Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: alancarp
"Yes, ALL denominations are the result of break-offs from the original church. At some point, somebody thought "hey, these guys are wrong" are were unable to achieve a satisfactory correction. Are denominations scriptural, per se? No, but I'll bet that every one of them believed at the outset that they were trying to reform the main body they broke away from, and regretted having to do so. You could argue that Christ himself was such a reformer as he railed against the corruption of the Jewish leadership of the day (Matt. 23)."

Jesus did not rail against the corruption of the Jewish leadership for the same reasons that denominations are not biblical. The Pharisees, Saducees, Priests, Sribes, etc. were focused on a misapprehension of the message of the Scriptures. They believed God wanted Jews to behave and make up the difference with sacrifices. That God was generally happy with them (after all, they were the "chosen race", right?). These men fabricated hundreds of ways to "accomplish" the Law. Read the Mishna, Midrashim.

That they were irretrivably lost, broken beyond repair, not seeking God, dead in their trespasses and sins never dawned on them in spite of the message of the prophets (Is). Their incorrect view of the real need for Messiah is quite different than groups creating organizations with brand names.

And, originally (if you insist) Paul was "sent" by God from Damascus (Galatians). There was no "official ordination" or any such thing by a group. That the various towns recognized what God was doing is a far cry from being a "member" of an Organization called the First Church of Jerusalem, part of Central Palestine Orthodox New Covenant Accepters of Jesus from Nazareth Holy Spirit Filled Believers Denomination. Please do not put words into the Scriptures that are not there.

44 posted on 10/26/2011 12:17:44 PM PDT by Dutchboy88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]


To: Dutchboy88
Now that's interesting: you yourself mentioned earlier that Paul was sent out from Antioch. Now you say he wasn't ever ordained or sent out. Refer to Acts 13:2...

"Now in the church at Antioch there were prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. 2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off."

Back to Paul and Jerusalem, though: clearly, Paul was compelled to act under their leadership: in general, searching 'Paul' and 'Jerusalem', we find that many of his actions involved them. He felt compelled to bring theological issues there (Acts 15:2, Gal 2:14). He mentioned the apostles as leaders at Jerusalem (Gal 2:9) and received their blessing to go to the Gentiles.

I did slightly misquote Acts 11:22: "News of this reached the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch."

Yep, they didn't directly send Paul at that time. Barnadas - who WAS under their direction - took him (verse 25): "Then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, 26 and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch." If I misquoted, it's because I believe that Barney went (out of his way) to Tarsus and get Paul because he was asked to do so.

However in 27-30: "27 During this time some prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. ...29 The disciples, as each one was able, decided to provide help for the brothers and sisters living in Judea. 30 This they did, sending their gift to the elders by Barnabas and Saul." (clearly operating as emmissaries for the apostles).

Yes, Paul took some actions as directed by the Holy Spirit. He also operated in conjunction with the church at Jerusalem."

"Read the Mishna, Midrashim."
Ummm... I'll get back to you on that (or not).

Look: the point of this whole thing can be reduced to these items:

1. Christ left human leadership in charge of expanding his church (lowercase 'c') of believers when he left. Our role is to preserve, protect, defend, and spread the Word.
2. Humans fail at doing this. No kidding?
3. Denominations are the result of some sub-group deciding that a heresy has formed within the main group that cannot be erradicated.

Is this Biblical? You tell me: if both Heresies and Denominational splits are sin, which is the greater one? The one that causes a divide or the one that tries to correct it?

I will choose the correction path, for that leads to the scriptures. You're not gonna bump me off that position.

I have chosen (for now) the Presb. Church in America as the group closest to my own view of a proper Christian world view and one I believe to be most in accord with the scriptures. If denominations are bad, then I'll repent of that, but I'll never subscribe to the views of the RCC, from which all denominations seem to have originated.

That's quite enough from me, for I do not wish to sow discord - I do hope that the scriptures cited are sufficiently compelling. Apart from that, I can do no more.

61 posted on 10/26/2011 1:16:29 PM PDT by alancarp (Liberals are all for shared pain... until they're included in the pain group.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson