Jesus said, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Jesus said, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)Exactly. Humans are not known for their shunning of human politics in favour of an outside counter-culture. Even institutional Christianity shunned the Kingdom to harlot itself to the Roman Empire.
Yes He did but in Acts 20 Paul predicts that problems would arise from within and in 2 thess 2 Paul predicted that a great apostasy would occur.Jesus said, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)
It's anachronistic to think of "church" as an institution...the word is ekklesia, which is called-out assembly. It is not a matter of offices and ordinances, but the gathering of believers.Jesus said, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)
Yes and His church didn't and still hasn't sold out, like the Gentile institution did.Jesus said, I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)
Apostates leave the Church.Yes He did but in Acts 20 Paul predicts that problems would arise from within and in 2 thess 2 Paul predicted that a great apostasy would occur.
Gathered people in a place to meet is the church; the church is not a building.It's anachronistic to think of "church" as an institution...the word is ekklesia, which is called-out assembly. It is not a matter of offices and ordinances, but the gathering of believers.
Agreed, but in additon to not being a building it is not institutional offices or magisterium. It is everyone who genuinely confesses Christ as Lord and Savior.Gathered people in a place to meet is the church; the church is not a building.
That comment in your post is more prejudicial than factual. The Church is and always has been organised with leadership and their helpers working for the growth of the congregation. The church is institutional by its nature. It's a wish, not well thought out nor in accord with holy scripture, to think that the church is a bunch of people in an anarchy of people with the same beliefs.Agreed, but in additon to not being a building it is not institutional offices or magisterium. It is everyone who genuinely confesses Christ as Lord and Savior.
There has always by necessity been some structure, sure, but it was a loose confederation rather than a properly structured institution. Those who lead did so not on the basis of some intrinsic authority of an office, but through the authority of the Scriptures. The officers were functionaries whose primary role was one of serving the community, not as a magisterium or authority over the Scriptures.That comment in your post is more prejudicial than factual. The Church is and always has been organised with leadership and their helpers working for the growth of the congregation. The church is institutional by its nature. It's a wish, not well thought out nor in accord with holy scripture, to think that the church is a bunch of people in an anarchy of people with the same beliefs.
Acts 15 teaches otherwise.There has always by necessity been some structure, sure, but it was a loose confederation rather than a properly structured institution.
The apostles and leaders present at the council in Jerusalem led by intrinsic authority, they issued a letter which instructed the churches in the matter of circumcision and the Law.Those who lead did so not on the basis of some intrinsic authority of an office, but through the authority of the Scriptures.
Acts 15 teaches the opposite of what you claim.The officers were functionaries whose primary role was one of serving the community, not as a magisterium or authority over the Scriptures.
No it doesn't, since what happened was those who knew the Scriptures gathered together and came to a mutual decision. That is, of course, besides the problem of taking descriptive narratives as normative. If intrinsic authority was the case, then Peter's position would have won out but it was James and Paul who won the day. Your anachronistic lens has you reading into Acts something that isn't there.Acts 15 teaches otherwise.
The apostles and leaders present at the council in Jerusalem led by intrinsic authority, they issued a letter which instructed the churches in the matter of circumcision and the Law.
Acts 15 teaches the opposite of what you claim.
Your post skates over the details of the council; and it is important to know that at that time the scriptures were the old testament and perhaps a letter or two written by saint Paul but not yet canonised as holy scripture. Paul and Peter were there, they are authors of parts of the New Testament, James too, who is thought to have written the letter that bears his name, this was no "house church" gathered to discern what the scriptures said for themselves and then rejoice in it, these men gathered to answer a dispute and that dispute was to decide if the gentiles would require circumcision and also require obedience to the Law of Moses to be saved, or not. The decision was "not", and the decision was sent to all the churches and those churches obeyed the decision and rejoiced to have it. These things are said in the passage.No it doesn't, since what happened was those who knew the Scriptures gathered together and came to a mutual decision. That is, of course, besides the problem of taking descriptive narratives as normative. If intrinsic authority was the case, then Peter's position would have won out but it was James and Paul who won the day. Your anachronistic lens has you reading into Acts something that isn't there.
I didn't skate over anything, nor did I say anywhere anything about a house church. The dispute they settled was in the region of Galatia, and seems to only have applied within that region considering Paul's words regarding sacrifice to idols elsewhere. But the crux of the matter is you presume that they invoked a personal authority in their decision, rather than finding their authority from their knowledge of the Scripture and personal knowledge of teachings of Jesus. If it were intrinsic authority then the person Catholics claim to be the head of the church's word would have been the end of the matter, but as we read in Galatians Paul vigorously opposed him and didn't seem to regard any sort of office authority. You're reading a modern Catholic view of authority into the texts, which isn't actually present.Your post skates over the details of the council; and it is important to know that at that time the scriptures were the old testament and perhaps a letter or two written by saint Paul but not yet canonised as holy scripture. Paul and Peter were there, they are authors of parts of the New Testament, James too, who is thought to have written the letter that bears his name, this was no "house church" gathered to discern what the scriptures said for themselves and then rejoice in it, these men gathered to answer a dispute and that dispute was to decide if the gentiles would require circumcision and also require obedience to the Law of Moses to be saved, or not. The decision was "not", and the decision was sent to all the churches and those churches obeyed the decision and rejoiced to have it. These things are said in the passage.
