Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | mouse2 | 50348 | ||
This is as good a place to jump in as any. I applaud your efforts Raven in trying to make your points. Good job. I would like to address points made throughout this dialogue. 1. Denominationalism defined: "Please note that our motives are pure. We have no desire to become isolationists or exclude ourselves from everyone else. We like people. But we cannot defend or embrace the denominational world, because first of all it is based upon an unbiblical philosophy: One writer notes 'a denomination is by definition a part of the whole, hence a party among parties. The theory of denominationalism is that one may be a Christian and a member of the universal and "invisible" church, but by choice may be also a member of a particular segment of "Christianity". That segment will have certain features which distinguishes it from other "Christian" segments. These distinguishing features are what denominate that segment, making it a denomination.' (Pharr p. 8) " Source:www.beavertonchurchofchrist.net/Not_Denomination_1.html 2. Question was basically something like this: Where was the church from the 1st century to the 19th century? "Some have recently tried to argue that the churches of Christ have only existed for approximately three hundred years, and that they are simply an American denomination. Yet someone noted that if the game of baseball were wiped off the face of the earth, and someone discovered the rule book a thousand years from now and restored the game of baseball, would it be a new game? No, people would proclaim, “This game is over a thousand years old” (Spiritual Sword p. 2). The fact of the matter is that churches of Christ are spoken of as being in existence in the first century (Romans 16:16). In addition, all the practices that are associated with the church of Christ (see the identifying marks above) are not practices or doctrines that are 300 years old, rather they are all found in the New Testament! Thus the challenge to someone who makes the above claim would be, “Which doctrine or practice in the churches of Christ is only three hundred years old?” Finally, the church of Christ may be 300 years old in America from the fact that the country itself is only that old! To argue that the church of Christ is only three hundred years old is about as silly as arguing that the marriage relationship based on the Scriptures is only three hundred years old." Source:www.beavertonchurchofchrist.net/The_church_of_Christ.htm Now perhaps someone will be all up in arms about quoting someone else, but why must I reinvent the wheel. I believe these thoughts precisely echo my thougts and I could not have worded it any better. Thank you for your patience in getting this far. Mouse2 |
||||||
2 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 50361 | ||
Greetings Mouse2! I have been reading this thread, but haven't actually contributed as of yet. May I ask a question? Do you actually believe that the Church of Christ is the only true Christian Church? I sincerely fail to see how it differs from any other denomination. It began at a certain point in history and has divided and merged several times (see http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/who.html) for a brief history. Every denomination ever begun felt that they too were 'restoring' the true spirit of the first century church. Usually, all they were doing was overemphasizing one particular point of doctrine. I may not be a member of the 'Church of Christ', but I am most definitely a member of the Body of Christ! I have been for almost 32 years now. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
3 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | mouse2 | 50407 | ||
You wrote: Do you actually believe that the Church of Christ is the only true Christian Church? No - I don’t believe every group that meets wearing the title - church of Christ – is true to Christ’s command for the church. That seems evident in Rev 2 and 3 with the churches in Asia. “What a congregation is presently doing or not doing determines whether or not it is the Lord’s church.” Yes – I do believe that the church of Christ is the only true church. When I speak of the church of Christ I am speaking of the church that Jesus established (Matthew 16:18). Follow me? You wrote: I sincerely fail to see how it differs from any other denomination. It began at a certain point in history and has divided and merged several times (see http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/who.html) for a brief history. The church was begun in the 1st century on the day of Pentecost and false teachers quickly splintered off. Around AD 150, infant baptism was advocated (Roman Catholics). It was from Roman Catholicism that many more denominations sprung up: Lutheran (1530), American Episcopal (1609), Methodist (1739), etc. There are many respects in which the church of Christ differs from denominations. Perhaps I will be able to shed some light. Would you agree that when you are looking for something specific, you are looking for something with particular characteristics? Those characteristics are the specific items of distinction. So then, what would be those items of distinction? 1. Founded by Christ: Matt 16:18 states that Jesus would build His church. Not Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Ellen G. White, etc. 2. Christ as the Head: Eph 1:22-23 “And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and have Him as head over all things to the church.” Not any human heads (i.e. the Pope), associations, committees, etc. 3. Bible as only creed: 2 Tim 3:16-17. No need for anything else, i.e. Book of Mormon, Koran, Watchtower, etc. 4. No human names: 1 Pet 4:16 “…but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name.” Where will you find Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, etc in the Scriptures. More could be listed, but I think this gives pause for thought. You wrote: Every denomination ever begun felt that they too were 'restoring' the true spirit of the first century church. Usually, all they were doing was overemphasizing one particular point of doctrine. I am not interested in what anyone felt they were doing. I am interested in the truth. Certainly, many people felt they were right with God in the days of Noah, yet only 8 people made it onto the ark (2 Peter 2:5) Jesus has made it clear the way is narrow (Matt 7:13-14), narrow indeed. Scripture predicts the apostasy to come (2 Peter 3:16; 1 Tim 4:1-3 – is that not Catholicism’s doctrine?; 2 Tim 4:2-4; Matt 7:22). Do you still fail to see any differences? Mouse2 |
||||||
4 | need for a bible-anyone | Bible general Archive 1 | srbaegon | 50418 | ||
Hello Mouse2 The Plymouth Brethren have said the same thing since their beginning concerning purity, simplicity, and truth. Guess what? They are as much (sometimes more) of a denomination as those they rail against. I should know--I'm one of them. I see the very same symptoms in the Churches of Christ. Steve |
||||||