Christians rebuking Christians

@sonship said
@Gambrel

I was showing that the answer to the problem of denominations is go return to the NT model - one church according to a city. This is a principle that is apparent throughout the whole New Testament. There are four example of churches in the homes of someone. But this is because local churches usually started in the homes of some Christians.

Oh, I did smile at your joke.
Then I offered some more serious comment.

2000 years ago, this might have been possible.

Today, I'd rather have choice, because not all churches are of God.

Some are just money-fleecing schemes. Politicians aren't the only con men.

We are in the last days, when even churches are falling away from God.

@Suzianne

2000 years ago, this might have been possible.

Today, I'd rather have choice, because not all churches are of God.

Some are just money-fleecing schemes. Politicians aren't the only con men.

We are in the last days, when even churches are falling away from God.

Read the story of Gideon's small army of 300.
Before you fix your viewpoint too solidly please read Judges 6:1 - 8:32.

Then come back and let us talk about it either here or in another thread.

@sonship said
@Gambrel

I was showing that the answer to the problem of denominations is go return to the NT model - one church according to a city. This is a principle that is apparent throughout the whole New Testament. There are four example of churches in the homes of someone. But this is because local churches usually started in the homes of some Christians.

Oh, I did smile at your joke.
Then I offered some more serious comment.

In that case, Quakers are probably the nearest to what the original Christian communities were like. No Church hierarchy, no distinction between clergy and laity, just people gathered in his name.

@moonbus

In that case, Quakers are probably the nearest to what the original Christian communities were like. No Church hierarchy, no distinction between clergy and laity, just people gathered in his name.

I agree somewhat. However other groups share some characteristics with Quakers.
( there are two major branches of Quakerism - one more conservative the other more liberal in theology). The very liberal strain would probably not care about gathering "in the name" of Christ as you would imagine.

Brethren assemblies have no clergy / laity hierarchy.
There are the Exclusive Brethren and the Open Brethren.
However, both major Brethren groups forsook the clergy / laity system.

In the local churches we long adopted Brethren practice of having no clergy/laity. We do share plurality of elders which is biblical.
But the elders are only brothers among other brothers in commonality.