|
Post by didymus on Sept 15, 2010 16:36:44 GMT -5
Just a simple question. What is the church? I do not expect a simple answer, however. And, I do have my opinions. But, I would like to know what you think first.
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Sept 16, 2010 9:37:48 GMT -5
The "church" is simply the assembly of people that have been called by God and have answered that call. It is the congregation of the people of God, the family of God's children, and the context under which God also gathers with people.
The church existed before Christ was manifested to us. Acts 7 tells us that the people of Israel, even back when they were in the wilderness and gathered before Mt. Sinai, were the church; they were called out by God to be His people.
"Church" has nothing to do with a building or an organization.
That is my understanding of what the church is.
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Sept 18, 2010 1:48:08 GMT -5
Thanks Morris, That's a good explanation. However, I think there is a little more.
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Sept 20, 2010 10:35:58 GMT -5
Thanks Morris, That's a good explanation. However, I think there is a little more. You're welcome. However, from my point of view, there is nothing more than being a child of the living God and co-heir with His Son. 2 Peter 1:3 " as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue"
|
|
|
Post by didymus on Sept 20, 2010 18:25:06 GMT -5
However, since encountering Roo, I have adjusted my understand ing of the church slightly. Keep in mind, the temple was a physical representation of heaven. Today we are the temple of the living God. As such, are we not also a spiritual representation of heaven, even though we may still be in the flesh?
|
|
|
Post by Morris on Sept 21, 2010 12:39:42 GMT -5
Oh, I though you meant more as in qualitative instead of just including more aspects. I should not have assumed such. And don't forget that we are currently seated in heavenly places.
Ephesians 1:20 and 2:6 "which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, ... and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus"
|
|
|
Post by mellontes on Sept 22, 2010 14:06:47 GMT -5
...Keep in mind, the temple was a physical representation of heaven. Didymus, I have two questions for you. 1) Where in Scripture does it say the temple was a physical representation of heaven? 2) What do you mean exactly when you say "heaven" in that context? Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 6, 2011 9:42:30 GMT -5
Hi, Has anybody here ever researched the roots of the word Ekklesia Jesus used to designate the reality of what he is building ? What exactly was the Ekklesia in Jesus' day and what do you think the people who heard His teaching in Mathew 16 ; 18 understood?
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Mar 6, 2011 10:51:31 GMT -5
Hi Joel, It is my opinion that this time of the building of the church is the time of regeneration of Israel. It is through the efforts of the Apostles under the authority of Christ that this is accomplished. In Matthew 19:28 Jesus said: “Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."
This was the time of the church building period to the Jews first. We see in Rev. 20 that the thrones are mentioned there as well and it involved a great time of persecution for this newly developing church. Those who had received Christ and were killed for that testimony were those who would participate immediately in the reign of Christ.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 7, 2011 10:07:21 GMT -5
Allyn, I find your opinion very interesting, to say the least. But you didn't even come close to answering my question about the roots and contemporary meaning of the word for church - Ekklesia. The Ekklesia has it's roots in the governmental model of the Greek - city states. In Jesus time, the governments of the Mediteranian countries were called the Ekklesia, interestingly left intact by the conquering Romans. Literally it means " Those called out from a place of authority to rule ". Jesus called the church He will build a ruling body. Where ? In heaven. No, here on the earth. So the people who heard Jesus' words understood that the church was to be a far more than a religious organization. Therefor the church is to be the foundation for the implementing of the kingdom of God ( God's reign and rule ) back into the earth and the systems that run it. In short, the peoples and nations are to be discipled and living by the mandates of the " Ways of the Lord ".
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Mar 7, 2011 10:12:21 GMT -5
So then do you find that preterists have a different definition then the commonly held one? I guess I don't know what you are otherwise trying to understand.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 7, 2011 10:19:31 GMT -5
Just what exactly is the commonly held one that FP's hold ?
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Mar 7, 2011 11:27:12 GMT -5
Just what exactly is the commonly held one that FP's hold ? I was referring to the commonly held view of the church by christianity.
