What IS MATT 16:18 REALLY TEACHING ?

[ozso]

I myself am also curious on these points, although an honest and correct answer would be to refer to Holy Tradition, however, among Orthodox Christians we do not discourage critical thinking, since much of our evangelism has involved asking people to use their faculty for independent tought to evaluate what we regard as the Apostolic kerygma. What is more, the specifics of how baptism is to be performed is provided in some of the oldest surviving documents we have, such as in church orders such as the Apostolic Constitutions and Didache (both of which, not unlike Protestant books of church order, such as the United Methodist Book of Discipline, or the Church of Scotland Book of Common Order, contain varying amounts of liturgical material), and the oldest surviving liturgical service books in our possession, including the very oldest, the Euchologion of St. Sarapion of Thmuis.

Since the Church was ruled out, doesn't that rule out Holy Tradition regarding @concretecamper's question?

As far as baptism goes, would you agree the primary reason why baptism is important and why Christians should get baptized, is because all of the passages in scripture regarding baptism make it clear that is what God wants?

 

[The Liturgist]

Since the Church was ruled out, doesn't that rule out Holy Tradition regarding @concretecamper's question?

Well, firstly, I was replying how I would answer the question, not subject to the strictures that @concretecamper imposed upon his own answers.

Although interestingly from a liturgical Protestant, Assyrian or Old Catholic perspective I believe the answer to your question would be “no,” since these churches tend to regard there as being a multiplicity of churches, also incuding the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, that participate in a Holy Tradition. Of course, collectively these disparate churches are regarding as unified invisibly or on the basis of apostolic succession, or through another model of ecclesiology. I have heard that historically some canonical Oriental Orthodox churches have also felt this way, and the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, which is a Syriac Orthodox jurisdiction among the Nasrani, or St. Thomas Christians of India that is in full communion with the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, a denomination among the St. Thomas Christians that is a member of the Anglican Communion, obviously feels this way, considering that their main communion partner is an Anglican church.*

*Of course some might argue that this fact makes the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, better known by the name of the town where its cathedral is located, Thoyizoor, is not actually a West Syriac Orthodox church but rather an Anglican church that uses the West Syriac Orthodox liturgy, but on this point I feel compelled to disagree, since using an Orthodox liturgy constitutes an act of correct glorification, but nonetheless, many would make such an argument.

 

[The Liturgist]

Because God only told Noah to build an ark. Just like God only told Abraham to sacrifice his son. Just like God only told Moses to speak to a rock to get water. Just like God only told Solomon to build a temple. Just like God only told Jonah to go to Nineveh.

That seems to contradict your previously stated position of sufficiency of scripture.

 

[ozso]

Well, firstly, I was replying how I would answer the question, not subject to the strictures that @concretecamper imposed upon his own answers.

Then you've taken it into entirely sperate territory and thus an entirely separate discussion.

Although interestingly from a liturgical Protestant, Assyrian or Old Catholic perspective I believe the answer to your question would be “no,” since these churches tend to regard there as being a multiplicity of churches, also incuding the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox and the Roman Catholics, that participate in a Holy Tradition. Of course, collectively these disparate churches are regarding as unified invisibly or on the basis of apostolic succession, or through another model of ecclesiology. I have heard that historically some canonical Oriental Orthodox churches have also felt this way, and the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, which is a Syriac Orthodox jurisdiction among the Nasrani, or St. Thomas Christians of India that is in full communion with the Mar Thoma Syrian Church, a denomination among the St. Thomas Christians that is a member of the Anglican Communion, obviously feels this way, considering that their main communion partner is an Anglican church.*

*Of course some might argue that this fact makes the Malankara Independent Syrian Church, better known by the name of the town where its cathedral is located, Thoyizoor, is not actually a West Syriac Orthodox church but rather an Anglican church that uses the West Syriac Orthodox liturgy, but on this point I feel compelled to disagree, since using an Orthodox liturgy constitutes an act of correct glorification, but nonetheless, many would make such an argument.

As usual I see you know the names of a lot of churches, places, people and events, but I don't know what your point is.

