The instruction to the disciples Matt. 28

[SemperFiDawg]

That is true, however Jesus instituted the Church and promised that the "Gates of He11 would not prevail against it".

I am not sure what the "formal" church you mention is. Can you expound?

Any formal church. The term Church has a lot of meanings. Most think of church or The Church as a building, a denomination, or maybe The Catholic Church. That's what I was referring to...formal church. Matthew 16:18 is often taken to mean this. I'm not sure it does, for a lot of reasons. When I think of the term Church I think of the collective body of active, practicing believers who are pursuing Christ with daily fevor and sacrifice. Two totally separate definitions. Two totally separate concepts.

 

[hummerpoo]

Yes this authority extends itself for discipline. Matthew 18:15-17.

We are on the same page of Scripture. It was not my intent to deny the authority to discipline, the understanding of which I think is enhanced by the passages in 1 Cor. 5 and 2 Cor. 2, as well as many in the Pentateuch, but to propose that the underlying purpose is to forestall the charge of hypocrisy by the enemies of the Body (2 Cor 2:11).

​

The Church has never claimed salvation for itself,

​

I don't think I can agree with you, notwithstanding my uncertainty of your meaning in the term "The Church", but the seriousness of the charge I would be making in disagreement, makes me hesitate to go beyond my previous qualified negative statement concerning Protestants. ​

​

but without the authority to discipline its saints, all you get are thousands of denominations led by individual men being blown about by every wind of change.

As agreed above, that premise is not the case.

 

[Israel]

That the matter of a remnant should be foreign to any, is foreign.

That it is a gravely serious matter can only be of no matter to what has no care of the Spirit:

"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches."

He that hath an ear excludes none, but is only inclusive of "he that hath an ear".

If one does not know to whom the command "let him hear" is given (for there is a spirit that must make way by its authority, [for it recognizes hearing ears], that till then it is all in seeking to keep numb and deaf) it matters not...if any have ears to hear...they shall hear by that command issued to what would hinder.

What might this effectual command to what would hinder accomplish?

The very first might be (as I will leave the arguing to others) "He". The one with an ear.
Not they, not them, not anything but "he".

Not the apostle, not the bishop, not the pastor, not the leader or elder, not the...

 

[Madman]

Any formal church. The term Church has a lot of meanings. Most think of church or The Church as a building, a denomination, or maybe The Catholic Church. That's what I was referring to...formal church. Matthew 16:18 is often taken to mean this. I'm not sure it does, for a lot of reasons. When I think of the term Church I think of the collective body of active, practicing believers who are pursuing Christ with daily fevor and sacrifice. Two totally separate definitions. Two totally separate concepts.

I look at the Biblical concept, which a lot of Christians choose to neglect. As for why anyone would choose to deny the very clear structure of the church escapes me.

Christ built it for our good and sanctification and yet we choose to do it the hard way.

 

[Madman]

I don't think I can agree with you, notwithstanding my uncertainty of your meaning in the term "The Church", but the seriousness of the charge I would be making in disagreement, makes me hesitate to go beyond my previous qualified negative statement concerning Protestants. .

]
I use Church as defined in Holy Scripture, a visible institution started by Christ for the spreading of the Gospel and the teaching and edification of the saints.

Perhaps people are disturbed by the RC claim that there is no salvation outside of the church, which is true since Christ is the head and there is no salvation outside of Christ.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

I look at the Biblical concept, which a lot of Christians choose to neglect. As for why anyone would choose to deny the very clear structure of the church escapes me.

Christ built it for our good and sanctification and yet we choose to do it the hard way.

Madman, I truly wish I had your admiration and adoration for the Church. I love my Church, but I don't feel about it the way you do. i wish I did.

 

[hummerpoo]

]
I use Church as defined in Holy Scripture, a visible institution started by Christ for the spreading of the Gospel and the teaching and edification of the saints.

Perhaps people are disturbed by the RC claim that there is no salvation outside of the church, which is true since Christ is the head and there is no salvation outside of Christ.

And the only interpreter of Holy Scripture is the Church. And the sacraments are required for salvation. And the source of the sacraments is the Church.

It has, and does, disturb some people, when it was not a man or an institution, but The God-Man who said “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." (Mat. 28-18). With which, perhaps, for some, the circle of this thread, as is appropriate, closes where it started. Or perhaps not.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

]
the RC claim that there is no salvation outside of the church, which is true since Christ is the head and there is no salvation outside of Christ.

