The Church Jesus Built - Introduction

"I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in...the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Timothy 3:15).

Jesus Christ proclaimed, almost 2,000 years ago, "I will build My church." He declared that His Church would never die out, promising that "the gates of Hades [the grave] shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18).

As we will see in the pages that follow, the institution to which Jesus referred was not an earthly building or a mere physical organization. Rather, the Church was and remains the called-out assembly of Christ's spiritually transformed and faithful followers.

Jesus assured His disciples that He would guide and preserve His Church until His return, promising them, "I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:20).

What happened to the Church Jesus built? An eyewitness tells us that immediately after Christ ascended into heaven following His resurrection, His apostles "went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs" (Mark 16:20). The Church had a powerful beginning.

Millions of people profess Christianity; they claim to be members of the Church Jesus founded. But Christianity is a divided religion, comprising hundreds of denominations and schisms. Through the centuries, most of Christianity's branches have assimilated many non biblical traditions—philosophical, cultural and religious—into their teachings and practices, spawning even more variations.

How can we account for the explosion of contradictory practices and conflicting factions in the world of Christianity? Is it possible to reconcile competing denominational groups with the standards and objectives Christ established for His Church? Can we know whether Christianity's bewildering variety of customs and teachings faithfully represents those of Jesus Christ? Remember, Jesus not only promised He would build His Church, but He assured His disciples that His Church would not perish. Is the divided Christianity we see around us that Church? Only the Holy Scriptures can provide a reliable answer to this question.

If Christ's promise that "the gates of Hades shall not prevail" against His Church should be considered a guarantee that those who believe on His name could never be misled or corrupted, then we would have every reason to accept the collective sum of the various divisions of Christianity as the Church Jesus built.

But He guaranteed no such thing. Instead, He warned His disciples that "false christs and false prophets will rise and show signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect" (Mark 13:22, emphasis added throughout).

Later the apostle Paul expressed his concern to Christians in his day that their minds could be "corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ" by the preaching of "false apostles" (2 Corinthians 11:3 , 13).

Jesus spoke even more plainly, explaining that "narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits" (Matthew 7:14-16).

In these pages we examine the fruits Jesus and His apostles said would identify His Church. We look at the contrasting fruits that identify those who are influenced by a different spirit and preach a different gospel. We will learn, not from human tradition or opinion but directly from God's Word, how we can distinguish "the church of the living God" (1 Timothy 3:15) from those who follow "false prophets" in sheep's clothing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For clarity throughout this booklet, the word Church (with a capital C ) refers to the faithful Church that Jesus Christ founded. The word church (with a small c ) refers to local groups of believers or other physical organizations. Since church is not capitalized in the Bible translations quoted, all scriptural quotations—whether referring to the Body of Christ or a local congregation—use church with a small c.

“Well all I can say is thank God it’s not your job to determine my salvation. That’s the role of the Lord and his angels :-)”

Comparing your Gospel to the Gospel handed down to us by the Apostles, I can only come to the conclusion that you are damned. Whether you will repent at some later point, that’s not something I can know. But in your current condition, your theology is not compatible with Christianity.

Gal 1:8-9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (9) As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

If you say I am wrong about the theology of your religion, which I quoted directly from, you should address the alleged errors and respond to them. Until then, I can only read from your own website and realize that you believe I am damned because I cannot possess the Holy Spirit outside of your religion, as it requires a “laying on of hands” and “prayer” by your church, not to mention having right views of the laws (apparently, you DO follow the dietary laws as seen in Leviticus, according to the “about” page, along with multiple holy day and Jewish festival observances) and is not the sovereign act of God as seen in the New Testament, received at the moment of saving belief, which itself (belief) is the gift of God.

