# What is the church?



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

What is the church?  Where did it start? Who started? For what reason? Does it have authority?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2020)

What was it called before it was "the Church?"


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 30, 2020)

Not exactly sure when is started other than Jesus saying Peter was the rock upon which he would build his Church. Also Paul was writing all those churches but I don't know if he started them.


----------



## bobocat (Jan 30, 2020)

I believe Jesus started the church on the shores of Galilee when he called out the two to follow him.  I believe the authority was left to the church since the church could be the only one he could be with until the end of the age that is mentioned in Matt 28. I believe it was started to bring God glory. Ephesians 3:21.     But I could be wrong also.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 30, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Not exactly sure when is started other than Jesus saying Peter was the rock upon which he would build his Church. Also Paul was writing all those churches but I don't know if he started them.



I don't think Jesus called Peter the rock that the church was built upon.  My reading of the scripture leads me to believe that the proclamation that Peter made "thou are the Christ, the son of the living God" was the founding principle of the church.  I believe that Jesus is talking about the statement of faith being the rock that his church is built upon.  It was not to designate that Peter was the foundation. In Eph 2:20, we learn that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and phophets and that Jesus is the chief cornerstone.  Apostles and prophets are plural.  If the rock were Peter, would it not read the Apostle and the prophets?

Matt 16....
*15*He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
*16*Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
*17*Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed _this_ to you, but My Father who is in heaven. *18*And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not [g]prevail against it. *19*And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth [h]will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

So can we agree that Jesus Christ started the church?


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

bobocat said:


> I believe Jesus started the church on the shores of Galilee when he called out the two to follow him.  I believe the authority was left to the church since the church could be the only one he could be with until the end of the age that is mentioned in Matt 28. I believe it was started to bring God glory. Ephesians 3:21.     But I could be wrong also.


I dont want anyone to think we are "wrong".  I try to learn from these threads.  Good stuff.


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

What did the first church look like?  What do we know about it?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 30, 2020)

Madman said:


> What did the first church look like?  What do we know about it?


it was filled with a bunch of reformed jewish believers, who went out and preached the gospel to other jews who were unbelievers


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> it was filled with a bunch of reformed jewish believers, who went out and preached the gospel to other jews who were unbelievers


It started out with 12 plus, we know that.


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

Once Christ ascended how was there any assurance that his TRUE teachings would continue?  Maybe by his 3 year teaching of the 12?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

The Church. ( Or do you want your train pulling in another station?) The Church is the instrument ( institution) that systematically provided and assembled for the truth, (regards a pedagogy or teachings and doctrine) from varied sources.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I don't think Jesus called Peter the rock that the church was built upon.  My reading of the scripture leads me to believe that the proclamation that Peter made "thou are the Christ, the son of the living God" was the founding principle of the church.  I believe that Jesus is talking about the statement of faith being the rock that his church is built upon.  It was not to designate that Peter was the foundation. In Eph 2:20, we learn that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and phophets and that Jesus is the chief cornerstone.  Apostles and prophets are plural.  If the rock were Peter, would it not read the Apostle and the prophets?
> 
> Matt 16....
> *15*He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
> ...



I like this answer as it is a good brief explanation of the classic dissenter view on what the church is founded apon,   that I and a billion Christians have disagreed with. Not to derail the tread I will say little else on it.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> I like this answer as it is a good brief explanation of the classic dissenter view on what the church is founded apon,   that I and a billion Christians have disagreed with. Not to derail the tread I will say little else on it.


The rest of christendom will not align 100% with Rome on Peter's prominence.  The history of that and the pope is very interesting.  My Roman brothers take umbridge at my views.

My question is; did Christ put anyone in charge of the church he founded?


----------



## Israel (Jan 31, 2020)

Any and all that are not of this world...even as He...is not of this world. Sent into it as testimony to the truth, and testimony against what denies it.


----------



## Geno67 (Jan 31, 2020)

Not known what it was built to worship or who was occupying the site. Who knows if they had authority - it was 12000 years ago - no written records.


https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...ekli-tepe-oldest-monument-turkey-archaeology/


----------



## Israel (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> The rest of christendom will not align 100% with Rome on Peter's prominence.  The history of that and the pope is very interesting.  My Roman brothers take umbridge at my views.
> 
> My question is; did Christ put anyone in charge of the church he founded?



And hath put all _things_ under his feet, and gave him _to be_ the head over all _things_ to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

Emphasis mine.

The church is what is "made up" of that which sees him so...not only not needing a vicarious presence...but forswearing it...as He is known to such as (please forgive the superlative that cannot do justice) the _most present._

_In Him we live, and move, and have our being._


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I don't think Jesus called Peter the rock that the church was built upon.  My reading of the scripture leads me to believe that the proclamation that Peter made "thou are the Christ, the son of the living God" was the founding principle of the church.  I believe that Jesus is talking about the statement of faith being the rock that his church is built upon.  It was not to designate that Peter was the foundation. In Eph 2:20, we learn that the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and phophets and that Jesus is the chief cornerstone.  Apostles and prophets are plural.  If the rock were Peter, would it not read the Apostle and the prophets?
> 
> Matt 16....
> *15*He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
> ...


Doesn't Peter mean rock?

One thing else I noticed is that scripture didn't reveal who Jesus was to Peter. Man didn't reveal who Jesus was to Peter. Therefore, the Church can't reveal who Jesus is.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> The Church. ( Or do you want your train pulling in another station?) The Church is the instrument ( institution) that systematically provided and assembled for the truth, (regards a pedagogy or teachings and doctrine) from varied sources.


We've got to make sure we stay spiritual enough to worship God and not the Church. Just another off topic I though about.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

John 1:42
And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone.

Kephas, meaning a rock, of Aramaic origin.

1 Corinthians 15:5 
and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.

I guess it could be just a coincidence that Jesus named Peter the rock and that he built His Church on "another" rock.


----------



## BeerThirty (Jan 31, 2020)

The church is nothing more than a bunch of believers coming together. Church can be an official building, it can also be my home or yours... This is my belief, but on the contrary I know Catholicism took this to a whole new level back in the day. God's "church" has no authority, it is mankind who gave authority to the church.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> We've got to make sure we stay spiritual enough to worship God and not the Church. Just another off topic I though about.




And conversely we should make sure we stay "spiritual enough"??? to worship God and not our use of scripture or our glorification of bible study as to call it worship and the  first essence of what is church. Just another though added to your though and off topic subject.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> The rest of christendom will not align 100% with Rome on Peter's prominence.  The history of that and the pope is very interesting.  My Roman brothers take umbridge at my views.
> 
> My question is; did Christ put anyone in charge of the church he founded?


 
Your answer is the 12 apostles... did I get that correctly?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> And conversely we should make sure we stay "spiritual enough"??? to worship God and not our use of scripture or our glorification of bible study as to call it worship and the essence of what is church. Just another though added to your though and off topic subject.


I know, it's an enigma. Peter was revealed by God, Paul was revealed by God. Neither by man. No revelation from man.

Yet without scripture and the Church where would man be?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Your answer is the 12 apostles... did I get that correctly?


Which one of those 12 did he give the key to the Kingdom to? Which one said, we need to replacement for Judas? Which of the 12 did Jesus first tell to feed His sheep?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Doesn't Peter mean rock?
> 
> One thing else I noticed is that scripture didn't reveal who Jesus was to Peter. Man didn't reveal who Jesus was to Peter. Therefore, the Church can't reveal who Jesus is.



yes, the original word used means stone.  The Bible used 2 different words in that scripture where Jesus was talking to Peter... 

Petros - Peter - Stone is the masculine form of the word

petra - rock - feminine   

Why two different words if Peter where to be the foundation of the church.

and if Peter were the "Boss" appointed by Christ, then why did Paul and others scold him for his actions in Acts 11?  Was Peter in charge of Paul?  Did Paul need to get permission from Peter to travel and preach in Asia? 

What of the other disciples?  Was Steven under the authority of Peter as he was being stoned?  Thomas as he traveled to India?

You are correct Art that no one but God revealed to Peter who Jesus was.  For Peter to make the proclamation that Jesus was the ONE.  The Messiah.  The Chosen One of God.  That is a huge step of faith.  and one the rabbis would have killed Peter for saying.  But Jesus said he was blessed.

So who reveals Jesus today as Messiah?  Who points out that He is Lord of Lords, the King of kings... the Great I Am?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Which one said, we need to replacement for Judas?



we have discussed this in the past... was that appointment the correct appoinment, or a mistake?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Geno67 said:


> Not known what it was built to worship or who was occupying the site. Who knows if they had authority - it was 12000 years ago - no written records.
> 
> 
> https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...ekli-tepe-oldest-monument-turkey-archaeology/


that is interesting


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

BeerThirty said:


> The church is nothing more than a bunch of believers coming together. Church can be an official building, it can also be my home or yours... This is my belief



I do believe the "church" is the body of baptized believers, doesn't matter where it meets, I think most christian denominations would agree.



BeerThirty said:


> but on the contrary I know Catholicism took this to a whole new level back in the day. God's "church" has no authority, it is mankind who gave authority to the church.



 Does that mean that the Apostles were not given any authority by Christ?  There are several places we see in Scripture that they executed authority over different church locations.  We see that Christ gave them some authority.

Scripture says that part of the churches responsibility is for the teaching and edification of the saints, it also seems to have the authority to discipline members.

And it is not just the Roman Catholics who believe the church has been given authority, the Lutherans, Anglicans, Episcopalians, Orthodox, Coptics, et al. believe the same way.

We can dig into Scripture for some of those teachings.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Your answer is the 12 apostles... did I get that correctly?


That would be my answer, and I have what I think is a valid reason for the belief.  I am interested in what others believe also.

This goes back to some threads about what constitutes sin, who should be allowed in the church, drinking, tobacco use, dancing.  Who gets to make those decisions?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> yes, the original word used means stone.  The Bible used 2 different words in that scripture where Jesus was talking to Peter...
> 
> Petros - Peter - Stone is the masculine form of the word
> 
> ...



It's still The Father in Heaven, through His Holy Spirit that reveals!


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Israel said:


> The church is what is "made up" of that which sees him so...not only not needing a vicarious presence...but forswearing it...as He is known to such as (please forgive the superlative that cannot do justice) the _most present._



Forgive me but I sometimes get lost in the words.  Are you saying that the church is made up of those who see Christ as the head and not only does the body not need a visible authority on earth, it should reject that authority should it be proclaimed by anyone or anything other than Christ?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> we have discussed this in the past... was that appointment the correct appoinment, or a mistake?



That's the one thing I don't understand about God. All these men keep making a lot of mistakes. They choose the wrong persons, they choose the wrong paths. Yet we are suppose to think that God chooses people when it's usually just a bunch of men doing the choosing.

So did Jesus choose Peter? Did Jesus choose Saul?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> That's the one thing I don't understand about God. All these men keep making a lot of mistakes. They choose the wrong persons, the choose the wrong paths. Yet we are suppose to think that God chooses people when it's usually just a bunch of men doing the choosing.


What wrong person are saying God chose?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

I did not start this thread to cause any problem or for anyone to get ticked, I genuinely enjoy peoples thoughts and beliefs. I do not have to agree with theirs and they certainly do not have to agree with mine, and I am readily prepared to change my beliefs on some things.

Conversations like this are not about salvation, salvation belongs to the Lord, I want to know others beliefs and how they came to them and I would like to share my beliefs and how I have come to them.

God's peace


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> What wrong person are saying God chose?


I'm not saying God chooses the wrong person but men. Men chose Matthias is one example. There are other examples in the Bible where the men choose what they think God wants. Abraham sleeping with Hagar is another example of conceiving the wrong person, etc.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Which one of those 12 did he give the key to the Kingdom to? Which one said, we need to replacement for Judas? Which of the 12 did Jesus first tell to feed His sheep?


Peter.  That is why many say he was the chief Apostle.  When the king left home he would give the keys to the head servant so that all matters could be handled on behalf of the master until his return.

I believe there is evidence that Peter was the head servant, but don't confuse that with believing that his direct bishopric was passed down to the bishop of Rome.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not saying God chooses the wrong person but men. Men chose Matthias is one example. There are other examples in the Bible where the men choose what they think God wants. Abraham sleeping with Hagar is another example of conceiving the wrong person, etc.


Sorry, i misunderstood.  Men do human things, I am still not sure why the choosing of Matthias was a wrong choice.  If it was explained I missed it.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> What wrong person are saying God chose?


What I'm getting at is that sometimes man does what he thinks is God's will when in fact it may not be. Even great men such as those God "chose" for various tasks, often themselves choose the wrong paths.

Reading Paul's letters, it's easy to see that sometimes he is conveying his thoughts and other times those of God. He is a man. Yet we do know that God reveals some things from men and other things directly to us.

I would think it hard for us to sometimes figure it out as well. I mean if Abraham or David couldn't and even Paul sometimes wondered? How then are we not also like them?

In this regards say when a local Church is choosing a minister or even the Pope, how do we really know if it's from God or man?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> What I'm getting at is that sometimes man does what he thinks is God's will when in fact it may not be. Even great men such as those God "chose" for various tasks, often themselves choose the wrong paths.
> 
> Reading Paul's letters, it's easy to see that sometimes he is conveying his thoughts and other times those of God. He is a man. Yet we do know that God reveals some things from men and other things directly to us.
> 
> ...



Now you are getting at the heart of the question.  "What is the church"?
Is my pastor more likely to make a theological error, or are 600+ pastors meeting, praying, discussing Scripture, fasting, some of whom may have know Christ personally and some who knew the Apostles personally, more likeley to make a mistake?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Peter.  That is why many say he was the chief Apostle.  When the king left home he would give the keys to the head servant so that all matters could be handled on behalf of the master until his return.
> 
> I believe there is evidence that Peter was the head servant, but don't confuse that with believing that his direct bishopric was passed down to the bishop of Rome.


Yes, I agree, he was just the head apostle. He was given the key to the Kingdom. Jesus continued to Peter; "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” 

Yet Peter was just a man, just a David was, just as Paul was. They all made terrible mistakes. 

