Church is it even biblical

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,417
6,699
113
No, I am not interested in the company of Webster. What is advisable is that you recognize that a synagogue is not representative of the Church of Chrsit. Playing with words doesn't always get you where you want to go.

Close doesn't count. Neither does your evaluation. The Church is all born-again believers.

In your dreams and imagination.

Quantrill
There are some who are truly galled to know our foundation of faith was laid by Jews of Judah, beginning with our Savior Jesus, Yeshua, and His Twelve, followed immediately by the lost of Israel saved first………..the Jew first and then the Greek.

If you give so much value to your own vocabulary, I am afraid nothing, not even the true foundation is within your scope of understanding. I give as much credence as is possible to all languages and words with which I am familiar, for they all bear witness to God when understood.

Shalom chavari.
 

Noose

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2016
5,096
932
113
That's just weird. Paul dying and indwelling them? No. That's not what it's saying. Take a look at the verse again:
"10 Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. "

This is death he bears in his body, and life made manifest in our body as well.



I think you just have some strange notions. There is no logical connection between being baptized for the dead and dead OT saints indwelling them. That verse says nothing about OT saints, and nothing about them indwelling them.

I don't see these notions of yours in the New Testament. We do not know about their baptism from the dead beyond this reference. They could have been baptized on behalf of those who had professed faith but hadn't yet been baptized, for example. We just don't know. There just isn't a framework for the idea you propose in the Bible.

I think some of these strange doctrines and ideas you hold to are good illustrations for why it might be helpful for you to go to a church where there are people gifted to teach, exhort, etc.
That is exactly what Paul says and there's nothing weird about it just like there was nothing weird about Elijah living in John the Baptist.

2 Cor 4:
10We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. 11For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may also be revealed in our mortal body. 12So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.

13It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.” b Since we have that same spirit of c faith, we also believe and therefore speak, 14because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you to himself. 15All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God.

Isn't Paul talking about resurrection? The underlined phrase is the same exact phrase he uses here:

1 Thess 4:14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him.

If Paul is not talking about resurrection in 2 Cor 4, he was not talking resurrection in 1 Thess 4 either.If the resurrected souls are not presented together with living ones in 2 Cor 4, those that arise from sleep are also not caught with those that were living in 1 Thess 4.

You are the one who needs to read again not me.
 

Quantrill

Well-known member
Sep 20, 2018
988
300
63
James 2:2 warns the believing readers that if a man comes into their synagogue wearing a gold ring and a poor man comes in wearing vile rainment, they should not show partiality toward the man with the gold ring and despise the poor man. The Greek word translated 'assembly' is synagogen, the Greek word from which we get synagogue.

Synagogue originally meant assembly, and later came to also mean the building where the meetings occurred. The same thing happened with ekklesia after Biblical times.

James could be talking about a Jewish synagogue where Christian Jews were participants. Or he could have been talking about Christian assemblies. He mentions a footstool, so the assembly might have been in a home. Though I have read that there is a tradition that James was an elder at the assembly at the upper room site and that archeologists have found a first century synagogue building on the first century level of that made from the same type of stone as the temple, with Christian 'grafitto' and the Torah niche facing the Tomb of the Holy Sepulchre, the likely resurrection site. James apparently died before the destruction of the temple.
As I said, the Church is not a building. And a church can be any certain meeting of religious people. As (Acts 7:38) says. "This is he that was in the church in the wilderness..." But that is not the Church of Jesus Christ, which is that mystical Body of believers.

If you want use the word 'synagogue' to mean an assembly or a building, it is still not the Church. If you want to use the word 'church' or 'ekklesia' to mean a fellowship or building, it is still not the Church. The Church is that mystical Body of Jesus Christ whereas all are indwelt with the Holy Spirit, the very Spirit of Christ.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

Well-known member
Sep 20, 2018
988
300
63
There are some who are truly galled to know our foundation of faith was laid by Jews of Judah, beginning with our Savior Jesus, Yeshua, and His Twelve, followed immediately by the lost of Israel saved first………..the Jew first and then the Greek.

If you give so much value to your own vocabulary, I am afraid nothing, not even the true foundation is within your scope of understanding. I give as much credence as is possible to all languages and words with which I am familiar, for they all bear witness to God when understood.

Shalom chavari.
I have no problem understanding the foundation of our faith. That doesn't make the Church a synagogue.

Quantrill
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,417
6,699
113
All languages are the sum total of their own historic influences. You use Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and many more foreign roots to what you seem to believe are English words, proper words.

Every word has a history leading to other languages. English as it is today is the product of this lingual evolution.

Do not say one word cannot be used when you do not know its history. the nature of language.

No, it is not necessary to be expert in languages to be saved, but do not show your ignorance by making such declarations. Just because the word, synagogue, has gone out of fashion for two thousand years (almost), does not change its original meaning.

Sorry, but the history of the word declares your are being obstinate without knowledge of what you speak. God bless you.
 

