Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you know as well as I do, Mystic, that in Matthew 16:18, He said, "Upon this rock I will build my church." Did He say, "I'm going to establish 'a Christian Church'?" Uh... no. He said He was going to establish His Church. And His Church would be the Church of Jesus Christ. It seems obvious to me, though maybe not to you, that this would be a Church His disciples (i.e. those who came to be known as "Christians") would affiliate themselves with. As to whether that Church survived in its original form or not is a topic best left to another thread.
As a Jew, if Jesus meant to establish what He knew as a "church" He would have used synagōgē NOT ekklēsia . I know how and why we differ on this issue, Katz, but it is not a significant enough issue to warrant our exploring the reasons, IMO.
As a Jew, if Jesus meant to establish what He knew as a "church" He would have used synagōgē NOT ekklēsia . I know how and why we differ on this issue, Katz, but it is not a significant enough issue to warrant our exploring the reasons, IMO.
I think the question is whether the modern idea of "church" as an organized structure was intended or just a group of people who follow Jesus. I think it significant that the emphasis was on membership rather than organization.
As a Jew, if Jesus meant to establish what He knew as a "church" He would have used synagōgē NOT ekklēsia . I know how and why we differ on this issue, Katz, but it is not a significant enough issue to warrant our exploring the reasons, IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
I think the question is whether the modern idea of "church" as an organized structure was intended or just a group of people who follow Jesus. I think it significant that the emphasis was on membership rather than organization.
I'm always intrigued by people who are so certain that Jesus meant something other than what He actually said. Of course Jesus was not going to physically "build" a synagogue or any other religious edifice, and the idea of a "church" can have varying meanings. One of those is "a body or organization of religious believers." That's what I believe Jesus had in mind, that His followers would unite themselves as His, and would join together to worship as He taught them, would be unified in understanding everything that He had taught them during His ministry and would continue to spread His word and serve others in His name. Collectively, that's a lot easier to do than it is individually.
I'm always intrigued by people who are so certain that Jesus meant something other than what He actually said. Of course Jesus was not going to physically "build" a synagogue or any other religious edifice, and the idea of a "church" can have varying meanings. One of those is "a body or organization of religious believers." That's what I believe Jesus had in mind, that His followers would unite themselves as His, and would join together to worship as He taught them, would be unified in understanding everything that He had taught them during His ministry and would continue to spread His word and serve others in His name. Collectively, that's a lot easier to do than it is individually.
I really do not want to get into your church beliefs, Katz. The simple fact of the matter is that there are two unwarranted presumptions in your view of things that are problematic. The first is that you presume that the "assembly" is supposed to be "believers" instead of "followers." The second is that this assembly or ekklēsia was to be a formal organization or institution but He would have used synagōgē if that was His intent. The consciousness I encountered would have no concern whatsoever about what anyone believed nor with having them become members of any organization. Unconditional love and acceptance for one another are the only concerns detectable. YMMV.
1. State your religion or the group of people your beliefs are associated the closest to. If you're Christian, please state your denomination
2. Who is the "founding person" of your beliefs?
3. If the person could connect with every person on earth today and give a short 3 sentence or less message, what do you think that message would be?
1. Atheist.
2. There isn't one. There are a number of influential thinkers and writers, but they didn't found the belief. Listing them would be like listing all of the church fathers, prophets, saints, or prominent clergy.
3. There being no person responsible, there is no message from the founder.
I really do not want to get into your church beliefs, Katz.
Excuse me, Mystic, but that's not what I was doing. I made no mention of "my church," so you don't need to, either. When I want to discuss Mormonism, I will be sure to make it clear that that's what I'm doing. Hundred of millions of Christians who are not in any way, shape, or form affiliated with "my church" believe, as I do, that when Jesus Christ said He was going to establish His Church, He meant what He said.
Quote:
The simple fact of the matter is that there are two unwarranted presumptions in your view of things that are problematic. The first is that you presume that the "assembly" is supposed to be "believers" instead of "followers."
Well thank you for telling me what I "presume," but allow me, please, to set the record straight. As I understand the it, a true believer in Jesus Christ is also a follower of Jesus Christ. They are inextricably linked. You're splitting hairs in your effort to dismiss my opinion as flawed, and it's not going to work. I don't care if you agree with me or not, and I don't care whether we discuss it further or not, but 90% of the time, when you respond to my posts, I feel as if you're talking down to me, sort of like a kind old grandfather would to a six-year-old.
Quote:
The second is that this assembly or ekklēsia was to be a formal organization or institution but He would have used synagōgē if that was His intent.
No, He would not. He used the word He intended to use. He wasn't going to physically build a synagogue, a cathedral, a temple, an LDS meetinghouse, or a kingdom hall. He was going to create a means by which His teachings could be accurately preserved and passed on to others, a means by which His believers/followers/disciples/friends could fellowship with one another, teach one another, and uplift one another as a single body.