I don't think that Peter being the Rock that the Church was made on made it the Roman Catholic Church. It was just the way Jesus stated it. Maybe a way of giving Peter some special authority. Even with 12 men, considering they were men, one has to be like a leader.

Any time you have a group of men, even if they cast lots, one has to be the leader. It doesn't make his vote any more important.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yes, I agree, he was just the head apostle. He was given the key to the Kingdom. Jesus continued to Peter; "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”



this was spoken to all twelve.  What do you think was meant by that?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Now you are getting at the heart of the question.  "What is the church"?
> Is my pastor more likely to make a theological error, or are 600+ pastors meeting, praying, discussing Scripture, fasting, some of whom may have know Christ personally and some who knew the Apostles personally, more likeley to make a mistake?


Maybe that's why Jesus chose twelve instead of one.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> this was spoken to all twelve.  What do you think was meant by that?



Because Jesus was personally addressing Peter.

He was the first chosen by Jesus;

John 1:43
And he brought him to Jesus. Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, “You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas” (which is translated, A Stone).

He was named "Rock" way before the Last Supper. Jesus said things to Peter at that supper that were addressed directly to Peter and it was more than just bringing him back to the flock.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

I don't think or see Peter's place in the realm of things being any more important than even James or Paul.  I just recognize that God chooses men by grace and not of works.

God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born. He raised Pharoah up for the purpose he made him for.

Jesus choosing and saying what he did to Peter, is just one of those things that I can't explain. Why did Jesus choose Israel? Why is genealogy so important to God? If none of us are chosen for what we are or what we do?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

So when my boss comes in the shop and says Art, go look at the A/C in the computer room, it's in alarm?
Why did he tell men if three more mechanics are in there? Did he want just me to look at it or can I take another mechanic? Is the computer room's computer all of our responsibility?
Does all the other mechanics bare the praise for keeping it running? Even if I'm the one that fixed it?

If I confer with the other mechanics and choose the wrong path, can I blame them?

Who really was my boss addressing, even though he was transferring his authority to me verbally?


----------



## bobocat (Jan 31, 2020)

My take is he called Peter(small stone) but refered to himself as the Rock which he would build upon. 1 Corinthians 3:11


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 31, 2020)

Allow me to throw something else into the conversation. We as believers are considered the church, although I am not defining that specifically, Was Abraham the Father of "our" faith? If so, is he part of our church? We tend to think of the living as the church, but after little consideration, we realize it's more than this. Just something to ponder


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Because Jesus was personally addressing Peter.



John 20:21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”  

Jesus gave His authority to forgive sins to the Apostles, and they forgave sins and healed the sick by Christ's power.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> John 20:21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
> 
> Jesus gave His authority to forgive sins to the Apostles, and they forgave sins and healed the sick by Christ's power.



Does Christ give that power to all who believe in him?  Is the power to heal given to men today?  Or is healing a lost benefit to us?

Did Jesus mean that Peter could look at an unrepentant person and just say their sins were forgiven?  Or where there strings attached?  Did Peter really forgive their sins, or did he recognize when the Holy Spirit had done His work in that person, and their sins were forgiven?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> Allow me to throw something else into the conversation. We as believers are considered the church, although I am not defining that specifically, Was Abraham the Father of "our" faith? If so, is he part of our church? We tend to think of the living as the church, but after little consideration, we realize it's more than this. Just something to ponder



Abram was the father of the Abrahamic convenient but I can't see him as the father of Christianity.  

I have been taught the Church has 3 segments.
(1) the Church militant.  Us here alive
(2) The Church Expectant. Those who have died
(3) The Church Triumphant. Those in the presence of the Father.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Did Jesus mean that Peter could look at an unrepentant person and just say their sins were forgiven?



this may be where the selling of indulgences by the Catholic church came into being.
Where priest thought only they had the power to forgive sins, and began selling that forgiveness to people who were unrepentant.  Just as King James "bought" his forgiveness of sins by paying to have the Bible translated into English


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Abram was the father of the Abrahamic convenient but I can't see him as the father of Christianity.
> 
> I have been taught the Church has 3 segments.
> (1) the Church militant.  Us here alive
> ...



Where are those that have died, if they are not in the presence of God?  Doesn't the Bible teach ' to be absent the body is to be present with God'


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Does Christ give that power to all who believe in him?



I am speaking of forgiving sin specifically. I don't see anywhere in Scripture or tradition that he does.



NE GA Pappy said:


> Is the power to heal given to men today?  Or is healing a lost benefit to us?



Christ can heal whom he chooses by whatever means he chooses.



NE GA Pappy said:


> Did Jesus mean that Peter could look at an unrepentant person and just say their sins were forgiven?  Or where there strings attached?  Did Peter really forgive their sins, or did he recognize when the Holy Spirit had done His work in that person, and their sins were forgiven?


God alone can forgive sins, however it is apparent by Scripture that the authority to forgive sins in his name had been given to the 12.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> this may be where the selling of indulgences by the Catholic church came into being.
> Where priest thought only they had the power to forgive sins, and began selling that forgiveness to people who were unrepentant.  Just as King James "bought" his forgiveness of sins by paying to have the Bible translated into English


Crooked men will always be around, in society, in the police department, in the medical profession, in the priesthood, as pastors.

that is new one, I have never heard that Henry bought his forgiveness.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Abram was the father of the Abrahamic convenient but I can't see him as the father of Christianity.
> 
> I have been taught the Church has 3 segments.
> (1) the Church militant.  Us here alive
> ...


The promise came through his seed. That promise was for us, not the Jews, is the case I would make. However, i'm only thinking about all that for the first time, thinking out loud, so to speak, fishing for thought provoking input


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> The promise came through his seed. That promise was for us, not the Jews, is the case I would make. However, i'm only thinking about all that for the first time, thinking out loud, so to speak, fishing for thought provoking input


You got it!!  Doesn't thinking this "out load" open all kinds of possibilities?  
The reason I say I don't think Abraham could technically be called the father of Christianity is because he did not know Jesus.  There was a promise coming in Christ, and it was for the salvation of the world.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Where are those that have died, if they are not in the presence of God?  Doesn't the Bible teach ' to be absent the body is to be present with God'


Not to pick nits but present with the Lord. If we go there you will have opened a whole nother can of worms.
The conversation moves to the topic of 2 judgments.
for now I will say the church has always taught of a final purification, we die here with sin and still need a little "touch up" before entering into the beatific vision. (The presence of God).  
a.k.a. purgatory.  By the way that is what the selling of indulgences was all about.  They would convince people to pay for "prayers" that would shorten or lighten the time in purgatory.  It was a scam.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> You got it!!  Doesn't thinking this "out load" open all kinds of possibilities?
> The reason I say I don't think Abraham could technically be called the father of Christianity is because he did not know Jesus.  There was a promise coming in Christ, and it was for the salvation of the world.


I would think that there was zero church until Jesus was raised. Just my thinking however, Abraham is interesting in regards to this


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 31, 2020)

I think... that we see two uses of church. One speaks of a church as in regards to a foundation belief .... and the other as to that same foundation but broken down by location, such as "church of" . Although locations define that group by location, it's still the same church


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> God alone can forgive sins, however it is apparent by Scripture that the authority to forgive sins in his name had been given to the 12.



I agree with the highlighted part of your statement, but if God alone can forgive sins, how is it that the Apostles were endowed with the power to forgive sins?  Is it possible that that scripture has a different meaning than the actual forgiveness of sins?  Maybe it means that the Apostles would be so in tune to what God was doing they would know when God had forgiven the sins, and they were just stating that fact?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Is it possible that that scripture has a different meaning than the actual forgiveness of sins? Maybe it means that the Apostles would be so in tune to what God was doing they would know when God had forgiven the sins, and they were just stating that fact?


The Apostles pronounce the forgiveness of God.  Wouldn't Christ be able to give them that ability?  Scripture says he did. For 2000 years the church has believed and taught exactly what the verse says.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I agree with the highlighted part of your statement, but if God alone can forgive sins, how is it that the Apostles endowed with the power to forgive sins?  Is it possible that that scripture has a different meaning than the actual forgiveness of sins?  Maybe it means that the Apostles would be so in tune to what God was doing they would know when God had forgiven the sins, and they were just stating that fact?


If speaking to the 12, what did Jesus mean by this;

"Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” 

Mentioned in Isaiah 22:22 
I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> The Apostles pronounce the forgiveness of God.  Wouldn't Christ be able to give them that ability?  Scripture says he did. For 2000 years the church has believed and taught exactly what the verse says.



anyone with knowledge of the scriptures can pronounce the forgiveness of God.  That doesn't give them the ability to forgive sins.  

If Jesus gave Peter the ability to forgive sins, did He also give Peter the ability to pass that authority down to others?  Is there scripture to back that thought?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Is it possible that that scripture has a different meaning than the actual forgiveness of sins?


Why would we doubt what Holy Scripture teaches?  Do we discount the Word of God because it goes against what we have believed for so long? 
Better yet, does Jesus Christ have the authority and the ability to allow someone else to pronounce his forgiveness.  We do see that he has put the Apostles in charge at his resurrection.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> If speaking to the 12, what did Jesus mean by this;
> 
> "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
> 
> ...



what exists in both heaven and on earth that could be bound or loosed?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Why would we doubt what Holy Scripture teaches?  Do we discount the Word of God because it goes against what we have believed for so long?
> Better yet, does Jesus Christ have the authority and the ability to allow someone else to pronounce his forgiveness.  We do see that he has put the Apostles in charge at his resurrection.



there is a great deal of difference in PRONOUNCING forgiveness and GRANTING forgiveness.

as for the Apostles being in charge of Christ Resurrection.... HUH????


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> anyone with knowledge of the scriptures can pronounce the forgiveness of God.  That doesn't give them the ability to forgive sins.


 Agreed.  Only those given the authority can do it.  Do we agree that Christ gave the apostles the Authority to Forgive sins?



NE GA Pappy said:


> If Jesus gave Peter the ability to forgive sins, did He also give Peter the ability to pass that authority down to others?  Is there scripture to back that thought?


 I believe a better question is "why would Jesus give anyone the authority to forgive sins in his name"?  And if it was important enough to to be done for one generation would it not be important enough to continue until his return?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> there is a great deal of difference in PRONOUNCING forgiveness and GRANTING forgiveness.
> 
> as for the Apostles being in charge of Christ Resurrection.... HUH????


charge at his resurrection.

maybe AFTER his resurrection would have been better.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> there is a great deal of difference in PRONOUNCING forgiveness and GRANTING forgiveness.


I was using theological language as to how the church says the forgiveness of a priest is done.  i.e. the priest pronounces the forgiveness of God, because they have been given the authority by Christ to do that.

But lets go back to the literal language in Scripture.

John 20:23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”
  If you want to use the language of Scripture then the Apostles were given the authority to forgive sins on their own, but we know there is more to it then that, so how was Jesus able to convey it to them?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Why would we doubt what Holy Scripture teaches?  Do we discount the Word of God because it goes against what we have believed for so long?
> Better yet, does Jesus Christ have the authority and the ability to allow someone else to pronounce his forgiveness.  We do see that he has put the Apostles in charge at his resurrection.


If the apostles could forgive sins, did that also grant salvation? I mean if the apostles were in charge of that, then is is like being in charge of Christ's resurrection. 

I guess I'm trying to see the difference between salvation(Christ) and forgiveness of sins(apostles.)


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Pappy,
What have you been taught that Jesus meant by John 20:23?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> If the apostles could forgive sins, did that also grant salvation? I mean if the apostles were in charge of that, then is is like being in charge of Christ's resurrection.
> 
> I guess I'm trying to see the difference between salvation(Christ) and forgiveness of sins(apostles.)


I don't see where that authority was given to them.  There is a difference in the forgiveness of sins and salvation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> what exists in both heaven and on earth that could be bound or loosed?


I have no idea what "bound and loosed" even mean?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> I don't see where that authority was given to them.  There is a difference in the forgiveness of sins and salvation.


And what difference is that? Isn't salvation dependent on forgiveness of sins?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> And what difference is that? Isn't salvation dependent on forgiveness of sins?


salvation is forever, forgiveness of sin may be temporary.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> salvation is forever, forgiveness of sin may be temporary.


So Christ died for our sins. If one believes Christ died for his sins, then those sins are forgiven, right?

From that point forward, why would a believer need his sins forgiven? If salvation is forever, how does all of this future temporary sin forgiveness fall into play?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> So Christ died for our sins. If one believes Christ died for his sins, then those sins are forgiven, right?
> 
> From that point forward, why would a believer need his sins forgiven? If salvation is forever, how does all of this future temporary sin forgiveness fall into play?


So if you sin tomorrow will you need to repent for that sin or will your request to be forgiven today for the sins you commit today cover tomorrow's sin also?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

I guess if a fellow man came up to me today and said "Art, I just started believing that Jesus died for my sins." I could in turn say "very well, your sins are forgiven."

What I don't understand about John 20:23 would be if I didn't believe they were sincere and could say, "your sins are not forgiven." I couldn't nor would I say that. 
I can't see where any man can do the second part of John 20:23.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> So if you sin tomorrow will you need to repent for that sin or will your request to be forgiven today for the sins you commit today cover tomorrow's sin also?


Didn't you say salvation is forever? Either it is or it isn't.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jan 31, 2020)

"For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition _between us"_

"Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond _nor_ free: but Christ _is_ all, and in all."

All true believers of any time and any place are one family(church) and brothers and sisters in Christ.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> this may be where the selling of indulgences by the Catholic church came into being.
> Where priest thought only they had the power to forgive sins, and began selling that forgiveness to people who were unrepentant.  Just as King James "bought" his forgiveness of sins by paying to have the Bible translated into English




The problem Martin had with indulgences was it indulgences themselves or their abuse by the church authorities? I understand that Martin did have problems with their abuse, but not the indulgence itself.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> anyone with knowledge of the scriptures can pronounce the forgiveness of God.  That doesn't give them the ability to forgive sins.
> 
> If Jesus gave Peter the ability to forgive sins, did He also give Peter the ability to pass that authority down to others?  Is there scripture to back that thought?



