- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
15 Feb 18
Does "take it to the church" mean, for example that an entire local congregation must hear about the Christians' problem?
I think Christ meant to take it either to the assembly or to those who are overseers in responsibility. They are the elders of the church. But this is not clearly laid out until the book of Acts and in the epistles.
It bears repeating, the local church is not a physical structure any more than the universal church is one.
Christians need to come BACK from the deception that has blurred the nature of both the universal and the local churches.
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @sonshipYou need to retire less the universal winds tip u over. As politely as I can put it
Does [b]"take it to the church" mean, for example that an entire local congregation must hear about the Christians' problem?
I think Christ meant to take it either to the assembly or to those who are overseers in responsibility. They are the elders of the church. But this is not clearly laid out until the book of Acts and in the epistles.
...[text shortened]... ACK from the deception that has blurred the nature of both the universal and the local churches.[/b]
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @sonshipI have intended to tackle this issue at length at some point.
The church in [b]Matthew 16:18 is universal. She is the unique body of Christ which includes every believer in Christ that has ever or will ever live. She spans ages. Peter, Mary, John, Priscilla, Aquila, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Darby, Mrs. Barber, Mrs. Penn Lewis, all are members of the church universal.
The church mentioned in Matt. 18:17, ...[text shortened]... ysical structures).
That is a misunderstanding that is no longer, or ever really was, funny.[/b]
It is an exceptionally difficult question because I do believe that there has to be more qualifications as to what constitutes the Church in the intentions and veins of the original Church.
I recognize anyone who affirms the Nicene Creed as a Christian, and I will honor all Christians who do so, and I will respect their churches and traditions.
But I think that they should want to be within the fold of Orthodoxy.
I am not ready to argue this extensively, though, and that will be one thing that I am going to try to read about more and be prepared to discuss.
It is also noteworthy that we would better handle this by discussing things like sacraments and what role they should play.
More noteworthy, perahps, is that instead of sowing discord with other Christians and Bible believers in some public place, I am more interested in us coming together to win souls for Christ and present the rational, beautiful CHristian faith to others.
So I am not exactly chomping at the bit to get into a b itter discussion on which Church is best, especially in a place that needs Christian apologetics.
Christian apologetics very well delivered by many here who are not Orthodox! And for which I am grateful.
Originally posted by @philokaliaThe Church is the Body of Christ
I have intended to tackle this issue at length at some point.
It is an exceptionally difficult question because I do believe that there has to be more qualifications as to what constitutes the Church in the intentions and veins of the original Church.
I recognize anyone who affirms the Nicene Creed as a Christian, and I will honor all Christians ...[text shortened]... apologetics very well delivered by many here who are not Orthodox! And for which I am grateful.
The Body of Christ is his brethren / children of God
His brethren are all those who love Him
All who love him are those who follow his commandments.
All who do evil and continue with a life of sin are not his brethren.
Mans classification of church is useless in the eyes of God.
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @rajk999Do you agree with ToO that one cannot commit a single sin after accepting Christ and maintain his or her salvation?
The Church is the Body of Christ
The Body of Christ is his brethren / children of God
His brethren are all those who love Him
All who love him are those who follow his commandments.
All who do evil and continue with a life of sin are not his brethren.
Mans classification of church is useless in the eyes of God.
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @romans1009I answered already but I know that your head has some holes so I will be patient.
Do you agree with ToO that one cannot commit a single sin after accepting Christ and maintain his or her salvation?
Jesus is the judge of what sins and how many will be forgiven.
Nobody can claim that all sins are forgiven.
Not even Paul could have done that because he said
- people have to wait for the righteous judgment of Christ
- he himself need to be careful lest he be a castaway.
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @romans1009How do you account for Jesus saying '..go, and sin no more?'
Do you agree with ToO that one cannot commit a single sin after accepting Christ and maintain his or her salvation?
Was that less instructing, more encouraging?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @rajk999So is your answer “Yes,” “No,” or “I don’t know.”
I answered already but I know that your head has some holes so I will be patient.
Jesus is the judge of what sins and how many will be forgiven.
Nobody can claim that all sins are forgiven.
Not even Paul could have done that because he said
- people have to wait for the righteous judgment of Christ
- he himself need to be careful lest he be a castaway.
ToO is clear on his position. Why aren’t you? Why retreat into a vague word salad instead of simply answering the question?
If your answer is “I don’t know,” which is what it sounds like based on what you’ve written, just say you don’t know. Or does your foolish and sinful pride prevent you from writing those words?
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeWe’re talking about whether one loses his or her salvation after accepting Christ if he or she commits a single sin. ToO says they do, I say they don’t and rajk seems not to know.
How do you account for Jesus saying '..go, and sin no more?'
Was that less instructing, more encouraging?
Of course God doesn’t want us to sin. I’ve never claimed otherwise.
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @romans1009If I say only Jesus knows who is saved.
So is your answer “Yes,” “No,” or “I don’t know.”
ToO is clear on his position. Why aren’t you? Why retreat into a vague word salad instead of simply answering the question?
If your answer is “I don’t know,” which is what it sounds like based on what you’ve written, just say you don’t know. Or does your foolish and sinful pride prevent you from writing those words?
Then obviously I do no know.
Are you that dense?
15 Feb 18
Originally posted by @romans1009Are you not familiar with Hebrews 10:26?
We’re talking about whether one loses his or her salvation after accepting Christ if he or she commits a single sin. ToO says they do, I say they don’t and rajk seems not to know.
Of course God doesn’t want us to sin. I’ve never claimed otherwise.
'For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.'
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeYes, and I addressed this point earlier, (though I don’t remember in which thread.)
Are you not familiar with Hebrews 10:26?
'For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.'
Paul is telling Christian Jews that they cannot abandon Christianity and the New Covenant and go back to the sacrificial system they knew in Judaism (sacrificing animals to atone for sins.)
- Joined
- 31 Jan 18
- Moves
- 3456
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeAnd “sinning deliberately” is not the same as committing a single sin due to weakness and repenting afterward.
Are you not familiar with Hebrews 10:26?
'For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.'