Quantrill

Well-known member
Sep 20, 2018
988
300
63
Your use of certain words does not define the Church. A synagogue of what? A church of what? As I said, the Church is that mystical Body of Jesus Christ composed of every born-again believer.

Quantrill
 

JaumeJ

Senior Member
Jul 2, 2011
21,417
6,699
113
Your use of certain words does not define the Church. A synagogue of what? A church of what? As I said, the Church is that mystical Body of Jesus Christ composed of every born-again believer.

Quantrill
I must leave you to the Body of Christ to understand, now or some time in the future.
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
In the time of the apostles they would have called it synagogue.
The church was first brought to light in the 16th century by Catholics and king james.
Jesus called his gathering Eclesia.
The church is a building we are a temple.
The Catholics built the greatest empire in the world. Killing those who disagreed. And stealing untold billions of dollars from those who wanted to know god.
Then there are the multitude of denominations with no fellowship with each other.
Inside. Of each group there is the hierarchy.
Fellowship amongst saints happen at the grass roots level. I e boots on the ground.
To summarize church is not of God, for he wanted a relationship with us and each other.
That is surely lacking in most church.
Hope your happy I'm back
Is this your excuse for not being part of a church?
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
Okay
The point of all this.
The church has created a mess, in the USA, now you may be in sound church but of the multitude of church doctrine, which do you subscribe to.
I have been in many a church, and the doctrine differs in all.
A man or a woman comes into a church, is he welcomed yes, is he or she loved, only if the person agrees with that doctrine.
Exactly what is sound doctrine. On any given day it is what the pastor percieves to be true.
Are there still miracles, some doctrine say yes, some say no..
The church has become confusing, to even the learned amongst us. Confusion is the work of satan.
When I speak to people about Jesus, I have found most are interested but they hate church.
Side note
Jesus is always with me.
If Jesus is always with you, then you are a church.
But you are against churches.
You seem to have taken a stand against yourself.
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
I have been in many a church, and the doctrine differs in all.
You were slamming the Catholic Church in your first post.
They have the perfect solution to your "differing doctrines" problem.
Is that really what you want?
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
After reading all your post let's see I'm the anti-christ to say God doesn't honor the church is wrong I'm silly and I have no Doctrine and I don't assemble with other believers.
Question how did the word church get in the Bible if you do your history or one of them fancy religious words you'll find a King James put it in there my point was the apostles wouldn't even known the word church.
as far as assembling with other believers I assemble with Believers more than you ever believed and there are not only Catholics and Protestants Methodist episcopalians every kind of congregant you can imagine I don't agree with bad teaching I don't agree with church leaders with big words because at the end of the day when I need a word from God I go to God cuz pastors aren't going to give it to you Ecclesia is the Gathering when Jesus spoke he spoke either Aramaic or Hebrew but a lot of you have Catholic upbringing so you choose to use Greek
As far as being the Antichrist or having an antichrist spirit that makes me chuckle for most of you don't even know who Christ is or what Christ is but I can say you ready shocker Jesus is no longer the Christ
You seem to be suffering from claustro-ekklesaphobia.
The fear of fellowship with other Christians in an enclosed space, such as a building. (horrors)

Symptoms include, shortness of breath, rapid heart rate, rise in blood pressure, cold sweats, speaking in tongues (if it happens to be a Charismatic or Pentecostal fellowship), and slumber due to sermons longer than five minutes. For relief, run to the nearest Christian chat room or forum and tell everyone how horrible church is.
 

maverich

Senior Member
Jun 27, 2017
294
34
28
All of the above or previous posts are what church has placed on the table.
Doctrine!
I know that if it's not biblical you automatically refute.
Let's look at Noah
He and his grandpa witnessed for 100 years. No one believed.
Animals of kinds came peacefully to the ark, still they didn't believe.
Side note.
The animals were sign and even a wonder
Yet they still didn't believe.
God told Noah get on the boat.
3 sons 4 wives and Noah get on the boat.
There was no doctrinal discussion.
Get on the boat or die.
Original point! When the apostles spoke there was know interpretation.
I belong to Jesus I am finishing my ark.
You all are charged by Jesus to work out your own salvation.
A man must be born again, no doctrinal, or church interpretation needed.
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
All of the above or previous posts are what church has placed on the table.
Doctrine!
I know that if it's not biblical you automatically refute.
Let's look at Noah
He and his grandpa witnessed for 100 years. No one believed.
Animals of kinds came peacefully to the ark, still they didn't believe.
Side note.
The animals were sign and even a wonder
Yet they still didn't believe.
God told Noah get on the boat.
3 sons 4 wives and Noah get on the boat.
There was no doctrinal discussion.
Get on the boat or die.
Original point! When the apostles spoke there was know interpretation.
I belong to Jesus I am finishing my ark.
You all are charged by Jesus to work out your own salvation.
A man must be born again, no doctrinal, or church interpretation needed.
If you actually managed to "convert" anyone, wouldn't they be spiritual orphans? (homeless)
You might have to start a church. (horrors)

Hey, wait a minute... maybe that's where the church came from.
 

