Lloyd,
bmerr here. It is clear that no assembly of people will be sinlessly perfect. However, that does not mean that an assembly cannot be faithful in doctrine and practice. 1 Cor 4:2 tells us that it is faithfulness that is required of man, not perfection, as you acvocate. Perfection is found in Christ.
I agree, most will at least claim to want to follow the Bible. All one need do to see if this claim is genuine is investigate the Bible, and see if they're following it. I guess we could look at some of the examples you gave.
1. "Women must not wear pants." I believe this is a reference to an OT verse about women not wearing that which pertaineth to a man. I'm not sure where it's found, at the moment. My take on this verse is that it is simply a prohibition against cross-dressing. Don't dress in such a way that another would be confused about your gender.
There are pants that are made for women, and there are men who don't wear pants (Scots). Go ahead and tell a Scotsman to stop dressing like a woman; but be ready for a fight!
Partaking of the Lord's supper each week. In Acts 20:7, we find that it was "...upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread..." This is a reference to the Lord's supper, and it is differentiated from eating a meal in 20:11, where they "...had broken bread, and eaten..."
So how often did they partake of the Lord's supper? Every time there was a "first day of the week". Since every week has a first day, the pattern left for us demands that we also observe the Lord's supper on every first day of the week.
You made mention of Acts 2:46. I've asked about that, too. Upon closer examination, this is speaking of the sharing of food. Let's look at the verse.
2:46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and
breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart,
They were simply sharing food with each other in separate houses. The Lord's supper is observed when the disciples come together (Acts 20:7).
Setting the "pastor" over the elders and deacons. "Pastor" is just another word for elder. Bishop, shepherd, overseer are other names for the same office. The different names have respect to either the qualifications, or duties of the office.
According to the NT pattern, each congregation was overseen, or ruled by a plurality of elders (Acts 20:17; 14:23; 11:30; 15:2, 22; 16:4). Phillipians 1:1 gives us a snapshot of the organization of the church, as it was in the first century under the inspired direction of the apostles.
"Paul and Timotheus [preachers, evangelists], the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints [members] in Christ Jesus which are at Phillipi, with the
elders and
deacons."
The "one pastor" with "deacons" type of organization found in most religious bodies today is not what is found in the NT. It is unscriptural. No matter how much truth may or may not be taught within that body, it is still an unscriptural body, since they have not taught the whole council of God, which is evidenced by their unscriptural organization.
Individual elders have no authority. Elderships do, so long as they remain under the authority of Scripture, and thus, Christ. The "one pastor" system eventually gave rise to the papal system of Rome. Failure to adhere to the NT pattern always leads to more and more error.
I'm not sure what "ecclesiology and polity" are, but I'll do my best with your last set of examples. Frankly, this quote from you is more than a little disturbing.
Example 4: a church has the right ecclesiology and polity. However, they add things to Christ's cross. One must believe and tithe (commanded). Are they scriptural? This church is not scriptural.
Tithing is part of the OT, which has been nailed to the cross of Christ and put out of our way (Col 2:14). In the NT, we are commanded to give as we purpose in our hearts (2 Cor 9:6-7), bearing in mind the law of sowing and reaping, and to give as God has prospered us (1 Cor 16:2). There is no set percentage. That's part of the liberty we have in Christ.
Anything added to simple faith in Jesus is a corrupt message.
Well, again, is that a simple, obedient faith, or simply acknowledging the facts of our sinfulness and the atonement? Let's just follow the pattern in the NT.
It is an attribute to the saving power of the gospel message that people can get saved in any cult. There will many Catholics and CoCers in heaven in spite of blatant corruptions to the gospel message. There will even be Islamics in heaven in spite of all their bad doctrine.
Now
]that's interesting! Idolatrous Roman Catholics, with their Maryolatry, and rosary beads, and ring-kissing, side-by side in heaven with Muslims, who deny that Jesus is the Christ, thus qualifying themselves as antichrists (1 John 2:22)! And they'll all be hanging out with JW's and those from the church of Christer? Where do you get this stuff?
And quite frankly, I don't appreciate the implication that the church of Christ is a cult. Cults try to hide information from outsiders. The church does not. We are open to investigation from anyone, and welcome questions from both doctrinal opponents, and honest seekers of the truth. I've come to expect better from you, sir.
Likewise, there will be many free grace theologians who have not believed the gospel they can so truthfully articulate.
I suppose it is true that many are in it for the money. Your "bee line" led to a doctrine flatly denied by the Bible (James 2:24).
I'm worried about you, Lloyd.
In Christ,
bmerr
