How the "Church" is defined

I tend to view "Christians" and the "Church" as all those who simply claim to believe in Christ as their spiritual life. They are not always consisting of those who completely make the transition to the "new birth."

People can follow the "knowledge of Christ" without making a complete commitment to him from the heart. They may mean well, but unless they completely commit to Christ, they are basically men living in their carnal nature who only sometimes obey Christ's word. They are not fully transformed.

The Church thus consists of all kinds of Christians who are in process of determining whether they will complete their "Salvation" with a complete transfer of power, from their carnal selves to Christ himself, who would endow them with a completely new spiritual nature.

I don't know if this definition appeals to you? Most Christians I know define the "Church" as the "glorious Bride of Christ" as if transported into the future, all of the "Christians" who didn't make it are now cut off.

I believe both definitions of "Church" are used in the Bible. It tends to refer to a church as simply a gathering of those who profess faith in Christ, whether they become the future glorious Bride or not.

The ideal is also presented when in the future those who prevail in their faith and are spiritually made new become "glorified." This is how the Bible views the *future Church.* Let me know what you think?

tdidymas said:

One thing I agree with is that those who are not living according to the Lordship of Christ are not born again. Thus, "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" - this is spiritual truth, indicating a person who has the indwelling Spirit regards Jesus as his Lord in reality. And I agree that not everyone in the church, although called "brothers," are not born again. Jesus said "not everyone who calls Me 'Lord' will enter the kingdom of heaven."

However, "commitment to Christ" is evidence of being born again, not the cause. If a person doesn't see Christ as Lord of their personal life, then they haven't really believed the gospel, and therefore will not obey it. Biblical belief follows through with obedience to Christ, since Jesus said "he who hears My words and observes to do it..." One who actually believes follows through with obedience.

If I believe in Christ, I will certainly do what He commanded. 1 John 5:1 "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves His child as well," is followed by "this is love for God, to obey His commands, and His commands are not burdensome," which is followed by "who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes in the Son of God?"
We can see by this progression that one who believes in Christ obeys God and overcomes the world by faith. Therefore, true faith is lived out in life. According to James 2, one who is not living out the commands of Christ is one whose faith is useless (not real). What kind of faith a person has is the crux of the matter.

Click to expand...

Well, you're very astute and have nailed the main issue in my sharing this. In my experience, there are folks in the church who don't just go through the motions of Christianity, but actually do Christian things, like share Christian teaching, and do acts of Christian love. But they never seem to be all the way there.

I can only surmise that something prevents them from committing wholly to the Lord. They don't completely hang up control over their being, and thus remain, in essence, carnal people--people who only occasionally sacrifice their carnal nature to do spiritual things.

I really don't know how else to say this? There are people in the church who have committed to the Christian lifestyle, who have put on a habit of speaking Christian things and doing Christian things without fully giving up their carnal being. The carnal man remains in control, whereas the Christian things they do are not really reflective of a complete commitment.

How can one tell the difference between a "goat" and a "sheep," since all of us are sometimes carnal in our behavior? As you say, a true commitment always completes the conversion by putting on a new nature. When we do spiritual things it exemplifies we've made a total commitment, and as such indicates love flowing out of a complete commitment, rather than just a "show" of love, or a "one-time payment" to God.

Zechariah called a leader in this state of being a "hireling." They do the "loving" thing, but they are only there for the ride, as a temporary means of self-realization. It isn't really "love" in the Christian sense. It's got ulterior motives, namely personal gain.

Have you seen this in your church? I know genuine saved Christians can be pretty flawed, and really backslide, even though they were truly saved. But there are those I've seen who are respectably committed to the Christian discipline, whose major flaw is that they don't have pure motives in their commitment to Christ. They want to be seen of men for their "good works." Put under pressure there is a boat load of hostility that emerges, with all of the carnal exhibitions that are normally suppressed.

Tolworth John said:

Here in the west we can see our fellow church goers, listen to there conversation and form an idea of how they practise what they believe.
Someone who says they are a Christian, but whose lifestyle denies it is in my opinion not a Christian.

In direct contradiction, when praying for the perscuted church, I pray for Christian in a country who are very likely only Christian because they belong to a Christian community.
Yet to those perscuting them, because they do not belong to their religious group they are Christian and suffer for it.

We all need to make these distinctions.

Click to expand...

I agree with you, but there are also those in church who live a relatively Christian life, but who seem more of a "paid" Christian than a "generic" Christian. This is the equivalent of a "hireling" pastor, as opposed to one who would lay his life down for his sheep. In my Lutheran past, I've seen Lutheran pastors who didn't really appear to be genuine Christians in heart, and held to somewhat liberal views, and appeared, frankly, somewhat "worldly."

There are Christians who for whatever reason simply want to be perceived as a Christian, and utilize all of the tools of the craft to appear as such. They talk Christian, they live relatively moral lives. But in terms of having a deep-rooted love for God, it's more show than real. They might be more into arguing the politics and legalities of religion than fellowship in Jesus.

I do find these, and am concerned never to put too much stock in them, nor trust them. These are the ones who at critical moments withdraw from you, and aren't there when it isn't convenient for them. After all, Christianity is, for them, a matter of personal advancement. If they get nothing out of it, they're not going to help you. If it doesn't show up in their advertisement, they're not going to pin any value to it.