I think that if you view the new church as an institution similar in functions as the Jewish Temple your questions will have a place to land with possible answer. Jesus was a Jew, and a practicing one and so were the apostles. It follows then that the institution that the Christians frequented were types they were use to and that preformed similar functions. The Jewish Temple did minister to the forgiveness of sin, as per God's instructions via Moses. The Christians had the same institution and it also ministered to the forgiveness of sin as per Jesus's instructions ( binding and loosing).

So for many Christians God  ministers to his flock  via the sacraments Jesus instituted for the Christian Church.

Peter by himself could not forgive sin, but as minister of the Church he could. Any Christian can break bread, but when Peter or his ministers do as presiding for the body when they break bread it is not ordinary  but rather it is their role with the intent Jesus had within context of the church body.

I do doubt that you will even consider this a possibility... but again think of what could the church be as a body other than a type of institution that Jesus and the apostles frequented or followed and for which they knew what the different rites and offices provided for them.  It is doubtful they would come up with a TV style church for example.... not wait,--- impossible. It is also impossible they would have come up with what we know as the worship of dissenting churches today... impossible.

Jesus was the fulfillment of the law... The institutional algorithm of the law did not change... but the content did, because the context changed. So it is not Peter or anyone individual that forgives, or declares anathema, it is the church as an institution that ministers to believers and the world.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

gemcgrew said:


> "For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition _between us"_
> 
> "Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond _nor_ free: but Christ _is_ all, and in all."
> 
> All true believers of any time and any place are one family(church) and brothers and sisters in Christ.


Was that partition man-made?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 31, 2020)

So Madman. Would you agree that the Church leader in India is Thomas? And in England and Russia it is Andrew? In Greece it is Paul? In Egypt Mark? In Palestine  James and Peter? And John to us and future nations?

How do you see it? Come on bros.  Let  your light shine.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I guess if a fellow man came up to me today and said "Art, I just started believing that Jesus died for my sins." I could in turn say "very well, your sins are forgiven."


 then I guess you are a bishop or priest in apostolic succession.



Artfuldodger said:


> What I don't understand about John 20:23 would be if I didn't believe they were sincere and could say, "your sins are not forgiven." I couldn't nor would I say that.
> I can't see where any man can do the second part of John 20:23.


See above


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Didn't you say salvation is forever? Either it is or it isn't.


Back to can you loose your salvation?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> So Madman. Would you agree that the Church leader in India is Thomas? And in England and Russia it is Andrew? In Greece it is Paul? In Egypt Mark? In Palestine  James and Peter? And John to us and future nations?
> 
> How do you see it? Come on bros.  Let  your light shine.


I don't know.  I'd have to reread what history says.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> anyone with knowledge of the scriptures can pronounce the forgiveness of God.


But the question at hand is; did Jesus give the authority to forgive sins?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> But the question at hand is; did Jesus give the authority to forgive sins?


Again my question is, what good would it do for those in authority to forgive me of my sins, if they can't grant me salvation?


----------



## NCHillbilly (Jan 31, 2020)

IMO, "The Church" is that political organization that screwed religion up for everybody.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Back to can you loose your salvation?


I don't think you can loose your salvation from future sinning, just if you stop believing.  The prerequisite for sin forgiveness is believing. That's what salvation is. The forgiveness of sins as a result of believing that Jesus died for those sins.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> So if you sin tomorrow will you need to repent for that sin or will your request to be forgiven today for the sins you commit today cover tomorrow's sin also?


God has already forgiven me of all of my sins. I now pray,"thank you God for forgiving me of my sins." I no longer ask God to forgive me of my sins.

If constant confession is a prerequisite to salvation, we are all doomed.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Again my question is, what good would it do for those in authority to forgive me of my sins, if they can't grant me salvation?


Because it is not theirs to grant.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't think you can loose your salvation from future sinning, just if you stop believing.  The prerequisite for sin forgiveness is believing. That's what salvation is. The forgiveness of sins as a result of believing that Jesus died for those sins.


Once saved always saved is one view.  I don't have it but it is one view.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> God has already forgiven me of all of my sins. I now pray,"thank you God for forgiving me of my sins." I no longer ask God to forgive me of my sins.
> 
> If constant confession is a prerequisite to salvation, we are all doomed.


Isn't that part of the Lord's prayer.  "...forgive us our tresspasses......."


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Isn't that part of the Lord's prayer.  "...forgive us our tresspasses......."


I look at the Lord's prayer as an example. I pray from my heart using that example.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Because it is not theirs to grant.


How can they forgive me of my sins yet not grant me salvation? I'll just let the entity that grants me salvation forgive my sins. That being said, why ask God to forgive you if it's the men in the Church that have been given that authority?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I look at the Lord's prayer as an example. I pray from my heart using that example.


Ok.  "When you pray, pray.like this,  our Father...."


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> How can they forgive me of my sins yet not grant me salvation? I'll just let the entity that grants me salvation forgive my sins. That being said, why ask God to forgive you if it's the men in the Church that have been given that authority?


Ok.  That works too


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

If my sins can be forgiven by a priest or an apostle, why should I have to ask God for forgiveness also?   If God grants me forgiveness of my sins, why should I ask a human for forgiveness of my sins?

Are you saying when Jesus told the woman caught in adultery that her sins were forgiven, she wasn't granted salvation?

If you are tying the apostles forgiveness of sins to be a type of the rabbi forgiveness of sins, are you saying that the rabbi forgiveness did not lead to salvation?


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

What does Scripture say?  What does John 20:23 say?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> What does Scripture say?  What does John 20:23 say?


Are there any verses that show the disciples forgiving people's sins? Like maybe at the Pentecost or some other event or place?  

Also was Jesus forgiving sins as a man?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Are there any verses that show the disciples forgiving people's sins? Like maybe at the Pentecost or some other event or place?
> 
> Also was Jesus forgiving sins as a man?



there isn't any reference to them forgiving anyones sins that I know of.  Unlike Acts 2 where Peter calls on the crowds to repent....


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

From what I gather from a bit of reading tonight is that some see God as giving Jesus authority to forgive sins;

Mark 2:10
But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." So he said to the man,

That Jesus was acting as man with authority from his Father. Then along those same lines, Jesus grants the disciples the same way;

John 20:21-23
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace _be_ unto you: as _my_ Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22And when He had said this, He breathed on _them,_ and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
23If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the _sins_ of any, they are retained.”


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 31, 2020)

makes you wonder what that 'He breathed on them' means, don't it?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> makes you wonder what that 'He breathed on them' means, don't it?


And this passage was even before the crucifixion and resurrection. If Jesus was acting as just a man in forgiving sins. 

Another view is Jesus said “Receive the Holy Spirit” meaning when it came to them in the future, at the Pentecost.

It hard to just take an obscure passage like that one in John and make it one of the main dogmas of the Church. Now if we had lots of other example where Peter went around forgiving the sins of individuals or Paul forgiving the sins of individuals. But to take that one passage in John and make it a major Church doctrine may be of concern.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 31, 2020)

I don't think it would be right to use Jesus as an example of forgiving sins as a man and then use John 20 where Jesus breaths the Holy Spirit on the apostles to forgive as men.


----------



## Israel (Feb 1, 2020)

Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

If any man see his brother sin a sin _which is_ not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. 

But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because _he does_ not _eat_ from faith; for whatever _is_ not from faith is sin.

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

"and pray for them which despitefully use you..."

How little God is purposed to work with.

He will work with the man who is despitefully used.

He will work with the man, who, then praying in such situation thinks "at least I am one who prays for my enemy".


And He will work with the man who comes to see such self congratulation is vain and unsavory, now repulsive once exposed, and though not able to apprehend what the purer prayer might be, is willing to abide in that place of not knowing, forswearing his need to "feel better about himself" as might come in self congratulation of his own seeming obedience.

And there He may work with a man to deliver him from the many things provoking to thoughts of his own being despitefully used. Teaching him that the very thing used against him to sense being despitefully used, is the very thing causing himself to feel despitefully used, that once need to "feel better about himself". By which he once sensed as insult.

And so he may learn to pray, loving his neighbor as himself, and even enemy, that as he has been brought to this place of deliverance from need to feel better about himself, having learned that had he not had "enemies" to insult his sense of betterness, he might never have learned. And he may begin to thank God.


But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but _weep for yourselves, and for your children. _

The way of deliverance from feeling sorry for oneself...is by full entrance into it, not denying.

While we yet retain any sorrow that Jesus bore the cross, it may only show to ourselves...we are not. But:

For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

That this might be apprehended:

But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

By which God may show his authority over time and we may:

Let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

All I have ever brought to Him, my very total all of all...is selfishness, self care, self pity, treachery, fear, and doubt...


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 1, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> If my sins can be forgiven by a priest or an apostle, why should I have to ask God for forgiveness also?   If God grants me forgiveness of my sins, why should I ask a human for forgiveness of my sins?
> 
> Are you saying when Jesus told the woman caught in adultery that her sins were forgiven, she wasn't granted salvation?
> 
> If you are tying the apostles forgiveness of sins to be a type of the rabbi forgiveness of sins, are you saying that the rabbi forgiveness did not lead to salvation?



You seem to equate the forgiveness of sins and salvation.

I know deep in my heart I will not convince you.  Nevertheless I will try to give you my level and honest answer that you may know it plain.

Forgiveness of sin and salvation are two different things. A Christian is "saved" or justified by the salvific work of our Lord Jesus and for our declaration and our walk  that we believe this. Yet we continue to sin against our bodies and against our born again spirit in Christ. ( Romans 10:9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. ) and Romans 10;10 (For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.



So we are told to confess our sins to each other. (James 5:16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.) 1 Tim 6:12 Fight the good fight of the faith. Take hold of the eternal life to which you were called when you made your good confession in the presence of many witnesses.

Do you notice that "with your mouth" and to each other seems to be important to the gospel writers? They do not say confess to God directly, they say confess to the congregation of saints with your mouth or audibly. Don't you think that seems a bit strange.  But it is not strange.

When we sin who do we injure? Do we injure God? What does sin do to us and the people surrounding us?  1 Cor 6:18 Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a person commits are outside the body, but whoever sins sexually, sins against their own body. So all sins outside of the body injure not only yourself but others. ( Love your neighbor as yourself it should follow that to sin ourselves is also injurious to others--especially the body of believers.) So we should confess or ask forgiveness of our sins to the body of believers which we have injured.)

Now what injury do we cause ourselves  due sin that would so injure others?( 1 Cor 6: 18 Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. ) So the purpose of confession for the forgiveness of sin is to purify the heart and remove "double-mindedness". And this is how we injure others... hearts, our minds, our actions are double minded due to sin. Our declarations are not yea and nay, they are mealy mouthed. We are not fully present in Christ to others and indeed we might just be poison to them.

So why should we confess our sins with our mouths to each other? I submit this is what religious Jews knew in the days of Jesus and that it is still valid today.

When I kept silent,
my bones wasted away
through my groaning all day long.
Psalm 32:3

Whoever conceals their sins does not prosper,
but the one who confesses and renounces them finds mercy.
Proverbs 28:13

The problem for the individual going directly to God is the great tendency to conceal our sins. We spin around them and believe our lies about them even to the point that we in our prayers to God and in silence  think that God has forgiven us. But is it God we injure for our sins?

Now you seem to be stuck that of confessing to a priest or an apostle if I understood correctly. But what are these offices to the body of believers? They preside over it as designated ministers to it and representatives of it which in turn makes them ministers of the Church and representative in the capacity of officials of the Church. If they are representative of the body to which confession is to be made then they can hear ( audibly) the confession of sins on behalf of the body of believers.

Now what power does the body have to remove sin, especially that some say only God has this power? It is one thing to hear confession, it is another that minister of the Church should be said to have the power to forgive sin. Do they have this power. No! The power is in the body of believers of which they are ministers and where God is said to forgive and forget sin because...?


James 5: 16 Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.
This is what the apostle James says as recorded in scripture, "THE PRAYER OF A RIGHTEOUS PERSON IS POWERFUL AND EFFECTIVE."


Now ask yourself in what way has God organized that his forgiveness of sin should take effect in the body of believers? Does James indicate that we are to ask God directly? No! ( How can a sinner also be righteous  and so to conform to what James says as powerful and effective?  Although it is God who forgives, God chooses the righteousness of at least one believer within the body, and not forcibly the priest or the minister who prays to give his forgiveness power and effect. After all what is righteousness to a man or woman double minded in mind and spirit, in body towards God? Do they have individual power to go directly to God for forgiveness of sin? Not according to the Jews and not according to the first Christians. ( Again see James.)  Going directly to God with a double mind as to sin and righteousness is a no brainer. It is a no brainer because sin distances a person and the persons around them from God and it is easy for a double minded person to conceal their sin and spin as if it was forgiven and forgotten, especially that it is said submitted to God in silence or without the witness of the saints.

James 4:8 says to come near to God and not directly to him. (Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded.



Man listens to what comes out of his mouth, because sometimes what the mind would believe the mouth cannot say--subject, verb and compliments don't always agree with the interplay of mind and heart. Yet one can lie to themselves when they are the only hearers and much more difficult when others also hear.

Now there is much more to say. But in brief Jewish tradition and Christian tradition supported by scripture  has always been that one should _*confess audibly to the body of believers or the persons ministering for it.*_


Ministers, as individuals, don't have the power to forgive sin as some have been led to believe. The way to look at it is that God forgives sin through the body of believers and for the reasons stated above.

Salvation and the forgiveness of sin within the body of believers are separate items. The remedy for each are  obviously not  the same.

Now I know my explanations will be in vain and from the very same scripture I shared others will to them differently claim. But I raced with love, where I could have walked away had I not loved all, you, even in and out of our way.


----------



## Madman (Feb 1, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Are there any verses that show the disciples forgiving people's sins? Like maybe at the Pentecost or some other event or place?
> 
> Also was Jesus forgiving sins as a man?


Why does it matter?


----------



## Madman (Feb 1, 2020)

I believe we agree that Christ started the church but does it have any authority in our spiritual life?


