Who Is The True Church Of Jesus Christ?

[Mike182]

Mike . . . I realize that there are matters of interpretation that are somewhat hazy . . . somethings God has not revealed to us . . . but God has made a lot plain to us . . . we don't need bible code or extra revelation . . . we just need to read God's word and let the text speak for itself in its proper context . . . no twisting . . . there is a God's eye view . . . and it is the Bible.

so can you lay out for me, what the "god's eye view" is? and if i can offer valid arguments against it, then there will be splits in the congregation of the new church - so then, which side of the split is "right"? - answer - both are - so the true church is not the church who's congregation believe what you see as the right thing to believe, but those who love christ deep in there hearts

 

[TheGreaterGame]

so can you lay out for me, what the "god's eye view" is? and if i can offer valid arguments against it, then there will be splits in the congregation of the new church - so then, which side of the split is "right"? - answer - both are - so the true church is not the church who's congregation believe what you see as the right thing to believe, but those who love christ deep in there hearts

We're making progress . . . we have to agree on some ground rules:

1. Is the Bible from God and can we trust it? If yes, then God has given us "Clearly" what he expects from us, plainly . . . God is supernatural . . . but God has given us language to communicate, and although God transcends our simple language and simple minds . . . he has communicated with us through the Bible . . . this is the God's eye view.

2. If the Bible is God's word and it plainly declares what is true and how we live . . . then let it plainly declare it and may we live by it. Let's major on what we know and minor on the things we don't.

 

[Katzpur]

...dare I say Jesus' brand of Christianity

Absolutely. I don't think there's a Christian on this forum who doesn't want to follow Jesus' brand of Christianity.

 

[benjosh]

I agree with your example. There would be "HELL to pay" if a child wrecked the car.....but the punishment meted out not only would fit the crime. (I.E. Grounded, or not using the family car for a period of time) but the punishment must also have an ending time. If not, then the child cannot learn from his mistake.

I like the way you added to what I was thinking. A person needs a chance to show changed behavior so they can experience redemption.

BenJosh

 

[TheGreaterGame]

Indeed, the followers of Jesus in all generations have had God's Word, which is Jesus -- whether they had Bibles or not, and whether they could read them or not.

But as you explain it, it's largely about condemnation and retribution.

I may come down heavy on wrath . . . but I assure you the God of the OT is as Gracious and Merciful as the God of the NT . . . its all about grace friend.

 

[Smoke]

No this is exactly the reason why Christianity must be redefined . . . because you have many groups who are outside orthodox Christianity calling themselve Christians . . . this is why we must work on our definitions.

The reason Christians must keep refining their definitions is that it's the only way to exclude people who disagree with one's personal opinion but meet the older standards of Orthodoxy. The constant process of exclusion on the basis of dogma is really nothing but the assertion of pride and an expression of vain arrogance.

 

[Smoke]

True Orthodox Christianity . . . Paul's Christianity . . . dare I say Jesus' brand of Christianity

Christianity has nothing to do with Jesus -- that's why the teachings of Jesus, and even of Paul, are insufficient for Christianity. In your statement of faith at the beginning of this thread you repeated none of the teachings of Jesus, but expound on teachings that are found neither in the scriptures nor in the acts of the councils. The problem is that you aren't the exception to the rule. Those who want to follow Jesus must lay aside their manmade dogmas and their vain imaginings, and even their religions. That's something Christianity has resolutely refused to do.

 

[TheGreaterGame]

The reason Christians must keep refining their definitions is that it's the only way to exclude people who disagree with one's personal opinion but meet the older standards of Orthodoxy. The constant process of exclusion on the basis of dogma is really nothing but the assertion of pride and an expression of vain arrogance.

Its about purity of faith . . . nothing more. A little leaven leavens the whole lump . . . sounds like you have been burned a few times, a little bitter . . . I'm sorry for that, nonetheless, doctrinal purity is of extreme importance . . . its the difference of heaven or hell.

 

[Smoke]

2. If the Bible is God's word and it plainly declares what is true and how we live . . . then let it plainly declare it and may we live by it. Let's major on what we know and minor on the things we don't.

Sorry. The Bible is, at best, words about God. Jesus is God's Word.

 

[Smoke]

I may come down heavy on wrath . . . but I assure you the God of the OT is as Gracious and Merciful as the God of the NT . . . its all about grace friend.

The God you worship is neither gracious nor merciful; he's a perverse monster who creates sentient beings for the sole purpose of condemning them to eternal torture, with no hope of mercy. It would be better to be damned by such a god than to worship him -- supposing he existed.

 

[TheGreaterGame]

Sorry. The Bible is, at best, words about God. Jesus is God's Word.