And some, coming down from Judea, taught the brethren: That, except you be circumcised after the manner of Moses, you cannot be saved. And when Paul and Barnabas had no small contest with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas and certain others of the other side should go up to the apostles and priests to Jerusalem, about this question. They therefore, being brought on their way by the church, passed through Phenice and Samaria, relating the conversion of the Gentiles. And they caused great joy to all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church and by the apostles and ancients, declaring how great things God had done with them. But there arose of the sect of the Pharisees some that believed, saying: They must be circumcised and be commanded to observe the law of Moses. And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them: Men, brethren, you know that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knoweth the hearts, gave testimony, giving unto them the Holy Ghost, as well as to us: And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why tempt you God to put a yoke upon the necks of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we believe to be saved, in like manner as they also. And all the multitude held their peace: and they heard Barnabas and Paul telling what great signs and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying: Men, brethren, hear me. Simon hath related how God first visited to take to the Gentiles, a people to his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets, as it is written: After these things I will return and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down: and the ruins thereof I will rebuild. And I will set it up: That the residue of men may seek after the Lord, and all nations upon whom my name is invoked, saith the Lord, who doth these things. To the Lord was his own work known from the beginning of the world. For which cause, judge that they who from among the Gentiles are converted to God are not to be disquieted: But that we write unto them, that they refrain themselves from the pollutions of idols and from fornication and from things strangled and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him in the synagogues, where he is read every sabbath. Then it pleased the apostles and ancients, with the whole church, to choose men of their own company and to send to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas, who was surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren. Writing by their hands: The apostles and ancients, brethren, to the brethren of the Gentiles that are at Antioch and in Syria and Cilicia, greeting. Forasmuch as we have heard that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, to whom we gave no commandment: It hath seemed good to us, being assembled together, to choose out men and to send them unto you, with our well beloved Barnabas and Paul: Men that have given their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves also will, by word of mouth, tell you the same things. For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication: from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well. Fare ye well. They therefore, being dismissed, went down to Antioch and, gathering together the multitude, delivered the epistle. Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation. But Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, with many words comforted the brethren and confirmed them. And after they had spent some time there, they were let go with peace by the brethren unto them that had sent them. But it seemed good unto Silas to remain there: and Judas alone departed to Jerusalem. And Paul and Barnabas continued at Antioch, teaching and preaching, with many others, the word of the Lord. And after some days, Paul said to Barnabas: Let us return and visit our brethren in all the cities wherein we have preached the word of the Lord, to see how they do. And Barnabas would have taken with them John also, that was surnamed Mark. But Paul desired that he (as having departed from them out of Pamphylia and not gone with them to the work) might not be received. And there arose a dissension so that they departed one from another. And Barnabas indeed, taking Mark, sailed to Cyprus. But Paul, choosing Silas, departed, being delivered by the brethren to the grace of God. And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches, commanding them to keep the precepts of the apostles and the ancients.Acts 15:1-41 DRB
The letter was taken to Syria and Cilicia too - And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches, commanding them to keep the precepts of the apostles and the ancients.The dispute they settled was in the region of Galatia, and seems to only have applied within that region considering Paul's words regarding sacrifice to idols elsewhere.
Isn't personal knowledge of the teachings of Jesus Christ an exercise of innate authority because the apostles were the ones who were with Jesus from the beginning of the Lord's earthly public ministry.and personal knowledge of teachings of Jesus.
Still was of limited interest, unless you believe the Holy Spirit contradicted Himself by both allowing the eating of meat sacrificed to idols and forbidding it. The council meeting speaks against a universal hierarchical church rather than for it, even if we could take descriptions of historical events as necessarily normative.The letter was taken to Syria and Cilicia too - And he went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches, commanding them to keep the precepts of the apostles and the ancients.
Not as something intrinsic to a person/office. But who in today's Roman church was alive and heard Jesus personally?Isn't personal knowledge of the teachings of Jesus Christ an exercise of innate authority because the apostles were the ones who were with Jesus from the beginning of the Lord's earthly public ministry.
I see from your post that the facts in the holy scriptures will not be accepted so, with that, I leave you to your own best judgement. God be with you always.Still was of limited interest, unless you believe the Holy Spirit contradicted Himself by both allowing the eating of meat sacrificed to idols and forbidding it. The council meeting speaks against a universal hierarchical church rather than for it, even if we could take descriptions of historical events as necessarily normative.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?