Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | srbaegon | 149099 | ||
Hello Doc, Rant? Was it really? :-) "Ecumenism has even more serious flaws than does denominationalism." Most view ecumenism as a system way to convince denominations of jettisoning propositional truth in order to attain unity, or to attain unity because they have already jettisoned truth. You gave an excellent Biblical definition of ecumenism--"passionately promote unity in the Holy Spirit"--though you applied it to the local church only. Why not rather "passionately promote unity" between your local church and another local church? They are your brethren in Christ. Should not the same courtesy be extended to them as to those with whom you fellowship regularly? Steve |
||||||
2 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | DocTrinsograce | 149138 | ||
Dear Brother Steve, I use the term "rant" because this person repeatedly brings this topic up, accomplishing nothing but to elicit hard feelings in those whose denominational affiliation has significance for them. (I don't see Paul giving this approach as appropriate for helping to build up weaker brothers.) Furthermore, such posts are rants because they are full of criticism while lacking viable, Scriptural alternatives. In almost every case, the epistles were written to a single church. What you and I would call a "local" church. Jesus, Himself, addressed individual churches in His messages through the apostle John. Since those were the situations that were being addressed, a proper hermeneutic would begin to seek application within that context. Furthermore, this is the primary issue that church-attenders face, since the greatest interaction is with fellow believers in the same congregation. If a local congregation is unable to achieve unity in itself, how can it possibly seek unity on some broader, external basis? The appropriate behavior associated with believers with a non-denominational stance is to avoid becoming a member or submitting to a denomination or a church that subordinates itself to a larger human structure. Next, a believer ought to work to submit appropriately to the elders and shepherd of the flock in which he is serving, while earnestly seeking to walk in love with the brethren. Then, a believer should avail himself to manifesting love to surrounding (important distinction, that) congregations, but not with any other objective than to serve. Saving faith always manifests itself in obedience. Obedience always manifests itself in holiness. Holiness always manifests itself in worship. The Lord works these things out in local congregations according to His will -- while taking little note of historical associations, denominational affiliation, or the careful plans of man. In conclusion, if you study church history, you will understand why this is a particularly important subject to Baptists. I have other posts to answer, but that will have to do for tonight. :-) Thank you for your patient attention, brother. In Him, Doc PS Here's a very interesting set of lectures by a former president of the United States on this very topic: http://www.reformedreader.org/history/adams/btrtoc.htm |
||||||
3 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | JCrichton | 149156 | ||
"In almost every case, the epistles were written to a single church. What you and I would call a "local" church. Jesus, Himself, addressed individual churches in His messages through the apostle John. Since those were the situations that were being addressed, a proper hermeneutic would begin to seek application within that context." Hi, Doc! If I understand you correctly (see above) you are saying that there were only seven groups/local churches that were having problems so Jesus addressed them and ignore the others that were doing well? ...and the epistles... you are saying that they were only applicable to the very group/local church to which they were addressed hence, when Paul or any of the others would say something like "as I teach in all the churches" or "read at other church," these were mere catch phrases? I am not being critical... I truly want to understand your statement! God Bless! Angel |
||||||
4 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | DocTrinsograce | 149207 | ||
Hi, Angel... I'm afraid my ability to adequately word-smith a given concept leaves something to be desired. Thank you for asking me to clarify. Lord willing, my explanations will improve. I did not mean that the epistles only have application to those to whom they were addressed. I do not mean that at all. You use the word "application." Before one can find a way to apply the truths of Scripture, one must discover their relevance today. Before one can discover the relevance of Scriptural truths to today, one must understand their relevance to the people to whom they were originally written. Proper hermeneutics begins with solid exegesis. Many hermeneutical errors are made because they are not controlled by good exegesis. People frequently start with the "here and now," and read meanings into the texts that were never intended. The correct approach is to begin with the "there and then," and understand what was intended by the texts at the time they were penned. Any given text can never mean what it never meant. Solid exegesis always seeks the original meaning of the text. After the original intent of a passage of Scripture is understood, then it is possible to understand its relevance to us today. Therefore, when we read an epistle we ask "who" wrote it and to "whom" was it written, "when" it was written, "why" it was written, and "what" does it say. After -- and only after -- we understand the answers to these questions as well as possible, we can begin to find relevance to us today. The primary relevance always begins within the same context. This is the point I am making. Let me repeat, for emphasis: The primary relevance always begins within the same context. (Note that I did not say it is the only relevance, or that there were no other ways that it is relevant.) After the relevance is found, then application can be appropriately derived. Therefore, look, for example, at the first epistle of Paul to the church in Corinth. We know it was Paul (v1:1) and we know it was to a single church (v1:2). Let us look at an early admonition in this epistle: Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. (1 Corinthians 1:10) Paul wrote this with a specific congregation in mind, with a specific set of problems in mind. Thus, the *primary* relevance to us should be in how this pleading request of Paul's applies to us in our own congregation. That is where it has the most pertinence. Now, that does not mean that we *cannot* extend this to circles beyond our own congregation, only that as we extend it beyond its original scope, the applicability becomes much less reasonable. I simply take issue with the fact that people apply these sorts of passages to denominations, which is entirely unwarranted. Paul had never seen a denomination, nor had the concept entered his mind. The epistles to the Corinthians are first and foremost relevant to local church life! On the high church side, there is at least a concerted effort to be "joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." That is because people are required to affirm a specific catechism. On the low church side, there are statements of faith that people must -- more or less -- affirm. (However, the less you control this, the less homogeneous a church becomes. On the other hand, the more you control such things, the more easily it all becomes fleshly legalism.) The people that decry denominationalism the most are frequently the least "joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." As the old adage goes, physician, heal thyself! Well, I hope the waters are a little less muddy than before! In Him, Doc |
||||||
5 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | JCrichton | 149226 | ||
Hi, Doc! The reason I asked is because I've come across a similar idea... I better understand your perspective, and as I said that my query was not being critical, I thank you for your patience and your generosity. God Bless! Angel |
||||||