Hi to my Forum Friends,

In the discussion I recently began, "Standing Shoulder To Shoulder With Fellow Christians!" I compare religion to Christianity. And, from this, my Forum Friend, Beter, raises a good question which I will answer in this post. You may wonder why I am starting a new discussion rather than just responding in the existing discussion.

When someone raises a good question or makes a good comment which leads to a dialogue that may be beneficial to everyone, I do not want it buried within another discussion. I want it out in public view so that more might read it, possibly learn from it, and, hopefully, join in the discussion.

Beter's question concerns the following issues: Is the church the physical building or denominational organization? And, is there a difference between Christianity and religion?

In my earlier post, I wrote, "No, Christian believers do not consider themselves 'religious.' Religions consist of sets of traditions, rituals, and honoring of created things, i.e, churches, idols, nature, etc. Christians do not have rituals or tradition; we have a 'relationship' -- a relationship with Jesus Christ."

And, Beter responds, "Is the church a 'created thing' in some sense -- other than it's being created by Christ, who purchased it with his own blood? (Acts 20:38). If so, then the church (the one defined in the New Testament) is a creation of the Lord Himself, bought at the cost of His suffering on our behalf, and thus is something to be cherished, not diminished by being lumped into a list of other and lesser things (e.g. 'idols'!!), as you have done.

The church is 'the house of God, which is the house of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.' (I Tim 3:15) "The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." (Acts 2:47). Those who are in a 'relationship with Jesus Christ' are those who are in 'the church.'"

We read in Ephesians 5:23, "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body."

In this passage and in subsequent passages, the word "church" in Greek is "ekklesia" and according to Strong's Concordance means, "In a Christian sense, (1) an assembly of Christians gathered for worship in a religious meeting, (2) a company of Christian, or of those who, hoping for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ, observe their own religious rites, hold their own religious meetings, and manage their own affairs, according to regulations prescribed for the body for order's sake, (3) those who anywhere, in a city, village, constitute such a company and are united into one body, (4) the whole body of Christians scattered throughout the earth (5) the assembly of faithful Christians already dead and received into heaven."

So, the "church" is not the physical building where people meet to worship God; nor is it the denomination or leaders who organize and lead the "church." The "church" is the body of believers -- all the Christian believers around the world who gather in small or large groups to worship God, study His Word, and to fellowship with other believers. As this definition in Strong's Concordance tells us, "It is the the whole body of Christians scattered throughout the earth -- and, the assembly of faithful Christians already dead and received into heaven." Yes, those who have died in Christ are still a part of the church of Jesus Christ; they are just the more fortunate -- for they are already in His presence.

Beter, you mentioned Acts 2:47 (kjv), which reads, "Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." Or in the NKJV, "Praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved."

The NASB shows the meaning more clearly, "Praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved."

But, in all three translations, we see that God was adding believers to the newly formed church, the existing body of believers. He was not adding stones to a building.

Matthew 16:18, "I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it."

The apostolic churches use this statement made by Jesus to claim that Jesus built His church upon Peter. Not so. The footnote in my Harper's NASB Study Bible explains it well: It is plain that Christ was making a play on words, for Peter and rock are Petros and petra in the Greek. The church is not built upon Peter or any other individual as its foundation stone, for Peter makes it clear in 1 Peter 2:4-8 that Christ Himself is the only cornerstone of the church. The church, then, is built on the person of the Lord Jesus, and its membership includes only those who have confessed Him as Peter did.

And, in Matthew 18:15-17, "If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."

Most certainly Jesus is not telling us to "tell it to a building" -- or to an officer or leader of the church organization. No, Jesus tells us to approach our wayward brother, or sister, one on one. If that fails, take two or more "mature" believers with you. If that fails to win your brother over -- tell it to the church, the congregation, the body of believers.

I will admit that 1 Corinthians 14:34 could be taken to mean the physical building, "The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says."

But, here again, the word "churches" can be seen to mean "in the assembly or in the gathering," i.e., within the body of believers who are worshiping God together.

