"Non Denominational Church"

[Albion]

The Rock Jesus was referring to was in Peter, it was his faith in Jesus. On that faith He Has built His church. All true Christians have the same faith and He knows who we are. Then men come along and build a glorified building over Peters dead body. I would submit it's likely Jesus couldn't care less about the building or the dead remains of human flesh, Peter will get his new Glorified body the same time the rest of us do.

You are certainly right that for Jesus to have made a play on words involving the idea of a rock does not mean that Peter was being made a Pope. In fact, the verses that follow this one verify your point, in that when Peter's rock-ribbed faith faltered, Jesus responded with the "Satan" comment. That was undoubtedly the issue there--Peter's faith/loyalty/steadfastness.

 

[Dave G.]

Wrong again. You need to repent of that cult and ask the Lord to guide you through his Word.Mary was not a virgin after Jesus. Every Catholic stumbles at this passage.

Mark 3:31-35 (KJV)
31 There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

I've always thought that scripture amazing, the Body of Christ is placed above His own Mother and Brother. I'm sure He respected them but this scripture speaks volumes.

 

[Dave G.]

You are certainly right that for Jesus to have made a play on words involving the idea of a rock does not mean that Peter was being made a Pope. In fact, the verses that follow this one verify your point, in that when Peter's rock-ribbed faith faltered, Jesus responded with the "Satan" comment. That was undoubtedly the issue there--Peter's faith/loyalty/steadfastness.

Yep Peter even faltered at the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowing and Jesus forgave Him, came looking for him after the resurrection wanting to cook breakfast so to speak. That is our Savior ! I so Love Jesus, don't you !

 

[wilts43]

Yep. We call it the Christian Church, or Christianity or, sometimes, the Church of Christ.

Your ignoring the thread OP .....

"Over the last two to three decades this term has been used to draw people into these churches because they don't want to be connected to a denomination convention for good reason, since really when you think about it there are no denominations in scripture"

So where did all these denominations come from?
From the Protestant-movement starting 1520's & following.
All these denominations come from that.... & from nowhere else.
There was a non-denominational Church from Christ until 1520 and it's still here.
Looking for a "non-denominational" denomination or church is like trying to re-invent the wheel while it's right in front of you, but protestant-goggles stop you from seeing it.

 

[Albion]

So where did all these denominations come from?
From the Protestant-movement starting 1520's & following.

Some of them. Others come from much earlier than that and still others have been founded more recently and have no particular connection to the Reformation.

 

[Dave G.]

Your ignoring the thread OP .....

"Over the last two to three decades this term has been used to draw people into these churches because they don't want to be connected to a denomination convention for good reason, since really when you think about it there are no denominations in scripture"

So where did all these denominations come from?
From the Protestant-movement starting 1520's & following.
All these denominations come from that.... & from nowhere else.
There was a non-denominational Church from Christ until 1520 and it's still here.
Looking for a "non-denominational" denomination or church is like trying to re-invent the wheel while it's right in front of you, but protestant-goggles stop you from seeing it.

Well: 1 Corinthians 12:27
King James Bible
Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

 

[Dave G.]

It dawned on me you probably don't want it from King James, so here it is from yours: Douay-Rheims Bible
Now you are the body of Christ, and members of member.

 

[REM]

It dawned on me you probably don't want it from King James, so here it is from yours: Douay-Rheims Bible
Now you are the body of Christ, and members of member.

Are you kidding me? KJV is The Bible.

 

[wilts43]

Wrong again. You need to repent of that cult and ask the Lord to guide you through his Word.Mary was not a virgin after Jesus. Every Catholic stumbles at this passage.

Mark 3:31-35 (KJV)
31 There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!


35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

I assume you are not implying Jesus was being rude to, or rejecting, His mother.
As The perfect Jew Jesus must "Glorify His father & His mother" (4th commandment) more than anyone else ever living.
Therefore we are left with the obvious rhetorical device of using what is at hand to make a point...... "My family? Anyone who does God's will is like family".
Or certainly in Mary's case she was His mother, not by any fluke, but because she was "full of grace" as the Angel addressed her......i.e. because "She did God's will".
What really happened in the verses 31-35 is this. Jesus was teaching dramatically, and comparing two things, the dignity of being physically the Mother of God, and the privilege of hearing the word of God and keeping it. She was, of course, at the peak in both categories.

