The current Christian Church

[Allie]

Firstly, let me say like I always do, that I am very young. Please be patient with me, as I am quite new at debating and make mistakes.

Here we go:

The perfect church. I've been thinking about this for a while, and would like to hear your ideas. Keep in mind that we are talking a Christian church, and while I respect all of your views, for this thread we are talking Christianity.

I didn't post on the Christian-only board because I would like to hear the non-Theist opinions.

Questions for debate:
1. Do you think the church is currently set up in the best possible way? If not, how would you change it?
2. Do you think any vital part of Christianity is missing in the church today?

For example, I think it would be much better to have the church split into groups. Everyone is on a different level, so the more advanced Christians would go and delve deep into the Bible and into the details, while the new Christians would hear more of the basic message. There could be many groups, with certain teachers specializing in certain types of teaching--I think that would be wonderful.

Also, I think churches today are missing something incredibly vital--prayer! We won't feel the power of prayer if we don't pray! At my church, at least, there is no deep prayer. I think that is extremely important.

With that said, go ahead and post your opinions! I'm excited.

[micatala]

Moderator Comment

Are we allowed to copy and paste? I thought we weren't allowed to, at least back in the day.

The rules state:

8. Extensive quotes from another source (particularly other websites) should state the source to avoid plagarism.
9. No unconstructive one-liners posts are allowed in debates (Do not simply say "Ditto" or "I disagree" in a post. Such posts add little value to debates).
10. Spamming (duplicate posts, advertisements, etc) is not allowed.

Copying and pasting is OK, but please indicate where the information is copied from, preferrably with a link.

The information provided should be relevant to the questions for debate. As moderators, we typically move advertisements to the Trash Can and rambling or irrelevant information to Random Ramblings.

Although not stricly against the rules, it is good form to edit the information to the most relevant aspects. Overwhelming a thread with long passages copied from elsewhere is not too productive, and many debaters are likely to simply ignore long cut and past passages, especially if it seems only some of the material is relevant to the debate topic.

[Sir Rhetor]

I think that the Church would do best to paint Christianity as fun and soul-saving. I think that this is what it is doing right now.

[jeafl]

1. Do you think the church is currently set up in the best possible way? If not, how would you change it?

The only correct way to set up and run a church is the way the Lord God intends. This means a church must be sound in doctrine, sound in polity and sound in practice. As near as I can tell no current organized church on earth meets this test. Churches that may have sound doctrine dont have sound polity and with unsound doctrine or unsound polity sound practice is impossible.

2. Do you think any vital part of Christianity is missing in the church today?

Any? More likely all.

For example, I think it would be much better to have the church split into groups. Everyone is on a different level, so the more advanced Christians would go and delve deep into the Bible and into the details, while the new Christians would hear more of the basic message. There could be many groups, with certain teachers specializing in certain types of teaching--I think that would be wonderful.

How would being at different levels of Christian maturity prevent people from being of the same body? Is an infant or an aged grandparent not part of their family because of their age?

Also, I think churches today are missing something incredibly vital--prayer!

Likely true. The world probably wouldnt be in the fix it is in right now if we had an abundance of prayer. But prayer is contingent on sound doctrine, polity and practice. As long as People who claim to be Christians are unwilling to be in one accord and unwilling to earnestly contend for the faith in everything they do, their prayers are useless. Insincerity in man produces deafness in God.

[kayky]

jeafl, what do you consider "strong polity"?

[bernee51]

1. Do you think the church is currently set up in the best possible way? If not, how would you change it?

The only correct way to set up and run a church is the way the Lord God intends. This means a church must be sound in doctrine, sound in polity and sound in practice. As near as I can tell no current organized church on earth meets this test. Churches that may have sound doctrine dont have sound polity and with unsound doctrine or unsound polity sound practice is impossible.

IOW it is open to interpretation.

2. Do you think any vital part of Christianity is missing in the church today?

Any? More likely all.

As i suspected...there are no 'true christians'(tm)

For example, I think it would be much better to have the church split into groups. Everyone is on a different level, so the more advanced Christians would go and delve deep into the Bible and into the details, while the new Christians would hear more of the basic message. There could be many groups, with certain teachers specializing in certain types of teaching--I think that would be wonderful.

How would being at different levels of Christian maturity prevent people from being of the same body? Is an infant or an aged grandparent not part of their family because of their age?

I think she is referrig to 'spiritual maturity'

Also, I think churches today are missing something incredibly vital--prayer!