I have a problem with any Church which makes this claim. My wife came from a Pentecostal Church. They too think they have "the only way". I went to speak to her pastor, more out of respect than anything. We were getting married and she was moving to where I lived and I just wanted to tell him, I would cherish her and treat her well. I didn't want him to worry. He said, "I know a lot of Baptist. They are good folks. They are all going to Hades." That was pretty much the end of our conversation. I've come to realize one comes God when God draws him. It's through faith and is followed by love and devotion on the believers part. The Church, any church can be an avenue to God, but they are not the only avenue. When God draws someone to him, God will provide the avenue he wishes the elected to take. The thief on the cross was the only person that was told he would be with Christ TODAY. He was never baptized, spoke in tongues, etc. Christ saved him none-the-less. That should give anyone pause when they think they have "the only way". To say that my understanding is perfect enough to put God in a box in any matter, is to make equal with God, if not in but on one point. In short, God is simply too big, to put in any shoebox I can fashion. We can differ on this, as we will, and that's ok. I know you love and serve God and am happy for you and proud to call you a Brother in Christ.

 

[Madman]

Madman, I truly wish I had your admiration and adoration for the Church. I love my Church, but I don't feel about it the way you do. i wish I did.

I wish you did also. There is no way to express here why I love The Church, not just my Church.

Maybe one day we will meet and discuss the love of Christ, the love of fellow Christian's, and the wonderful care that Christ has provided for his bride in the institution of the Church.

God's peace.
"This is the day that the Lord has made, let us be glad and rejoice in it."

 

[Madman]

I have a problem with any Church which makes this claim. My wife came from a Pentecostal Church. They too think they have "the only way". I went to speak to her pastor, more out of respect than anything. We were getting married and she was moving to where I lived and I just wanted to tell him, I would cherish her and treat her well. I didn't want him to worry. He said, "I know a lot of Baptist. They are good folks. They are all going to Hades." That was pretty much the end of our conversation. I've come to realize one comes God when God draws him. It's through faith and is followed by love and devotion on the believers part. The Church, any church can be an avenue to God, but they are not the only avenue. When God draws someone to him, God will provide the avenue he wishes the elected to take. The thief on the cross was the only person that was told he would be with Christ TODAY. He was never baptized, spoke in tongues, etc. Christ saved him none-the-less. That should give anyone pause when they think they have "the only way". To say that my understanding is perfect enough to put God in a box in any matter, is to make equal with God, if not in but on one point. In short, God is simply too big, to put in any shoebox I can fashion. We can differ on this, as we will, and that's ok. I know you love and serve God and am happy for you and proud to call you a Brother in Christ.

I do not understand, are you saying there is salvation outside of Christ? The RC, Orthodox, Anglicans, etc., do not teach nor believe you must be a member of their church to be saved, as several protestant denominations do. My maternal grandmother was Baptist and her pastor taught you had to baptist to be saved.

Baptism is another topic but we can touch on it. According to Holy Scripture, the sacrament of baptism "washes away our sins". God does not need sacraments, we do, God can save anyone he chooses. As for the thief, he had what is called by the church, the baptism of desire. He confessed Christ, yet there was no way for him to be baptized before his death.

The Church teaches and has taught for 2000+ years that salvation comes through Christ alone and no one nor nothing else, but we must remember that the church is the body of Christ, of which he is the head, an arm cannot survive without other parts.

Why would a member of the body not desire to be part of the whole? Who and what sustains the arm if it is removed?

Some would argue the Holy Spirit, but Christ did not leave us orphans, he saved us and put us in the body of the Church.

The Churchn cares for us, feeds us, dispenses the Grace's of God. God provides the sustenance of the sacraments through the church, the teaching and the preaching of the Word of God through the Church.

I am lost and greatly saddened by the thought that any Christian would not desire to be a part of the Church which our Lord built.

 

[Madman]

I have noticed one thing over the years.

Much of my family is protestant and the attend several different denominations, those assemblies are all fairly homogeneous, same thoughts, same politics, same economical class, dress the same, and are pretty much even the same color.

The parish I attend is quit a mix, taxi drivers, lawyers, doctors, multi-millionaires, white, black, brown, many different countries are represented, Chinese, Nigerian, Syrian, and plain old melba toast crackers like me, We have NOTHING in common from a social aspect, and yet we have EVERYTHING in common in Jesus Christ.

Our fellowships are unbelievable! A young Nigerian lady passed the bar exam, at her families request, the church had a special Mass in Thanksgiving to God for the blessings he had given her and her family.

Want to see a party? Come to a baptism at our Parish, nothing like another saint coming into the body.

 

[gordon 2]

"the RC claim that there is no salvation outside of the church, which is true since Christ is the head and there is no salvation outside of Christ. "

I think that if this point is studied a little bit that the way people understand the RC claim might be incorrect on all sides.




No. 847 adds, “This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation.


