to the church as an "it"

Even in English, church, nation and the name of a ship is "her"

"with His own blood He bought her
and for her life He died"

And English has very few words that carry gender like that, it's not like Greek where a NOUN ITSELF can be neuter, masculine, or feminine.

Anyway, Melchisedec predates Israel.
And Moses' father-in-law was a priest of Midian,
there was definitely RELIGION prior to Israel
whether you would want to call Moses' father-in-law's crowd a "church"
i dunno - I wouldn't

I never studied any German
Only Spanish and Greek
and unlike customer service people I try to understand on the phone, English is my first language

people call up -- wanting to sell me something -- and sometimes I just have to say
"I cannot understand you" til they hang up
 
I was being a bit light hearted about my own lack of understanding.. That kind of discussion flies over my head.. I dont need to understand Greek or German to know the Church is feminine We are His bride Brides are feminine ..

Please dont not take my comments as rude they are not meant so.. I was just being light hearted
 
Anto9us said:
I don't refer to the church as an "it"

Even in English, church, nation and the name of a ship is "her"

"with His own blood He bought her
and for her life He died"

And English has very few words that carry gender like that, it's not like Greek where a NOUN ITSELF can be neuter, masculine, or feminine.

Anyway, Melchisedec predates Israel.
And Moses' father-in-law was a priest of Midian,
there was definitely RELIGION prior to Israel
whether you would want to call Moses' father-in-law's crowd a "church"
i dunno - I wouldn't

I never studied any German
Only Spanish and Greek
and unlike customer service people I try to understand on the phone, English is my first language

people call up -- wanting to sell me something -- and sometimes I just have to say
"I cannot understand you" til they hang up
Click to expand...

Anto,

If a person asks me where I attend worship and teaching, I say it's Caboolture Presbyterian and it meets at 24 Cottrill Rd, Caboolture Qld. I have no problem associating 'it' with this congregation and it fits with the context of what I state.

Oz
 
reba said:
I was being a bit light hearted about my own lack of understanding.. That kind of discussion flies over my head.. I dont need to understand Greek or German to know the Church is feminine We are His bride Brides are feminine ..

Please dont not take my comments as rude they are not meant so.. I was just being light hearted
Click to expand...

:sohappy:pepsican:pepsi2

We have different gifts, Reba. Are you suggesting the content of my post at #65 should not be on this forum?

I'm sure you are aware that we wouldn't have the overabundance of English translations we have today if it were not for many linguistic scholars in Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek who knew their grammar and syntax to be able to complete the translations.

Oz
 
OzSpen said:
We have different gifts, Reba. Are you suggesting the content of my post at #65 should not be on this forum?
Click to expand...
Not in any way am i suggesting any thing of the like...many things are over my head.. There are people who need the blessings of your gifts.. because your gift is over my head does in no way imply it should not be here. I had zero business sticking my unacknowledged 2 cents in ...

unacknowledged not the right word :sad
 
I guess "IT" fits, OzSpen

I think of THE CHURCH AS A WHOLE as a "she, Bride, feminine"

and getting theology from hymns is not always the best thing

like the joke about Forrest Gump at the Pearly gates and St Peter asked him what God's first name was.

"It's ANDY." Forrest said

St Peter questioned this, Forrest says "Yeah - we sang about it in church.
ANDY walks with me,
ANDY talks with me,
ANDY tells me I am His own! "
 
reba said:
Not in any way am i suggesting any thing of the like...many things are over my head.. There are people who need the blessings of your gifts.. because your gift is over my head does in no way imply it should not be here. I had zero business sticking my unacknowledged 2 cents in ...

unacknowledged not the right word :sad
Click to expand...

Thanks Reba.
:amen
 
Anto9us said:
and getting theology from hymns is not always the best thing
Click to expand...

I agree. Like getting one's theology from Hillsong songs or Jesus Culture teaching. Also consult, Hillsong: A Breeding Ground of False Converts – And Your Church Pays For It.

But I can come to Christian forums and get similar trite theology.

I've heard it from preachers in pulpits.

I can be guilty of it. That's why we need all of us to check out our theology with the Scripture and be like the Bereans of the first century: 'The Berean Jews were very glad to receive Paul’s message. They studied the Scriptures carefully every day. They wanted to see if what Paul said was true. So they were more noble than the Thessalonian Jew' (Acts 17:11 NIRV).

If the great apostle Paul's messages had to be compared with Scripture, it is even more so for all of us who communicate biblical truth.