As for Jesus "brethren" you must know that is very far from clear that this mean full blood brothers as we use the term. The language used means they could well have been cousins, or children of an earlier marriage of Joseph. Most early Protestant reformers held to this. And Jesus confiding Mary to John's care would have been illegal if He had brothers. Was His last act on the cross such a transgression? it's impossible.

 

[REM]

I assume you are not implying Jesus was being rude to, or rejecting, His mother.
As The perfect Jew Jesus must "Glorify His father & His mother" (4th commandment) more than anyone else ever living.
Therefore we are left with the obvious rhetorical device of using what is at hand to make a point...... "My family? Anyone who does God's will is like family".
Or certainly in Mary's case she was His mother, not by any fluke, but because she was "full of grace" as the Angel addressed her......i.e. because "She did God's will".
What really happened in the verses 31-35 is this. Jesus was teaching dramatically, and comparing two things, the dignity of being physically the Mother of God, and the privilege of hearing the word of God and keeping it. She was, of course, at the peak in both categories.

As for Jesus "brethren" you must know that is very far from clear that this mean full blood brothers as we use the term. The language used means they could well have been cousins, or children of an earlier marriage of Joseph. Most early Protestant reformers held to this. And Jesus confiding Mary to John's care would have been illegal if He had brothers. Was His last act on the cross such a transgression? it's impossible.

You people need to get beyond Mary who is no greater than any other believer in Christ. She was born in sins like all of us except for Jesus who was incarnate and sinless. If he wasn't crucifies he would have lived in the flesh forever now of course is seated with the God head.

 

[Wolf_Says]

Wrong again. You need to repent of that cult and ask the Lord to guide you through his Word.Mary was not a virgin after Jesus. Every Catholic stumbles at this passage.

Mark 3:31-35 (KJV)
31 There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

This is why you need historical context when reading scripture.

Jesus had no siblings. He is referencing those who are close to him and follow him. NOT blood siblings.

I suggest you do some research into the manner of speaking back then. You cannot read scripture with modern day glasses as you will get confused.

IF Jesus had brothers, the Jewish custom was for them to take care of Mary when Jesus died, yet he entrusted His mother to John!

John had a mother he took care of, and if Mary had other children they would have been entrusted to take care of her. Clearly that did not happen.

Jesus knew that nobody would rake care of Mary because she had no other children.

 

[Wolf_Says]

Wrong again. You need to repent of that cult and ask the Lord to guide you through his Word.Mary was not a virgin after Jesus. Every Catholic stumbles at this passage.

Mark 3:31-35 (KJV)
31 There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.

32 And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.

33 And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?

34 And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

35 For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

Oh and Catholicism is not a cult.

If it was a cult, you are using that cult's own book for your beliefs. Just saying.

History is a fascinating thing.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I assume you are not implying Jesus was being rude to, or rejecting, His mother.
As The perfect Jew Jesus must "Glorify His father & His mother" (4th commandment) more than anyone else ever living.
Therefore we are left with the obvious rhetorical device of using what is at hand to make a point...... "My family? Anyone who does God's will is like family".
Or certainly in Mary's case she was His mother, not by any fluke, but because she was "full of grace" as the Angel addressed her......i.e. because "She did God's will".
What really happened in the verses 31-35 is this. Jesus was teaching dramatically, and comparing two things, the dignity of being physically the Mother of God, and the privilege of hearing the word of God and keeping it. She was, of course, at the peak in both categories.

As for Jesus "brethren" you must know that is very far from clear that this mean full blood brothers as we use the term. The language used means they could well have been cousins, or children of an earlier marriage of Joseph. Most early Protestant reformers held to this. And Jesus confiding Mary to John's care would have been illegal if He had brothers. Was His last act on the cross such a transgression? it's impossible.

Duh! Just read the passage. Mary and His brothers came to Jesus and wanted to meet with him. These were recognized as genuine physical mother and brothers. Jesus expanded His relationship from them to all who believe.