Christ is indeed the Logos . . . the Bible is indeed the word's of God spoken to men about what God expects and requires of man . . . but you do not belive that it is from God, do you?

 

[Smoke]

Its about purity of faith . . . nothing more. A little leaven leavens the whole lump . . . sounds like you have been burned a few times, a little bitter . . . I'm sorry for that, nonetheless, doctrinal purity is of extreme importance . . . its the difference of heaven or hell.

Jesus never spoke of faith in terms of dogma, and never spoke of the "extreme importance" of doctrinal purity.

Yes, I've been burned, but I'm not bitter. I was bitter when I was a Christian, and saw the nonsense, superstition, and rank inhumanity that was perpetrated in the name of my faith. Now I've broken free from the prison of vain religion and can begin to learn to follow Jesus. It's not bitterness that makes a man prefer the garden of the Lord to the prisons of false teachers and hireling clergy.

 

[Smoke]

Christ is indeed the Logos . . . the Bible is indeed the word's of God spoken to men about what God expects and requires of man . . . but you do not belive that it is from God, do you?

The Protestants have rejected the infallible Pope and embraced the infallible Book. But whether your authority is a Pope or a Book, it's all the same error and the same idolatry. There are no infallible men, and no infallible books. Nevertheless men who walked in the Light had a hand in the creation of the Bible, but such knowledge of God as they had cannot be communicated by books, nor by any means to those who set up dogmas and religions in place of the life in the Light and the teachings of Jesus.

 

[benjosh]

The Protestants have rejected the infallible Pope and embraced the infallible Book. But whether your authority is a Pope or a Book, it's all the same error and the same idolatry. There are no infallible men, and no infallible books. Nevertheless men who walked in the Light had a hand in the creation of the Bible, but such knowledge of God as they had cannot be communicated by books, nor by any means to those who set up dogmas and religions in place of the life in the Light and the teachings of Jesus.

Midnight, spoken like a man who is walking in the light !

You sound like George Fox. And. . . . I know you're not parroting.


BenJosh

 

[jeffrey]

The bible is a study guide wrote through inspiration from God, not by God himself. God speaks to me through my heart, with the bible only confirming what I already knew.

 

[jeffrey]

And as far as a 'true' church, it would have to be one that teaches Christ's word without error. One without mistakes. Every religion has and has made mistakes. Christ is 'Error Free'. Man is not, nor his churches and religions.

 

[may]

If it is true that we, or you, have messed up in trying to educate people on salvation through Christ, through faith, repentance and baptism then truely they are not accountable and will be given a proper understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ JOHN 17;3 So who is the true God psalm 83;18 tells us

That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,


​

You alone are the Most High over all the earth psalm 83;18 KJV

 

[Mike182]

We're making progress . . . we have to agree on some ground rules:

1. Is the Bible from God and can we trust it? If yes, then God has given us "Clearly" what he expects from us, plainly . . . God is supernatural . . . but God has given us language to communicate, and although God transcends our simple language and simple minds . . . he has communicated with us through the Bible . . . this is the God's eye view.

2. If the Bible is God's word and it plainly declares what is true and how we live . . . then let it plainly declare it and may we live by it. Let's major on what we know and minor on the things we don't.

there are a lot of problems in using written language to make a point, and the men who wrote the bible did just that - if i wrote the words "im going to kill someone soon" - this could mean a variety of things! some might take this to mean i am stressed, and that thsi is an expression of strees - some might think i actually have a knife in my hand and drool coming out of the corner of my mouth

anything that is written is interprited, and anything that can be interprited can be interprited in a variety of ways - only the writter can say which interpritation is right, so if you believe God is the author of the bible, then we need further revelation to decide upon these interpritations

on the other hand, i believe that if you live by the interpritations you have of the bible, then you are living how you feel God wants you to be, resulting in you being apart of the "true" church of Jesus - which also means people who disagree on interpritations will still be apart of the "true" churches congregation

mike

 

[may]

Christianity has nothing to do with Jesus -- that's why the teachings of Jesus, and even of Paul, are insufficient for Christianity. In your statement of faith at the beginning of this thread you repeated none of the teachings of Jesus, but expound on teachings that are found neither in the scriptures nor in the acts of the councils. The problem is that you aren't the exception to the rule. Those who want to follow Jesus must lay aside their manmade dogmas and their vain imaginings, and even their religions. That's something Christianity has resolutely refused to do.

so who really is the faithful slave of Jesus christ
Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47 Truly I say to YOU, He will appoint him over all his belongings matthew 24;45-47

 

[jeffrey]

Mike, I agree. Good example here. I could say of someone I know... "Her beauty could stop time..." Someone could translate that to 'Her face could stop a clock!' Saying the same thing, but 2 completely different meanings....