Is your comment connected with anything in particular?I suppose we can just throw 1 and 2 timothy out of the bible then.
along with 1 Corinthians 11 and 12.
Is your comment connected with anything in particular?
the claim that the church is unnecessary.
And where do you see that the church is a system of hierarchy, buildings, tithes and so on in either epistle to Timothy?
There is no perfect church, but faithful yes. In Revelation we see the Seven letters to Seven churches and three out seven were faithful the rest were put on notice to repent, exposing the sin within. These letters were to specific churches but were also messages to all churches throughout the Church Age. Yes, man misinterprets scripture (as you apparently do as well) and some mislead their flocks. But make no mistake, God is sovereign and He has everything under control. He has factored in our sins and failures into His perfect plan. Every Christian in the Book of Life has been accounted for. His work has been done and He is right on schedule. Man cannot mess up His plan. Only the works of the Holy Spirit through us matter -- they are accomplished. Fear not, evil has been restrained by the Holy Spirit and He also uses the Body of Christ and governments of the world to do His will.the spiritual corruption is obvious to all, unless of course one is wilfully blind.
Intellectual ability is utterly irrelevant when it comes to serving God.
If St Francis of Assisi is a church of Jesus Christ, then inviting pagans to place their pagan gods on the altar is the equivalent abomination of putting idols in the temple of God in Jerusalem.
You don't make converts by indicating that their god is equal to your god!
He gave legitimacy for perverse and satanic gods.
He continually told Christians to pray to Mary.
The final world antichrist religion will be pantheism, all gods being equal. That is what he endorses.
Well, you know the saying: "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church."Churches in times of heavy persecution, such in today's China, or the early centuries of Christianity, were never cathedrals. People's private homes, catacombs underground, out of sight and out of mind of those who would kill Christians for such activities, were the churches of the time. Even in times of less persecution, and the churches that were being described by Timothy, the usual form was the family church of the estate, with relatives and slaves and people with close personal ties, were the form the Church took.
As Christianity became dominant throughout Europe, honor and praise and glory to God entailed spending time and resources in creating environments of great beauty and elegance all in the glory of God.
North Americans do not fully appreciate the role that beauty plays in cultivating the higher senses, and the higher senses are of a spiritual nature. Europeans show much more concern for elegance and craftsmanship, and the architect of the church is the highest achievement in creating environments of great beauty and splendor that has ever been attained in all of human history. This is all in honor and glory to God.
When a Christian is asked what is the reason for their existence, the correct answer is normally said to be to give honor and praise and glory to God. Not even fighting evil is as important to our earthly existence as is our purpose of praising God.
When it comes to creating spaces of beauty and splendor to honor our Creator, that is exactly what the space of the physical church may do.
In the architect of the physical church, we have often achieved our purpose for being here. The music of Christianity, the art and frescoes and mosaics, the domes of the great cathedrals, the spires and the apses; these are all expressions of our highest spiritual nature. These all exist as tributes to our God.
Of course there is a gospel of social justice, and a personal relationship expressed in the quiet of our own private spaces. But in no way does the physical space of the church impede or contradict that personal relationship. Indeed, church services also include those types of worship and charities, in effect giving us the types of behaviors we are to mimic in our homes and in our lives outside of the physical space of church.
not everyone is an elder of the church. Paul appointed elders to the churches. the buildings in this case were houses where people met for worship and where these elders lead, taught, and administered the sacraments.
the "building" that everyone seems to be vilifying is merely a place where the saints are meeting for worship under the guidance of appointed elders. if followers of Christ were not under heavy persecution at the time of the apostles, they would have met in buildings with furnished sanctuaries and pulpits back then too.
Islam was a religion that was developed with exactly that in mind. The first lands that Arabs conquered were predominately Christian lands, and now much of that world, roughly two thirds of the extent of the lands that were Christian at the time of invasion, are now upwards of 99 % Muslim. The history of Christians in the House of Islam has not been one of genocidal purges, for the most part. It has been a history of relentless humiliation that does not normally enter into the range of slaughter of martyrs, but each and every generation a few more seek to at least moderately improve their social standing in society by crossing over to the other side.Well, you know the saying: "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church."
You did not answer my question and Paul did not appoint a single person in 1st or 2nd Timothy other than saying to take Mark with him as he is a benefit. Matter of fact Paul spends more time talking about how people will distort the truth to twist it for their own gain....go figure. One this is true, they met in homes and that is the biblical model.
1 timothy 3 lays out the qualifications for elders and deacons. unless you want to argue that elders and deacons were never appointed to lead churches than you're question is indeed answered.
Yes it lays out the qualifications for elders but it is not a description of the system we see today in buildings that operate as temples with a hierarchy.
But you said Paul appointed people in those chapters, he did not. You also implied that those chapters is evidence for the system we see now which it does not.
"Christians have to meet somewhere, so this hatred of buildings used for Christians meeting together for worship seems entirely ridiculous to me" (ViaCrucis) I agree, the problem is hierarchy not buildings. The problem is the idea of 'clergy'- the problem is the ecclesiological format.
You can have a large assembly of believers without the hierarchy, pews and pulpits. The hierarchy, pews and pulpits prevent the community, fellowship, participation in what was meant to be discipleship (we often do what Church 'should' look like, we have bible study, fellowship nights where we have rooms of 50-400 believers meeting and sharing around 'tables'. That is what Sunday morning 'should' look like).
Like the scriptures points out, the disciples' met around 'tables'. They 'talked' to one another, it was study, singing, prayer and meals (communion) 'with' one another - like normal life - there was no religious ritual, pulpit, hierarchy.
The simplicity of Christ and His body the Church, and the assembly, became a ritualized religious ceremony - rather than all it was meant to be: believers gathering together, enjoying their forgiveness and new life with one another.
(I believe pastors, deacons, overseers, elders were meant to 'simply' be table leaders, serve the tables, keep others from 'lording' over others. And that there were 'many' of them - are there not many wise or mature among you? If not then the leadership has failed, and the church has failed - and it has for centuries)
The Church is absolutely unnecessary.
Hi everyone. I'd like to start a debate with regards to the necessity of church worship.
I am of the opinion that aside from enhancing your social life and having a sense of community, a church is absolutely useless. If a church becomes responsible for providing food for the needy and shelter from the homeless, then it's a different story. However, outside of those things, it is absolutely and utterly useless.
Sometime in the late medieval period, a group of Christians, who later became known as "mystics", absolutely rejected church worship and took to worshiping God their own way. This to me is brilliant. God, after all, is a personal God who resides in our hearts. There is no practical use for a church when it comes to salvation and fulfillment. It is nothing but just another business that employs people. All we really need is a Bible and our unwavering faith.
Your thoughts?
So when Jesus and the disciples attended the synogogues, they weren’t going to buildings with Pharisees or Saduacees as teachers?Yes it lays out the qualifications for elders but it is not a description of the system we see today in buildings that operate as temples with a hierarchy.
But you said Paul appointed people in those chapters, he did not. You also implied that those chapters is evidence for the system we see now which it does not.
So when Jesus and the disciples attended the synogogues, they weren’t going to buildings with Pharisees or Saduacees as teachers?
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?