Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What constitutes matters of Brotherhood and Fellowship?
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 43 of 163 (557834)
04-28-2010 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jaywill
04-28-2010 7:10 AM


jaywill writes:
Do you actually mean that you read through my post about the church in Ephesians and you could not discern that I was not talking about a physical building ?
People, of course.
i think its the fact that you continually use the word 'church' which to me sounds like you are speaking about the building. And your comment "The distinction between "churches" in the New Testament is geographical. What distinquishes one church from another church is locality." sounds like you are speaking about the buildings.
this is why i like the use of the term 'congregation' in the new world translation....it conveys the idea of a congregated group of people as opposed to a building where they might meet.
I dont take the view that there is a universal and local 'congregation'. There is only one congregation and it is a worldwide brotherhood. Paul wrote: Just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although being many, are one body"1Corinthians 12:12,13
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jaywill, posted 04-28-2010 7:10 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-28-2010 10:21 AM Peg has not replied
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 04-28-2010 12:43 PM Peg has replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 46 of 163 (557950)
04-28-2010 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by jaywill
04-28-2010 12:43 PM


jaywill writes:
Churches according to other boundaries other than locality are deformed entitities. At best they are improper assemblies. But the constituients may still be Christians regardless. They are divided improperly according to the New Testament standard of one church for one locality. But they are still members of the universal church and of the whole Body of Christ.
sorry, i dont get it.
What are 'other boundaries'? And in what way are they 'deformed'?
Why are they 'improper'?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jaywill, posted 04-28-2010 12:43 PM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by jaywill, posted 04-29-2010 8:23 AM Peg has not replied

  
Peg
Member (Idle past 4960 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 54 of 163 (558074)
04-29-2010 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Dawn Bertot
04-29-2010 10:57 AM


EMA writes:
Besides this you keep refernceing BIRTHDAYS, but have not YET provided one reference in SCRIPTURE or even a reference in Pagan practices and their usage of those symbols or what they were used for. Perhaps you could provide that and what they did in this connection
I can provide you evidence that the early christians did not celebrate. Did you know that the christian writer Origen wrote in one of his writings, homily on Leviticus xii 2, "none of the saints can be found who ever held a feast or a banquet upon his birthday, or rejoiced on the day when his son or his daughter was born. But sinners rejoice and make merry on such days.
I wonder what motivated Origen to write this about birthdays? What it indicates is that the early century christians did not celebrate birthdays and obviously viewed them negatively.
And the nations who celebrated birthdays had religious reasons for doing so as the following shows.
The Lore of Birthdays, Ralph and Adelin Linton writes:
The Greeks believed that everyone had a protective spirit or daemon who attended his birth and watched over him in life. This spirit had a mystic relation with the god on whose birthday the individual was born. The Romans also subscribed to this idea. They called the spirit the genius. This notion was carried down in human belief and is reflected in the guardian angel, the fairy godmother and the patron saint...
The keeping of birthday records was important in ancient times principally because a birth date was essential for the casting of a horoscope
The custom of lighted candles on the cakes started with the Greeks, Philochorus [an ancient Greek historian] records that on the sixth day of each month, the birthday of Artemis, [the fertility] goddess of the moon and the hunt, honey cakes round as the moon and lit with tapers were placed on the temple altars of this goddess.
Birthday candles, in folk belief, are endowed with special magic for granting wishes ... Lighted tapers and sacrificial fires have had a special mystic significance ever since man first set up altars to his gods. The birthday candles are thus an honor and tribute to the birthday child and bring good fortune,
Birthday greetings and wishes for happiness are an intrinsic part of this holiday. ... originally the idea was rooted in magic. The working of spells for good and evil is the chief usage of witchcraft. One is especially susceptible to such spells on his birthday, as one’s personal spirits are about at the time. ... Birthday greetings have power for good or ill because one is closer to the spirit world on this day.Page 20.
Can we today celebrate such things? Yes sure we can. But how might it affect ones standing with God?
thats for you to decide. If you are happy to do it and dont believe it would bother your conscience or Gods view, then go for it.
EMA writes:
I think it is perfectly alright for you to adopt such a belief concerning these things. The real question would be would you make it a matter of fellowship if others did not
in our congregation it does because everyone has taken the same stand against birthdays. So if someone tried to bring such a custom into their congregation, it would not be permitted. Either they would have to stop, or they would have to leave. It's even a baptismal requirement that one understands where birthdays originate from and the principles involved before they can be baptized. If they dont agree then they wont be baptized until they agree.
For us it also comes down to Jesus words about being 'no part of the world' in John 15:19. Originally the early christians remained no part of the world by rejecting such celebrations and customs. But later in the 4th century, when the church was trying to hellenize and be accepted by the roman world, they decided to accept the pagan customs. But
nowhere do the Scriptures authorize the church to reject Jesus’ statement that you are no part of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. So on who's authority did the 4th century church decide to reject Jesus’ words? What gave them the right to become part of the world? Certainly not Jesus or God or the Apostles.
James is very clear when he says at James 4:4 Adulteresses, do you not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.
so this is another strong reason to reject these worldly customs and celebrations...they put one at enmity with God according to the scriptures.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
Edited by Peg, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-29-2010 10:57 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024