 

[ozso]

Because God only told Noah to build an ark. Just like God only told Abraham to sacrifice his son. Just like God only told Moses to speak to a rock to get water. Just like God only told Solomon to build a temple. Just like God only told Jonah to go to Nineveh.

That seems to contradict your previously stated position of sufficiency of scripture.

Sorry but that does not compute.

 

[The Liturgist]

Sorry but that does not compute.

The information in the New Testament actually does indicate that these are not one-time events like their counterparts in the Old Testament, and thus you are effectively imposing an external interpretation onto the scripture in these cases.

 

[The Liturgist]

Then you've taken it into entirely sperate territory and thus an entirely separate discussion.

As usual I see you know the names of a lot of churches, places, people and events, but I don't know what your point is.

My point is that the answer to your question, according to the faith of those specific churches, was “no”, since in their case Holy Tradition is larger than the ecclesiastical identity of their denomination. Whereas in Eastern Orthodoxy or most of Oriental Orthodoxy, or in the case of some confessional Lutheran churches, Holy Tradition has become connected to the ecclesiastical identity of their communion (which is to say, denomination or denominational grouping) but not their specific local jurisdiction. So in the former model, both the Anglicans and the liturgical Reformed churches might regard each other as legitimate participants in Holy Tradition, whereas in the latter model, all of the participants in Holy Tradition are of the same denomination or denominational grouping, but individual jurisdictions in full communion with each other would regard those other churches they are in full communion with as legitimate participants in and practitioners of Holy Tradition (for example, among confessional Lutherans, the LCMS, LCC and AALC regard each other as such, and among Eastern Orthodox the various Orthodox churches like the Church of Georgia, the Belarussian Orthodox Church, the Antiochian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Church in America generally regard each other as being legitimate participants in, and practitioners of, Holy Communion).

Does that, I hope, clear things up?

 

[ozso]

My point is that the answer to your question, according to the faith of those specific churches, was “no”, since in their case Holy Tradition is larger than the ecclesiastical identity of their denomination. Whereas in Eastern Orthodoxy or most of Oriental Orthodoxy, or in the case of some confessional Lutheran churches, Holy Tradition has become connected to the ecclesiastical identity of their communion (which is to say, denomination or denominational grouping) but not their specific local jurisdiction. So in the former model, both the Anglicans and the liturgical Reformed churches might regard each other as legitimate participants in Holy Tradition, whereas in the latter model, all of the participants in Holy Tradition are of the same denomination or denominational grouping, but individual jurisdictions in full communion with each other would regard those other churches they are in full communion with as legitimate participants in and practitioners of Holy Tradition (for example, among confessional Lutherans, the LCMS, LCC and AALC regard each other as such, and among Eastern Orthodox the various Orthodox churches like the Church of Georgia, the Belarussian Orthodox Church, the Antiochian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Church in America generally regard each other as being legitimate participants in, and practitioners of, Holy Communion).

Does that, I hope, clear things up?

Not really I'm afraid because it doesn't follow the conversation I was having or my line of thought regarding the conversation.

 

[ozso]

The information in the New Testament actually does indicate that these are not one-time events like their counterparts in the Old Testament, and thus you are effectively imposing an external interpretation onto the scripture in these cases.

Okay what are the NT counterparts?

And just for clarification @Guojing was bringing up his two gospels hyper-dispensationalist view that the commandments of Christ were only to the nation of Israel and therefore don't apply to gentile Christians. So if you're following the commandments of the OT and those of Jesus, then why aren't you building an ark as God commanded?

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

The ways through which God delivers salvation are manifold; Martin Luther expressed this in his explanation of the 3rd article of the Apostles Creed: I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true.

Salvation is not limited to Scripture, nor can Scripture alone convey grace; it is clear from Scripture that as Luther summed things up above, that the Holy Spirit is always required. The Holy Spirit works through Word and Sacrament ministry (the Church, the Bible. Earlier someone said water baptism is essential; no argument, but it is not entirely essential. God's grace knows no bounds; the good thief on the cross beside Jesus did not have the benefit of baptism.

That being said, why would anyone who has faith reject any of the means of grace such as Baptism, Communion, Confession, hearing and studying God's word, and fellowshiping within the Church; yet many do.

