The Essential truth of Landmarkism preserves the gospel

[The Biblicist]

I am assuming (yes I know what happens when you assume) that when Paul gathered the elders, they were the leaders of the Church from different assemblies...

Acts 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.

Jon, Paul does use the plural "churches" at times but in Acts 20:17 he ues the singular "church" not churches. Most Bible scholars freely admit that there were plural elders in each singular church. One reason is that there was no New Testament Scriptures and revelatory gifts were used by God to provide revelation until the Biblical canon was completed. Notice that Acts 14:23 says plural "elders" were ordained in every singular church. The leadership was given such revelatory gifts through the laying on of apostolic hands and two or three were esential for confirmation of prophecy by another. That is one Biblical reason for plurality of elders in a singular congregation as in Acts 13;1. Another reason was when a congregation reached a size that one man could not efficiently pastor a church as in the case of the congregation at Jerusalem. Adrian Rogers had a membership role that some estimate to be about 28,0000 in Bellvue Baptist Church in Memphis and he had many other elders (Pastor of this and that) serving under him as seemingly did James in Acts 15.

And when He addressed the Ephesians, it was the assemblies at Ephesus.


Acts 20:20 And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house,

Notice the distinction between "publickly" and "house to house." It would seem to me that when they met as a congregation at some public place (Arena, feild, etc.) that was the congregation he addressed. However, after the Sunday service he visited the members "house to house."

I don't think you can fairly use your line of reasoning in the way you do in this particular debate as the evidence would not seem to favor your assumptions.

 

[The Biblicist]

.... isn't the point of the universal invisible church theory about spiritual union in Christ and that is then the basis of true Christian unity? Am I correct in making that evaluation?

What if spiritual union in Christ has nothing to with any kind of church nor any kind of baptism then what would be the value of that kind of church?

Not a single person on this forum has yet attempted to deal with the following words:

ALL who are "in Adam" are "in the flesh" BECAUSE they are "BORN" of the flesh or PROCREATION and all who are "in the flesh" are "none of his" - Rom. 8:8-9
ALL who are "in Christ" are "in the Spirit" BECAUSE they are "BORN" of the Spirit or NEW CREATION - Eph. 2:1-10 and indwelt by the Spirt or else they are "none of his" - Rom. 8:8-9

Not a single person on this forum has been able to successfully demonstrate how the church can precede its own "foundation" which consists of apostles and prophets which aposltes are FIRST to be "set in" this church then secondarily prophets - 1 Cor. 12;28

Not a single person on this forum has been able to successfully demonstrate how a Pentecost baptism in the Spirit, as an ACTION necessary to remove a person from his state of condemnation "in Adam" to a saved state "in Christ" can occur prior to Pentecost? However, if this baptism is the action that does this, then none prior to Pentecost was "in Christ" during their own life time or in death.

Not a single person on this forum has demonstrated how anyone OUTSIDE of Christ at any time in history can be called "saved" or ACT like they are saved and yet this must be the fate of all prior to Pentecost if it is the baptism in the Spirit as an action that places one "in Christ."

Not a single person on this forum has even attempted to deny that spirutal death is spiritual SEPARATION and therefore the reverse must be equally true and that is spiritual life is spiritual UNION. and therefore to be "in Christ" must be the creative act of God called quickening/life.

Therefore, there is no baptism in the Spirit as the big church theory defines it before Pentecost.
Therefore, there is no church as the NT defines it before its own own NT foundation
Therefore, there is no spiritual union by the baptism into such a church as defined by Universalists between Genesis and Pentecost and all those in between are therefore OUTSIDE of Christ and there is no salvation outside of Christ so this theory damns to hell all before Pentecost.

CONCLUSION: Neither the baptism in the Spirit or the church have anything to do with spiritual union of believers "in Christ." Beleivers are "created in Christ Jesus" by new birth not by any baptism or any kind of church membership and this is how all who have been saved since the fall of mankind.

The above post was directed to another forum member who decided that he would not address these issues. This post brings us back to the original OP and the problems with a universal invisible church theory. If Jon, and others would address these issues I would appreciate it because I think the whole foundation for assuming a universal invisible church is at least in part inseparable from these issues. If you don't understand what these issues have to do with that kind of church theory then I would be more than happy to explain.

 

[JonShaff]

The above post was directed to another forum member who decided that he would not address these issues. This post brings us back to the original OP and the problems with a universal invisible church theory. If Jon, and others would address these issues I would appreciate it because I think the whole foundation for assuming a universal invisible church is at least in part inseparable from these issues. If you don't understand what these issues have to do with that kind of church theory then I would be more than happy to explain.

I believe I'm following you.

To be honest, I am not for certain how OT saints were baptized into Christ. I believe the mode was still Grace through Faith by the Spirit of God. Do I believe they had the Spirit of God indwelling in them? No. Why would David beg God not to take His Holy Spirit from him (Psalm 51)

We have this...