Then, Beter, you tell me, "As to 'religion,' you seem to have embraced the current fad of depreciating this term. You might reconsider this in light of New Testament teaching on that term. See James 1:26 and 27."

You say that I denigrate religion. No, only certain forms of religion. Yes, Christianity is a religion -- religion being, in its definition, a belief system. However, religion in its strictest sense -- the worship of idols -- should be made clear to people; for this kind of religion leads only to self destruction.

Religion as we see it in some churches today is built upon sets of man-made traditions and rituals. And, most often, this kind of religion dilutes the teaching of God's Word, the Bible. This kind of religion places higher authority upon man-made traditions and rituals -- and relegates the Bible, the Written Word of God -- to being only a good book, a good guideline for living -- but, not God's Word. This presents a danger to the new Christians and new seekers who are not yet mature in their knowledge of God's Word; for it can lead them to the worship of buildings and organizations -- instead of Jesus Christ.

While religion in the form of Christianity is built upon Jesus Christ, and only Jesus Christ. It is our personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

And, this kind of religion, this Christianity, is what James is telling us in James 1:26-27, "If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man's religion is worthless. Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.

Yes, we are called by Jesus Christ to love the Lord our God with all of our being -- and to love our fellow man as ourselves. That is part of His message to us. The other part is found in Matthew 28:19-20 -- Go, Make Disciples, Baptize Them, Teach Them. And, it is found in Acts 1:8 -- Be His witnesses in all the world. And, in Mark 16:15 -- Go into all the world; preach the Gospel!

If we, as Christian believers, are doing these things -- we are honoring our relationship with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Yes, we are called by Jesus Christ to love the Lord our God with all of our being -- and to love our fellow man as ourselves.

read that as many times as you need to to make it echo in your cold heart you hateful old fart.

That is not what the word "apostolic" means, old meanie. It means that the church teaches what the Apostles taught, not just Peter, certainly not just Paul, all of the Apostles. That means no new doctrine, rather what has been believed by all since the Apostolic Age, that means no Scofield as a sine non qua for dogma, no Rapture, no 1000 year reign of Our Lord on Earth, etc, in other words, nearly everything you rant for is repudiated in the Apostolic Faith or else simply not mentioned as it had not yet been invented.

The "Thou art Simon Peter and upon this rock I shall build my church" is only used by the Bishop of Rome to justify Roman Catholicism.

Learn something before you spout it next time.

quote:

Originally posted by Aude Sapere: That is not what the word "apostolic" means, old meanie. It means that the church teaches what the Apostles taught, not just Peter, certainly not just Paul, all of the Apostles. That means no new doctrine, rather what has been believed by all since the Apostolic Age, that means no Scofield as a sine non qua for dogma, no Rapture, no 1000 year reign of Our Lord on Earth, etc, in other words, nearly everything you rant for is repudiated in the Apostolic Faith or else simply not mentioned as it had not yet been invented.

The "Thou art Simon Peter and upon this rock I shall build my church" is only used by the Bishop of Rome to justify Roman Catholicism. Learn something before you spout it next time.

Hi Neal,

Apostolic refers to "apostolic succession" and is indeed what the Roman Catholic church means. But, you forget that your Anglican church of England, your parent church, is only one step removed from Roman Catholicism. When the good king split from the Roman Catholic church; all he did was to replace the pope with himself as the head of that church. All the rest, all the Roman Catholicism, he kept intact. And, your American Episcopalian church is as close to being Roman Catholic as one can get -- and still be called different.

So, no, Neal, I stand with what I wrote. And, I stand upon what God gave us in His Written Word, the Bible -- for there is no higher authority.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill, it is beyond me why you even brought up the business about the church being a building. Nothing I posted had anything to do with that concept. I would be interested in knowing how you justify listing the church with idols and other lesser things, as you did in the initial post to which I replied. You seem to have dodged that issue.

Succession of bishops from the Apostles is what my church teaches, and not only us, but the RC Church, the Lutheran Churches, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox, the Church of Alexandria (Copts and Ethopian Church), the Ancient Church of the East headed in Baghdad, having been translated from Antioch, the Old Catholics, the ad naus.