Salvation; sanctification/justification are continually delivered in manifold yet very synergistic ways.

 

[ozso]

That being said, why would anyone who has faith reject any of the means of grace such as Baptism, Communion, Confession, hearing and studying God's word, and fellowshiping within the Church; yet many do.

That makes no sense to me. Christianity is supposed to be a way of life one wants to follow by way of following Jesus.

 

[Guojing]

Earlier someone said water baptism is essential; no argument, but it is not entirely essential. God's grace knows no bounds; the good thief on the cross beside Jesus did not have the benefit of baptism.

What most do not realize is that water baptism did not originate with John the Baptist nor with Jesus. The people of Israel knew exactly what John was doing. The Pharisees did as well, but they did not know why.

“And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?” – John 1:25

The Pharisees knew that before the coming kingdom there would come a messenger who would clean the house of Israel in order for them to enter the ‘holy priesthood’ and take their rightful position as the ‘Priests of the Lord’

“But ye shall be named the Priests of the LORD: men shall call you the Ministers of our God: ye shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, and in their glory shall ye boast yourselves.” – Isaiah 61:6

Originally God excluded only the tribe of Levi to maintain the temple and only a select few of Israel were to be priests. However, it was always God’s intention to make the entire nation a nation of priests to all the world!

“Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation.” – Exodus 19:5-6

It was written in the Levitical law that the priests were to be first washed with water before entering their holy position.

“And Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water.” – Lev 8:6
“And thou shalt bring Aaron and his sons unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and wash them with water.” – Exodus 40:12

So then, John the Baptist came proclaiming the kingdom of God (the kingdom where Israel would be priests) and the remission of sins through water washing.

“John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” – Mark 1:4

John preached his water baptism in the river Jordan for the remission of the sins. However, this water washing was not the only prerequisite for the priesthood.

“And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint him, and sanctify him; that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.” – Exodus 40:13

Under the Levitical law the priests put on holy garments and were anointed with oil after their water baptism, but John the Baptist describes the true anointing with the Holy Ghost:

“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:” – Matthew 3:11

Both the water baptism and the Holy Ghost anointing were necessary requirements as described in the Levitical law in order for Israel to enter the kingdom.

In Luke 7:29-30 submission to water baptism was how believing Israel justified their faith in the coming kingdom as taught by Jesus.

 

[JulieB67]

That being said, why would anyone who has faith reject any of the means of grace

Baptism, Communion, Confession, hearing and studying God's word, and fellowshiping within the Church; yet many do.

Some of these don't not have to be done in a physical church/building. Again, it would seem that people don't understand the significance of the veil being rent from top to bottom. That means anyone can go straight to the Father in Christ's name.

Hebrews 4:14 "Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, That is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession."

Hebrews 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

Hebrews 4:16 "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need."

That's where we find our grace.

The church is the body of Christ/community of believers and it can even be in someone's home.-

I Corinthians 16:19 "The church of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house

Romans 16:5 "Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well beloved Epaenetus , who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ."

You don't greet buildings.

Many "churches" today are not even teaching the word of God as it should be. It's one or two verses surrounded by a personal sermon that has nothing to do with God's overall plan, etc. I always say and I'll say it again, one can sit in a pew an entire lifetime and sometimes only come away being fed milk. That's not church. And if that's the case, you would be better off with a few like minded people who are intent on sincere bible study, fellowship, communion and yes, this can be done at someone's house. And even baptism doesn't have to be done in a building.
As long as they are holding the traditions that were brought forth by the prophets first laying the foundation, and then the disciples/apostles bringing forth Christ's ministry through their letters. Nothing needs to be added to those.

I'm not saying all physical churches are bad, but we have to test them.

And God is very understanding in everyone's circumstances and is the heart knower. He know who's "playing church" and who's not.

Salvation is not limited to Scripture

I think it can be. As Paul notes what Isaiah stated- who hath believed our report? And then he states faith comes from hearing and hearing the word of God. That's how one strengthens their faith.