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 7, 2011 13:43:32 GMT -5
The Ekklesia has it's roots in the governmental model of the Greek - city states. In Jesus time, the governments of the Mediteranian countries were called the Ekklesia, interestingly left intact by the conquering Romans. Literally it means " Those called out from a place of authority to rule ". Jesus called the church He will build a ruling body. Where ? In heaven. No, here on the earth. So the people who heard Jesus' words understood that the church was to be a far more than a religious organization. Therefor the church is to be the foundation for the implementing of the kingdom of God ( God's reign and rule ) back into the earth and the systems that run it. In short, the peoples and nations are to be discipled and living by the mandates of the " Ways of the Lord ". Lumberjack, Very nice. I like it. One caveat. Allyn disagrees, but the Ekklesia, is the Bride, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, the body of Christ, the New Creation, the New Heaven and the New Earth. Your definition (which I like) begs the question, what "earth?"
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Mar 7, 2011 13:53:04 GMT -5
The Ekklesia has it's roots in the governmental model of the Greek - city states. In Jesus time, the governments of the Mediteranian countries were called the Ekklesia, interestingly left intact by the conquering Romans. Literally it means " Those called out from a place of authority to rule ". Jesus called the church He will build a ruling body. Where ? In heaven. No, here on the earth. So the people who heard Jesus' words understood that the church was to be a far more than a religious organization. Therefor the church is to be the foundation for the implementing of the kingdom of God ( God's reign and rule ) back into the earth and the systems that run it. In short, the peoples and nations are to be discipled and living by the mandates of the " Ways of the Lord ". Lumberjack, Very nice. I like it. One caveat. Allyn disagrees, but the Ekklesia, is the Bride, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, the body of Christ, the New Creation, the New Heaven and the New Earth. Your definition (which I like) begs the question, what "earth?" Jeff, I don't disagree that the bride is the holy city. What gave you that idea that I disagree?
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 7, 2011 15:57:21 GMT -5
The Ekklesia has it's roots in the governmental model of the Greek - city states. In Jesus time, the governments of the Mediteranian countries were called the Ekklesia, interestingly left intact by the conquering Romans. Literally it means " Those called out from a place of authority to rule ". Jesus called the church He will build a ruling body. Where ? In heaven. No, here on the earth. So the people who heard Jesus' words understood that the church was to be a far more than a religious organization. Therefor the church is to be the foundation for the implementing of the kingdom of God ( God's reign and rule ) back into the earth and the systems that run it. In short, the peoples and nations are to be discipled and living by the mandates of the " Ways of the Lord ". Lumberjack, Very nice. I like it. One caveat. Allyn disagrees, but the Ekklesia, is the Bride, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, the body of Christ, the New Creation, the New Heaven and the New Earth. Your definition (which I like) begs the question, what "earth?" I just finished reading the last chapter of Beyond Creation Science this morning and was going to say that Lumberjack's definition of the church sounds very much like the mission of the church given in the last chapter of BCS.
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 7, 2011 16:03:25 GMT -5
Lumberjack, Very nice. I like it. One caveat. Allyn disagrees, but the Ekklesia, is the Bride, the Holy City, the New Jerusalem, the body of Christ, the New Creation, the New Heaven and the New Earth. Your definition (which I like) begs the question, what "earth?" Jeff, I don't disagree that the bride is the holy city. What gave you that idea that I disagree? Allyn, Are you now saying that: New H&E= Holy City ? and New H&E = Bride ?
|
|
|
Post by Allyn on Mar 7, 2011 16:07:49 GMT -5
To be exact, Jeff - Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God is the bride of Christ. It is not what I am just now saying because it is something I have said is my view for 7 years now.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 7, 2011 22:44:19 GMT -5
Man, you guy's get so technical. I deal better with straight simple truths. Allyn, the Lord sent me into many churches and denominations , including a couple years in the JW's ( we were never members, but we love those people ) ( I will post our experiences there sometime - fascinating journey) . I also co-pastored a non-denominational chruch for a few years and pastored a home church for several years. I know the traditional church and it is not what Jesus had in mind nor is it His handiwork.
Jeff, I can't see anything else but the physical earth in this particulr instance. I agree with CC to an extent in the H & E old-new covenant deal but I also see an overlapping truth of the physical earth in all this.