Oz
 
Anto9us said:
Some people (like Catholics) think Peter himself was the ROCK that the church would be built on.
Click to expand...
That was part of the support for the argument for the primacy of the bishop (pope) of Rome. Meaning that he has authority over all other bishops int he world.
It worked to keep chaos in check in the western part of the Roman Empire when it was falling apart under the pressure of wave after wave of invasions by barbarians. (Germans, Vandals, Huns, Goths, etc.)
The Eastern and African parts of the Church didn't buy into it.

But ROCK in that verse is PETRA -- a feminine noun -- as is also ekklesia, the word for church
Click to expand...
In modern English, we tend to think of the gender of a word as relating to being "male" or "female." (Joe is male; Sallie is female; and that rock is neither. It's "neuter.")
That is not the case with the NT Greek.
"Gender" has to do with the form of the word; specifically, it's ending.

So, it's a bit too much of a leap to conclude that, because both PETRA and EKKLESIA are feminine nouns that Jesus must not have been referring to Peter because PETROS is a masculine noun.

Rather, go to scripture.

1Co 3:11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Eph 2:19-20 Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,
 
My point is -- different gender endings are used in the one verse -- "thou art Petros (masculine noun) and upon this PETRA (feminine noun) I WILL BUILD my church"

Mat 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, (petros) and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The deliberate change in gender endings for ROCK is not a 'leap' at all to me -- it is something very significant.

The interpretation that Peter himself is the Rock helped split the church in the great schism, after a thousand years, we suddenly had Roman Catholic vs Orthodox - the RC claiming primacy for Bishop of Rome rather than him being one of a college of bishops

Your other two scriptures are good support as well; I just emphasize the significance of the TWO GENDER ENDINGS within a few words of each other in Matthew 16:18 -- it's either coincidence or deliberate -- and there would have been no change in gender endings if Christ had meant to say Peter himself was the Rock on which Christ would build his church
 
Anto9us said:
The deliberate change in gender endings for ROCK is not a 'leap' at all to me -- it is something very significant.
Click to expand...
It's not a deliberate change in gender.
The change is unavoidable in the NT (Koine) Greek.
There was no other way to say it.
That's all...
Anto9us said:
The interpretation that Peter himself is the Rock helped split the church in the great schism, after a thousand years, we suddenly had Roman Catholic vs Orthodox - the RC claiming primacy for Bishop of Rome rather than him being one of a college of bishops
Click to expand...
The split was a bit more complicated than that. The primacy of the pope was one issue. Another issue was the addition to the creed of the words "and from the son" (Lat. "filioque") to the proceeding of the Holy Spirit. Yet another was the development of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. (though that was not official doctrine tel waaaay after the split.)

While the conciliar form of ecclesiology worked very well in the east and in north Africa; the western church looked to Rome for guidance and leadership. There had always been multiple centers of leadership in the east and Africa but, in the west, people naturally looked to Rome which had been the center of their universe for so many centuries.

There were also political issues. When Constantine declared his new capital (Constantinople) to be the "new Rome", that really stuck in the craw of the folks in "old" Rome. Then there was the crusade where the "Christian" armies of the west laid siege to and sacked Constantinople, the capital of the "Christian" Roman Empire! (Nothing says koinonea like kicking down your door and stealing everything in your house.)

Further, the western half of the empire having to deal with waves of barbarians from the north while the eastern empire was in constant warfare with the Persians further east. Then the Muslims under the Turks further separated the East and West by taking territory in the Balkans thereby isolating East and West.

But, yes, the primacy of Peter as ruler of the worldwide church became an issue when Rome started to insist on it. The eastern Church had gone along with it in the form of the pope being "first among equals" and never really challenged the claim until Rome made it clear they were serious.

iakov the fool
 
I did not mean to over-simplify the causes of The Great Schism

As I originally said "The interpretation that Peter himself is the Rock helped split the church"

You have given good further background.
 
Anto9us said:
My point is -- different gender endings are used in the one verse -- "thou art Petros (masculine noun) and upon this PETRA (feminine noun) I WILL BUILD my church"

Mat 16:18
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, (petros) and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

The deliberate change in gender endings for ROCK is not a 'leap' at all to me -- it is something very significant.

The interpretation that Peter himself is the Rock helped split the church in the great schism, after a thousand years, we suddenly had Roman Catholic vs Orthodox - the RC claiming primacy for Bishop of Rome rather than him being one of a college of bishops

Your other two scriptures are good support as well; I just emphasize the significance of the TWO GENDER ENDINGS within a few words of each other in Matthew 16:18 -- it's either coincidence or deliberate -- and there would have been no change in gender endings if Christ had meant to say Peter himself was the Rock on which Christ would build his church
Click to expand...
I agree, Peter is no more important a stone in the building of Jesus church than the least of all ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top