Many read the scriptures and certainly don't believe. And many do. Once sincere belief has set in repentance (change of heart and mind) should come. It might take others longer than some. But everything laid out in the scriptures sets someone on the path to salvation and yes, with the work of the Holy Spirit. Again, God is the heart knower. You don't need a physical church with that. The early churches met wherever they could.

 

[concretecamper]

although an honest and correct answer would be to refer to Holy Tradition

You would think that the inability to answer the most basic questions about Scripture by using only Scripture would lead people to this conclusion. I think pride will not let them go there. But maybe one day it will happen.

 

[The Liturgist]

The ways through which God delivers salvation are manifold; Martin Luther expressed this in his explanation of the 3rd article of the Apostles Creed: I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true.

Salvation is not limited to Scripture, nor can Scripture alone convey grace; it is clear from Scripture that as Luther summed things up above, that the Holy Spirit is always required. The Holy Spirit works through Word and Sacrament ministry (the Church, the Bible. Earlier someone said water baptism is essential; no argument, but it is not entirely essential. God's grace knows no bounds; the good thief on the cross beside Jesus did not have the benefit of baptism.

That being said, why would anyone who has faith reject any of the means of grace such as Baptism, Communion, Confession, hearing and studying God's word, and fellowshiping within the Church; yet many do.

Salvation; sanctification/justification are continually delivered in manifold yet very synergistic ways.

Ah, doctrinal Orthodoxy. Like balm for the soul

 

[WilliamC]

You would think that the inability to answer the most basic questions about Scripture by using only Scripture would lead people to this conclusion.

Sounds familiar. I think that has already been done for nearly 1500 years already though... started by your so called masters. Don't understand it?......make it up!!! call it sacred tradition and separate it from the truth..Sacred Scripture. When the gig is up, there is only one thing to do...move the goalposts.

I think pride will not let them go there. But maybe one day it will happen.

Pride is always the destroyer of souls. Always before destruction. As I previously stated..as one who was very full of pride, I remember a statement one person said to me years ago, and stung a bit. and I would like to pass it on to anyone who is smug, in other words, full of pride.
Here's what I was told once... "I would love to buy you for what your worth, and sell you for what you think your worth". Still hurts to hear it 30 years later. concretcamper...I would like to pass this wisdom on to you now.
A person who earnestly searches for real truth, will seek out the original source and accept what it relays, not merely concoct dogmas in place of what one cant or wont comprehend ...or make up, to not lose control or power over the masses..so no, no need for.. "But maybe one day it will happen". Blessings!

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Some of these don't not have to be done in a physical church/building. Again, it would seem that people don't understand the significance of the veil being rent from top to bottom. That means anyone can go straight to the Father in Christ's name.

Hebrews 4:14 "Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, That is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession."

Hebrews 4:15 "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."

Hebrews 4:16 "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need."

That's where we find our grace.

The church is the body of Christ/community of believers and it can even be in someone's home.-

I Corinthians 16:19 "The church of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house

Romans 16:5 "Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well beloved Epaenetus , who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ."

You don't greet buildings.

Many "churches" today are not even teaching the word of God as it should be. It's one or two verses surrounded by a personal sermon that has nothing to do with God's overall plan, etc. I always say and I'll say it again, one can sit in a pew an entire lifetime and sometimes only come away being fed milk. That's not church. And if that's the case, you would be better off with a few like minded people who are intent on sincere bible study, fellowship, communion and yes, this can be done at someone's house. And even baptism doesn't have to be done in a building.
As long as they are holding the traditions that were brought forth by the prophets first laying the foundation, and then the disciples/apostles bringing forth Christ's ministry through their letters. Nothing needs to be added to those.

I'm not saying all physical churches are bad, but we have to test them.

And God is very understanding in everyone's circumstances and is the heart knower. He know who's "playing church" and who's not.



I think it can be. As Paul notes what Isaiah stated- who hath believed our report? And then he states faith comes from hearing and hearing the word of God. That's how one strengthens their faith.

Many read the scriptures and certainly don't believe. And many do. Once sincere belief has set in repentance (change of heart and mind) should come. It might take others longer than some. But everything laid out in the scriptures sets someone on the path to salvation and yes, with the work of the Holy Spirit. Again, God is the heart knower. You don't need a physical church with that. The early churches met wherever they could.