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Deuteronomy 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

Addressing Pentecost, do you mean to say that some people believe that Spirit Baptism was to cause a Spiritual Union between Christ And His bride?

I don't see that to be so.

Pentecost Was when Christ's disciples were endued with Power from on High.

They had already received the Spirit of God as the Seal of the New Covenant in John 20

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe I'm following you.

To be honest, I am not for certain how OT saints were baptized into Christ. I believe the mode was still Grace through Faith by the Spirit of God.

Jon, that is not what the doctrine of the universal invisible church teaches. They teach that it is the baptism in the Spirit that removes a person from his "in Adam" to his "in Christ" position. However, the baptism in the Spirit, at least according to how they define it, had no existence prior to Pentecost.

Moreover, Paul explicitly states that we are "CREATED in Christ" and the creative act he is speaking of in context is NEW CREATION or quickening by the Spirit of God. In other words, ALL who are "in Christ" are "in the Spirit" BECAUSE they are "BORN of the Spirit" if they are not then they are "none of his" - Rom. 8:8-9.

Furthermore, the church cannot precede its own "foundation" (Eph. 2:20) which is composed entirely of New Testament materials (FIRST set in the church are apostles).

So, there is no baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost, so no means of placing anyone into the invisible church body AND there is no church body in the Old Testament because the FIRST set in the church were apostles. In essence that repudiates the whole theory.

Do I believe they had the Spirit of God indwelling in them? No.

First, there are two different kinds of temples of the Holy Spirit or temples indwelt by the Spirit. (1) the physical human body of the believer (1 Cor. 6:19). (2) The corporate assembly of baptized believers in a given locality (1 Cor. 3:5-16). Note the context of 1 Cor. 3:5-16 is how the congregation at Corinth came into existence. Note the pronoun "ye" rather than "we" in verse 16 as Paul was not part of this temple. Note the plural pronoun "ye" with the singular "temple" as paul was not talking about all their plural individual physical bodies.

On the day of Pentecost what was indwelt was not individuals but the new institutional house of God made without hands or the ekklesia just as the tabernacle had been immersed in the Spirit in Exodus 40:35. just as the temple had been immersed in the Spirit in 2 Chron. 7:1-3 so the new public "house" of worship must be immersed in the Spirit in Acts 2;1-3 or else the Jews would not forsake the temple.

Why would David beg God not to take His Holy Spirit from him (Psalm 51)

First, what is the context about? David has sin? What does sin do to the personal expereince of a child of God? It separates from experiencing God's blessings and presence. There is a difference between removing the Person of the Spirit from your body and removing the "joy" or the experiential presence of the Spirit.

We have this...

1 Corinthians 10:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

Deuteronomy 30:6 And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live.

Amen! The new birth which IS spiritual union with God was the experience of OT saints. Spiritual DEATH is spiritual SEPARATION from God is it not? What then is the opposite of "death" and "separation" if not "life" and "union". Spiritual life IS spiritual union and spiritual life IS NEW BIRTH/quickening.

Addressing Pentecost, do you mean to say that some people believe that Spirit Baptism was to cause a Spiritual Union between Christ And His bride?

Jon, everyone on this forum who embraces the universal invisible church theory (except perhaps you) not only believes and defends that idea, but every theology book that promotes the universal invisible church theory teaches that idea.

I don't see that to be so.

I hope you continue to see it that way.

Pentecost Was when Christ's disciples were endued with Power from on High.

They had already received the Spirit of God as the Seal of the New Covenant in John 20

that was merely the filling of the Spirit, the indwelling presence of the Spirit occurred when they beleived in the gospel as they possessed "eternal life" at the moment of faith.

You passed over the bulk of my previous post.Please consider the other points as they are equally fatal to that theory. The Universal church theory is nothing more or less than a retweaked Roman Catholic church salvation doctrine. To be saved is to be in this church and to be outside of it is to be lost. I believe in "gospel" salvation not church or baptismal salvation, both of which are part and parcel of the UIC theory.

 

[The Biblicist]

Happy Thanksgiving to one and to all. I will be taking a break from the forum until Friday, so if I don't answer that is the reason why.

 

[Yeshua1]

You seem to have overlooked my questions. Here they are again:


Where does the bible say that?

Where does the bible say that?

Where does the bible say that? (Scofield notes don't count.)

Mathew 5 17-20 :/Galatians 4:4

You seem to have overlooked my questions. Here they are again:


Where does the bible say that?

Where does the bible say that?

Where does the bible say that? (Scofield notes don't count.)

1 Corithians 12:13/Matthew 5:17-20 /Galatians 4:4!

 

[Yeshua1]

Where does the Bible say that? The promised administrator of that baptism is not the Holy Spirit but Christ read Mt. 3:11. The only baptism administered "by" or "under the direction of" the Holy Spirit is water baptism (see 1 Cor. 3:5-16). Just as Jesus, the first comforter administered baptism through his disciples (Jn. 4:1-2) so the Holy Spirit administers water baptism through his servants: Read this:

5 ¶ Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
7 So then neither is he that plants any thing, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase.
8 Now he that plants and he that waters are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.
9 For we are laborers together with God: you are God’s husbandry, you are God’s building.