From your website, requiring baptism and laying on of hands from a “minister of the truth church”:

The Bible gives us a clear answer. Paul came upon some believers in Ephesus who had been baptized by no less than John the Baptist. Yet they had not received the Holy Spirit for two reasons. One is that they did not have the laying on of hands. The other was that they apparently did not fully understand the Christian way of life, the covenant into which one enters through baptism.
What did their baptism by John accomplish? Undoubtedly, it helped prepare them for conversion, for he preached repentance. And it likely strengthened their resolve to obey God. But the baptism didn’t bring about their conversion or result in their receiving the Holy Spirit. Clearly, many factors have to be in order for that to take place, including knowledge of sin (the transgression of God’s law, 1 John 3:4
), an awareness of the need for forgiveness, true repentance (turning from sin to obedience) and a clear understanding of the obligations of Christianity. In addition, the baptism should, under normal circumstances, be done by a minister of God’s true Church, followed by the laying on of hands and prayer to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

http://www.ucg.org/bible-faq/laying-hands-necessary-receive-holy-spirit

And then you said, over and over again, that “Protestants” are in rebellion against Christ, that we have conspired to mistranslate the Bible, that the Bible itself is subject to error, and that you are the only person here that is a member of the actual Church of God.

Your points:

that “Protestants” are in rebellion against Christ

This is evident even if we leave aside the issue of the sabbath and holy days. Entire denominations have determined that priests can be practicing homosexuals. Entire denominations have embraced and teach sin. That's as a group.

Individuals sin. That's a fact. I sin. That's fact. You sin. That's a fact. Christians were all, as individuals, in full outright rebellion against Christ. I was. You was. Some today who call themselves "Christians", even among the church of God, are in full rebellion against Christ. There IS a false Christianity that goes across all denomination lines, even mine:

Mat 7:20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
Mat 7:22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
Mat 7:23 And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

Now if THIS is what you're referring to then the answer is yes.

that we have conspired to mistranslate the Bible,

It's not so much a "conspiracy" as it translator bias. Translation bias is a known entity. It exists. If not every single translation in a particular language would be exactly the same. On the verses I've quoted it's evident that someone who embraces and teaches that the holy days of the Lord Jesus Christ are to thrown on a scrap heap and disregarded is obviously going to have a bias against translating them differently then they have.

that the Bible itself is subject to error,

Is it your position that all translations are error free? I don't think anyone believes that except perhaps for the King James only crowd.

and that you are the only person here that is a member of the actual Church of God.

I take people at their word that they are Christians. I've said multiple time that I do not know the salvational state of anyone.

There ARE those who exhibit, in these forums, more of a carnal outlook than a spiritual one. For example some of the behaviors and attitudes I perceive from you are less than kind and charitable. But that doesn't mean that I don't think of you as a Christian brother or that I can and do exhibit works of the flesh.

"Until you can do that, then it is your Sola Scriptura belief that is on shaky ground."

Let me get this straight...you buy the words of a broken chain of degenerates and I have to prove that Rome is NOT the center of all Christendom?

As von Dollinger notes:

"Then the Papacy sank back into utter confusion and moral impotence; the Tuscan Counts made it hereditary in their family; again and again dissolute boys, like John XII [age 16 when he became Pope] and Benedict IX [age 11 when he became Pope], occupied and disgraced the Apostolic throne, which was now bought and sold like a piece of merchandise,..."

Or Edward Gibbon writes:

"The influence of two prostitutes, Marozia and Theodora, was founded on their wealth and beauty, there political and amorous intrigues. The most strenuous of their lovers were rewarded with the Roman mitre...The bastard son, the grandson, and the great grandson of Marozia-a rare geneology-were seated in the Chair of St. Peter."

This is your gang of infallible reporters claiming your organization is the central authority? The Bible has no reference to Rome being important, but your cult requires someone prove it is NOT there? No wonder Rome cannot get any of its doctrines correct...it makes them up and argues, "Prove they are not part of tradition!" Okay, we'll just wait and see how this works out for you folks. Just remember...you were told they are false.

Sure it is. It's just not compatible with whatever it is you believe.

and realize that you believe I am damned because I cannot possess the Holy Spirit outside of your religion, as it requires a “laying on of hands” and “prayer” by your church

You should read a little bit more because you're wrong...I don't think you're damned at all.

The teaching of scripture is that the holy spirit is given by the laying on of hands.

