Recently i had a chat with my Bus Captain and we got into the topic on what church is right. I would like to offer this to the Chrisitians first then the non-chrisitians but how do you choose a church?
The reason why i chose a baptist church is because we believe in an indipendent church. We are not one of the churches that broke off of the catholic church (not trying to be of any offence to the catholic or any of it break off's) But our church has the belief that the catholics were persecuting us during the medieval age because we wouldn't join the catholic seperation. So here are my rules before attending a chruch
--Must believe that god is the diety and follow the bible not saints
-- Must be an indipendent bible believing church
--must not be a break off of the catholic church
What church is right?
Moderator: Moderators
ok hows this
Post #11The 'church' is not a Biblical concept.
Jesus was and is the Jewish Messiah who will come back for His bride Israel.
The church and it's fathers were anti-semitic.
The question is bogus to begin with. Yeshua {Jesus} didn't start the church man did.
does this help?
Jesus was and is the Jewish Messiah who will come back for His bride Israel.
The church and it's fathers were anti-semitic.
The question is bogus to begin with. Yeshua {Jesus} didn't start the church man did.
does this help?
-
Piper Plexed
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 10:20 am
- Location: New Jersey, USA
Post #12
Yes that helps a bit, though still a tad open ended.
Correct, if one only read the Old Testament, but then again one wouldn't be a Christian, but a Jew in that case.The 'church' is not a Biblical concept.
Not quite sure about this bride Israel comment, though Jesus being the Jewish Messiah is self evident, Jesus the Christ, could not be a Christian, a Christian is a person who follows Jesus the Christ. How could someone be the Christ then a follower of the Christ at the same time?Jesus was and is the Jewish Messiah who will come back for His bride Israel.
Yeah, and what is your point? Since the Church is comprised of men and man is sinful, are you surprised? Christians have waged war against each other against Muslims and done any number of questionable (or unthinkable) things. I venture to say Jesus would not have approved of much that we do here on earth, not just Christians either.The church and it's fathers were anti-semitic.
I pretty much addressed this already, though I must ask if the question for debate is Bogus then why did Jesus exist in the first place if not to teach? If Christians are followers of Jesus then what do you propose? The only way to avoid the existence of Christianity would be to denounce Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. If that were the case then I guess I would be a Jew, not a Christian. I guess what I am trying to say is that in the days of Jesus, some Jews believed that Jesus was their saviour and some didn't. The ones that didn't continued to call themselves Jews and did not adopt the contents of the New Testament, the ones that did started to spread the Gospel, and found themselves at odds with their Jewish brethren. Seems quite natural that they then Identify themselves as a new name. Call it ancient marketing and brand identification if you like, they weren't Jews any more were they.The question is bogus to begin with. Yeshua {Jesus} didn't start the church man did.
*"I think, therefore I am" (Cogito, ergo sum)-Descartes
** I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that ...
** I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that ...
lets see if this helps any more
Post #14To start with I'm glad that you seem to be understanding what I'm saying a little.
Point 1
The word church is not in the Bible. Not the OT or the NT. Just as the word easter is not in the Bible. If you look up these two words, you will find somthing completly differant.
Lets start with easter, you'll find something else. easter in the strongs is 3957 ac 12:4 this word 3957 pascha means the passover; it has 28 other referances in the NT. the same word the same consept. how is it that it some how means easter here in acts? easter is not the same as passover.
Second lets look at the word church. The strongs # is always 1577 ekklesia meaning a called out, a popular meeting, a community of members on earth or in heaven, assembly. ac 7:38 says: He was in the assembly in the desert, with ... talking about Mosses and the assembly - the children of Israel. If we look up the word assembly in the OT we find
6951, 15 times; 5712, 8 times; 6116, 8 times; 5475, 5 times; 4168, 1 time; 4150, 2 times. 4168; mowqed, a fire or fuel.conflagration, 4150; mowed, by implacation an assembly, 5475; cowd, a session, i.e. companyof persons{ in slose deliberation } assembly, counsel. 5712; edah, assembly, company, cangregation, multitude. a side bar here is look at 5713; edah, to witness, so the assembly is a witness in the hebrew sense of the word. cool! 6116; atsarah, an assembly aspec. festival or holy day meeting. 6951; qahal, pronounced kaw-hawl, assembly, company, congragation, multitude. see also 6950 and 6952*.
If we were to look at the LXX, the septuagint; a Greek translation of the OT made in either the 3rd or 2nd century B.C.E. we will find that the word for assembly used in the Greek is ekklesia, is going to line up best with 6951/6952 kawhal/keh-il-law. congragation.
So if we put on our thinking caps we can see an equivalent meaning in the to languages, even with the limitation of translation and transliteration.
then if we look at the word church and find that it didn't even exist until the 3rd or 4th century A.D. or C.E.- common erra, we have to ask ourselfs; does it make sense that we use a word incorperated later to express what God ment hundereds of years earlier? As if He didn't have enough available to communicate clearly.
Everything in the NT is only true if it can be substantiated in the OT. See the Bereans, ac chapter 17:10...
Point 1
The word church is not in the Bible. Not the OT or the NT. Just as the word easter is not in the Bible. If you look up these two words, you will find somthing completly differant.
Lets start with easter, you'll find something else. easter in the strongs is 3957 ac 12:4 this word 3957 pascha means the passover; it has 28 other referances in the NT. the same word the same consept. how is it that it some how means easter here in acts? easter is not the same as passover.