If you think that these brothers of Jesus were only spiritual and had no physical relationship with Him then you must also believe that Mary was only His spiritual mother and not His physical mother. You cannot have it both ways - physical mother, but spiritual brothers.

 

[Wolf_Says]

Many, if not most, theologians do think that Jesus was making a pun there.

Please then show your proof? There was no joke if you understood the OT and the Aramaic Jesus spoke.

Its a poetic difference in the Greek translation of petra/petros because petra is feminine and petros is masculine. Would you call Peter, Patricia? No, because he is a man.

 

[Wolf_Says]

I smiled when I read "It's as plain as a pikestaff to the Jews what Jesus was doing!" Was it also "plain as a pikestaff to the Jews" that Jesus had actual siblings and that these siblings were known and identified by name?

Oh you mean those who belonged to another Mary?

I would give the verses proving this point, but its a little hard on a phone.

Jesus had no siblings, and the giving Mary to John at the foot of the cross is proof of that if you understood Jewish customs.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Oh and Catholicism is not a cult.

If it was a cult, you are using that cult's own book for your beliefs. Just saying.

History is a fascinating thing.

Interestingly, most Western cults use the Bible as one of the foundations for their beliefs. Examples include the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), Christian Science, and Jehovah's Witnesses. Some of them make a great fuss about believing the Bible only, but all of them have added their own Tradition (either Oral or Written) with the result being that they stray far from the orthodox faith of the Christian Church.

If the shoe fits, then wear it.

 

[Wolf_Says]

The Rock Jesus was referring to was in Peter, it was his faith in Jesus. On that faith He Has built His church. All true Christians have the same faith and He knows who we are. Then men come along and build a glorified building over Peters dead body. I would submit it's likely Jesus couldn't care less about the building or the dead remains of human flesh, Peter will get his new Glorified body the same time the rest of us do.

You cannot separate the faith from the person.

If what you said is true, why the name change? Why the authority to bind and loose? Why given the keys to the kingdom.of heaven? Why is he asked by Jesus 3 times to tend my sheep? Why does Jesus pray for Peter specifically by name?

Wow you sure make Jesus sound heartless.

The early Church knew that Jesus meant Peter here and did so for 1500 years until Protestants didnt like it.

Heck, even the OO and EO recognize the position of the heir to Peters spot as patriarch, they just dont agree with Papil Primacy.

 

[Dave G.]

Oh you mean those who belonged to another Mary?

I would give the verses proving this point, but its a little hard on a phone.

Jesus had no siblings, and the giving Mary to John at the foot of the cross is proof of that if you understood Jewish customs.

Copy paste, Wolf. I used to share scripture all the time by phone before I retired. Unless still use the old flip phones, like my sister In Law LOL.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Oh you mean those who belonged to another Mary?

I would give the verses proving this point, but its a little hard on a phone.

Jesus had no siblings, and the giving Mary to John at the foot of the cross is proof of that if you understood Jewish customs.

I always am impressed that Catholics adamantly refuse to believe what their own approved Bible translators have clearly provided for them in at least five clear passages from three Gospel writers. If you choose to keep your brain pickled in your dogmatic Tradition, it is really of no concern of mine. Just don't tell anyone that you believe the Bible to be true.

 

[Wolf_Says]

Interestingly, most Western cults use the Bible as one of the foundations for their beliefs. Examples include the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons), Christian Science, and Jehovah's Witnesses. Some of them make a great fuss about believing the Bible only, but all of them have added their own Tradition (either Oral or Written) with the result being that they stray far from the orthodox faith of the Christian Church.

If the shoe fits, then wear it.

Do you understand the history of the Bible?

1) Mormons do not believe in the trinity
2) JW do not believe in the trinity

You have your own traditions, that being of Martin Luther who took out 7 books and declared sola fiede and sola scriptura, both which are unbiblical and man made traditions.

Quick history lesson. The Bible as we know it today wasnt around until the late 4th century, when the NT books were declared scripture by a series of church councils and synods. That was the RCC.

The Bible contains 73 books, (EO have slightly more in the OT due to how they seperate the books) and it stayed this way until Martin Luther.

You would not have the Bible, or know which books were ment to be in the Bible, if it wasnt for the RCC.