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 1, 2020)

Madman said:


> I believe we agree that Christ started the church but does it have any authority in our spiritual life?




Your not sure?


----------



## Madman (Feb 1, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Your not sure?


I am most certain, I am asking if anyone  else believes it so.  In another thread there appears to doubt.  Seems each man and his Bible make the church.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 1, 2020)

It has authority yes... ( And No lone rangers in my church.) And also it has power. I've experience of it personally.


----------



## Israel (Feb 2, 2020)

There may be many lone rangers in any "ones" particular church, but it is true there are no lone rangers in the church.

Without doubt John the Baptist (for the most part) was viewed as being very much alone and separate form what boasted of claim to be in covenant with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And though Jesus never spoke "against" the Temple (as he was supposed and accused, for a handiness of some) and though He even recommended on another occasion submission to the Pharisees, but not their ways, for their "sitting in Moses seat" (as Jesus is not a rebel), it was neither to them nor by them He came to be baptized.

But make no mistake...Jesus had much to say to what took their stand and their place upon "their history" in linking themselves to Abraham. Jesus was so bold as to say they actually had no relationship to Abraham at all as their spiritual "father". (And spoke quite to the contrary) Their trust was all in the natural. And how they believed that placed them.

The scourge of cords with which Jesus drove the money changers from the Temple showed no disrespect to it, but rather His esteem. But again, no doubt, this was made handy to some who by their inferences, implied later that Jesus was speaking and acting against what had once been given of God as instruction.

"This man speaks against the Temple"!

Yes, what is the Church?

Who and/or what speaks in it, to it, for it? Is anything "over" in authority to it, and for the believer? 

As for what appear individual churches, anyone with a will, a paint brush, and piece of plywood can declare. (Per God's allowance) Or it may be carved or etched in stone by the most talented craftsmen. No doubt.

Jesus Christ yet suffers His name in the earth.

And despite all the words that overflow in so much fluffiness of "the church is not a building made by hands" but a people called out to God through Christ...there yet remains so much "yes, yes, but where do you "go"? What is your "church home". "How, when, where do you meet with "your" church...in your church?"

"What do you call..."your" church?" Where "are you submitted"? Where do you exercise..."accountability"...What_ place_? What location? What is "your form" of worship?

To answer at all is in all forfeit. If a man does not see his brother's form he will ask. And if a brother answers to such blindness, thinking he is being "kind", helpful, enlightening, he is only adding to deformity. That pressure that causes the ask is the same as what deforms by blind answer.

At the moment Jesus shut up the Pharisees, I have no doubt they hated it. But those often most wounded by the Lord may take a lesson. "Why am I so offended?"

And Jesus answered and said unto them, I also will ask you one thing, which if ye tell me, I in like wise will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him? But if we shall say, Of men; we fear the people; for all hold John as a prophet. And they answered Jesus, and said, We cannot tell. And he said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.


Who/what/how has authority in the church?

By whose authority did John write "Whoever has ears let him/them hear what the Spirit says to the churches!"?

Leave such hearing "to another"...and you are already deceived. In _your_ church.


----------



## Madman (Feb 2, 2020)

Who lead the church through the centuries when there was no canon of Scripture?


----------



## Israel (Feb 2, 2020)

Madman said:


> Who lead the church through the centuries when there was no canon of Scripture?


The same One leading it now.
And there was not a time through _those_ centuries the church was without Scripture.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 2, 2020)

Israel said:


> The same One leading it now.
> And there was not a time through _those_ centuries the church was without Scripture.


That makes it appear that Jesus has always had a Church and spripture. Perhaps if only in a spiritual way.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 2, 2020)

Israel said:


> The same One leading it now.
> And there was not a time through _those_ centuries the church was without Scripture.


Amen.

even in 2 Peter 3:16, Peter refers to Paul's writings as scripture.  

Peter died in 64ad.  It is believed that Jesus was crucified, buried and resurrected in 30ad.  So, here we are less than 34 years later, probably closer to 30 years, and Peter is already saying that Pauls writings were to be considered on the same level as the other prophets and judges thru the centuries


----------



## Madman (Feb 2, 2020)

Israel said:


> The same One leading it now.
> And there was not a time through _those_ centuries the church was without Scripture.


Are you saying there was no earthly leadership?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 2, 2020)

Madman said:


> Are you saying there was no earthly leadership?


I understand what you are saying. No matter how hard we try and take "man" out of the equation, we can't.
Somehow God does use man in Church leadership roles. It was man that God used at those councils of Nicea or was it? 

Was it God who decided what we should believe or man?


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 2, 2020)

About battle plans, generals and soldiers. I once was a member of an organization that had as its goal the search and rescue of missing individuals believed to be lost in the forest.

Have u ever heard soldiers say they spent more time waiting in the field of operations than doing actual fighting? Well I have a story to tell you.


One Monday morning at around 9 oclock I got a call from someone in the organization that were were going out on a search and that it was not in our usual district of operations. Two young boys were missing since Sunday noon and were thought to be somewhere in the forest behind the houses where they lived. They and been the nite in the woods. And the Search and Rescue helicopter was being call to assist as I left work, got home, packed  and met with my team. In a matter of an hour and a bit more were were  off.

When we were to the boys homes the police had set up a base and there were perhaps 250 local people wanting to assist. Some searching had been done by the locals that morning but it got confusing for the police so they held all but a few back.

We were given instructions to search a grid of land fully. It has been search by the locals, but the police could not know that it was searched completely.

We had trained to search 20 men shoulder to shoulder and approximately 10 yards apart or more depending how the cover was. The idea was to look and listen in every possible place in a sweep. The line had to keep strait so that the captain could command, relay info and make curtain that the work we were set to do was done effectively. So as the terrain in dense forest is not level the line would get bent out of shape. Periodically the captain would halt the line at some point so that the ends or the middle could catch up. Were were stopped alot on this particular search. The place was a dense ticket with lots of windfalls etc... We had been trained to follow orders, and to be patient even though we hoped to find our targets asp. so that they would survive, be recovered quickly etc.

Now when we had started our search we had taken in a few locals into our line at the request of the police. The police said they were chomping at the bit and asked if we would take them. We did take maybe five local men.


Well let me tell you... that was an eye opener! They were not use to our line formations and knew little of the need for them although it was briefly explained and OH! The waiting, man they complained. The captain had the added burden of hearing their displeasure and that he and our team had no idea what we were doing. After some time they started lecturing the line how it should proceed and the captain did not know what he was doing.

It was then I realized that in the army or in a search and rescue outfit there can only be one general and the soldiers take orders ( and keep their thinking on operations to themselves)... otherwise the effectiveness of the organization is significantly reduced and especially demoralizing to the members.


Now the kids walked out to a road mid afternoon where they were picked up where we had started our line. By that time we were perhaps one mile inland from where they had been, on the opposite side of the road. They had been following the helicopter thinking that it was trying to give them direction by the direction of flight. The helicopter had gone back and forth in the search area. And they had gone back and forth. LOL They were ok.

But I learned something about human nature and organization that day. And I hope you will to for my little story.


----------



## Israel (Feb 2, 2020)

> It was then I realized that in the army or in a search and rescue outfit there can only be one general and the soldiers take orders ( and keep their thinking on operations to themselves)... otherwise the effectiveness of the organization is significantly reduced and especially demoralizing to the members.




Yes.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 2, 2020)

Israel said:


> Yes.



Yes! But all you got now is the HS and fallible you? The general that you think of appointed 12 tribes and 12 apostles...  ( Like the checks and balances...  maybe.) He did not leave it all to Peter... or John or Paul...they conferred with each other.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 2, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> makes you wonder what that 'He breathed on them' means, don't it?



This was when they were born again.  Jesus breathed spiritual life into dead men, just as he had breathed original life in creation.



Madman said:


> I believe we agree that Christ started the church but does it have any authority in our spiritual life?



Yes, the church has the authority to wash men's feet.  To prepare God's people for works of service.  

To boss men around?  Absolutely not.  That would be the lording over that Jesus prohibited.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 2, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> This was when they were born again.  Jesus breathed spiritual life into dead men, just as he had breathed original life in creation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



it a good thing that Peter didn't try to boss Paul around and tell him he couldn't go to all those cities and preach, ain't it?


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 2, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> This was when they were born again.  Jesus breathed spiritual life into dead men, just as he had breathed original life in creation.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No one bosses anyone in Christianity. ( Except that most denominations < foot washers especially,  have their doctrines or else see the door.)  You're making a straw man...


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 2, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> it a good thing that Peter didn't try to boss Paul around and tell him he couldn't go to all those cities and preach, ain't it?




It's a good thing Paul checked with Pete about it. Is it a good thing that Paul went to Jerusalem when he knew it was foolish to do so , so much so that he required the protection of the Romans and they in turn executed him? Maybe he should of checked with Pete?? Was this  a good thing?

Peter was not the" boss" you make him out to be. He was not a despot, we know he differed to others...


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 2, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> It's a good thing Paul checked with Pete about it. Is it a good thing that Paul went to Jerusalem when he knew it was foolish to do so , so much so that he required the protection of the Romans and they in turn executed him? Maybe he should of checked with Pete?? Was this  a good thing?
> 
> Peter was not the" boss" you make him out to be. He was not a despot, we know he differed to others...



how can one that is ' The ROCK that the church is built on' defer to anyone?  His decisions must always be correct, and if he defers to someone else making the decision, doesn't that mean he was in error?  Could the church be built on error?

If I read scripture correctly, Paul was following the lead of the Holy Spirit when he went to Jerusalem.  Do you read it differently?

When Jesus went to Jerusalem for the final time, He was crucified.   Was this a good thing?


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> I would think that there was zero church until Jesus was raised. Just my thinking however, Abraham is interesting in regards to this


Jesus tells the disciples " On this rock I WILL BUILD my church."  So we know the church started after that time.


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> makes you wonder what that 'He breathed on them' means, don't it?





Israel said:


> The same One leading it now.
> And there was not a time through _those_ centuries the church was without Scripture.


Who held the scrolls and the parchment?  There were not enough for everybody to have a copy.  The church held them, they were read in the church and taught by the church.


----------



## Israel (Feb 3, 2020)

No, Peter was no despot, Paul no daring rebel, Agabus not misaligned in his (or any of the other brother's) grief in Paul's persistence, Peter saved from wincing at "Lord, be it far from you" and "even if they all desert you"... all into unbridled joy, along with Paul's own once wincing at even having mentioned Peter's behavior when separating himself to those of the circumcision having come from James. 

(Don't imagine there was not some overcoming required there "Oh, man, why did I even go so far as to write that down!?...after all, Peter received my rebuke...")

And we know Peter did, for he ascribed to Paul the very greatest accolade he was allowed in both recognition and reception into himself of Paul, in mention of those unstable who wrestle with Paul's words "as they do with _other scriptures" _in his sharing of the wisdom God had given him.

Who has doubt these brothers see? And even see us?  Even saw us...before they left their bodies...better than we see our own selves? 

Saw the darkest of waters into which the first birth would bring us. All the things to us "normal"...so that we with even stain darkened eye might think..."thanks be to God we do not live in the days of our ancestors when it was so dangerous for a man to confess Jesus Christ...Oh, but they were rough times!" 

Now we can erect churches on every corner! How tolerant (and even kind in tax breaks!) the world has become toward Jesus Christ...let's make statues of the men who paved the way for this...and let us name our temples after these...men. Let's make songs of the words they wrote...too, some even seem...marketable! There's gold in that there savior, I'm telling you!

If only Paul were not so cynical!

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

Jesus, not quite so plain:

But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.
For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed _are_ the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck. 
Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us. 
For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry? 

John not with such perspective:

And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. 

This could surely not be of us_ they _spoke or saw. We have even whole TV networks devoted to our Church, our churches...our...savior. We have a whole city!  Or, we broadcast our services for goodness' sake! We record every sermon, congregations of 20 have full sound systems...(to reach those in the back row!)...and BOOKS! Shelves are full...! Do you want to know how to pray to "move God"? Want to know the 101 Reasons the Rapture is true? It's right there on the shelf next to "The 101 Reasons the rapture is a lie".

And of course, and rightly...anyone could say, "here's a napkin for your egg dripping face, no one on here has pumped out more words!" Guilty!

Guilty guilty guilty. (But you do not benefit by my giddiness)

Dare I accuse the church? Not without accusing the very One who said:

For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if _it were_ possible, they shall deceive the very elect. 

It is far better for all that I appear deceived, than He.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> Jesus tells the disciples " On this rock I WILL BUILD my church."  So we know the church started after that time.


I have not followed every word of the thread so pardon me if you have already spoken this.... But I'm curious as to your thinking, in asking this question... and your own answer to the question. I seem to recall someone here that believes in church authority. Is that you or someone else? When I say church authority, I mean that they believe that the church can rightfully evolve in it's beliefs. That may not be a good way of explaining a complex topic. Maybe there's a simplistic answer that can precede a more in depth answer.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 3, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> how can one that is ' The ROCK that the church is built on' defer to anyone?  His decisions must always be correct, and if he defers to someone else making the decision, doesn't that mean he was in error?  Could the church be built on error?
> 
> If I read scripture correctly, Paul was following the lead of the Holy Spirit when he went to Jerusalem.  Do you read it differently?
> 
> When Jesus went to Jerusalem for the final time, He was crucified.   Was this a good thing?



You are making things up from spin or on purpose to cast for your general views about how the RCC especially is set up in administration...

We know from scripture that Peter was not always correct in his views regards somethings. So that the Peter 100% correct as an individual with the Holy Spirit is a bogus that some put on so as to smear the RCC. Peter and who ever stands in the office of Peter is just a man, perhaps with the HS but quite imperfect and never !00% right and this notion is held by all level headed Christians including RCs. ( It is a trope, has been a smear with a definite history. Some people use it because they have heard it so much that they believe it is true.)

