The Bride of Christ is NOT the Church!

[HankD]

The basic problem is semantics and the dynamics in which the word "church" is used.

The "invisible" church makes it sound like a sci-fi movie but means the church known only to God.
The "universal" or "catholic" church also have unpleasant nuances (wheat and tares mingled together)

It has to be explained in context

e.g. when sharing the gospel with others i.e. Mormons claiming that the Mormon Church is the "true church", I say - the true church is comprised only of those who have been born again - have you been born again?

etc...
HankD

 

[TCassidy]

The point is, as Baptists, we believe the church is an organized assembly of baptized believers.

What you describe as "all the redeemed" is not a church. It is the Family of God, made up of all His children regardless of whether or not they are faithful to a local assembly, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized.

Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.

 

[Felipe Rios]

The point is, as Baptists, we believe the church is an organized assembly of baptized believers.

What you describe as "all the redeemed" is not a church. It is the Family of God, made up of all His children regardless of whether or not they are faithful to a local assembly, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized.

Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.

Amen. The "church" is always visible and local, never universal.

 

[Felipe Rios]

The point is, as Baptists, we believe the church is an organized assembly of baptized believers.

What you describe as "all the redeemed" is not a church. It is the Family of God, made up of all His children regardless of whether or not they are faithful to a local assembly, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized.

Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.

If you really study the word "church" and how it was used in the 1st and 2nd century, it was used in legal meetings and it was always referred to a "local" assembly. It was never used for a "universal" assembly. Every time the word "ekklesia" is used in the N.T, it always refers to the "local" assembly gathered in Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, Jerusalem, etc. There is no such thing a universal church. This is something that was started by the Catholic Church.

 

[Felipe Rios]

If you really study the word "church" and how it was used in the 1st and 2nd century, it was used in legal meetings and it was always referred to a "local" assembly. It was never used for a "universal" assembly. Every time the word "ekklesia" is used in the N.T, it always refers to the "local" assembly gathered in Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, Jerusalem, etc. There is no such thing a universal church. This is something that was started by the Catholic Church.

I meant to send the last message to HankD

 

[Felipe Rios]

The basic problem is semantics and the dynamics in which the word "church" is used.

The "invisible" church makes it sound like a sci-fi movie but means the church known only to God.
The "universal" or "catholic" church also have unpleasant nuances (wheat and tares mingled together)

It has to be explained in context

e.g. when sharing the gospel with others i.e. Mormons claiming that the Mormon Church is the "true church", I say - the true church is comprised only of those who have been born again - have you been born again?

etc...
HankD

If you really study the word "church" and how it was used in the 1st and 2nd century, it was used in legal meetings and it was always referred to a "local" assembly. It was never used for a "universal" assembly. Every time the word "ekklesia" is used in the N.T, it always refers to the "local" assembly gathered in Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, Jerusalem, etc. There is no such thing a universal church. This is something that was started by the Catholic Church.

 

[Felipe Rios]

The point is, as Baptists, we believe the church is an organized assembly of baptized believers.

What you describe as "all the redeemed" is not a church. It is the Family of God, made up of all His children regardless of whether or not they are faithful to a local assembly, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized.

Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.

If you don't mind me asking. Are you Southern Baptist?

 

[HankD]

The point is, as Baptists, we believe the church is an organized assembly of baptized believers.

What you describe as "all the redeemed" is not a church. It is the Family of God, made up of all His children regardless of whether or not they are faithful to a local assembly, regardless of whether or not they have been scripturally baptized.

Ephesians 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named.

As a Baptist I understand your description of the local church and agree.

The Matthew 16 passage says nothing about water baptism or a description of its organization or offices accept for "My church".

A composite of Scripture must be put into a descriptive narrative to cover the "local church".

The weakness with the description is that it cannot be sure everyone is regenerate.
The "baptized believers" is the problem
There are those who have been baptized who are not true believers (born again) in some local churches.

In any given local church only God knows who are His own.

The description of the Matthew 16 "my church" as its builder is all who have been born again after the day of Pentecost in the Book of Acts until being taken up to meet Him in the air.

HankD

 

[Mr. Davis]

I agree with you on that one.

Besides the local Church, isn't there the Church Universal? Don't all true believers belong to it? Isn't this the "Church of the first born"--the Church of the preeminent Christ? Granted, there are denominations. There are many faithful servants of God in them. I am speaking only of Protestant Churches. I don't recognize the Catholic Church as part of Christ's Church Universal. Felipe, I am directing these questions to you alone. What do YOU say?

 

[HankD]

If you really study the word "church" and how it was used in the 1st and 2nd century, it was used in legal meetings and it was always referred to a "local" assembly. It was never used for a "universal" assembly. Every time the word "ekklesia" is used in the N.T, it always refers to the "local" assembly gathered in Rome, Ephesus, Corinth, Jerusalem, etc. There is no such thing a universal church. This is something that was started by the Catholic Church.