In Ephesians 4:11-16, Paul discusses the organizational structure that He (i.e. Jesus Christ) put into place. He explains why this was essential and what would be accomplished by a formal assembly of saints. The Cambridge University New English Bible puts verses 15 and 16 like this: "Let us speak the truth in love; so shall we fully grow up into Christ. He is the head, and on Him the whole body depends. Bonded and knit together by every constituent joint, the whole frame grows through the due activity of each part, and builds itself up in love."
Paul may be one of the ignorant, barbaric savages you have so little use for, but I believe that when he said what he did about the organizational Church, he was spot on.
Quote:
The consciousness I encountered would have no concern whatsoever about what anyone believed nor with having them become members of any organization. Unconditional love and acceptance for one another are the only concerns detectable. YMMV.
I respect the fact that you have had your own spiritual experiences, Mystic, but you need to remind yourself from time to time that they are no more valid or legitimate than the next person's are. Encounters of the sort you say you have experienced are meant for your personal growth and enlightenment, not mine. They may be irrefutable facts to you, but to me, they are nothing more than your own opinion. It's an opinion worth considering, but no more so than anybody else's.
Excuse me, Mystic, but that's not what I was doing. I made no mention of "my church," so you don't need to, either. When I want to discuss Mormonism, I will be sure to make it clear that that's what I'm doing. Hundred of millions of Christians who are not in any way, shape, or form affiliated with "my church" believe, as I do, that when Jesus Christ said He was going to establish His Church, He meant what He said.
We agree He meant what He said. We disagree about what He meant.
Quote:
Well thank you for telling me what I "presume," but allow me, please, to set the record straight. As I understand the it, a true believer in Jesus Christ is also a follower of Jesus Christ. They are inextricably linked. You're splitting hairs in your effort to dismiss my opinion as flawed, and it's not going to work. I don't care if you agree with me or not, and I don't care whether we discuss it further or not, but 90% of the time, when you respond to my posts, I feel as if you're talking down to me, sort of like a kind old grandfather would to a six-year-old.
The presumption is inherent in the interpretation. It is not personal to you. I accept that I seem to be talking down to people since so many people say so and for the record, I AM a kind old grandfather. The problem is in the phrase "believe IN" Jesus because it includes a bunch of beliefs ABOUT Him that are necessary to qualify for membership in a Church which is irrelevant to being a follower of Christ.
Quote:
No, He would not. He used the word He intended to use. He wasn't going to physically build a synagogue, a cathedral, a temple, an LDS meetinghouse, or a kingdom hall. He was going to create a means by which His teachings could be accurately preserved and passed on to others, a means by which His believers/followers/disciples/friends could fellowship with one another, teach one another, and uplift one another as a single body.
In Ephesians 4:11-16, Paul discusses the organizational structure that He (i.e. Jesus Christ) put into place. He explains why this was essential and what would be accomplished by a formal assembly of saints. The Cambridge University New English Bible puts verses 15 and 16 like this: "Let us speak the truth in love; so shall we fully grow up into Christ. He is the head, and on Him the whole body depends. Bonded and knit together by every constituent joint, the whole frame grows through the due activity of each part, and builds itself up in love."
Jesus considered the religious leaders to BE the problem and wanted no such organization or hierarchy among His FOLLOWERS. That is why He explicitly decried anyone who wanted to be first among them. The testament to our human perversity is revealed by the Catholic Church adopting His demonstration of disdain for authority into a ritual for appointing the Pope! It is a travesty, IMO.
Quote:
Paul may be one of the ignorant, barbaric savages you have so little use for, but I believe that when he said what he did about the organizational Church, he was spot on.
The religionists make much of my ACCURATE description of our ancient ancestors as lacking in knowledge and understanding of our reality (ignorant) and largely primitive and uncivilized (barbaric) apparently thinking it is an insult. It is NOT. It is the reality. I have a lot of use for their views as they inform my views and understanding of the significance of Jesus Christ.
Quote:
I respect the fact that you have had your own spiritual experiences, Mystic, but you need to remind yourself from time to time that they are no more valid or legitimate than the next person's are. Encounters of the sort you say you have experienced are meant for your personal growth and enlightenment, not mine. They may be irrefutable facts to you, but to me, they are nothing more than your own opinion. It's an opinion worth considering, but no more so than anybody else's.
We agree He meant what He said. We disagree about what He meant. etc....
I really do feel at regular intervals, that I am a teacher explaining something to a lot of shop window mannequins.
Perhaps I am too bought in to my own Theory that the gospel Jesus never exited and the actual Jesus (a Pharisee Jew and a messianist if not a zealot) said nothing of what is in the gospels. The sayings and a majority of the doings attributed to him in the gospels are reflecting the views of the Greek Christians who wrote them.
So of course it is going to talk of founding a church - because that church was already in existence. Matthew look almost as late as Luke and later than John to me. And that 'Church' reference is just Matthew -not even original Synoptic material.
So why are we still getting 'Jesus said and meant what he said?' Am I the only one who can see the bleedin' obviiouis?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