So the church that baptizes is in part the Church and even though a denomination or individual cannot make the link between salvation and the Church as per the RCs, that individual can still be saved just as good as a RC who does. The RC church recognizes protestants for example to be Christians and although they are not in full communion with the RCs, yet for baptism and God's grace they are not denied salvation. At least that is the way I see it.

Also many folks might not know this but the Eucharist is not the only way of Holy Communion for Catholics. Spiritual Communion can provide the same satisfactions. And Spiritual Communion is essentially the saint's will to unite intimately with Christ in love, in prayer and contemplation, not unlike in the manner of the protestant's sincerity with the Sinner's Prayers.

My point is that general ideas about what RC believe, practice and value are sometimes understood from a long history of false information. Which even Catholics suffer for. ( And it includes myself.)

 

[Madman]

"the RC claim that there is no salvation outside of the church, which is true since Christ is the head and there is no salvation outside of Christ. "

I think that if this point is studied a little bit that the way people understand the RC claim might be incorrect on all sides.




No. 847 adds, “This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience — those too may achieve eternal salvation.


So the church that baptizes is in part the Church and even though a denomination or individual cannot make the link between salvation and the Church as per the RCs, that individual can still be saved just as good as a RC who does. The RC church recognizes protestants for example to be Christians and although they are not in full communion with the RCs, yet for baptism and God's grace they are not denied salvation. At least that is the way I see it.

Also many folks might not know this but the Eucharist is not the only way of Holy Communion for Catholics. Spiritual Communion can provide the same satisfactions. And Spiritual Communion is essentially the saint's will to unite intimately with Christ in love, in prayer and contemplation, not unlike in the manner of the protestant's sincerity with the Sinner's Prayers.

My point is that general ideas about what RC believe, practice and value are sometimes understood from a long history of false information. Which even Catholics suffer for. ( And it includes myself.)

I agree. I just was not ready to go that deep all at once. The Anglicans are in agreement to a point, and of course ignorance does not stop the potential of salvation.

We differ from RC where they claim to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH, because of several reasons including the See of Peter. The Anglicans, Orthodox, Coptics, etc., can show that our bishops have the same Apostolic succession as Rome has. If our bishops are invalid so are theirs.

Rome does recognize some Eastern Byzantine rites also. Tis a holy mess in my opinion, but just like the United States, it is the best there is.

My particular Anglican denomination is in communion with most of the Historical Church and in sporadic discussions with Rome but it seems Rome is still ticked off at England for taking their property in the 1500s and is holding that against a lot of us even though we broke from Canterbury decades ago.

It is ironic that the RCC does not claim a protestant cannot be saved but many protestant denominations says RCs are not saved.

 

[gordon 2]

I agree. I just was not ready to go that deep all at once. The Anglicans are in agreement to a point, and of course ignorance does not stop the potential of salvation.

We differ from RC where they claim to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH, because of several reasons including the See of Peter. The Anglicans, Orthodox, Coptics, etc., can show that our bishops have the same Apostolic succession as Rome has. If our bishops are invalid so are theirs.

Rome does recognize some Eastern Byzantine rites also. Tis a holy mess in my opinion, but just like the United States, it is the best there is.

My particular Anglican denomination is in communion with most of the Historical Church and in sporadic discussions with Rome but it seems Rome is still ticked off at England for taking their property in the 1500s and is holding that against a lot of us even though we broke from Canterbury decades ago.

It is ironic that the RCC does not claim a protestant cannot be saved but many protestant denominations says RCs are not saved.

Ah bros and maybe that is the reason they can be saved... ignorance. Funny how that works. You know it takes a whole lot of historical-political deprogramming to love Christians distant for family kerfuffle.

Hey I tell you something. I have studied ( personal study) how land ownership worked in Europe under the Kings and the Church... and it was a mess in my view. I make a statement here: And that is, that an institution that owns or controls property, especially on a large scale, on which others work for their daily bread as was the case with the CC in the middle ages and beyond ---then that institution had ventured into politics. Own capital to make capitol and your a politician. And that somehow was big part of the Reformation... In France they needed a revolution to change that system. And I suspect that this is why in part that the CC should not venture candidates political from within the ecclesiastic state. Personally I think in hindsight that booting the CC from economic control was not such a bad idea... for many reasons.

Also the Anglican and Roman theologian have issues with their wordings( definitions and understandings) of what constitutes the Eucharist for example as do other topics I suspect. But what gets me is when RC mystics who are recognized by the RCC big wigs as such agree with protestants on important matters, such as the forgiveness of sin for example... Again funny how that works.

