Scripture calls for preachers, teachers and evangelists and does not define any of those as a group of any kind, rather .. individual men.
Bored today ?
....Or rather using just only the Lenard Bernstein version of Romeo and Juliet called “West Side Story.”
Any church that accepts the mutterings of small children as equal to God’s Holy Word is clearly insane and corrupt. When some church tradition stands in opposition to Scripture, the tradition is sinful.
The Law of First Mention Is it all those called out by YHvH ? or What was the purpose of the Ekklesia ? Was it a temporal corporation to rule on earth ? No ! Was it to have a temporal head ? No ! It was a gathering of YHvH's chosen people to hear His Word ? and learn to Fear YHvH all their days ? And to teach their children the same ? Yes. ------------- Ekklesia is from the Hebrew Qahal (kof, hey, lamed) How does YHvH define "church" i.e.Ekklesia ?
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
A study of the word "church", in the Koine Greek : Ekklesia.
Was the "church" started at the YHvH commanded
Feast day of Shavuot (pentecost) as some say ?
Did the "church" exist earlier ?
Using the LXX as a guide we see that the Ekklesia
is first used in Deuteronomy 4:10 NAsbU Deuteronomy 4:10 "Remember the day you stood before YHvH, your God
Also see : Deu 4:10, Deu 9:10, Deu 18:16, Deu 23:3, Deu 23:4, Deu 23:9, Deu 31:30,
at Horeb, when YHvH said to me, 'Assemble the people to Me, that I may let
them hear My words so they may learn to fear Me all the days they live on
the earth, and that they may teach their children.'
Jos 9:2, Jda 20.2, Jda 21:5, Jda 21:8, Jdg 20:2 Jdg 21:5, Jdg 21:8, 1 Sa 17:47,
1 Sa 19:20, 1 Ki 8:14, 1 Ki 8:22, 1 Ki 8:55, 1 Ki 8:65, 1 Ch 13:2, 1 Ch 13:4, 1 Ch 28:2,
1 Ch 28:8 (kof => The HOLY ONE
which is haQahal The assembly (hey, kop, hey, lamed)
hey => grace, breath of G-d
lamed => teaching and learning)
In scripture it is always used to describe
those who have been assembled by YHvH.
It begins in Exodus 16:3 ( the bread from heaven )
and continues to Nehemiah 8:17 (living in Booths) NAsbU Nehemiah 8:17
The entire assembly of those who had returned from
the captivity made booths and lived in them.
The sons of Israel had indeed not done so
from the days of Joshua(Yehoshua)
the son of Nun to that day.
And there was great rejoicing.
Ouch!
My brain hurts from trying to understand that analogy. Maybe if I were Catholic; it would all make sense?
Well we know that whoever authored this bible hit piece is lying because we have the words of the bible right in front of us...
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Who does the bible say is going to keep and preserve God's words forever??? The Catholic religion??? Of course not...If that religion would have written the bible let alone had the capability to understand it, those verses such as these would not have been put into the bible...
This week’s episode of “Adventures in Missing the Point”
Catholicism and Scripture. More like studying the free market economy by reading Lenin.
Bad analogy - the church did not write the Bible. A more correct analogy would be to trust in the Bible but not listen to one of the actor’s guild opinion about how the play should be conducted.
since many have left the Church here is what has happened:
they threw out:
the Blessed Mother,
bishops,
ordained priests,
the Eucahrist,
seven books of the bible,
the crucifix,
religious icons,
saints,
the Mystical Body,
physically going to Church on the Lord’s Day,
and One Truth.
INSTEAD THEY HAVE:
Everyone has their Own Personal Interpretation of Scripture,
moral relativism,
protestant ministers coaching newlyweds on birth control options,
sects arguing with sects over the smallest scriptural details,
Welches grape juice and Ritz crackers,
new bibles whose interpretations vary widely,
and faithful who say they often don’t agree with their minister.
AMDG
Ad Majoram Dei Gloriam
“Only trusting the Bible without the Church would be like loving ‘Romeo & Juliet’ and hating Shakespeare’s explanation of it.”
THE CHURCH is made up of the people who are indwelled by the Holy Spirit because they have believed the Gospel that Christ commanded His Church to proclaim.
This has always been the case since the Holy Spirit descended at Pentecost. Apostles were commissioned to found the Church and were required to provide proof of their apostolic authority which included being eye-witnesses to the risen Christ. This apostolic authority is preserved for us today in their writings. (See 2 Peter 1:15.)
Believers are collectively indwelled by the Holy Spirit. Therefore believers do need other believers to receive all of the benefits and blessings of the Holy Spirit as God has fashioned His Church so that each part serves a purpose. Each is needed and needs the other parts.
The idea that believers need help from other believers, i.e. THE CHURCH is not foreign to scripture, but the Catholic concept of reserving to itself and its hierarchy the title of CHURCH is foreign to the message of the Bible and of the Gospel in general.
When the disciples debated over who would be greatest, Christ rebuked this and taught them a different model of leadership. When God ordained that Paul would be an apostle to the Gentiles, He ordered it so that his apostleship did not rely on any other apostles. “neither did I confer with those who were apostles before me...” Paul wrote.
Further, the Catholic idea of apostolic tradition “was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time” is completely foreign to the Biblical basis which it claims. Paul left Timothy to appoint elders (or bishops if you prefer) in each city. These had leadership roles within the church in their geographic boundary which comprised the local churches.