Think of it this way. The office of Peter is as the office of the president in a republic is. When he is officially in his office he speaks for the body of believers-- the buck stops with him. But... very little if anything issues from him personally, unlike a president in some republics. Most items with regards to the cult itself has been studies and debated from within with imput from excutives, office holders, counsils etc.. to the normal believer in the pews.

So when the person in Peter's office is playing golf, or out walking the streets for his own  individual purposes as an individual his words have not the authority of the Church!!!!!!!! He is not a President of a Republic!


So from simple scripture alone we know that the office holder or leader, or head ( Representative) of the Church as an individual can make errors or have incomplete views on things. That's number 1.

Number two. Infallibility is often misunderstood and sometimes well understood by people who still keep using the error to their purposes in prejudice. See above for a layman's explanation of the case of Infallibility. It is not a item of the individual but of the office. ( There is lots to say and read on this.) But basically the office stamps, signs off on the Church business. Much as business would go up from congress to senate to president, on matters of constitution and amendments, so it is with the RCC and the role of the office of Peter. ( Note that the person occupying the post is just a normal human being. He might be esteemed for various reasons, but he is not perfect... or without error as an individual.
-------------------------


Now perhaps Paul was directed by the Holy Spirit to go to Jerusalem, but was he? Did he think it was and it wasn't. I seem to recall that he was warned not to by believers, but I might be wrong.

What I find interesting about Paul is that if the HS directed him there why did he turn for his safety from the jews to the protection of the Romans! This is so unlike the other times when he escaped danger and when believers and the HS got Him out of sticky situations. But on this trip to Jerusalem  he turns not to the HS, having disregarded the warnings,  but to his political affiliation as a Roman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He called apon the protections afforded a roman citizen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This got his head cut off. I find this so sad!

I will never say that Paul being beheaded because he went to Jerusalem and its dens of wolves at the time, especially that he trusted his life to the Romans, was a good thing! I would never equate it to Jesus going there.

All I seem to recall as to his reason for going was to bring money to the Church there which had been collected from other assemblies where he ministered. Yet his business was with the gentiles! He said so himself and he had asked to be so!

I recall also that it is said that Paul wanted to go to Spain after his prison term in Rome. How wonderful that would have been.

I think that Paul in the case of his Jerusalem caper might be a good example of differing to ordinary saints sometimes , Like Peter differed to him on some issues. Paul like you and me can't walk with the Holy Spirit as lone rangers... I think this might be our lesson here unfortunately.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 3, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> You are making things up from spin or on purpose to cast for your general views about how the RCC especially is set up in administration...
> 
> We know from scripture that Peter was not always correct in his views regards somethings. So that the Peter 100% correct as an individual with the Holy Spirit is a bogus that some put on so as to smear the RCC. Peter and who ever stands in the office of Peter is just a man, perhaps with the HS but quite imperfect and never !00% right and this notion is held by all level headed Christians including RCs. ( It is a trope, has been a smear with a definite history. Some people use it because they have heard it so much that they believe it is true.)
> 
> ...



I didn't think we had a lot of examples of Peter playing golf or doing a lot of day to day things, except for fishing.  If Peter was wrong about what side of the boat to cast his net, then I can forgive him that.   Most all the scripture we have deals with Peter and his role within the church, and it deals with his errors in dealing within the church.  Tell me again how this is not Peter presiding in his role as a leader of the church, please.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2020)

Thinking about Church authority and evolving. I guess that would have to be lead by the Holy Spirit. Then the "Protest," maybe Martin Luther was being lead by the Holy Spirit as well.

When man thought the Jews were the chosen and it turns out to be  "ALL," then maybe Luther was chosen to increase that "ALL."

Perhaps in a strange way Christ built His Church on Luther, through Peter and Paul's progression.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2020)

Then in order to reach even more people, individuals were being lead by the Holy Spirit to start the various denominations in order to save even more souls as they lined up with the various beliefs of Baptism, Trinity, Oneness, Musical Instruments, and Foot Washing.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 3, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I didn't think we had a lot of examples of Peter playing golf or doing a lot of day to day things, except for fishing.  If Peter was wrong about what side of the boat to cast his net, then I can forgive him that.   Most all the scripture we have deals with Peter and his role within the church, and it deals with his errors in dealing within the church.  Tell me again how this is not Peter presiding in his role as a leader of the church, please.



When Peter and Paul hash out issues it does not follow that because Peter has the office leadership that his view prevails in the hash out. The view that prevails comes out of the interactions of the two individual at least. Peter can in official capacity give his blessing or not.

Peter although he is an official is not like the prophets of old, where God inspires that prophet alone to declare God's designs. With Christians the whole body is inspired with new life in eternal relationship. Although we have this relationship we find also error because we are also to the world that presses the flesh.

The power of eternal life comes from the body of believers-- who are now all prophets! So the person involved in the office of Peter has to listen to the body and others as an official just as much or more than putting his rubber stamp on things.

No Christian is perfect, and by definition even guided, in relationship with the HS, they are not perfect, even the individual sitting in the office originally occupied by Peter. However the office binds and loosens, otherwise it has no earthly reason to be an office.

(Is the HS helping you and I in our discussion? And if yes, what is getting in the way of our stubborn and differing views?)


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 3, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> The power of eternal life comes from the body of believers-- who are now all prophets!
> 
> (Is the HS helping you and I in our discussion? And if yes, what is getting in the way of our stubborn and differing views?)



You think that every person who proclaims to be a believer is a prophet?  (maybe we better define exactly what  prophet is now)

as far as the Holy Spirit directing and being in our conversation, I would have to say that He is present, but as far as directing, I feel that it is up to us.  We may feel a nudge here and a poke there from Him, but it is ultimately up to you and me to yield to that  nudge.  So anything that would hinder our views coming together would be 

1.  a misunderstanding of scripture

2.  an unexamined, long held belief, taught to us for years 

3.  a blind spot that we can't, or are unwilling to see

4.  a plateau in our comprehension.  At times we are unable to comprehend truths that others may plainly see.  It is not that we are unwilling, or that we are not honestly seeking truth, but that the framework, the foundation, for that revelation is not in place for us to be able to put it into work in our lives


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 3, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Thinking about Church authority and evolving. I guess that would have to be lead by the Holy Spirit. Then the "Protest," maybe Martin Luther was being lead by the Holy Spirit as well.
> 
> When man thought the Jews were the chosen and it turns out to be  "ALL," then maybe Luther was chosen to increase that "ALL."
> 
> Perhaps in a strange way Christ built His Church on Luther, through Peter and Paul's progression.



I do believe that Martin Luther was being lead by the Holy Spirit when he protested the abuse of indulgences. He was correct. He was not against them, but against their abuse. There are other items about him that I'm not as familiar with. Martin was a believer, he tried to correct or debate some wrongs by officials within the body of believers. The times were ripe with economic and political frustrations of which the Church was a participant. Martin's protest would be taken by all sides for their advantage.

Fortunately the Lutherans have returned to the orthodox cult largely due that the RCC has admitted to the errors in dealing with some of Martin's protests. Unfortunately Martin's protest was fuel to many other sides fed up with the Church, the political and the economic status quo. Their spawn has fractured integrity of belief to the point where prejudices prosper, truth compromised and confident renewals in the Church is made near impossible.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 3, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> You think that every person who proclaims to be a believer is a prophet?  (maybe we better define exactly what  prophet is now)
> 
> as far as the Holy Spirit directing and being in our conversation, I would have to say that He is present, but as far as directing, I feel that it is up to us.  We may feel a nudge here and a poke there from Him, but it is ultimately up to you and me to yield to that  nudge.  So anything that would hinder our views coming together would be
> 
> ...




Amen! Sometimes we need to sit in other peoples pews. We can like missionaries to foreign land take off to them without known anything about the people there, having only preconceptions from prejudice, or stereo type thinking they are to be trusted and not prejudice. ( I don't think this is how Paul proceeded.)

For example, I remember going to a worship service where money and prayers were being offered so that a couple could go to Iraq and convert people to Christianity. ( This was before the war with the US.) I questioned them on who their contacts there were. They said they had none and that the HS was their contact. I also came to the realization that they did not know that there was a significant Christian population in Iraq despite it be majority Muslim. And they did not know that the Christians there had a history with their  Muslim countrymen--  that everyone there knew.


But they did not! And they did not know that there were some Christians in President's Hussein's administrations!

When I questioned them on it-- I can still see their eyes light up as if they were seeing Satin incarnate in me and my queries. Funny how that works.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> You think that every person who proclaims to be a believer is a prophet?  (maybe we better define exactly what  prophet is now)
> 
> as far as the Holy Spirit directing and being in our conversation, I would have to say that He is present, but as far as directing, I feel that it is up to us.  We may feel a nudge here and a poke there from Him, but it is ultimately up to you and me to yield to that  nudge.  So anything that would hinder our views coming together would be
> 
> ...



I do see a difference in Peter and Paul and us concerning the Holy Spirit. That being said, and considering they were prophets or at least being lead more by God than we were, did God lead them in every aspect of their lives?

Then move ahead to those councils in Nicea? At what point did God stop leading the various actions of men especially concerning Church leadership?

I can see Paul often talking as Paul when he's not talking for the Holy Spirit. Peter and Paul both did make mistakes. Paul was not seeking God when he converted, etc. The councils in Nicea voted. The Catholic Church vote on the Pope. 

Sometimes even great preacher take the wrong path and commit adultery. I guess I'm just trying to see why Peter could not be the Rock and still make terrible mistakes. 

All of the apostles were hand picked by Jesus, each to eventually spread the gospel but even when they were together, This Rock had to cast lots. 

It seems to me if a man was being 100 percent being lead by God, that one man would be all that is needed. Yet we know that God doesn't work that way.


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> I have not followed every word of the thread so pardon me if you have already spoken this.... But I'm curious as to your thinking, in asking this question... and your own answer to the question. I seem to recall someone here that believes in church authority. Is that you or someone else? When I say church authority, I mean that they believe that the church can rightfully evolve in it's beliefs. That may not be a good way of explaining a complex topic. Maybe there's a simplistic answer that can precede a more in depth answer.


I believe there is Biblical evidence that Christ built his church so that his followers would have proper teaching and edification for the preaching of the gospel and for their well being.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> I believe there is Biblical evidence that Christ built his church so that his followers would have proper teaching and edification for the preaching of the gospel and for their well being.


And the Holy Spirit lead power to evolve?


----------



## Israel (Feb 3, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> It seems to me if a man was being 100 percent being lead by God, that one man would be all that is needed. Yet we know that God doesn't work that way.





> Yet we know that God doesn't work that way.



Final answer?


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> I believe there is Biblical evidence that Christ built his church so that his followers would have proper teaching and edification for the preaching of the gospel and for their well being.


Can you convey this response differently? I'm not understanding


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> And the Holy Spirit lead power to evolve?


Evolve?  I dont believe the Gospel has evolved.


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> Can you convey this response differently? I'm not understanding


I would argue that Christ started the and put men in charge for the teaching and edification of the saints, and the spreading of the gospel.   They conveyed the teaching ga of Christ to future leaders through the laying on of hands.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> Evolve?  I dont believe the Gospel has evolved.


The church surely has. Leaving out doctrine... it has gone from home church's to mega church's with million dollar budgets. It has gone from taking up donations to give to other churches whom are not doing as well, to high pressure for pew warmers to give 10% of their income. It has gone from sharing a meal of like believers with a teacher, to concert like displays of high paid entertainers. It has gone from the Holy Spirit will now be your teacher under the New Covenant, to how to white wash the walking dead. It has gone from persecuted to those whom persecute anyone whom does not believe their interpretation of the truth. It has gone from a simple gospel to the most internal divisive religion of all other religions being made up of many "ists", baptist, Methodist, etc. It has gone from word of mouth to our now socalled man picked authoritative books. It has gone to "greet each other with a holy kiss to preachers having an affair with the secretary. It has gone from having a good pure reputation to little to no difference from the secular world, having an equal rate of divorce. It has gone from receive new life to threats of eternal ****ation. However, it's made up of generally good people whom want to please God, just who seem to not know how to go about it other than to show up, some for Sunday only, some sunday night, and the hard core on wednesday night. This does not even address the catholic church and all it's baggage. Frankly, the church as I see it in my community, it's  light is so dim that they shine it on themselves every chance they get to try to make sure they get credit for every little thing they do. After 45 years of growing up in church, working to try to please God, not as just a pew warmer, but teacher, leadership, etc,  I have determined that something, not something small, but something big, is missing from the churches in my community. Therefore, I no longer attend, this in the last 4 years. At any time I see something real, I will jubilantly take my place. Until then, I remain highly disappointed. But my faith has never once wavered. One could say to work harder, but then, just as in a marriage, if you have to work so hard at it, something ain't right


----------



## Madman (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> The church surely has. Leaving out doctrine... it has gone from home church's to mega church's with million dollar budgets. It has gone from taking up donations to give to other churches whom are not doing as well, to high pressure for pew warmers to give 10% of their income. It has gone from sharing a meal of like believers with a teacher, to concert like displays of high paid entertainers. It has gone from the Holy Spirit will now be your teacher under the New Covenant, to how to white wash the walking dead. It has gone from persecuted to those whom persecute anyone whom does not believe their interpretation of the truth. It has gone from a simple gospel to the most internal divisive religion of all other religions being made up of many "ists", baptist, Methodist, etc. It has gone from word of mouth to our now socalled man picked authoritative books. It has gone to "greet each other with a holy kiss to preachers having an affair with the secretary. It has gone from having a good pure reputation to little to no difference from the secular world, having an equal rate of divorce. It has gone from receive new life to threats of eternal ****ation. However, it's made up of generally good people whom want to please God, just who seem to not know how to go about it other than to show up, some for Sunday only, some sunday night, and the hard core on wednesday night. This does not even address the catholic church and all it's baggage. Frankly, the church as I see it in my community, it's  light is so dim that they shine it on themselves every chance they get to try to make sure they get credit for every little thing they do. After 45 years of growing up in church, working to try to please God, not as just a pew warmer, but teacher, leadership, etc,  I have determined that something, not something small, but something big, is missing from the churches in my community. Therefore, I no longer attend, this in the last 4 years. At any time I see something real, I will jubilantly take my place. Until then, I remain highly disappointed. But my faith has never once wavered. One could say to work harder, but then, just as in a marriage, if you have to work so hard at it, something ain't right


I am terribly sorry to hear that.  I attend a church that has a 2000 year history that has not waivered.  It is exceptionally biblical,  and historic.  The gospel is preached and the widows and orphans cared for.