Also what is funny how it works is what the word Ecumenical does to some who are still fighting the German Peasant Wars or Cromwell's wars something like those who are still fighting the American Civil War like there is just a cease fire.

 

[Madman]

Ah bros and maybe that is the reason they can be saved... ignorance. Funny how that works. You know it takes a whole lot of historical-political deprogramming to love Christians distant for family kerfuffle.

Hey I tell you something. I have studied ( personal study) how land ownership worked in Europe under the Kings and the Church... and it was a mess in my view. I make a statement here: And that is, that an institution that owns or controls property, especially on a large scale, on which others work for their daily bread as was the case with the CC in the middle ages and beyond ---then that institution had ventured into politics. Own capital to make capitol and your a politician. And that somehow was big part of the Reformation... In France they needed a revolution to change that system. And I suspect that this is why in part that the CC should not venture candidates political from within the ecclesiastic state. Personally I think in hindsight that booting the CC from economic control was not such a bad idea... for many reasons.

Also the Anglican and Roman theologian have issues with their wordings( definitions and understandings) of what constitutes the Eucharist for example as do other topics I suspect. But what gets me is when RC mystics who are recognized by the RCC big wigs as such agree with protestants on important matters, such as the forgiveness of sin for example... Again funny how that works.

Also what is funny how it works is what the word Ecumenical does to some who are still fighting the German Peasant Wars something like those who are still fighting the American Civil War like there is just a cease fire.

Politics makes strange bed fellows, even in the church.

My denomination states changes in CHURCH doctrine stopped after the 7th ecumenical council, that was the last time the world wide church met as one body.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

I do not understand, are you saying there is salvation outside of Christ?

No. I'm not saying that.....at all.

The Church teaches and has taught for 2000+ years that salvation comes through Christ alone and no one nor nothing else, but we must remember that the church is the body of Christ, of which he is the head, an arm cannot survive without other parts.

completely agree.

Don't get me wrong. I love my little country church. I see God working in it every Sunday, but I also know that it's the church. It's not God, just an extension of him, that as long as it stays in his will, will continue to function. One day, if my pastor leaves it may lose it's light. I hope not, but it may. Many churches have. They lose their way, their love, their focus on God and his will. No church is immune to this just as no person is immune to this. I have a close personal relationship with God. It's person to person, and infinitely more of a blessing than the church could ever hope to be. To me the church and the scriptures are the main sources of the streams that flow from God. You follow them they will lead you to the source. If you sample them you can taste the source. But, they are not the source. I know the Source and he knows me.

 

[SemperFiDawg]

Politics makes strange bed fellows, even in the church.

My denomination states changes in CHURCH doctrine stopped after the 7th ecumenical council, that was the last time the world wide church met as one body.

Listening to you and Gordon discuss Church history and politics makes me happy I
don't have that kind of politics and history to contend with in my little home church.

 

[Madman]

Listening to you and Gordon discuss Church history and politics makes me happy I
don't have that kind of politics and history to contend with in my little home church.

I enjoy. I learn a lot from some on here, when people want to share.

Home churches are good, warm, home.
God's peace.

 

[Israel]

When we wake up and see evvybody's makin disciples o'sumthin' or someone (teaching submissions) it's easier to see why the instruction is a gift to us and for us.

Ain't no speshul efferts that are 'quired beyond hearing the 'struction to "walk in da spirit" cuz if one is believing dat to be true 'struction...he's fulfilling every bit o' his calling and 'struction. And will.

(And office as sum wud call it.)

Dere ain't no "added" stuff beyond...and there ain't no struction to ennything less. Cain't see Jesus widdout bein in da spirit, an ain't nothin' dun tha's bein' dun 'part from dat Heavenly vision.

A man at best iz only gunna do wut he is able to see Jesus doin'.

Udderwize he opposin'.

An we cunsider da patience of God to be salvation.

 

[gordon 2]

Listening to you and Gordon discuss Church history and politics makes me happy I
don't have that kind of politics and history to contend with in my little home church.

Now this is funny to me and in a wholesome way. Some might say that the point of a little home church without some kind of political or religious history to contend with is a rare bird indeed and that it does not have an eye to Church history and politics is ever a rarer bird!

I suspect that the little home church does not forget its existence is in part due to contentions with another little home church and likely the big ones down the road and especially that Jesus-God had and still has lots of contention with bodies political, with man spiritual welfare and by definition with man's history( historical personality) ...even recent---I find your view puzzling, seriously?

In any case it is good you are happy, but that you should be happy for distancing yourself from contention that has touched the mainline churches and others... hum... I'm not so sure how you can use the Lord's sword to be happy this way? In my heart people always have a history and a spiritual history good and bad. But hey... if it works for you...