This statement indicates that Jesus' sacrifice for the church was in the past; it does not indicate that the church was in the past.an gave himself for it:
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!
This statement indicates that Jesus' sacrifice for the church was in the past; it does not indicate that the church was in the past.an gave himself for it:
Ephesians 5:25 -
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it:
This Scripture points to the fact that the Church was in existence prior to the Cross!
The BF&M is mistaken. Redeemed of all ages, from every tribe, and tongue and people and nation are the "kingdom."
Originally Posted by JOAN OF ARC
Ephesians 5:25 -
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it:
This Scripture points to the fact that the Church was in existence prior to the Cross!
Followup Posted by JOAN OF ARC
The Scripture clearly states, "Husbands love ( present ) - Christ loved ( past ) - and gave ( past )" - obviously to the Church that was already in existence.
It is not obvious at all. Apart from Christ's love the church could never have existed.The Scripture clearly states, "Husbands love ( present ) - Christ loved ( past ) - and gave ( past )" - obviously to the Church that was already in existence.
It is not obvious at all. Apart from Christ's love the church could never have existed.
BTW, the thread topic is "when did the church begin". Do you have an opinion as to when it began?
Tom Butler, earlier you asked this question (I think twice) which is certainly germaine to the thread. The answer is The Holy Spirit. Prior to the sending of the Spirit, all of the elements of the church were assembled, as you note. However, Jesus specifically told them NOT to go into the world until the Spirit came. Going into the world is the mode of operation for the church. Since they were commanded NOT to go out until the Spirit came, I take the coming of the Spirit as the birth of the church. I really don't think there is any disagreement as to the facts here, there is only disagreement as to what one calls it.
Old Regular, I'm assuming that you are baptist (sorry, could've checked your profile before I typed this, but I didn't). Most baptist churches hold to two offices: pastor and deacon. If the first person who got saved constituted the church, when did pastors and deacons come about?
And... since most baptist churches hold to two ordinances: baptism and communion, when did these come about?
And, since the scriptures say "Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst", wouldn't you have to have had at least three people on earth who were saved before you could have had a church? I mean, it seems you would have to have three so that "two or three" would even be a possibility.
You are entitled to be wrong just as everyone else on this Forum. This time you are!
The BF&M is mistaken. Redeemed of all ages, from every tribe, and tongue and people and nation are the "kingdom."
Originally Posted by OldRegular
You are entitled to be wrong just as everyone else on this Forum. This time you are!
I figured this would hit somebody's hot button, and I'm surprised that you're the only one so far.
Quote:Let me go even further. Not only is the BF&M mistaken, the Bible knows nothing of a universal, invisible church. The majority of references are to local congregations. Other references are in a generic or institutional sense, in the same way we speak of "the family." It's easy to see when it is done. And we also know that when we speak of "the family" in an institutional sense, such as the breakdown of the family, that only real, visible families can break down.
Quote:The Universal Church, were it to exist, is a useless, dysfunctional entity. It has never sent a missionary, never had a worship service, never gave a dime or ever had a meeting. It is fractured, and some of its members are affiliated with groups which teach false doctrine and heresy.
Only local churches are uniquely able to carry out the Great Commission, preach the gospel, witness to the lost, send missionaries, teach new disciples, have fellowship, observe the ordinances.
All those things, by the way, the first church was already doing during Jesus earthly ministry, before Pentecost. Except that it did not venture beyond Israel's borders. That didn't happen until God forced them out of the country because of persecution.
You did not hit my hot button. You are just wrong, period.
I am not surprised though perhaps I should be that you are more learned than all the folks in the Southern Baptist convention who adopted this definition. Actually given there are so many dispensationalists in the SBC I am surprised that it was adopted, but the Holy Spirit prevailed and it was.
There will come a day when all believers will be one, because they all will know the truth. It is in heaven. The passage you described is it. One church. All believers. But not until then.You are wrong again.
What does Scripture mean when it speaks of the Bride of Jesus Christ? Is each of the local churches a Bride of Jesus Christ? Is Jesus Christ a polygamist?
What does Scripture mean when it states in Revelation 21:2? And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And in Revelation 21:10? And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God,
This is the generic or institutional sense I mentioned. Apply it to each local congregation and it fits perfectly.What does Scripture mean when it states in Ephesians 2:18-22?
18. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20. And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21. In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22. In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.
Generic, institutional, prospective.n each of the above Scripture the reference is to the total body of the redeemed!
The Lord added to the only church in existence--the one at Jerusalem. The principle is true of every succeeding localo congregation. The Lord adds to it.What does Scripture mean when it states in Acts 2:47?
47. Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Now who adds to the local church? The congregation or elders or whoever the ruling body is adds to the local church, and depending on the church even newborn infants. Are all members of a local church saved? No! Yet this Scripture states that the Lord added to the Church such as should be saved. That Church is the Bride of Jesus Christ, the New Jerusalem, the city whose builder and maker is God.
No contradiction. I said WERE IT TO EXIST, as you describe it, here is what it would look like. Fractured, disfunctional, etc. Sorry if I wasn't clear about what I meant.You are contradicting yourself. You say there is no universal Church and then say it is fractured ----- . How can something that does not exist be fractured? Besides I would say that a large portion of local churches teach false doctrine, some teach heresy.
The fact is that all the redeemed of all time constitute one body, one Bride of Jesus Christ, regardless of what age they lived or which local congregation they are associated with.
Old Regular said:You are partially correct here. However the SBC sends out missionaries, not the local churches.
I would say that this group would be more properly named "Israel". We are "called by" Israel's name, according to Paul. The "Kingdom", involves more than just the people of God: it involves all of Christ's sovereignty. But I guess I can see your point, though I don't exactly agree with it.Now there is such a group which involves all true believers. It's called the kingdom. All believers are subjects of the King.
I am not aware of any place where Paul calls the church "Israel."We are "called by" Israel's name, according to Paul.
Actually "Israel" is used frequently for unbelievers such as in Rom 9-11.... "Israel" are general terms, referring to all believers
No. The Biblical marks of a church (such as the practice of ordinances, biblical organization, discipline, etc) are not present at these conferences. The churhc is not simply a gathering. A church is a particular type of gathering ... baptized believers who rightly preach the gospel, rightly observe the ordinances, and rightly order the church.Conferences, such as T4G, Shepherds conference, etc., are the "assembly" (Church)
I am going to address this one question. Anyone who has read Romans, knows this is incorrect.I am not aware of any place where Paul calls the church "Israel."
So, let me get this strait, OR. There is one church. This church has existed since the very first person was redeemed, i.e. Adam. Yet, now you inform us that this one church that continues the same without distinction from the beginning of salvation history has two forms--and OT form and a NT form. Thanks for clearing that up. BTW, when did the NT form of the church begin?You are confusing the church in its New Testament form with the church in its Old Testament form.
Point taken. I have "theologized" by making an analogy between birth and conception for a human and for the church. For me, this theologizing is an attempt on my part to explain what I believe in a cogent way. However, the illustration is not from the scripture, so it is not authoritative. An illustration serves to illustrate, but it does not serve as a proof.There is a lot of "theologizing" that goes on that does not fully reckon with Scripture.