The Church is not the building; buildings are where the Church meets. They are a focal point for the congregation; a common place to fellowship and share in the grace of God. A Diocese/Synod are less localized but serve the same purpose: Supporting local congregations.

The Church on earth is made of of both believers and non believers and it is divided into that which we see; the buildings the organizations the works and the short comings; the Church triumphant is made up of all believers both those now living, and those who have gone before (this is the Communion of the Saints). This is also called the Church Triumphant. The Te Deum Laudamus (attributed to St. Ambrose) expresses this concept so well. We need to be vigilant that we too are numbered among all the company of heaven!

 

[The Liturgist]

The Church is not the building; buildings are where the Church meets. They are a focal point for the congregation; a common place to fellowship and share in the grace of God. A Diocese/Synod are less localized but serve the same purpose: Supporting local congregations.

The Church on earth is made of of both believers and non believers and it is divided into that which we see; the buildings the organizations the works and the short comings; the Church triumphant is made up of all believers both those now living, and those who have gone before (this is the Communion of the Saints). This is also called the Church Triumphant. The Te Deum Laudamus (attributed to St. Ambrose) expresses this concept so well. We need to be vigilant that we too are numbered among all the company of heaven!

Indeed, some Eastern Orthodox Christians, to provide disambiguation, refer to the buildings as Temples, which I quite like. Since technically a Parish is the administrative entity that operates the local church building and manages the congregation, which is the assembly of the laity, so saying that parishes are housed in temples clarifies things.

Now historically many church buildings were of the Basillica type, with some actually being conversions of the Roman administrative building known as the Basillica, as the three-aisled design has some nice Trinitarian symbolism and also rather efficiently accomodates Christian worship. However, many others are not bassilcas, technically, or have rather developed beyond the original basillica concept in terms of the utilization of interior space. And the word basillica itself has come to be used in Roman Catholicism as an honorary title for the four massive churches in Rome including the Cathedral Church of St. John Lateran and what is effectively the co-Cathedral of St. Peter’s In the Vatican, along with St. Mary Maggiore and St. Paul-outside-the-Walls, all four of these churches being territory of the Vatican City State (technically, St. John Lateran and the adjacent Lateran Palace and the other two churches outside of the Vatican City proper are extraterritorial posessions, like embassies, but their status is guaranteed by the Lateran Treaty of 1929 and this makes them more permanent than virtually any embassy). The Roman church also created the Minor Basillica as an honorary title for some churches. Furthermore, the Holy Sepulchre Church, which is the cathedral of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem and his Armenian Orthodox counterpart, and also of the Syriac Orthodox and Coptic Orthodox dioceses of that city, and also the headquarters church of the Franciscan Brotherhood that runs the Roman Catholic pilgrimage sites in the Holy Land, is often callled a Basilica, although I believe this is technically inaccurate as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre has a non-standard configuration based on the geographical layout of the Golgotha area and nearby tombs in which our Lord was buried, with the Holy Sepulchre itself located inside an Aedicule, or kiosk, inside a courtyard surrounded by the rest of the church on each side.

 

[JulieB67]

We need to be vigilant that we too are numbered among all the company of heaven!

Of course we do. But we shouldn't need a church to keep us vigilant. If you do than you're not very grounded to begin with. The Holy Spirit is what continues to work and ground us, mature us and we can only do that by staying true to his Word, not straying from it. I suppose some might need help to stay grounded, motivated. I myself am not a one day a week Christian. I'm a Christian 24/7. It's a reality, not a religion.
Yes, fellowship and encouragement and assembling together is a good thing. But they're not necessities for salvation.

If you feel like you need your church to do that for you, so be it. I grew up in a church that taught false doctrines. Again, I'm not saying all are bad but they need to be tested to see if they hold to the traditions that were brought forth in the Word.

We have to decide for ourselves and work out our own salvation as Paul states. We have to study to show ourselves approved and so on. We're on our own personal journey after all. And we have to face God ourselves at Judgement. We can't drag our church with us and blame them if things go badly.

 

[RileyG]

Religion is a relationship with God. I need the Church for word and sacrament. Without it I am spiritually dead.