It's actually an elementary teaching of the 1st century church:

Heb 6:1 Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, Heb 6:2 of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

There are numerous examples of the apostles giving the holy spirit by laying on of hands:

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them,
Act 8:15 who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit.
Act 8:16 For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Baptism wasn't enough...

Act 8:17 Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
Act 8:18 And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given, he offered them money,
Act 8:19 saying, "Give me this power also, that anyone on whom I lay hands may receive the Holy Spirit."
Act 8:20 But Peter said to him, "Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased with money!

Another example:

Act 19:2 he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" So they said to him, "We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit."
Act 19:3 And he said to them, "Into what then were you baptized?" So they said, "Into John's baptism."
Act 19:4 Then Paul said, "John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus."
Act 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.

One more example:

2Ti 1:6 Therefore I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.
2Ti 1:7 For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind

Biblically speaking, unless you repent, are baptized and have hands laid on you do not have the spirit of God indwelling in you.

However that does NOT mean you are damned. God sometimes works with people for YEARS or even decades before they're ready to have his spirit. If you're freely admitting that you have not repented of sin, been baptized or had hands laid on you then you have not followed the biblical example of obedience in even the smallest matter to Christ. You're in rebellion and odds are that you really don't have the spirit of Christ dwelling in you.

But even if you never come to that point then the Lord guarantees that you'll get your chance at redemption after the influence of Satan is removed at the great white throne judgement. Then you'll be able to make an informed choice.

This is the biblical teaching on these matters. It's completely possible that I'm wrong. I'm not perfect as you seem to enjoy pointing out. That's why Christ says we are to treat others charitably...to focus on our own faults and shortcomings rather than that of others.

There's nothing I can do about what the bible says, but I hope my attitude and speech have been kind and charitable. I hope and pray that I haven't conveyed any type of condemnation because it's easy to fall short there. I'm certain that in my conversation with you that I've entertained negative thoughts and emotions. If I've let them enter into my writings then please forgive me for my transgressions.

"Whatever truth is not revealed in that Word certainly comports with it.

For any fruitful dialog to take place there must be an agreement on the definition of terms, or at lease an understanding of the word usage of the other party. We have failed to establish that common understanding.

The "Word" is not the Bible. The Logos, as used by St. John in his Gospel, represents all order, all knowledge, all truth and all beauty. Allegorically, God spoke creation into existence and to speak and to express an idea a word is associated with the idea and spoken. God's idea of His perfect Self is "The Word" supreme above all other words. It is the second person of the hypostatic union, Jesus.

All knowledge, all order, all truth and all beauty is not contained within the Bible. The Bible is a reflection of the word and much truth can be found within it. Much knowledge, order, truth and beauty is also contained within Sacred Tradition and within natural revelation, science. I have no problem with referring to the Bible as Sacred Scripture", but it is not God or the Logos. Undue veneration or worship of a book is no different that what Catholics are accused of with respect to objects of sacred art, differing only from the printed word in medium.

"Grace to you...if He allows."

Grace is not something given only to the elect or based upon the merit if the recipient. "Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to his call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life." Justification results when we cooperate with that Grace and is manifest in the blessings and Fruits of the Holy Spirit in our lives. I am truly blessed.

Peace be with you

“The teaching of scripture is that the holy spirit is given by the laying on of hands.”

I’m not sure why you spend so much time on this, when I’ve already refuted it twice, and even said that you did not talk about it (my refutation) for a “reason,” since I discovered that the true extent of your theology is that no one can have the Holy Spirit unless someone from your church lays hands on them. (You’re even responding to my statement now, yet without actually addressing what I actually said!) Therefore, to respond to an instance where the Holy Spirit falls on someone without the UCG.org officiating, refutes the claim.

Here is the Holy Spirit falling on Cornelius and his family during the middle of Peter’s preaching, prior to water baptism and anyone laying their hands upon them.

Act 10:44-47 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (45) And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (46) For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, (47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

In fact, this frequently happens throughout the Old Testament as well, as the Holy Spirit, who is God, falls on whom He will according to His own purpose.