Only the RC has the Pope the Bishop of Rome, appoint the bishops. Many are NOT in line from Rome and Peter at all.

Take a church history course before you post out your butt, old Parasite, sucking up cartoons and text like a tick without a whit of shame.

Have you repented yet and confessed that you have not loved your neighbor as yourself, that you have like a sheep from the fold been led astray, that you have done the things you ought not to have done and left undone the things you ought to have done? Have you forsaken Satan and all his pomps?
Are you still publicly proclaiming dogma that is not considered safe for public teaching by most bishops throughout the world as true doctrine, even though it be in violation of the Church Fathers and the Creeds? Do you wish to be a 1%er or to take up your cross and follow Our Lord?

Do you enjoy blowing your air horn before you post to let everyone in the neighborhood know "I am Holy! Nearly everyone in the world is wrong! Now I post! Repent you lousy sinners, Catholics and non-Rapturites!"

I'll stick with doctrine 2000 years old plus or minus a few years.

A building is a building. Christians have assembled to worship in a bar room, a tent, an open meadow...the believers/people are the Church.

quote:

Originally posted by beternU: Bill, it is beyond me why you even brought up the business about the church being a building. Nothing I posted had anything to do with that concept. I would be interested in knowing how you justify listing the church with idols and other lesser things, as you did in the initial post to which I replied. You seem to have dodged that issue.

Hi Beter,

Possibly I misunderstood your question. When I wrote, "No, Christian believers do not consider themselves 'religious.' Religions consist of sets of traditions, rituals, and honoring of created things, i.e, churches, idols, nature, etc. Christians do not have rituals or tradition; we have a 'relationship' -- a relationship with Jesus Christ." -- I was referring to those churches which teach that the church is the ultimate authority.

Neal, in his last post, listed many of those churches. We, as Christian believers, are responsible only to Jesus Christ, to God. We worship with and fellowship with like minded Christian believers; we respect our pastors and leaders -- but, we do not answer to them; we answer to Jesus Christ. So, when I mentioned churches in my list; I meant those churches which designate themselves or their leader or leaders as the ultimate spiritual authority.

The churches in my list was not the body of Christian believers. It was those churches which put traditions, rituals, and leaders ahead of God and the Bible.

I pray this has cleared up any misunderstanding.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Repent, Bill, seek ye first the Kingdom of God and not the cult of the Tribulrapturites.

His list sounds like an ocean of sanity in a sea of knuckle dragging troglodytes known as the "Cult of Tribulation and Rapture, with Hate Lists Following, so I can do whatever I want as I am holy and you ain't -- na, na, na, na, na."

Hi Neal,

Should we repent and confess to your bishops, according to your traditions and rituals -- or should we repent and confess to Jesus Christ, direct to the throne room of God?

Personally, I daily repent and confess to Jesus Christ -- and not to any man or any church.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Gray:
Hi Neal,

Should we repent and confess to your bishops, according to your traditions and rituals -- or should we repent and confess to Jesus Christ, direct to the throne room of God?

Personally, I daily repent and confess to Jesus Christ -- and not to any man or any church.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Bill this reminds me of the Catholic guy who goes into the confessional...says..."Father, I haven't confessed in several years....and...WOW!! This is some upgrade, brandy and fine cigars.."

The Priest says, "Get out of there you idiot, you're on MY side..."

I guess confessing out loud to another person, with whom you can discuss things, and who is likely to ask uncomfortable, probative questions is somewhat more of a life-altering experience than hiding in a closet and confessing in your thoughts. But maybe that's just me. And I think the current term is "reconciliation" which implies more than simple confession.

Hi Zip,

In the new discussion titled "Do We Still Need To Pray/Confess Through A Priest?" I respond to your comments.

God bless, have a wonderful, blessed day,

Bill

Actually, God likes many of the celebratory rituals. He likes the singing, the baptisms, marriages. He sees last rites and funerals as helpful in resolving grief. He's okay with confession, but not as an absolution of sin. Mere regret is not enough.