As far as a church is concerned, don't let Judas keep you from Jesus.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> The gospel is preached and the widows and orphans cared for.
> 
> .


I consider that a great answer. Good for you.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 3, 2020)

Madman said:


> I am terribly sorry to hear that.  I attend a church that has a 2000 year history that has not waivered.  It is exceptionally biblical,  and historic.  The gospel is preached and the widows and orphans cared for.
> 
> As far as a church is concerned, don't let Judas keep you from Jesus.


Your Church hasn't waivered on becoming more liberal, the clothes women wear, women's roles, or birth control?


----------



## Madman (Feb 4, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Your Church hasn't waivered on becoming more liberal, the clothes women wear, women's roles, or birth control?


I dont understand the "clothes women wear" question.  Birth control is discouraged, recommended dress is modest, male and female, and women's roles are biblical and historical.  How about your assembly?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 4, 2020)

Baptist, leaning towards Election vs Free Will, though no major changes. Women's dress refers to Paul's instructions. Women in my church used to not wear fancy hair styles and dress. Now they pretty much wear what they want. Also parts from Paul on the husband being the head of the wife. Less restrictive in things like that. Just social changes that my Church made to go along with worldly changes society in general has made.
Nothing major concerning the Gospel though since the Protest. Maybe a few divisions along the way about issues concerning race, etc.


----------



## Israel (Feb 4, 2020)

Interesting times.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 4, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> No one bosses anyone in Christianity. ( Except that most denominations < foot washers especially,  have their doctrines or else see the door.)  You're making a straw man...



"Children obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right."  - In a Christian home, the parents are the boss of the children.  Time for bed.  Clean up your room.  Stop hitting your sister.  Do your homework.

And zooming out to the broader church, there are certainly many historical and personal examples of people in Christianity bossing and attempting to boss others around.  Wasn't it the attempted bossing of the circumcision party that gave rise to the book of Galatians and the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15)?  

My wife and I were once fired from our teaching jobs at a Christian school because we refused, even after pressure from the headmaster, to allow our children to participate in some things that violated our faith and conscience including: a festival of Saturnalia, singing a song to Mary as the Queen of Heaven, and reading a book celebrating witchcraft and the occult.  The school was certainly trying to boss us around in how we raised our children, and though we refused to submit, many other Christians at the school did submit to their bossing.


----------



## Israel (Feb 8, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> My wife and I were once fired from our teaching jobs at a Christian school because we refused, even after pressure from the headmaster, to allow our children to participate in some things that violated our faith and conscience including: a festival of Saturnalia, singing a song to Mary as the Queen of Heaven, and reading a book celebrating witchcraft and the occult.  The school was certainly trying to boss us around in how we raised our children, and though we refused to submit, many other Christians at the school did submit to their bossing.


That must have been an interesting experience. 

Would I be wrong to believe you didn't _set out_ to get fired? Even if at some point it may have become apparent that could come as result of your stance?

That also you didn't seek to change the program, or insist no one else should participate...just exempt your children from participation? (If either my questions or apparent assumptions are themselves presumptuous, forgive me)

But we learn stuff, don't we?

About the gift of having a clear conscience, seeking to keep it so, and what comes as a result.

We don't have to set out to make any of the things happen that Jesus says will come as consequence to His leading and our following...they just...happen.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 8, 2020)

Israel said:


> That must have been an interesting experience.
> 
> Would I be wrong to believe you didn't _set out_ to get fired? Even if at some point it may have become apparent that could come as result of your stance?
> 
> ...




We definitely weren't trying to get fired.  We had left good jobs elsewhere to move our whole family to a new state to take jobs at a purported Christian school.  We were confident enough that it was a good match that we bought a new home.  It was quite the emotional and financial shock for both parents to lose their jobs and the children to be kicked out of their school on the same day.  It took us about 4 years to sell the house we had bought, so we had to rent in the meantime, and our ongoing finances were very tight.

And we were very discrete in how we went about expressing our desire for our children to opt out of the objectionable activities.  We didn't talk to anyone about it except the single adult in charge until the headmaster called us in about it.  There was no gossip, and no effort to influence the actions of other students or parents.  Yet, the headmaster thought lots of parents would notice and that allowing us to opt out of these things based on an objection of conscious would set a dangerous precedent and "he would have no school."

You see, even though it was a Christian school, about 1/3 of the children there were from families without any profession of faith or claim to be Christians.  They were there simply for the safe environment and academic quality.  The headmaster worried that if he allowed our objections of conscience, that the more secular parents would raise similar objections to things like participation in weekly chapel services, the Christmas program, and other explicitly Christian content.

The odd thing was that the public schools our children attended over the years never objected to opting out once in a while over an matter of Biblical faith and conscience.


----------



## Israel (Feb 8, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> We definitely weren't trying to get fired.  We had left good jobs elsewhere to move our whole family to a new state to take jobs at a purported Christian school.  We were confident enough that it was a good match that we bought a new home.  It was quite the emotional and financial shock for both parents to lose their jobs and the children to be kicked out of their school on the same day.  It took us about 4 years to sell the house we had bought, so we had to rent in the meantime, and our ongoing finances were very tight.
> 
> And we were very discrete in how we went about expressing our desire for our children to opt out of the objectionable activities.  We didn't talk to anyone about it except the single adult in charge until the headmaster called us in about it.  There was no gossip, and no effort to influence the actions of other students or parents.  Yet, the headmaster thought lots of parents would notice and that allowing us to opt out of these things based on an objection of conscious would set a dangerous precedent and "he would have no school."
> 
> ...



The testimony of Jesus Christ is the spirit of prophecy.

And I very much appreciate this testimony. Things do indeed _get real._

Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess _him_, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:


----------



## Israel (Feb 8, 2020)




----------



## GunnSmokeer (Feb 8, 2020)

I don't have time to read this entire 9-page thread now; but I skimmed it.
I'm also interested in how "leadership" in today's Church is supposed to work.
Obviously the 12 original apostles, hand-chosen by the Lord himself during his earthly ministry, were supposed to the the leaders of Christianity for the early Church.  Now, does that hold true of Matthias, who replaced Judas the traitor ? He was chosen by the remaining 11. So does that mean that the apostles, as a group (or even individually) can chose their successors?  

When Jesus chose 12, why did he choose ONLY 12? Weren't there more than that small number of willing and loyal disciples?

When one apostle betrayed Jesus and then killed himself, that created an opening. 11 apostles didn't work, so they thought. They chose ONE disciple and elevated him to the status of Apostle. MY QUESTION: Why just one? Why see this as ONE OPENING to be filled?  Could they have predicted the growth of the early Church and the need for leaders of newly-planted churches in far-away lands and chosen several Apostles from among the many followers of Jesus? 

Similarly, two other men are called Apostles in the Bible, but they were not among the original 12.   Saul/Paul is one, though he was personally chosen for this role by post-resurrection Jesus.  And Barnabas (Acts 14).  So that's 15 men who held, or once held, the title of Apostle at that point.

What I don't know, haven't studied, and don't recall from my reading of the Bible, is what plan, if any, for succession of these Apostles there was in their minds.  I know the Catholic theory on this-- that all their Popes are fully equal in apostolic authority with Peter, first among the disciples and apostles. What's the protestant theory on succession of apostles or the ending of the apostolic age around A.D. 100 ?

Is our only "leadership" in "the church" today supposed to be regular people, ordinary Christian men, that we choose (with guidance from the Holy Spirit, and after earnest prayer)?  If so, what level of authority should such persons have to answer questions of theology and doctrine that the scriptures themselves leave unclear, or unclear to many people?  How does the authority of today's pastor of a local church, somebody with 20 years experience as a pastor following getting a Master's Degree in Divinity studies from some theological seminary, compare to the authority of somebody like Barnabas, who was sent by the early Christians from Jerusalem to guide the fleeing and persecution-fearing Christians at Antioch (Acts 11:22)?  If Barnabas is called an Apostle, what about Pope Leo?  Martin Luther?  Dwight Moody, Billy Sunday, or Billy Graham?


----------



## Madman (Feb 8, 2020)

GunnSmokeer said:


> I don't have time to read this entire 9-page thread now; but I skimmed it.
> I'm also interested in how "leadership" in today's Church is supposed to work.
> Obviously the 12 original apostles, hand-chosen by the Lord himself during his earthly ministry, were supposed to the the leaders of Christianity for the early Church.  Now, does that hold true of Matthias, who replaced Judas the traitor ? He was chosen by the remaining 11. So does that mean that the apostles, as a group (or even individually) can chose their successors?
> 
> ...


Actually the church believes all bishops in apostolic succession are continuations of the 12.  The bishop's responsibility is to teach the faith and pass it on EXACTLY as it was passed down to him.  Not all bishops take that responsibility seriously enough.

Wherever the bishop is, so is the church.  St Ignatius of Antioch 

By the way, the Orthodox, the Roman's, the Anglicans, and the Coptic church all believe pretty much the same.  Good study.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 8, 2020)

Madman said:


> Actually the church believes all bishops in apostolic succession are continuations of the 12.  The bishop's responsibility is to teach the faith and pass it on EXACTLY as it was passed down to him.  Not all bishops take that responsibility seriously enough.
> 
> Wherever the bishop is, so is the church.  St Ignatius of Antioch
> 
> By the way, the Orthodox, the Roman's, the Anglicans, and the Coptic church all believe pretty much the same.  Good study.



and none of us 'protesters' do.  We believe that God converses with us, and enlightens our paths, and that we need no other to intervene between us and God but Christ


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 8, 2020)

Madman said:


> Actually the church believes all bishops in apostolic succession are continuations of the 12.  The bishop's responsibility is to teach the faith and pass it on EXACTLY as it was passed down to him.  Not all bishops take that responsibility seriously enough.
> 
> Wherever the bishop is, so is the church.  St Ignatius of Antioch
> 
> By the way, the Orthodox, the Roman's, the Anglicans, and the Coptic church all believe pretty much the same.  Good study.


Are there always 12 bishops to keep the in succession going? Does the Orthodox have the same 12 as the Roman's?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 8, 2020)

Like Gun Smokeer asked though, why 12? Was their 12 areas that needed visiting? 
Why not leave it a 11 or why not at that time bump it up to 25? Is it scriptural that their was always to be 12? Some scripture stating as one of the original 12 passed, he would be replaced?
If so then how does Paul and Barnabas fit into the succession? Maybe one of the other original 12 had died and Barnabas replaced him?


----------



## Madman (Feb 8, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Are there always 12 bishops to keep the in succession going? Does the Orthodox have the same 12 as the Roman's?


No.  There were more bishops needed to carry the Gospel into the world.


----------



## Madman (Feb 8, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> and none of us 'protesters' do.  We believe that God converses with us, and enlightens our paths, and that we need no other to intervene between us and God but Christ


The church.has always believed we NEED no other intercessor other than Christ.  I am missing your point.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 9, 2020)

Madman said:


> The church.has always believed we NEED no other intercessor other than Christ.  I am missing your point.



why do some organizations pray to dead saints, Mary, and others to intervene for them with God?


----------



## Madman (Feb 9, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> why do some organizations pray to dead saints, Mary, and others to intervene for them with God?


Why do you ask your friends to pray for you?


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 9, 2020)

Israel said:


> But we learn stuff, don't we?



I've asked myself many times what we might have done differently to prevent our firing by the Christian school. 

Should we have not taken the jobs and moved there in the first place?  We did all due diligence, prayerfully sought guidance from the Lord, and our call to this ministry was confirmed both by the leadership of the church we were attending and by other long-time trusted advisers.  The school Constitution and Handbook both emphasize religious liberty AND before accepting the job, the headmaster assured me the school would not overstep their bounds an attempt to exercise undue authority in the sphere of the family.  In hindsight, there are a few things I could have done better trough the process, but unless we violated our faith and conscience, the outcome would have been the same.  I think the Lord set up this whole situation to make it clear to the school that they were not the champions of religious liberty that they claimed to be.

I could have been a better shepherd of my family through this season so that more of the burden was mine and less was theirs.  But sharing in their parents' trials did much to convince our children of the Scriptural perspective on these matters.  And I learned the meaning of "But Jesus would not entrust himself to any man, for he knew what was in a man."  Total depravity means we shouldn't entrust our most precious treasures to other men, not even "Christian" men in the context of Christian ministry.  The job of shepherding children belongs primarily to the parents, not to the "Church."  The job of the Church is to assist parents in that role with the heart of a servant, not the authority of a master.



Israel said:


> The testimony of Jesus Christ is the spirit of prophecy.



This is easier to see in hindsight than it was at the time. 

Even though we had done nothing wrong, we were somewhat ostracized by the local Christian community at the time.  The school is well-known nationally as a bastion of conservative values, and a major employer in the local community.  Our dismissals were very public, and most people  assumed we must have done something evil to be terminated in the middle of a school year.  We kept the real reasons private since we had no desire to gossip or tarnish the reputation of the school. 

It seemed like forever at the time, but within a couple of months I had accepted a faculty position at the Air Force Academy.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 9, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> and none of us 'protesters' do.  We believe that God converses with us, and enlightens our paths, and that we need no other to intervene between us and God but Christ




Then why have you ( your "us") put scripture between man and man, man and church, and between you and God if no other need intervening? Now scripture is profitable, yet it is interpreted by man. In your very life other individuals and their church intervene between heaven and earth on your behalf.

 Has it been, has it occurred in your history, that of your fellowships, so to make out of His bread, his word, men with hearts of stone?--and yet you say no one intervenes between us and God?

Or His teachings your teachings and interpretations to one the other and yet you say we need no other intervention between us and God?

