The Church Universal

[DrJamesAch]

Most of you are arguing the the different sides of the same coin.
The church proper is universal to the extent that universal is defined as the collective body of believers.

The church operational is through the local church.

The church can be viewed as a franchise with branches located all over the world, which are autonomously operated by an owner operator, with only one corporate office in heaven.

The issue becomes contentious because parties arguing for both side have different views on how the church functions. To the Catholic and their ilk, universal means that the corporate office is the Vatican, and the churches are subject to papal authority which is derived from apostolic succession, and a subordinate ecclesiastical hierarchy of authority overseeing divisions of dioceses.

The Baptists (most) view-the correct view-universal as the church is one collective body in Christ that operates autonomously with earthly authority entrusted to the local church under one pastor, collectively cooperating with each other as a brand franchise, but answer only to one corporate executive from above.

The term "universal" simply has a bad connotation because of it's association with the heresy of corporate salvation for all regardless of whether they are saved or not. The term universal in itself is not a bad term depending on how it is defined and applied. But the term "catholic" can not be separated from it's intended definition as defined by the RCC in the 4 century.

What the RCC and its proponents attempt to do is bootstrap "catholic" to "universal" to attempt to cause opponents to agree on its harmony, and from there move from catholic to Catholic to cause the opponent to choose Catholic by default.

However, though the term "universal" when defined properly is not itself so egregious, because of the confusion over it's usage and application it is probably unwise to refer to it over the Biblical term of ekklesia.

 

[DHK]

Best proof for the "universal" church is Galatians 1 and the switching from singular church to plural churches drawing a clear distinction.

Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—
Gal 1:2 and all the brothers who are with me, To the churches of Galatia:

Gal 1:13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.

Gal 1:22 And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ.

This is not a very good proof at all, and I don't think it has been addressed yet. It is actually a good proof for the one who does not believe in the universal church but only the local church.

Paul addresses "the churches of Galatia." This is later in life when every assembly (ekklesia) was independent of each other, and there were many of them. Here he states there were many local churches throughout the region of Galatia, many assemblies.

In verse 13 he refers to his past when he persecuted "the church" the assembly "of Judea" or particularly the one that was at Jerusalem. It was the only church or assembly that existed at that time. He is not referring to a universal church, but the FBC at Jerusalem, a local assembly, that grew very fast. From 120 gathered in chapter one to 3,120 on the Day of Pentecost, and more added to it each day. This is the church that he persecuted it. Not until chapter eight do we have the gospel going any further than Jerusalem, when because of persecution, the believers at Jerusalem were scattered preaching the Word. Shortly after that, in chapter nine, Saul was saved.

 

[Rippon]

There is no argument with you about Acts 28:20. Christ's blood redeemed every sin of every believer for all times.

Yes, I have sung the hymn many times, 25 years as a Presbyterian and 35 years as a Baptist.

I agree that the Bride of Christ is the universal church.

All good. We are agreed on the above.

I said you were a universalist because you gave some credibility to the founding of the RCC.

You said I was a Universalist because you wanted to cause a ruckus;plain and simple.

... you look for differences and go after them with a vengence.

You are not quite the one who needs to rebuke me when you have had scores of your posts censored because of their ungodly contents.

 

[Rippon]

I have before me a book by Williston Walker. It was published in 1906. It is called John Calvin:The Organiser of reformed Protestantism.

I found some lines that are relevant to this thread. After itemizing the various books of the Bible that Calvin wrote commentaries and tracts upon he says: "Calvin made firmer and broader his claim, already established by the Institutes, to a position in the first rank of theologians not merely of his own age, but of the universal church." (p.324)

 

[DHK]

I have before me a book by Williston Walker. It was published in 1906. It is called John Calvin:The Organiser of reformed Protestantism.

I found some lines that are relevant to this thread. After itemizing the various books of the Bible that Calvin wrote commentaries and tracts upon he says: "Calvin made firmer and broader his claim, already established by the Institutes, to a position in the first rank of theologians not merely of his own age, but of the universal church." (p.324)

The OP has to do with the "universal church" not with Calvinism, which doesn't have to brought into every thread.
Besides that you are setting yourself up for a fall by using Calvin. He was a former Catholic and no doubt brought that baggage with him when he came out of the RCC. He won't be any good to you as a former Catholic. His theology is tainted by his background in this area.
Next, when discussing this subject the Bible is our authority. Let's stick with that.