Hebrews 12:23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Which local church is this?

HankD

 

[TCassidy]

The weakness with the description is that it cannot be sure everyone is regenerate.

What part of "organized assembly of baptized BELIEVERS" is uncertain?

 

[TCassidy]

Which local church is this?

That is the first meeting of the church universal and triumphant.

 

[TCassidy]

If you don't mind me asking. Are you Southern Baptist?

I am Independent, Fundamental, Baptist presently attending a Southern Baptist church.

 

[HankD]

What part of "organized assembly of baptized BELIEVERS" is uncertain?

Only God knows if each and every one is a BELIEVER.

If there are 100 members of baptized professing BELIEVERS and only 50 are actually saved is it a local church?

HankD

 

[HankD]

That is the first meeting of the church universal and triumphant.

Close (as almost)

Hank

 

[TCassidy]

If there are 100 members of baptized professing BELIEVERS and only 50 are actually saved is it a local church?

The church is people. Organized, assembled, baptized, believers. I really don't understand what is so difficult about that "believers" part to understand.

The church is made up of believers only. If half the people sitting in the pews are saved, they are the church. The rest are not.

When you invite a lost friend to come to church with you does walking into the church house make that person a church member or are there other requirements?

 

[HankD]

The church is people. Organized, assembled, baptized, believers. I really don't understand what is so difficult about that "believers" part to understand.

The church is made up of believers only. If half the people sitting in the pews are saved, they are the church. The rest are not.

When you invite a lost friend to come to church with you does walking into the church house make that person a church member or are there other requirements?

I think we are 95% in agreement on this one - the whole thing concerning the church.

FWIW on my part - I certainly don't match your academics.



HankD

 

[TCassidy]

FWIW on my part - I certainly don't match your academics.

Well, as you know I seldom refer to my education or my academic credentials or my academic history and ministry. To do so would be to engage in a form of the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority."

My preferred method (which I sometimes forget or otherwise fail to accomplish) is to convince those with whom I differ using logic, exegesis, and the content of scripture.

I try to break my arguments down to simplified steps that are easy to follow and, when put together, make a complete and unassailable conclusion.

Content: In my opinion, the scriptures say what they mean and mean what they say. (The old "words mean things" argument.)

Context: You know. My three rules for understanding a bible verse: Context, context, context.

Comparison: Comparing scripture with scripture.

Culture: Putting the bible in the cultural context of the passage.

Consultation: Researching what others say about the passage/issue. (The least useful in New Testament context, but often useful in OT context by being familiar with the Chumash, Talmud, and Mishna.)

 

[Felipe Rios]

Besides the local Church, isn't there the Church Universal? Don't all true believers belong to it? Isn't this the "Church of the first born"--the Church of the preeminent Christ? Granted, there are denominations. There are many faithful servants of God in them. I am speaking only of Protestant Churches. I don't recognize the Catholic Church as part of Christ's Church Universal. Felipe, I am directing these questions to you alone. What do YOU say?

On the earth, each church is "local." In the heaven there is one church, but that church is still "local" and "visible." The problem is that most Christians confuse the "family of God" with the "body of Christ." I do not believe that we are all part of the body of Christ. Only those who are members of their local N.T church are part of that particular body. If the church was universal then there would be no point in membership and we could go to any church at any given time. In heaven, or in the future Kingdom to come, there will be one church, but even then, that future church will be gathered in one "place" and it will be visible and local.
The family of God is composed of local assemblies, each one separately being the body of Christ. Hence the reason why each church is autonomous and independent of each other.
Many Baptist have gone astray from the "local church only" teaching over the years and have embraced the "dual" nature of the church (local and universal).

 

[HankD]

Well, as you know I seldom refer to my education or my academic credentials or my academic history and ministry. To do so would be to engage in a form of the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority."

My preferred method (which I sometimes forget or otherwise fail to accomplish) is to convince those with whom I differ using logic, exegesis, and the content of scripture.

I try to break my arguments down to simplified steps that are easy to follow and, when put together, make a complete and unassailable conclusion.

Content: In my opinion, the scriptures say what they mean and mean what they say. (The old "words mean things" argument.)

Context: You know. My three rules for understanding a bible verse: Context, context, context.

Comparison: Comparing scripture with scripture.

Culture: Putting the bible in the cultural context of the passage.

Consultation: Researching what others say about the passage/issue. (The least useful in New Testament context, but often useful in OT context by being familiar with the Chumash, Talmud, and Mishna.)

I saw you were shy about said academics so I mentioned it.
It helps to know for some, maybe many, maybe even most in the area of trust and credibility.

HankD