OldRegular
Well-Known Member
HankD
Great post! Thanks!:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
Great post! Thanks!:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What! No Church?
- Thread starter OldRegular
- Start date
Ann
I believe that at this time there are many local Churches. I also believe that there is a body of all true believers at any time on earth which constitute The Church. Certainly this Body of all believers is not a visible Body. There are occasions in Scripture when the word applies to the local Body, there are also occasions when the word applies to the universal Body.
Many people are afraid of this concept of the universal Church because they think it smacks of Roman Catholicism. But to me that is a poor excuse for refusing to acknowledge that all true believers constitute one Body which is The Church of Jesus Christ, His Bride, Chaste and without Blemish, as the Apostle Paul states.
I agree. There are two meanings of "church" just as there is two meanings of me being a part of 4H. I am a member of the local 4H group yet with that, I'm also a part of 4H as a whole. I can claim to be in the same association as a 4Her in Colorado although we're not part of the same local group.
I repeat a question or two. What exactly is the purpose of the Universal Church? What does it do? How does it advance the kingdom?
I might point out that the things that local churches around the world are doing to reach the lost are exactly those things of which the Universal Church is doing zero.
So your church is the only one worshipping the Lord?
Your church is the only one serving the Lord's Supper?
Your church is the only one who ordains ministers?
If this is what you believe, you must not ever take into your church a pastor who was ordained by another church because it was not in YOUR church. Do not accept a baptism by another church because it was not in YOUR church.
The body of Christ is Biblical. THAT is one of the definitions clearly shown in Scripture. If you argue for only the local church and not the body of Christ being the church, then as per Ephesians, God is polygamous.
Tom Butler
New Member
Do you deny that there is on the earth at this time a number of believers scattered through the world.
No.
There are some on this Forum who believe, teach, and promote error! There is sin, error, and undoubtedly unbelievers in ever local "assembly", as you would call it.
Yes.
Now questions for you to consider. When we are told in Acts 2:47. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
What is the Church in this statement? Does the Lord add members to your Church or are they voted in by the congregation? How do unsaved people get into the local assembly? Does the Lord add them?
They were added by the Lord, following scriptural example. Each congregation is charged with guarding the integrity of the ordinances, thus must determine who shall participate in them, and whom it receives into its fellowship. One practical way is to vote, just as FBC Jerusalem did to select an apostle to replace Judas.
Tom Butler
New Member
So your church is the only one worshipping the Lord?
Your church is the only one serving the Lord's Supper?
Your church is the only one who ordains ministers?
No, Ann. What prompted the questions?
If this is what you believe, you must not ever take into your church a pastor who was ordained by another church because it was not in YOUR church. Do not accept a baptism by another church because it was not in YOUR church.
If you think I believe this, I was really unclear.
The body of Christ is Biblical. THAT is one of the definitions clearly shown in Scripture. If you argue for only the local church and not the body of Christ being the church, then as per Ephesians, God is polygamous.
I believe that what I believe is scriptural. If that makes God polygamous, then the problem is not scripture, it's your interpretation.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Tom ButlerPosted by OldRegular
Now questions for you to consider. When we are told in Acts 2:47. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
What is the Church in this statement?
You really did not answer the above question!
So you are right. Your church is the body, my church is the body, Darren's church is the body.
Eventually, all believers will assemble to worship the Lamb and to fellowship with him. And it will be one universal church. But not in this age.
Thank you, in that I agree. :thumbsup: One BODY but not many bodies.... If the church is made up of "members" that constitutes as the BODY than it is the members that constitute as the Body of Christ and not specifically the "Church" they attend.
Darren
Last edited by a moderator:
Ann
I believe that at this time there are many local Churches. I also believe that there is a body of all true believers at any time on earth which constitute The Church. Certainly this Body of all believers is not a visible Body. There are occasions in Scripture when the word applies to the local Body, there are also occasions when the word applies to the universal Body.
Many people are afraid of this concept of the universal Church because they think it smacks of Roman Catholicism. But to me that is a poor excuse for refusing to acknowledge that all true believers constitute one Body which is The Church of Jesus Christ, His Bride, Chaste and without Blemish, as the Apostle Paul states.
What you are saying is very common, I know many other baptist that think the same way, they believe the universal church idea came from Roman Catholicism, so naturally they are very much against it.