Sketch

Well-known member
Nov 1, 2018
1,278
300
83
Where's the potluck? It's not the "true" church without potluck.
I suppose someone will try to claim this is not biblical. (scripture please)
Here you go.

Ezekiel 24:3-5
Tell this rebellious people a parable and say to them:
‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:
“‘Put on the cooking pot; put it on
and pour water into it.
4 Put into it the pieces of meat,
all the choice pieces—the leg and the shoulder.
Fill it with the best of these bones;
5 take the pick of the flock.
Pile wood beneath it for the bones;
bring it to a boil
and cook the bones in it.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,160
1,787
113
Where's the potluck? It's not the "true" church without potluck.
I heard someone use"pot blessing". Maybe he did not nelieve luck was Biblical.

Have any heavily deterministic Calvinists out there taken to call it 'pot predestination'?
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,160
1,787
113
That is exactly what Paul says and there's nothing weird about it just like there was nothing weird about Elijah living in John the Baptist.
John cake in the spirit and power of Elijah. That does not mean e was possessed ny is ghost.


2 Cor 4:
10We always carry around in our body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our body. 11For we who are alive are always being given over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that his life may also be revealed in our mortal body. 12So then, death is at work in us, but life is at work in you.[/quote]

Paul wrote there about what was going on while he was on this earth, physically alive and breathing in a literal sense. He is not talking about is ghost coming back when physically dies

13It is written: “I believed; therefore I have spoken.” b Since we have that same spirit of c faith, we also believe and therefore speak, 14because we know that the one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus and present us with you to himself. 15All this is for your benefit, so that the grace that is reaching more and more people may cause thanksgiving to overflow to the glory of God.

Isn't Paul talking about resurrection? [/quote]

Yes, the resurrection, when odies that sleep in the dust arise. Resurrection- not Paul's spitit oming back help them after he dies.

In one passage he says it would be gain or him to depart and be with Christ but beneficial or the if he stayed.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
The point is that Jesus Christ was of human flesh. The same flesh of Adam and David.

The priestly order of Melchizedek was a true order. Melchizedek was a real person who was a type of Jesus Christ.

The supernatural introduced itself into the natural in the Person of Jesus Christ. God has no mother. God the Son being born into the human race and of the virgin Mary, had a mother. Jesus Christ the Man had a mother.

No, Jesus Christ made it clear that He was flesh and bone. You are big on the word 'demonstration' which means what?

Jesus Christ never resisted any worship toward Him as God.

Concening Job, you are talking about a time long before there was any 'daysman'. And Job wished for a 'daysman'. One who could touch both God and man. Thus we have Him in Jesus Christ.

If you're going to cite a Scripture, give the chapter and verse. Don't get lazy.

(Acts 1:11) doesn't support anything you said. (Rev. 1:7) doesn't support anything you said.

Quantrill

The eternal Spirit of God dwelt in the corrupted flesh of the Son of man. God did not become a man . He is not a man as us having mother and father, beginning of spirit life or end of it. He is supernatural without a nature.

I would think a real person in respect to what the eyes see does have a beginning, Melchizedek was a vision (not flesh and blood)

In order to establish a perfect type of the character and nature of the priesthood of the Lord, there was no man who could be a perfect type and so God Himself appeared in the form of a man as that seen . He did not take on a human nature. Melchizedek did not become man as He did when Jesus Christ became man, but He did appear in the form of a man in the person of Melchizedek. Again this was in order to set up a type, a perfect type of the eternal character of the priesthood of the Jesus .An demonstration of the unseen lamb of God slain from before the foundation of the world the real redemption... not the demonstration.

God is not a man us he remains without from as our invisible God. We walk by faith the unseen eternal. One demonstration of the temporal seen..............the veil is rent.

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him "no more".2 Corinthian 5:16

It causes me to wonder when he does come on the last day will he find faith or those looking for another outward demonstration.

I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth? Luke 18

Concening Job, you are talking about a time long before there was any 'daysman'. And Job wished for a 'daysman'. One who could touch both God and man. Thus we have Him in Jesus Christ.
A daysman is one usurps the authority not seen and gives it over to one seen, which also describes the antichrists.

We have him as the Son of God the Holy Spirit of God and not the Son of man used as a one time demonstration.

If we would have our invisible God as a Son of man that would describe a daysman . The Son of man resisted being a called a daysman. When accuses of good master seeing we can only serve one the Son of man replied; only God not seen is good. In the same way we are to call no man on earth Father the same applies to teacher master Rabbi

Good is defined by Him not seen not Him seen .The Pagan nations look for God made after the rudiments of this world.

No infallible fleshly interpreter set between God not seen and man seen. That would describe the Pope for one.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
I heard someone use"pot blessing". Maybe he did not nelieve luck was Biblical.

Have any heavily deterministic Calvinists out there taken to call it 'pot predestination'?
'Its not pot predestination, But as many as the father gave the Son they will come destination. For no man can possibly come unless the Father gives His faith to make it possible to come. The key is many.