While it is true that people were laid hands on by the Apostles and received the Holy Spirit, this was always immediately followed by the visible manifestations of God’s work. People could actually see what was happening. For example, the Holy Spirit here falls upon them accompanied by an Earth quake:

Act 4:31-32 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. (32) And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

(Also notice that this was not instigated by the laying on of hands, but by the sovereign grace of God in response to their prayers.)

These were all visible signs, and those who received it in such cases responded with miracles. They would speak in tongues (that is, foreign languages understood by those observing who knew them), and would perform many miracles, which were all visible signs that both glorified God and condemned the world who would still refuse to believe.

Considering no one in the UCG.org is actually performing in any visible miracles of God, it doesn’t appear the laying on of hands is actually serving any purpose for them.

On the other hand, if you read about the reformers in ages past, you see many miraculous answers to prayer that rival the times of the Book of Acts. I myself have received answers to prayer from God, whom you say I do not have because I have not been touched or prayed over by the cultic ministers of the UCG, nor do I regard any of their heretical doctrines. You thus ask me to embrace something I know, from experience, and the scripture, simply isn’t true.

And here is the truth, that whoever confesses the Lord Jesus Christ will be saved:

Rom_10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

That our faith itself is the work of God:

1Co_12:3 ... and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Mat_16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Joh_15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

That our faith is counted for righteousness, and therefore there is no need for moral perfection or perfect obedience to by right with God:

Rom_4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

And that the Holy Spirit is freely given to all those who ask:

Luk 11:13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

And therefore, there is none of the struggle, or the dependence on man or obedience, that is utterly riddled on that Demonic website of yours.

And as for your repeated claims that you think that I am a Christian, while asserting opinions that imply the exact opposite, I’ll point again to that article of yours that says that one must be baptized and prayed over by a minister of the “True Church of God.” If therefore YOU are in the true church, all others are false. Thank God in heaven, that salvation is through Jesus Christ alone, and not through a cult like the UCG.

“Your misquoting and out of context quoting various individuals in the Catholic Church does not bolster your position, it just makes you look foolish.”

I’m only quoting this part, but I am responding to the whole.

I did not misquote or misreport Augustine or Gregory, as their words are quite clear. You merely hope that I misreported or misquoted, but you cannot prove it nor respond to it. It’s a matter of blind faith with you that I am wrong. (I bet you couldn’t even read the quotes! You probably hissed and retreated like a vampire.) But it’s a matter of facts with me that I am right. If this is the best the Romanists have to offer, it’s no wonder the Reformation was so successful, and why today the Roman Church that once burned people at the stake, now tells us that we are still Christians, and even goes around praying with Muslims or members of other religions in a state of pitiful equality. A sad condition!

Now, you said “the OPINIONS of various people don’t amount to a hill of beans.” You really need to be consistent in your argument. You said that you had 2,000 years of tradition and the magisterium. But, if your traditions have changed in 2,000 years, and the magisterium of those ages condemned the beliefs of the magisterium of today, then you do not have 2,000 years of tradition or a linear succession. You have a developing theology, which has gone through many transformations, and is today in retreat due to liberation theology and the conquest of the infidels in Europe.

Augustine, for example, when he was preaching what you today would call “Calvinism,” was not expressing an opinion. He was condemning Pelagianism as a heresy. When Augustine said the Eucharist was a figure, that one eats and drinks Christ through faith, he was teaching and commentating on the scripture. When Augustine said that “yea, rather, blessed are they who obey the word of God,” saying that Mary was more blessed through faith than through birth, he was teaching and commentating on the scripture. When “Pope” Gregory and Theodorat placed the throne of Peter under three different Bishops, they were not being polite. They were expressing the actual stance of the church at the time. Therefore, the stance of the church has changed, as the people in the church changed, driven by their love of money, the root of all evil.

Regarding Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement, not only were they silent on the “universal pastor” whom you say we must all be in communion with, they flouted him (even Clement) by pointing to the scripture and the communion found in the local church with the Bishop, whose “head is God.” Thus, the most important doctrine in Romanism, which is unity with the Roman Bishop, was simply ruled out as unnecessary, as everyone was in communion one with another based on a unity of faith in correct doctrine as seen in the scriptures.