Darren
The only church existing in the second chapter of Acts (Acts 2:47) was the church in Jerusalem. To that one local church, the Lord added daily. History tells us that the church in Jerusalem eventually grew very large, perhaps 300-500,000 in number. The Lord was adding to them daily.Tom Butler
You really did not answer the above question!
The only church existing in the second chapter of Acts (Acts 2:47) was the church in Jerusalem. To that one local church, the Lord added daily. History tells us that the church in Jerusalem eventually grew very large, perhaps 300-500,000 in number. The Lord was adding to them daily.
But by the time Saul was persecuting them, they spread atleast as far as Damascus, correct??
On account of Paul's persecution there was a scattering of the believers:But by the time Saul was persecuting them, they spread atleast as far as Damascus, correct??
Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
It was the church that was in Jerusalem that was being persecuted.
On account of Paul's persecution there was a scattering of the believers:
Acts 8:1 And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.
It was the church that was in Jerusalem that was being persecuted.
But they were no longer in Jerusalem. Were they meeting elsewhere at all do you think?
They were scattered because of persecution. Perhaps some met secretly in homes. Have you ever been in an Islamic nation and known a Muslim who has converted to Christianity. His family turns against him. The society turns against him. Even the government turns against him (such as the police). No place is a safe refuge. It was like this for the Jews that turned to Christ in the first century. They faced persecution from their families (other Jews), and from the government (a great persecution from Nero's government). They were scattered everywhere.But they were no longer in Jerusalem. Were they meeting elsewhere at all do you think?
They were scattered because of persecution. Perhaps some met secretly in homes. Have you ever been in an Islamic nation and known a Muslim who has converted to Christianity. His family turns against him. The society turns against him. Even the government turns against him (such as the police). No place is a safe refuge. It was like this for the Jews that turned to Christ in the first century. They faced persecution from their families (other Jews), and from the government (a great persecution from Nero's government). They were scattered everywhere.
Yes, but if they met in homes, weren't they a different church? They met secretly in homes in places other than Jerusalem. I'd say that makes them different churches.
Acts 12:5 Peter therefore was kept in prison: but prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto God for him.Yes, but if they met in homes, weren't they a different church? They met secretly in homes in places other than Jerusalem. I'd say that makes them different churches.
--Which church?
Acts 12:12 And when he had considered the thing, he came to the house of Mary the mother of John, whose surname was Mark; where many were gathered together praying.
--It was the small church that met in the house John Mark's mother.
If I hold a Bible Study in my house it does not constitute a church just because believers gather together. Mat. 18:20 is not the definition of a church. A church is highly organized as the pastoral epistles describe. We cannot read into the Scriptures that which is not there.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
The only church existing in the second chapter of Acts (Acts 2:47) was the church in Jerusalem. To that one local church, the Lord added daily. History tells us that the church in Jerusalem eventually grew very large, perhaps 300-500,000 in number. The Lord was adding to them daily.
Since when does the Lord add members to the local body? Wonder how that half million members ever assembled. Do you believe Rome would have really allowed that? But since you don't believe in "the Church" guess it doesn't matter!
Every time someone agrees to the constitution of our church, is baptized and desires to become a member, and thus is accepted as a member--the Lord has added that person to our church.Since when does the Lord add members to the local body? Wonder how that half million members ever assembled. Do you believe Rome would have really allowed that? But since you don't believe in "the Church" guess it doesn't matter!
That is not a difficult concept to understand. It is the Lord that adds to our church. It is the Lord that blesses our church. All blessings come from Him. All glory and praise comes from Him. I thought you were a Calvinist? Praise and honor belong to God.
Check your history, and your Bible.Since when does the Lord add members to the local body? Wonder how that half million members ever assembled. Do you believe Rome would have really allowed that? But since you don't believe in "the Church" guess it doesn't matter!
They at first met in the Temple. But that lasted only for a temporary period of time, for the Jewish leaders could only tolerate it for so long. On his missionary journeys Paul met regularly in the synagogues.
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
Check your history, and your Bible.
They at first met in the Temple. But that lasted only for a temporary period of time, for the Jewish leaders could only tolerate it for so long. On his missionary journeys Paul met regularly in the synagogues.
Yes, but a half million???
I could be wrong, but I believe that is what Sir William Ramsey gives in his book.Yes, but a half million???