Yeshua did you read it? The context is with regard to how the congregation at Corinth was constituted and built up They had been fighting over their human administrator of baptism. Paul's response was that all the human adminstrators of water baptism "ARE ONE" because they are "LABORERS TOGETHER WITH GOD" - meaning they are all working UNDER HIS LEADERSHIP, under ONE BOSS - The Holy Spirit and therefore "YOU are GOD'S building". Paul did not say "WE" but "YOU." Paul was not a member of that church.

You seem to be slow at discerning Scripture. Read it again slowing and see how Paul is resolving division in the church at Corinth over the administrators of their individual baptisms. Paul is sayin there really are no human administrators of water baptism to be divided over as they are all "ONE" because they are LABORERS TOGETHER with God the Holy Spirit and so the credit for their baptism is given to the Holy Spirit as "YOU ARE HIS BUILDING" not Paul's, not Apollos or Cephas, etc.

Yeshua, read it again, until you grasp what it is saying.

We are the Temple of God in our own bodies, not in the Churchbuilding is that temple!

 

[TCassidy]

How many assemblies were in Ephesus?

Each of the references I gave you use the word "church" in the singular. One church at Ephesus. One body at Ephesus. "Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other."

 

[TCassidy]

leaders of the Church from different assemblies.

Leaders of the assembly from different assemblies?

Mathew 5 17-20 :/Galatians 4:4

No Scofieldian "True Church" there.

1 Corithians 12:13/Matthew 5:17-20 /Galatians 4:4!

No Scofieldian "True Church" there either.

 

[Yeshua1]

Leaders of the assembly from different assemblies?

No Scofieldian "True Church" there.

No Scofieldian "True Church" there either.

I do not use Scofield though!
Bible states there are local churches that gather, but also that there is ONE Body of believers!

 

[Yeshua1]

Each of the references I gave you use the word "church" in the singular. One church at Ephesus. One body at Ephesus. "Things equal to the same thing are equal to each other."

Yes, as there is AOG church locally/Baptist/Presby etc, and all of the saved in those c=local churches belong to Invisible Church!

 

[TCassidy]

Yes, as there is AOG church locally/Baptist/Presby etc, and all of the saved in those c=local churches belong to Invisible Church!

Where do you find an invisible church in the bible?

 

[Yeshua1]

Where do you find an invisible church in the bible?

the departed saints that have gone before us, as they still are alive in presense of Jesus, and are invisibile, correct?

 

[TCassidy]

I mean this with all sincerity and it is not a personal attack or a slight of any sort, but do you have some sort of learning or communication disability? It seems as if you never understand, in even the simplest terms, what I have posted. And your answers are, for the most part, complete non-sequiturs.

 

[Don]

Tom--I'm pretty sure English is not his first language.

 

[TCassidy]

Tom--I'm pretty sure English is not his first language.

That may be the problem. And if so I will gladly issue my humblest apologies.

Of course, most of the regulars on the BB know I suffer from MS and my postings are often affected by the deterioration of my neurological condition, but I proofread them, then proofread them again to make sure they are as coherent and grammatically correct as possible (well as correct as I am capable of making them).

And for that reason I tend to be very generous toward those who lack grammar and spelling skills, and especially with English as a second language, I can understand the issue. English is also my second language. My first language is gibberish.

 

[Salty]

MY first language is military

 

[The Biblicist]

We are the Temple of God in our own bodies, not in the Churchbuilding is that temple!

I am tired of dealing with someone who merely asserts their theory, NEVER provides evidence and NEVER responds with evidence to disprove the evidence placed before them. You my friend are being placed on "ignore." I am not placing you on "ignore" for your spelling. Even if English is not your first langauge you obviously have sufficient command of English to respond with evidence if you wanted to.

If anyone else wants to make the same arguments that Yeshua is asserting but with evidence, I am more than willing to take the time and respond.

 

[Yeshua1]

I am tired of dealing with someone who merely asserts their theory, NEVER provides evidence and NEVER responds with evidence to disprove the evidence placed before them. You my friend are being placed on "ignore." I am not placing you on "ignore" for your spelling. Even if English is not your first langauge you obviously have sufficient command of English to respond with evidence if you wanted to.

If anyone else wants to make the same arguments that Yeshua is asserting but with evidence, I am more than willing to take the time and respond.

Paul stes that we as individuals are right now te temples of God, and alo when collectively assembles, are thtempleof God...

Contex rules which view holds!

 

[The Biblicist]

Paul stes that we as individuals are right now te temples of God, and alo when collectively assembles, are thtempleof God...

Contex rules which view holds!

Yes, and the singular "temple of God" is composed of "YE" not "we" as Paul is no part of that temple. The Context is referring to the church located at Corinth RESTRICTED to the members at Corinth - 1 Cor. 3:5-10 - READ IT