Likely true. The world probably wouldnt be in the fix it is in right now if we had an abundance of prayer.

An unsupported claim? Wishful thinking?

Insincerity in man produces deafness in God.

No existence produces deafness in god.

[jeafl]

jeafl, what do you consider "strong polity"?

What do you mean by strong polity? This isnt a term that I have used.

The New Testament makes it clear that the 1st century church had a church-wide hierarchy- each individual congregation had its own elders, but there were elders in Jerusalem that had a supervisory role over the entire church on earth. Furthermore, every individual congregation submitted to the authority of Paul, the Apostles and the elders in Jerusalem when it came to determining legitimate Christian doctrine (circumcision) and practice (eating meat that had been sacrificed to false gods) while Paul and the Apostles had a say in choosing leaders for individual congregations. And my understanding is that every individual congregation had a plurality of leaders. There was never a one to one congregation to pastor relationship. This way no congregation could fall prey to a pastoral dictator and each congregation was held in check by every other congregation. Mutual accountability and independent outside authority insured that doctrine and practice would remain sound.

Of course this system could only last as long as Paul and the Apostles were alive on earth. Thus the system of apostolic succession was created. Each Apostle designated a successor that would assume the Apostles authority when the Apostle died and then the successor would repeat the process with a successor of his own. This system worked OK until Constantine took over the church and put governmental authority behind the Arian heresy. Legitimate apostolic succession dissolved at this point, although some churches still claim it.

[jeafl]

As i suspected...there are no 'true christians'(tm)

If you are an atheist, how would you know?

I think she is referrig to 'spiritual maturity'

As was I. I assumed that the reference was to Paul's feeding babes in Christ milk rather than meat.

No existence produces deafness in god.

Zoom! Right over your head. If we are insincere, God wont listen to us even though He hears us.

[bernee51]

As i suspected...there are no 'true christians'(tm)

If you are an atheist, how would you know?

By their words are they known....

No existence produces deafness in god.

Zoom! Right over your head.

Because you say so?

If we are insincere, God wont listen to us even though He hears us.

You seem to know a lot about the 'ineffable'.

[kayky]

jeafl, what do you consider "strong polity"?

What do you mean by strong polity? This isnt a term that I have used.


The New Testament makes it clear that the 1st century church had a church-wide hierarchy- each individual congregation had its own elders, but there were elders in Jerusalem that had a supervisory role over the entire church on earth. Furthermore, every individual congregation submitted to the authority of Paul, the Apostles and the elders in Jerusalem when it came to determining legitimate Christian doctrine (circumcision) and practice (eating meat that had been sacrificed to false gods) while Paul and the Apostles had a say in choosing leaders for individual congregations. And my understanding is that every individual congregation had a plurality of leaders. There was never a one to one congregation to pastor relationship. This way no congregation could fall prey to a pastoral dictator and each congregation was held in check by every other congregation. Mutual accountability and independent outside authority insured that doctrine and practice would remain sound.

Of course this system could only last as long as Paul and the Apostles were alive on earth. Thus the system of apostolic succession was created. Each Apostle designated a successor that would assume the Apostles authority when the Apostle died and then the successor would repeat the process with a successor of his own. This system worked OK until Constantine took over the church and put governmental authority behind the Arian heresy. Legitimate apostolic succession dissolved at this point, although some churches still claim it.

Oh, you actually said "sound polity." I didn't mean to misquote you. Actually, more often than not, Paul was in conflict with Jerusalem; and that brand of Christianity eventually died out.

You are quite confused about Constantine. His council voted down Arianism. It was the next emperor that brought it back. It went back and forth like that throughout the fourth century.

[teacherterry]

i've read your post. your thinking process is headed in the true and correct direction, oboviously guided by the Spirit. one comment though, remember, "church" is supposed to be crafted after a family unit. family units don't divided into smaller groups to be taught on different levels because they need the "rounding out" they recieve from the whole group or family. true spirit inspired preaching will have something for everyone in the message, but you are correct in thinking that a "first principles" type class is needed at the birth of new family members. just like new babies need constant attention so the parrellel in the natural and spiritual is the same, newly born again babes in the Lord need a teacher who delivers the word in the light of the Spirit. i used to teach a class of that same nature and it proved to be extremely sucessful, providing an excellent springboard for learning to hear the voice of the Lord by the newbies. the whole church is in desperate need of proper, spirit inspired teaching. please read my post "open letter to pastors everywhere if you get a chance.

god bless and raise you up in Him.

teacherterry