You cannot deny the usefulness of the Church as it was useful that Jesus ministered as a man. He did not minister only as a individual he ministered with apostles and had followers.  You cannot deny you are one member of a bigger church, and that you are a follower,  which intervenes for others and  for yourself and this between you and God-- even you say it does not.


----------



## Israel (Feb 9, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> I've asked myself many times what we might have done differently to prevent our firing by the Christian school.
> 
> Should we have not taken the jobs and moved there in the first place?  We did all due diligence, prayerfully sought guidance from the Lord, and our call to this ministry was confirmed both by the leadership of the church we were attending and by other long-time trusted advisers.  The school Constitution and Handbook both emphasize religious liberty AND before accepting the job, the headmaster assured me the school would not overstep their bounds an attempt to exercise undue authority in the sphere of the family.  In hindsight, there are a few things I could have done better trough the process, but unless we violated our faith and conscience, the outcome would have been the same.  I think the Lord set up this whole situation to make it clear to the school that they were not the champions of religious liberty that they claimed to be.
> 
> ...



There are things learned in fire that simply cannot be learned ( I was going to say)...any other way. But, there is no other way. There just isn't though...is there?

There is life...and "else".

Thank you for sharing, not only your trials endured (to which I have no right of anything) except to receive as gift. Even...a gift made to you as demonstration of God's steadfastness for what you readily proclaim was to your strength...but not yours alone. I am reproved as necessary by your deportment through them.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 9, 2020)

Madman said:


> Why do you ask your friends to pray for you?





gordon 2 said:


> Then why have you ( your "us") put scripture between man and man, man and church, and between you and God if no other need intervening? Now scripture is profitable, yet it is interpreted by man. In your very life other individuals and their church intervene between heaven and earth on your behalf.
> 
> Has it been, has it occurred in your history, that of your fellowships, so to make out of His bread, his word, men with hearts of stone?--and yet you say no one intervenes between us and God?
> 
> ...




it is not the intervention for myself or others that is the issue, as I see it.  It is praying to a person for them to intercede for you before God.  I don't see in scripture that praying to souls that have passed over being a good thing.  In fact, I see warnings not to have anything to do with speaking to the dead.  It is considered witchcraft.


----------



## Madman (Feb 9, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> it is not the intervention for myself or others that is the issue, as I see it.  It is praying to a person for them to intercede for you before God.  I don't see in scripture that praying to souls that have passed over being a good thing.  In fact, I see warnings not to have anything to do with speaking to the dead.  It is considered witchcraft.


You may want to read Revelation 5 to start.
The church has always prayed for interceasory prayer even from those who have passed.  They are not gone just.in a different state.

You may want.to reread "conjuring spirits" you apparently have been taught incorrectly about what is meant by that.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 10, 2020)

Israel said:


> There are things learned in fire that simply cannot be learned ( I was going to say)...any other way. But, there is no other way. There just isn't though...is there?
> 
> There is life...and "else".
> 
> Thank you for sharing, not only your trials endured (to which I have no right of anything) except to receive as gift. Even...a gift made to you as demonstration of God's steadfastness for what you readily proclaim was to your strength...but not yours alone. I am reproved as necessary by your deportment through them.



My wife and I were reminded by the snow this weekend of perhaps the most memorable occasion of answered prayer in our children's lives.  With the headmaster pressuring us to allow one of our children to attend the festival of Saturnalia in their class, I recalled the verse in Job where God says he has storehouses of snow reserved for the day of battle.  While saying grace one night shortly before the scheduled festival, I prayed that God would send a snowstorm resulting in the closure of school so they could not have the festival.  God answered with about a foot of snow and school was cancelled.  Is anything too hard for God?

Now, no one at the school knew of my prayer, but my wife and children knew.  As they grew into young adults, this event continued to serve as a sign to my children, both that God is serious about remaining separate from idolatry and the occult, and that God answers prayer when you're in a tough spot.

One of the fundamental errors of secular science is the claim that the laws of nature are constant which results in the fallacious conclusion that miracles never occur (including the creation and resurrection, for example).  A question I often pose to scientists and those who point to science to support their unbelief is, "How many miracles do you need to see to know that science does not explain everything and that miracles are possible?"  The answer is one.  At the time I did not expect my children to become scientists, but they have.  And this was their one miracle.  There were others over the years, but this was one they really remember.

As parents, we've often prayed that our children would stand firm in their faith through college and their training as scientists.  The pic below is my daughter who will graduate in May with a degree in Chemistry and has a job offer at a major government lab.  She shared in our shame at the Christian school, since she wasn't just kicked out with us, the headmaster insisted that she be given an F on her report card for refusing to read a book portraying idolatry and witchcraft favorably.


----------



## j_seph (Feb 10, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> My wife and I were reminded by the snow this weekend of perhaps the most memorable occasion of answered prayer in our children's lives.  With the headmaster pressuring us to allow one of our children to attend the festival of Saturnalia in their class, I recalled the verse in Job where God says he has storehouses of snow reserved for the day of battle.  While saying grace one night shortly before the scheduled festival, I prayed that God would send a snowstorm resulting in the closure of school so they could not have the festival.  God answered with about a foot of snow and school was cancelled.  Is anything too hard for God?
> 
> Now, no one at the school knew of my prayer, but my wife and children knew.  As they grew into young adults, this event continued to serve as a sign to my children, both that God is serious about remaining separate from idolatry and the occult, and that God answers prayer when you're in a tough spot.
> 
> ...


Sounds to me like Gods will was for snow, not just a prayer you stated brought all that snow. I do believe that there is nothing to small nor to big for him to handle and control however I do not believe that your one prayer brought a foot of snow to cancel school the next day.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Feb 10, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Sounds to me like Gods will was for snow, not just a prayer you stated brought all that snow. I do believe that there is nothing to small nor to big for him to handle and control however I do not believe that your one prayer brought a foot of snow to cancel school the next day.



Why?  Is it not totally possible that God honored his prayer and sent snow?  Or do you believe that God is not interested in our day to day lives, and just lets us bounce around from one paddle in the pin ball machine of life to another paddle before we fall into the hole?

I have seen prayers answered.  People have come to late to tell me that God doesn't intervene in the daily affairs of his followers.


----------



## j_seph (Feb 10, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Why?  Is it not totally possible that God honored his prayer and sent snow?  Or do you believe that God is not interested in our day to day lives, and just lets us bounce around from one paddle in the pin ball machine of life to another paddle before we fall into the hole?
> 
> I have seen prayers answered.  People have come to late to tell me that God doesn't intervene in the daily affairs of his followers.


What about the other maybe 50 or 100 people that prayed for it not to snow? What about maybe those who lost their lives possibly during that snow? What about those that maybe got injured in that snow or suffered? I feel it was Gods Will being done, not that one man prayed for snow to cancel school the next day, would that mean he is responsibe for those who may have been injured or suffered? Would that mean he is greater than those who were probably praying for it not snow? Hope you see where I am coming from on this. I read his post as by his prayer he had control of the weather. Not being disrespectful at all, I tend to pray for the safety of those when snow tornadoes floods are being forecast.


----------



## spurrs and racks (Feb 10, 2020)

Madman said:


> What is the church?  Where did it start? Who started? For what reason? Does it have authority?



God's house


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 11, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Sounds to me like Gods will was for snow, not just a prayer you stated brought all that snow. I do believe that there is nothing to small nor to big for him to handle and control however I do not believe that your one prayer brought a foot of snow to cancel school the next day.



I was surprised by such a negative response.  Weren't you encouraging me to give more personal testimonies on this GON forum a while back?  I don't believe it is generally possible to determine with certainty after the fact whether God heard a specific prayer and changed the course of future events or whether God was already planning a specific event regardless of the prayer.  Perhaps when the Holy Spirit reminded me of God's storehouses of snow mentioned in Job, he was giving my family an opportunity to participate (through prayer) in an even he already had planned.  But once I have a solution to a challenge in mind that only God can do, I don't want to be counted among those who don't have because they don't ask God (James 4:2).  Remember, Jesus said, "Ask and it will be given to you ..."  It seems presumptuous to me to think God will intervene in situations if the Christian fails to ask.  Likewise, it is presumptuous for others to assert after God intervenes that he would have intervened anyway even if the Christian failed to ask.

But Scripture does testify that one man's prayer can indeed be heard and result in a change of the weather.  "Elijah was a man, just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years.  Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops."  (James 5:17-18)  

Personally, I regarded the Air Force Faculty job as the bigger answer to prayer than the foot of snow and resulting school closure.  But Scripture reveals that miracles may also be reckoned as part of the children's daily bread.



j_seph said:


> What about the other maybe 50 or 100 people that prayed for it not to snow? What about maybe those who lost their lives possibly during that snow?  What about those that maybe got injured in that snow or suffered? I feel it was Gods Will being done, not that one man prayed for snow to cancel school the next day, would that mean he is responsibe for those who may have been injured or suffered?



What about the other applicants for the Air Force Academy job?  Was my prayer responsible for them not getting it?  And having been a teacher for many years, I've heard students and teachers mentioning praying for snow many, many times, but never once heard of folks praying for it _NOT_ to snow.



j_seph said:


> Would that mean he is greater than those who were probably praying for it not snow? Hope you see where I am coming from on this. I read his post as by his prayer he had control of the weather. Not being disrespectful at all, I tend to pray for the safety of those when snow tornadoes floods are being forecast.



 No one lost their lives in a small midwest farming town where everything shuts down.  I went back and checked the vehicle accident reports for the county - not a single snow related vehicle death in the whole year of the reported events.  A foot of snow in the midwest is not a threat to life or safety like hurricanes, tornados, floods, and earthquakes.

I'm doubtful that anyone in this small midwest town was actually praying for it NOT to snow on this Friday afternoon just before Christmas in late December.  But there are many situations in life where there probably are different people praying for mutually exclusive outcomes.  When there is one job with hundreds of applicants, odds are more than one person is praying for it.  But your doctrine that if more than one person is praying, God doesn't answer any of the prayers does not seem to comport with Scripture.  It requires we believe no one in Israel was praying for rain when Elijah prayed earnestly that it would not rain.  

Your doctrine that God does not answer prayers that may bring harm to third parties also does not agree with Scripture.  Recall Peter's release from prison in Acts 12 in response to the saints' earnest prayers for him.  This resulted in Herod executing the guards.  Were the saints responsible for the deaths of the guards?

Zooming out to the original question of "What is the church?"  As a man of faith, I am the church.  Insofar as my dinner table is an assembly of the saints, my dinner table is a meeting of the church.  For those assembled there, much valuable teaching and discussion of God's word has occurred there, and there have been many answers to prayers offered there, including signs and wonders.  God's intent was never that we wait until a weekly meeting of a larger group before doing the work he has called us to do.  If your dinner table is not a meeting of the church, may I suggest you might be doing it wrong?


----------



## Madman (Feb 11, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> Zooming out to the original question of "What is the church?"  As a man of faith, I am the church.  Insofar as my dinner table is an assembly of the saints, my dinner table is a meeting of the church.  For those assembled there, much valuable teaching and discussion of God's word has occurred there, and there have been many answers to prayers offered there, including signs and wonders.  God's intent was never that we wait until a weekly meeting of a larger group before doing the work he has called us to do.  If your dinner table is not a meeting of the church, may I suggest you might be doing it wrong?



Are you the church or are you a part of the church?
Is your dinner table a meeting of all of the saints or some of the saints?
Was "God's intent" ever  to have His saints meet weekly for corporate worship, teaching and edification?
Was Christ's intent by starting His church and placing men in charge of His church for the proper teaching and edification of the saints before sending them out to do the work he has called us to do?


----------



## j_seph (Feb 11, 2020)

@LittleDrummerBoy 
an example, how many prayed for snow this Christmas in 2014?

https://www.idahostatejournal.com/n...cle_36fc438e-8c79-11e4-9d44-1b0563f3e871.html

Would you say their prayers were answered, yet because of that prayer this happened?

Again I do not believe that Gods arm is too short or too long, no prayer is too small or too big. I do feel that if prayer could completely change the weather then why do we have hurricanes, tornadoes, flooding rains, etc. Is there not many people praying that they don't happen or come?

Was there no chance of snow predicted that night at all?

Not doubting so much what you say but just seems hard for me to believe that. 

Hence why I said I pray for safety not to change the weather. My dad is on oxygen, we get this ice and snow bad enough then power goes out, no oxygen no heat. I pray that the power stays on, no trees fall on their house because of the ice, and that God will put a hedge of protection around them. That weather is coming for a reason and a purpose. I have not searched it out but right now your the only one that I know that changed the weather with your prayer. If you have that much faith to ask it in his name and you recieve, I admire you and hope to have that much faith myself one day.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 11, 2020)

j_seph said:


> @LittleDrummerBoy
> an example, how many prayed for snow this Christmas in 2014?
> 
> https://www.idahostatejournal.com/n...cle_36fc438e-8c79-11e4-9d44-1b0563f3e871.html
> ...


I guess it would be like praying the hurricane doesn't hit your remote little Mississippi town and it hits New Orleans instead.

I also wonder why when someone rescues a baby from the middle of the road, people say God delivered them as angels. So why did God put the baby in the middle of the road?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 11, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> My wife and I were reminded by the snow this weekend of perhaps the most memorable occasion of answered prayer in our children's lives.  With the headmaster pressuring us to allow one of our children to attend the festival of Saturnalia in their class, I recalled the verse in Job where God says he has storehouses of snow reserved for the day of battle.  While saying grace one night shortly before the scheduled festival, I prayed that God would send a snowstorm resulting in the closure of school so they could not have the festival.  God answered with about a foot of snow and school was cancelled.  Is anything too hard for God?
> 
> Now, no one at the school knew of my prayer, but my wife and children knew.  As they grew into young adults, this event continued to serve as a sign to my children, both that God is serious about remaining separate from idolatry and the occult, and that God answers prayer when you're in a tough spot.
> 
> ...



The Talmud states that this festival was later turned into a pagan festival. Later on in the page, the Talmud calls it _Saturnalia_.  I wonder why a Christian school would want to have such a festival?