Once4all, I don't believe that to be a full preterist you have to hold to the dogmatic party line. As we go thru time, things progress. Nothing is at a standstill. If all the prophesy's are completely fullfilled, wouldn't things be at a standstill ? In reality, the Ekklesia has to evolve into what God said it would be. God is not a loser nor a liar.
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 7, 2011 23:58:03 GMT -5
Jeff, I can't see anything else but the physical earth in this particulr instance. I agree with CC to an extent in the H & E old-new covenant deal but I also see an overlapping truth of the physical earth in all this. Joel, Technical? We get in trouble when we aren't technical. Jesus said H&E will pass away. It did. Therefore, H&E was not "the physical earth." Neither is the new H&E. The H&E passed away when the law, the temple, and the people passed away. The H&E was certainly tied to those things. I say the H&E was those things / contained those things / was defined by those things. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Once4all on Mar 8, 2011 0:13:21 GMT -5
... the Lord sent me into many churches and denominations , including a couple years in the JW's ( we were never members, but we love those people ) ( I will post our experiences there sometime - fascinating journey) .... Would love to hear about that journey. I've never been involved with JWs and have personally known only one (that I know of, and I didn't know him all that well). Start a new thread (probably in "Church Talk" under the Life Issues section) when you are ready to share.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 8, 2011 8:49:36 GMT -5
Jeff, ... I'm Thinking....
Bev, I'll do that.
|
|
|
Post by lumberjack on Mar 10, 2011 9:00:03 GMT -5
Jeff, First off, " technical " can be a blessing or a curse ( for lack of a better summation ). The Pharisees got pretty technical too. Now, we got two threads going here that are going to run parrallel, this one and BCS - 20. On pg 435 - BCS you talk about the complete, ( notice complete ) conversion and evangelization of our planet. The foundation of this mission is the Ekklesia. It is thru the church that will train people up in the ways of the Lord to go out into the " governmental " systems (Self, Family, Civil, Commercial, Economic ) that basically " rule the nations ". Most of the " ways of the Lord " to govern the nations are layed out in the OC. So technically, " those called out from a place of authority to rule " ( Gods people, The heavens are the heavens of the Lord, but the Earth He has given to the sons of men ) have a mandate to take back what was lost and cursed ( " and there shall no longer be any Curse " Rev 22:3 ). Remember the sweeping effects of the judgment on both man and earth in Gen.
|
|
|
Post by JLVaughn on Mar 10, 2011 11:29:45 GMT -5
Jeff, First off, " technical " can be a blessing or a curse ( for lack of a better summation ). The Pharisees got pretty technical too. Now, we got two threads going here that are going to run parrallel, this one and BCS - 20. On pg 435 - BCS you talk about the complete, ( notice complete ) conversion and evangelization of our planet. The foundation of this mission is the Ekklesia. It is thru the church that will train people up in the ways of the Lord to go out into the " governmental " systems (Self, Family, Civil, Commercial, Economic ) that basically " rule the nations ". Most of the " ways of the Lord " to govern the nations are layed out in the OC. So technically, " those called out from a place of authority to rule " ( Gods people, The heavens are the heavens of the Lord, but the Earth He has given to the sons of men ) have a mandate to take back what was lost and cursed ( " and there shall no longer be any Curse " Rev 22:3 ). Remember the sweeping effects of the judgment on both man and earth in Gen. Joel, The Christian goal for missions must be nothing less than the complete conversion and evangelization of our planet through the gospel of Jesus Christ! We didn't write "the goal is." We wrotre, "the goal must be." I don't see anything on page 435 about the subjects you discuss. Instead, the topic is about what we, the authors, believe the Church as a whole needs to do. Our view is that the curse is gone. Therefore, our labor will not be subjected to the "futility" described in Is. 65:23. We are inside the new H&E. Outside the new H&E, outside the city, there is still weeping and gnashing of teeth. There has always been and will always be "futility" outside the Kingdom. This is not the curse. The curse was inside. The curse made inside the same as outside. That my understanding anyway. Does that help?
|
|