As for the “canon” being established 300 years later. Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement quote heavily from the New Testament canon before the end of the first century. The epistles were not written 300 years later or were waiting for 300 years for the Roman church to discover and reveal them. They were with the church from the beginning, since they were written by the Apostles and given to the believers since the beginning. Your position does not hold water. In fact, you didn’t even offer any evidence, aside from outraged assertions already ruined by your own “Pope.”

“Perhaps, I hope, I can save some time here in clarifying a point.

There is a difference between what the Catholic Church teaches and what any one individual Catholic writes or says. I think this distinction is obvious and necessary. We can’t quote all of Augustine as “the Church” and then all of Ignatius as “the Church”, and so on.

There is a distinction between the Church and any one individual.”

The Church is made up of the individual members of Christ’s body. If therefore the Bishop of Hippo, and then the Church at large, condemns Pelagianism, as an example, and affirm what the Romanists today call “Calvinism,” this is a contradiction in the “tradition” the Romanists claim is unbroken. If the “Pope” affirms a tradition wherein three Bishops possess the “throne of Peter” 500 years later, and the Romanists hold that only the Bishop of Rome has the throne of Peter, this is a change and contradiction in the Tradition which is claimed to have been consistent for 2,000 years.

The Romanists, therefore, live and die on the opinion of the leaders of their church.

This happened exactly two times in the new testament...the first time when the holy spirit was poured out on the first Jewish believers, and the second time when it was poured out on the first gentile believers.

It happens no other time. So unless you were one of the first Jewish Christian or gentile Christians the biblical example for having the holy spirit of the Lord is through the laying on of hands.

For example, the Holy Spirit here falls upon them accompanied by an Earth quake: Act 4:31-32 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. (32) And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.

You're taking those verses out of context and reading them wrong.

Who was there? The first Jewish Christians...who already had the ALREADY had the holy spirit:

Act 4:8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, "Rulers of the people and elders of Israel:

Verse 8 means that the spirit, already present, is being strengthened.

It's the same way later in the chapter:

Act 4:29 Now, Lord, look on their threats, and grant to Your servants that with all boldness they may speak Your word,
Act 4:30 by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus."
Act 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness.

The servants of Christ ALREADY had his spirit...they received it on the day of Pentecost, one of the Lord's holy days. This is a simply a way of restating what verse 8 said. It's the same way in numerous other verses.

Eph_5:18 And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissipation; but be filled with the Spirit,

Act_13:52 And the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit.

They're not first time giving of the spirit, but a strengthening, a stirring up, or the spirit.

EVEN Paul had to have hands layed on him to get the holy spirit because he was NOT in the group of the first Jews or the first Gentiles:

Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit."

Scripture is clear. Believing it or believing tradition is entirely up to you.

I said nothing about food, unless you also are a promoter of keeping the dietary laws. I believe that's a 'yes':

Absolutely because that's what Christ taught and practiced and that's what biblical Christians taught and practiced. The Lord Jesus Christ designed our bodies to run on particular foods. Not all foods were designed to be eaten by us and God lists those.

The problem that you (and most others have) is that they're ignorant of the difference between Jewish kosher laws and food prohibitions by the Lord. The Lord didn't give a lot of laws about food...basically it was "don't eat this type of flesh". The jews took this and added their own traditions, washings, rites and ceremonies to it.

Thanks for the links D-fendr...I'll make them clickable:

Did Jesus Cancel Dietary Food Laws"

Clean and Unclean Meats

And don't forget...

What Does the Bible Say About Clean and Unclean Meats?

Whew...you guys are keeping my fingers moving! The issue of meats is another one of those things that made the first Christians look "too Jewish". Many abandoned the food laws for fear of persecution in the Roman empire. In other word, they thought the dictates and demands were more important than the words and practices of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Douglas, this really is looking very close to the same as taught by Messianic Jews to me...

Many of the beliefs are similar. Messianic Jews however generally wish to retain many Jewish customs and tradition that are extra-biblical.

For those following the discussion please feel free to chime in and ask questions. We're jumping around a bit so private freepmail continues to be welcome if you prefer....

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Introduction: The Church Jesus Built