We can find proof from numerous examples that the Gospel was preached, people believed and were baptized into the church without this so-called continuous line. There were those who preached and did works in Christ’s name whom the disciples wanted to forbid because they “follow not with us”. What did Christ reply? “Forbid them not.” Apollos was not trained by the apostles but was recorded in scripture as being an influential preacher of the Gospel. Further, Christ appointed multiple apostles and did not leave a solitary apostle in charge of the others. And Paul was ordained to fulfill his calling as an apostle, not through the other apostles, but through the leaders of the local church in Antioch where he served. And in Revelation, Christ commends those believers who do not blindly follow those who claim apostolic authority but rather put these claims to the test. They tested these claims and found them fraudulent. Revelation, the last book of the canon of scripture, warns of those who want to add or take away from it. The canon has been closed, faithfully sealed by God and preserved by His divine power so that no matter who has opposed its spread and proclamation (even among those who claim to be its keeper), the Bible has prevailed.
Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in Heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” [Matthew 16]
Meanwhile in in the past you have shown yourself to be such a poor and refuted apologist that your straw man and other polemics are actually arguments against Rome. But like other RCs, you simply roll on like a papal propaganda machine.
There was a reason for the past papal pronouncement,
“We furthermore forbid any lay person to engage in dispute, either private or public, concerning the Catholic Faith. Whosoever shall act contrary to this decree, let him be bound in the fetters of excommunication. — Pope Alexander IV (1254-1261) in “Sextus Decretalium”,
and still in force at the time when the (my source) Catholic Encyclopedia was written [http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Religious_Discussions], which adds,
“This law, like all penal laws, must be very narrowly construed. The terms Catholic Faith and dispute have a technical signification. The former term refers to questions purely theological; the latter to disputations more or less formal, and engrossing the attention of the public. But when there is a question of dogmatic or moral theology, every intelligent layman will concede the propriety of leaving the exposition and defence of it to the clergy.” [who themselves needed due authorization]. - www.newadvent.org/cathen/05034a.htm
Likewise,
Quinisext Ecumenical Council, Canon 64: That a layman must not publicly make a speech or teach, thus investing himself with the dignity of a teacher, but, instead, must submit to the ordinance handed down by the Lord, and to open his ear wide to them who have received the grace of teaching ability, and to be taught by them the divine facts thoroughly.
"Do not converse with heretics even for the sake of defending the faith, for fear lest their words instil their poison in your mind". Bl. Isaias Boner of Krakow (Polish, Augustinian priest, theologian, professor of Scripture, d. 1471)
Here, your one line straw man argument is just that, as SS does not reject authority and the need for the teaching office, but as in Scripture, it reject the premise of assured veracity claimed by any such.
III. It belongs to synods and councils, ministerially to determine controversies of faith, and cases of conscience; to set down rules and directions for the better ordering of the public worship of God, and government of his Church; to receive complaints in cases of maladministration, and authoritatively to determine the same; which decrees and determinations, if consonant to the Word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission; not only for their agreement with the Word, but also for the power whereby they are made, as being an ordinance of God appointed thereunto in His Word. — http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/wcf.htm
Brother, your heart’s in the right place, but Shakespeare never explained his plays, and much of the commentary on them in the last 400 years has developed into an understanding that would not have been possible in 1608.
Nobody is trusting the Bible. They are trusting the Jesus the Bible tells us about.
On that note, the Bible must be trustworthy because not a church would exist without it. It is the infallible God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired word of God.
There is no other source of that kind of detailed knowledge of God.
So it’s hypocritical to claim to believe in God and Jesus and reject the authority of the very documents that teach us about Him.
Bible = God (Word made flesh, God-breathed, Alive, Spirit, Truth, Eternal, Pure etc), so in this very bad analogy, God would have to correctly be compared to Shakespeare, the Author, since you cannot separate God from His Word.
So that means the RCC is the tragedy, with two impudent teenagers who exacerbate tension between feuding families and then both die needlessly as the result of a friar’s ridiculous scheme?
The last place I go to understand love is to Romeo and Juliet, or even Shakespeare, who in this case is the author of confusion and strife. I go to Love Himself and His Word.
You don’t need religion to understand God’s Word. You need the pure Word of God that is both like fire and a hammer (Jeremiah 23:29), a light to guide (Psalm 119:105), the Sword of the Spirit (Hebrews 4:12; Ephesians 6:17), Life (Matthew 4:4), a cleansing agent (Ephesians 5:26), spiritual milk for growth of new Believers (1 Peter 2:2), solid food for mature Believers (Hebrews 5:11-14), power to create faith (Romans 10:17, 2 Timothy 3:15), for teaching and perfecting (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and the incorruptible seed that leads to Eternal Life (1 Peter 1:23).
Its sad to see such a low regard for God’s Word. God Himself has magnified His Word above His Name (Psalm 138:2).
What an absolutely goofy thing to say! Did you think of that all by yourself?
Once you begin to grasp that the "church" is the body of believers and not some hierarchical organization headquartered in royal palaces in Rome wearing scarlet and white satin robes and fish hats, seated on gilded thrones, you just might get it that you CAN trust in the Bible without the "church" telling you what it all means. You see, that is what the Holy Spirit does with every heart earnestly seeking to know the truth!
I was just thinking today...you know what Free Republic needs? Another Protestant v Catholic thread.