Second lets look at the word church. The strongs # is always 1577 ekklesia meaning a called out, a popular meeting, a community of members on earth or in heaven, assembly. ac 7:38 says: He was in the assembly in the desert, with ... talking about Mosses and the assembly - the children of Israel. If we look up the word assembly in the OT we find
6951, 15 times; 5712, 8 times; 6116, 8 times; 5475, 5 times; 4168, 1 time; 4150, 2 times. 4168; mowqed, a fire or fuel.conflagration, 4150; mowed, by implacation an assembly, 5475; cowd, a session, i.e. companyof persons{ in slose deliberation } assembly, counsel. 5712; edah, assembly, company, cangregation, multitude. a side bar here is look at 5713; edah, to witness, so the assembly is a witness in the hebrew sense of the word. cool! 6116; atsarah, an assembly aspec. festival or holy day meeting. 6951; qahal, pronounced kaw-hawl, assembly, company, congragation, multitude. see also 6950 and 6952*.
If we were to look at the LXX, the septuagint; a Greek translation of the OT made in either the 3rd or 2nd century B.C.E. we will find that the word for assembly used in the Greek is ekklesia, is going to line up best with 6951/6952 kawhal/keh-il-law. congragation.
So if we put on our thinking caps we can see an equivalent meaning in the to languages, even with the limitation of translation and transliteration.
then if we look at the word church and find that it didn't even exist until the 3rd or 4th century A.D. or C.E.- common erra, we have to ask ourselfs; does it make sense that we use a word incorperated later to express what God ment hundereds of years earlier? As if He didn't have enough available to communicate clearly.
Everything in the NT is only true if it can be substantiated in the OT. See the Bereans, ac chapter 17:10...
point two
Post #15Conserening Jesus being the Messiah and not a christian; this is obvious double speak. Luke 6:40 says that A stusent is above his teacher, but everyone that is fully trained will be like his teacher.
So if He is a profit like unto Mosses - teaching Torah {guidance, instruction} - according to Deut. 13 & parts of chapter 18, He CAN NOT lead anyone away from Torah. That would make Him a false profit and stone-able in the fullest sense.
As far as who the bride of Christ is; lets look at rev. 21:9-10
In David Dtern's Jewish New Testement Commentary; he reffers to vs 2 of chapter 21.
He states that; The holy city, New Jerusalam, " The jerusalamabove" which "is our mother"[gal. 4:26] "the city with permanent foundations, of which the architect and builder is God"...is seen coming down out of heaven from God, prepared like a bride beautifully dressed for her husband as described in 21:9-22:5.
The new Jerusalam is identfied with Gods people.
So if He is a profit like unto Mosses - teaching Torah {guidance, instruction} - according to Deut. 13 & parts of chapter 18, He CAN NOT lead anyone away from Torah. That would make Him a false profit and stone-able in the fullest sense.
As far as who the bride of Christ is; lets look at rev. 21:9-10
In David Dtern's Jewish New Testement Commentary; he reffers to vs 2 of chapter 21.
He states that; The holy city, New Jerusalam, " The jerusalamabove" which "is our mother"[gal. 4:26] "the city with permanent foundations, of which the architect and builder is God"...is seen coming down out of heaven from God, prepared like a bride beautifully dressed for her husband as described in 21:9-22:5.
The new Jerusalam is identfied with Gods people.
Post #16
Yeah, and what is your point? Since the Church is comprised of men and man is sinful, are you surprised? Christians have waged war against each other against Muslims and done any number of questionable (or unthinkable) things. I venture to say Jesus would not have approved of much that we do here on earth, not just Christians either.The church and it's fathers were anti-semitic.
Jesus {Yeshua in hebrew} was semetic. We all know who said 'A house devidec will not stand'.
His abolition of slavery was not that we go back to sun whorship; i.e. easter and christmas. The church fathers could not embrace the uncertainty that comes with faith in God, so they went back to the cucombers and leeks in Egypt!
Post #17
I pretty much addressed this already, though I must ask if the question for debate is Bogus then why did Jesus exist in the first place if not to teach? If Christians are followers of Jesus then what do you propose? The only way to avoid the existence of Christianity would be to denounce Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. If that were the case then I guess I would be a Jew, not a Christian. I guess what I am trying to say is that in the days of Jesus, some Jews believed that Jesus was their saviour and some didn't. The ones that didn't continued to call themselves Jews and did not adopt the contents of the New Testament, the ones that did started to spread the Gospel, and found themselves at odds with their Jewish brethren. Seems quite natural that they then Identify themselves as a new name. Call it ancient marketing and brand identification if you like, they weren't Jews any more were they.The question is bogus to begin with. Yeshua {Jesus} didn't start the church man did.
[/quote]More double speak; Jesus didn't start christianity, man did!
christians are more comfortable being told what to believe; a religion. Rather than an incounter with God through the authority of His government!
Paul never called himself a christain. in acts 22:1-4 & acts 24:14.
"But this I do admit to you: I worship the God of our fathers in accordance with the Way {which they call a sect}. I continue to believe everything that accords with the law [torah] and everything written in the prophits.
-
otseng
- Savant
- Posts: 20517
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 337 times
- Contact:
Post #18
Admin note:
I am going to close this thread since it's evolving more into a debate than a discussion. Please start a thread in the debate subforum for debates.