I guess another parent was wondering as well. Read this on a Catholic forum;
" We got a calendar from my kids’ school that lists a Winter/Advent/Christmas/Saturnalia program in December.   This is a Catholic school.    When I looked up Saturnalia, I found that it was described as a neo-pagan festival for the Winter Solstice and featured sacrifices to the god Saturnus.   I wrote the principal and he responded that it was a *pagan* festival, not a **neo-pagan ** one, no sacrifices would be offered and that it was a way to recognize the early Roman roots of Western culture."


----------



## j_seph (Feb 11, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I guess it would be like praying the hurricane doesn't hit your remote little Mississippi town and it hits New Orleans instead.
> 
> I also wonder why when someone rescues a baby from the middle of the road, people say God delivered them as angels. So why did God put the baby in the middle of the road?


Who said God put a baby in the road? Do you realize Satan and his Angel's are still out to lie steal and destroy?


----------



## Israel (Feb 12, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I guess it would be like praying the hurricane doesn't hit your remote little Mississippi town and it hits New Orleans instead.
> 
> I also wonder why when someone rescues a baby from the middle of the road, people say God delivered them as angels. So why did God put the baby in the middle of the road?




In a closed system, a zero sum game, one would suppose this would have to be true:



> I guess it would be like praying the hurricane doesn't hit your remote little Mississippi town and it hits New Orleans instead.



The hurricane_ has to be, _and therefore has to be or go somewhere. And it would be impossible for _me_ to know (or to tell anyone else) in the matter of prayer that unless one is aware of every possible ramification of their praying, one should not (pray). Or even be careful about it.

There are things only learned in the posture of supplicant that I see learned no _other_ way...and such things...needing to be learned. But, that is my opinion.

This does not even begin to touch the matters of things we generally call knowledge with all its variables and implications.

What is meant here? Simply that there's a whole process (generally) involved to believing a hurricane has even formed. What is informing us to be aware of tracks and cones? (Very few of us actually know anything about any of these except upon the word of others...)

There are a million things always happening, and what is "of note" to any of us may speak more of our own spiritual estate. Political things, social things, epidemiological things, environmental things...and in almost every case we might admit we have developed a reach for such information. And how much is first hand? And, does it matter?

But we may be brought to admit that such extended knowledge (if we receive it as such) comes then with inherent burden. We sit a little straighter once we learn "that tropical depression" a thousand miles from us has changed. And I am not ignorant of every (or at least some of them) argument(s) that might oppose "what, you fool! do you wait till the shingles are flying off your roof?"

And I do not imagine I am much different than any other thing that might call itself believer in wondering...or questioning...what should I know? And is my knowing due to a proper attending (paying of attention), or something else? Is there a knowledge that justifies its knowing...and a knowledge that "needs to be justified"? Or, is that too subtle?

Do "I know" (?) that in asking the storm to swerve, or commanding it, I am therefore asking or commanding it upon another? And if I do believe that my preservation comes (or must) at the expense of another, is there a true witness that convicts then, to where my attention must be in the circumstance of my preservation?

And...does he teach open or closed system, zero sum game or "all things are possible to him who believes"?

But, these are matters only in which I find myself. But, I don't think I am as different as once I idolized myself to be, than any other.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 12, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> The Talmud states that this festival was later turned into a pagan festival. Later on in the page, the Talmud calls it _Saturnalia_.  I wonder why a Christian school would want to have such a festival?



In our case, the festival of Saturnalia was not a school wide festival, it was a single teacher's replacement for the traditional Christmas party.  The Christian school had been founded by a Baptist church, and the headmaster was an ordained minister.  But along the way, they had hired a few Roman Catholic teachers, including this one.  When my wife and I requested our child be excused from the festival, the headmaster and teacher back-pedaled and tried to claim it was just a "Roman Feast" intended to promote western civilization, even though it was commonly referred to as the "Festival of Saturnalia" by students and teachers.    A school yearbook referred to it as such and included a picture of middle school students in togas drinking (or pretending to) drink directly from a wine bottle.

When an institution has a powerful local influence, local churches tend to give their sinful behaviors a pass.  Consider Mardi Gras in New Orleans as another example.  Many of the annual parades are explicitly named after pagan gods, and nearly all the local churches are silent.  In the past few years, I've heard more Christian objections to watching the Super Bowl than I have to participating in Mardi Gras parades named after pagan gods and goddesses.


----------



## spurrs and racks (Feb 12, 2020)

My church,............

 Is God's house, where I find an alter and pray for my forgiveness, my family's safety, count my many blessings, profess my beliefs, thank the good lord for another sunrise, and on the day I don't see another, accept me into the kingdom where I can reach for my lord, my family and friends who passed before me, stand and greet those who come behind me.


----------



## Israel (Feb 12, 2020)

Some of the conversation reminds me much of pages around 60 and forward in "Sit, Walk, Stand"


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 12, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Who said God put a baby in the road? Do you realize Satan and his Angel's are still out to lie steal and destroy?


Then maybe God didn't put those people in the road that died died in the snow.

If Satan put the baby in the middle of the road and God has to rescue it, it means God has to counteract the acts of Satan. 

I was thinking maybe God put the baby in the road to show the parents something. Knowing all along he was going to save the baby.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 16, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then maybe God didn't put those people in the road that died died in the snow.
> 
> If Satan put the baby in the middle of the road and God has to rescue it, it means God has to counteract the acts of Satan.
> 
> I was thinking maybe God put the baby in the road to show the parents something. Knowing all along he was going to save the baby.



2 Corinthians 12:7-10
Consider ... Satan gave Paul that thorn in his flesh "to torment",
God USED that same thorn to show His grace in weakness.

I think the word "allow" needs some reflections, yes?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Feb 16, 2020)

StriperAddict said:


> 2 Corinthians 12:7-10
> Consider ... Satan gave Paul that thorn in his flesh "to torment",
> God USED that same thorn to show His grace in weakness.
> 
> I think the word "allow" needs some reflections, yes?


I don't see it that way at all. That makes it seem like Satan is God. Like it's up to Satan to apply the thorn and God then uses that thorn.

Job 42:11
All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the LORD had brought on him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.


----------



## Madman (Feb 16, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't see it that way at all. That makes it seem like Satan is God. Like it's up to Satan to apply the thorn and God then uses that thorn.
> 
> Job 42:11
> All his brothers and sisters and everyone who had known him before came and ate with him in his house. They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the LORD had brought on him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.


What the Lord doesn't prevent He allows.


----------



## StriperAddict (Feb 16, 2020)

Madman said:


> What the Lord doesn't prevent He allows.


With thanks, you said it more concisely than me.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 18, 2020)

Madman said:


> What the Lord doesn't prevent He allows.



While this cerebral phrasing is certainly true, there are more useful ways for people of faith to view trials.

"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." - Romans 8:28

This verse should provide more than comfort in trials, it provides insight into better questions than "Why is this happening?" and "Is this from God or from the devil?"

Some of those better questions are, "How do I love God through this trial?"  and "What response from me would best serve God's purpose through this trial?"  

Job erred wanting to debate the divine fairness of the trial he faced, and many Christians err in similar ways when facing trials.  Yet, Scripture reveals we love God through trials by rejoicing, trusting, and obeying.  Trials ought not become excuses for bad behavior.

"What is the church?"  Unfortunately, many times the church has been somewhere between the agent bringing the trial and Job's friends giving bad advice.  "What should the church be?"  A gentle voice of guidance pointing believers in trials back to Scripture to maintain their love for God by responding in ways that serve God's purpose in the trial.


----------



## Madman (Feb 18, 2020)

LittleDrummerBoy said:


> While this cerebral phrasing is certainly true, there are more useful ways for people of faith to view trials.



I would disagree that it is cerebral phrasing, the remark was made questioning whether God does certain things or if Satan does them.  
My remark was  simple, I would add, God allows no evil that does not produce a greater good.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 18, 2020)

Trails back to scripture>


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 19, 2020)

Madman said:


> What is the church?  Where did it start? Who started? For what reason? Does it have authority?



1)  Simply put, those who have accepted Christ as their savior.
2)  Judea.
3)  Christ
4)  To glorify Christ and spread the gospel.
5)  Very vague and therefore broad question.


----------



## gordon 2 (Feb 20, 2020)

Perhaps another way of asking "does it have authority?" to avoid issues that Baptists specifically and dissenter denominations in general  have had with spiritual authority and social authority, is to ask, " Does the Church have power(s) specific (to itself) as an entity separate of all others ?

Does the Church  as an entity have spiritual powers that no other entity, including the local assembly of saints independent of the greater organizational entity, and any individual saint has ?

For examples we know that some Christian individuals know to facilitate the effectiveness of prayer and this can be shown to be independent of denomination-- with individual Christians as some we learn are good at calling down rain and others to calling down the healing of many kinds .

Some local assemblies are genius to bring forth the gifts specific to their assemblies as assemblies with works that are great witness and exemplary of the faith-- from soup kitchens to education, hospitals etc things that no individual could accomplish by themselves.

Now can the same or similar be said of the Church as an entity? Does the Church have competences as an independent entity or as a separate organization from the two distinctions above and with separate ( different)  spiritual powers that they have not?

Does the Church have the power to bless? In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit can it bless on Jesus's behalf? If it has this power, it has authority. If it does not have this power, it has no authority.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 20, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Perhaps another way of asking "does it have authority?" to avoid issues that Baptists specifically and dissenter denominations in general  have had with spiritual authority and social authority, is to ask, " Does the Church have power(s) specific (to itself) as an entity separate of all others ?
> 
> Does the Church  as an entity have spiritual powers that no other entity, including the local assembly of saints independent of the greater organizational entity, and any individual saint has ?
> 
> ...




I would say the Church has the power to exercise humility.  That is truly where all our (as believers) strength lies.  History has borne out that fact.  Christ modeled humility throughout his life.  It's when we forget that, when we wrest our will out of that humble Christ-like state, so we may foist it up upon the problem and show ourselves, .......that's the exact moment that we lose power.  You see, power/authority doesn't find it's origin in us.  At best, we are only vessels, that when doing our ABSOLUTE BEST as a vessel, can only hope it glorifies God.  That's 'our' best day.   It's something I have to remind myself of 1000 times a day.


----------



## Madman (Feb 20, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> 1)  Simply put, those who have accepted Christ as their savior.
> 2)  Judea.
> 3)  Christ
> 4)  To glorify Christ and spread the gospel.
> 5)  Very vague and therefore broad question.


Those who have accepted Christ are Christian not necessarily part of the church.
But Holy Scripture is not vague.  We know that Christ started the Church, we know that he put men in charge of it, we know that he gave those men authority over it, we know that those men taught other men, and they passed do the faith exactly as it had been handed down to them.
We only need search the Scriptures.


----------



## LittleDrummerBoy (Feb 21, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I would say the Church has the power to exercise humility.



My experience is that individuals are much better at humility than groups.  And small groups of the Church are much better at humility than larger groups.  And formally organized groups are worst of all at exercising humility.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 21, 2020)

Madman said:


> Those who have accepted Christ are Christian not necessarily part of the church.
> But Holy Scripture is not vague.  We know that Christ started the Church, we know that he put men in charge of it, we know that he gave those men authority over it, we know that those men taught other men, and they passed do the faith exactly as it had been handed down to them.
> We only need search the Scriptures.



I respect your knowledge and your walk with God immensely.  You have a more physical definition of the Church than I do, and that's expected and understood given your history.  My definition of the Church is much more spiritually centered/defined.  That said, I agree with the above completely.  To each his own.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 21, 2020)

Madman said:


> What the Lord doesn't prevent He allows.



Surgically concise, yet do we fully comprehend it to the point where we can do as Job and bless him for the pain as well as the joy.  That's the question, because if we can't personally apply it, then it's questionable whether we believe it.


----------



## Madman (Feb 21, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I respect your knowledge and your walk with God immensely.  You have a more physical definition of the Church than I do, and that's expected and understood given your history.  My definition of the Church is much more spiritually centered/defined.  That said, I agree with the above completely.  To each his own.


Thank you.  From what I read I feel the same about you.  My belief is that the "physical" church helps us to go deeper into the spiritual, or even deeper into the mystical.

God despensise his sacramental Grace's primarily thru His Church, Baptism, Holy Eucharist, etc.


----------



## Madman (Feb 21, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Surgically concise, yet do we fully comprehend it to the point where we can do as Job and bless him for the pain as well as the joy.  That's the question, because if we can't personally apply it, then it's questionable whether we believe it.


All I can say:


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Feb 21, 2020)

Madman said:


> All I can say:



That is one beautiful hymn.  It speaks to my spirit on so many levels.  Thanks for sharing it.  I had never seen it and never heard of that rendition of it.  Very edifying.


----------



## Madman (Feb 21, 2020)

SemperFiDawg said:


> That is one beautiful hymn.  It speaks to my spirit on so many levels.  Thanks for sharing it.  I had never seen it and never heard of that rendition of it.  Very edifying.



"Thinking a vacation would do his family some good, he sent his wife and four daughters on a ship to England, planning to join them after he finished some pressing business at home. However, while crossing the Atlantic Ocean, the ship was involved in a terrible collision and sunk. More than 200 people lost their lives, including all four of Horatio Spafford’s precious daughters. His wife, Anna, survived the tragedy. Upon arriving in England, she sent a telegram to her husband that began: “Saved alone. What shall I do?”
Horatio immediately set sail for England. At one point during his voyage, the captain of the ship, aware of the tragedy that had struck the Spafford family, summoned Horatio to tell him that they were now passing over the spot where the shipwreck had occurred.
As Horatio thought about his daughters, words of comfort and hope filled his heart and mind. He wrote them down, and they have since become a well-beloved hymn:
When peace like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll—
Whatever my lot, thou hast taught me to know
It is well, it is well with my soul.
Perhaps we cannot always say that everything is well in all aspects of our lives. There will always be storms to face, and sometimes there will be tragedies. But with faith in a loving God and with trust in His divine help, we can confidently say, “It is well, it is well with my soul.”

https://www.thetabernaclechoir.org/articles/it-is-well-with-my-soul.html


----------