 

[Tom Butler]

I think most of us can agree on the purpose and function of the local church.

Just exactly what is the function of the U-church?

 

[Rippon]

The OP has to do with the "universal church" not with Calvinism,

I started the thread. My quote has relevance to it. You are making a stink out of nothing.

Besides that you are setting yourself up for a fall by using Calvin.

You have an antipathy toward Calvin which is very evident.

He was a former Catholic and no doubt brought that baggage with him when he came out of the RCC.

As did Luther. But sitting from your vantage point in your comfortable 21 century perspective you make your vaunted judgments.Calvin moved in quite biblical ways against his former background. Put yourself back in that timeframe and see how far you would have removed yourself from Roman Catholic beliefs and practices.

Without knowing, or acknowledging it, you have derived many benefits from John Calvin's teachings. You, as well as the rest of us believers in the Lord sit on the shoulders of giants in the past.

 

[saturneptune]

All good. We are agreed on the above.



You said I was a Universalist because you wanted to cause a ruckus;plain and simple.


You are not quite the one who needs to rebuke me when you have had scores of your posts censored because of their ungodly contents.

Your first statement is positive, which is what I was hoping for on the rest of the post. You will just not stop will you? Have you ever overlooked anything in your life?

Why is it that every person you talk to is a battle? You have even managed to get into an argument with DHK, and that is hard to do.

 

[Rippon]

You will just not stop will you?

I speak the truth. That's something that is something foreign to you.

Why is it that every person you talk to is a battle?

Every person? You have used the most insulting language on the BB and yet you want to get up your high horse and say your pompous words?

You have even managed to get into an argument with DHK, and that is hard to do.

You don't read the archives much. You should check out an old thread called something to the effect God Got The Memo, if you want to see real differences between DHK and I on theology.

 

[saturneptune]

You don't read the archives much. You should check out an old thread called something to the effect God Got The Memo, if you want to see real differences between DHK and I on theology.

It is not necessary. He stands for Scripture and Baptist distinctives. You do not.

 

[Rippon]

It is not necessary. He stands for Scripture and Baptist distinctives. You do not.

If you are comfortable with his anti-Calvinistic stance then just come out from among the Calvinists and show your real Arminian stripes.

 

[saturneptune]

If you are comfortable with his anti-Calvinistic stance then just come out from among the Calvinists and show your real Arminian stripes.

I am more pro sovereignty than you, rosary breath. I lived a conservative Presbyterian Church much of my life. You are no more Baptistic than a hat rack.

 

[DrJamesAch]

I am more pro sovereignty than you, rosary breath. I lived a conservative Presbyterian Church much of my life. You are no more Baptistic than a hat rack.

As many disagreements as I have, and as stubborn as I am to give an inch to someone on certain issues, THAT made me spit my coffee out:laugh:

 

[saturneptune]

As many disagreements as I have, and as stubborn as I am to give an inch to someone on certain issues, THAT made me spit my coffee out:laugh:

I am honored to have brought laughter to someone's day. I do not know why, phrases like that just pop into my mind for a given situation.

 

[Rippon]

It is not necessary. He stands for Scripture and Baptist distinctives. You do not.

Sat/Nep,you have no shame.

 

[Rippon]

I am honored to have brought laughter to someone's day. I do not know why, phrases like that just pop into my mind for a given situation.

Yeah,37 minutes later. And you need a pop;not the soda variety.

 

[Rippon]

I lived [sic]a conservative Presbyterian Church much of my life.

What? No home?

You were not a Calvinist the entire time you were in the Presbyterian church. Sorry,no brownie points for you. (Remember"No soup for you"?JS)

 

[preachinjesus]

I speak the truth. That's something that is something foreign to you.

Ah yes, I'm reminded of why I don't interact with you much.

 

[Yeshua1]

Glad to hear that I am not in the minority here.But even if I was, I stand for the Church Universal. All believers are part of His Body,the Church,the Bride of Christ.

I stand for the Church Universal, made up of both thsoe who died and still alive in Christ, but that here on earth, that Church Body is split up into local assemblies!

 

[DHK]

If you are comfortable with his anti-Calvinistic stance then just come out from among the Calvinists and show your real Arminian stripes.

Are you able to give an answer to Tom's question apart from your allegiance to a man's system?

I think most of us can agree on the purpose and function of the local church.

Just exactly what is the function of the U-church?

http://www.baptistboard.com/editpost.php?do=editpost&p=1989578