Jim Lincoln wrote:
House churches are just for beginning Christian groups or in lands where Christians are persecuted as in Islamic and Communist countries. None of the seven churches mentioned in the book of Revelation, or in Paul's letters appear to be house churches.

There are several passages which refer to the assemblies in certain places meeting in someone's house, including Rom. 16:4-5, 1 Cor. 16:19, Col. 4:15, and Philemon 2. And of course there are passages that seem to indicate the early Jewish believers commonly met at the synagogue, though it seems likely that they ceased to meet in those places when the Jewish persecutions began in earnest.

SteveR wrote:
M
Modern pre trib theology has its basis with Englands John Nelson Darby and some visions of a woman he knew. But it isnt new, attempts to reconcile the NT and the Talmud have been attempted for centuries. The RCC was more effective containing the heresy than Protestants, but thats understandable considering methods employed.

fuzzy logic wrote:
I hope my fellow Amils do not resort to this kind of useless spewing.

fuzzy logic wrote:
Ignorant and blind Dispys will have their place in the lake of fire for siding with Beast in the purposeful and willful genocide of Palestinians--who many I don't doubt are Christians or perhaps even direct descendants of the 12 tribes of Israel.

John UK wrote:
Mr Dispy and I get on fine despite differing - why not you?

Unbelievable wrote:
Is that why you have adopted the moniker "Mr Dispy"?

Still, I have supposed calling myself Mr. Dispy does help people understand where I'm coming from, much as your moniker helps people understand you.

ecumaniac wrote:
Lets go all out for ecumenicalism.

Non Presby:

We are to follow Paul in his character, in his devotion to Christ, and in his doctrine, which we have now in the written form of his epistles. See 1 Co. 4:16, 11:1, and Phil. 3:17. The context in each has to do with right conduct and doctrine, not with offices in the church.

Re 1 Tim 3, they were instructions to Timothy based on abiding principles. He appointed elders at Paul's direction and with his apostolic authority. God's order is always based on authority. Paul and the other apostles received their authority to appoint elders directly from Christ. Unless an unbroken chain of authority from the apostles to the present can be demonstrated, men appointing other men to these offices is presumptuous at best. (As to following Paul's instructions, tell me, do the women at your church learn in silence with all subjection?)

But just because the offices of elder and deacon no longer properly exist does not mean there are not leaders in the church and that we are not to be subject to them. Jesus still gives the necessary gifts to edify the body - he cannot help but to care for his body!

There are no apostles today.

2. Acts 6 (not 4 - the authorities were laying hands on Peter and John there!): Again, seven were chosen specifically because the apostles saw a need to be ministered to, so the selection was done at their direction.

There are no apostles today.

3. 2 Cor. 8: Paul (an apostle, btw) directed the Macedonian churches to select men to go with him so there would be no talk of him stealing the offering they were sending to the poor saints at Jerusalem.

There are no apostles today.

4. The church at Corinth disciplined the wayward man at Paul's direction, not by any vote. Paul was an apostle.

John UK wrote:
Great answer, Mr Dispy.
And as a Christian, do you attend a Brethren Assembly for Sunday worship and breaking of bread? I attended a Brethren church once, and it was very nice.

John UK wrote:
The folks who use the word 'assemblies' in the UK are usually The Brethren. Is that what you are Mr Dispy?

[AUTHOR]DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
What do you mean by "renew the sacrifice"?Bert,
The Mass has changed greatly and in numerous ways since the 2nd or 3rd century, when it probably took on a highly ritualized form. I think what John is referring to is the Roman Catholic belief that every time mass is celebrated, Jesus is again sacrificed.

For example, from a Roman Catholic website: "The Eucharist is a true sacrifice, not just a commemorative meal, as 'Bible Christians' insist."

But Jesus died only one time, and that was the only sacrifice that was necessary to satisfy God's righteous wrath.

Hebrews 10:12; 14
"But this man [referring to Jesus], after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God...
For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."

The only sacrifice we need happened about 1,979 years ago, when Jesus died on the cross.

Angela Wittman wrote:
Dear Non Presby,
I guess I missed the punch line of the joke... But please know that as a new babe in Christ I belonged to an independent church and when the pastor and his hand picked elders began exercising tyranny over the congregation, I had no recourse but to leave. I tried to find someone to help in the situation, but could not because the church was independent.

djc49 wrote:
So then,... just HOW are elders and deacons to be appointed?
Huh?
Perhaps the Holy Spirit will alight upon the perspective candidate in the form of a dove?
Or perhaps these candidates are to be "tested" FIRST as per 1 Tim 3:10 ... THEN appointed ... by other men of faith.

Non Presby wrote:
No! Good people can make even a bad, unbiblical system work. But Independency is Biblical and works wonders even with bad people.

The very accusation levelled against Independency as a criticism of the system!

And there is nowhere in the NT where a vote was taken among the assembly to decide things. So, the Independents / Congregationalist systems are in error.

DisplacedMaritimer (Bert) wrote:
We all have a responsibility to spread God’s Word but the Apostles sent specific people out to preach. What do you call those people? What do you call the process the Apostles went through to identify and qualify them to preach?

Are there apostles today? No. Is there anyone, even the most devoted Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox or Episcopalian, who can demonstrate a clear line of apostolic succession from any of the apostles? No.

SmallTownGuy (WayneM) wrote:
The brass serpent on a pole described in Exodus ch.21 was a special instruction given to Moses. In fact, if you examine it, God or Moses is not saying to venerate or worship the serpent.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
I will point out to you, very few people in this country want to publish verses from the AV. It was designed as a device of the British Crown to be an ecumenical Bible, to replace the superior Geneva Bible. The AV makes, the Word of God, look foolish. Though thankfully Elizabethan English is so foolish to educated people that they wouldn't bother with it anyway....

2. The Geneva Bible is superior to the KJV? With all the mistakes in its marginal interpretations? It is the main source of the errors of those who follow covenant theology, Jim!

3. Your statement that the AV makes the Word of God look foolish makes me wonder what KJV Only person hurt you. Really. Forgive them and move on, but don't blame the KJV Bible for all the folly of the KJV Onliests.

4. Most educated people are not believers, so they can't understand the Bible no matter how much you dumb it down. It's a heart problem, not an intellectual one. (1 Co. 1:26)

Think of the layers of delusion and error contained in this little phrase: "laicized priest, Zen master and professor of world religions at Southern Methodist University"!!!!

"The call for young marriage raises questions: How young is too young? What if marriage is viewed as a ticket to guilt-free sex? What about the fact that marrying young is the No. 1 predictor of divorce?"

I am glad I am just a Christian and not an "evangelical." The source of confusion is obvious: listening to, and being conformed to, the world.

Paul's advice in 1 Corinthians 7 is still valid, of course: It is better to marry than to burn.

If our young people were trained better, the pressure to wait for marriage would not be nearly so great, since couples would look to the husband to provide and protect and to the wife to raise children and make a home.

Jim Lincoln wrote:
I think most of us really do wish the SBC well, since they generally follow the right path theologically.

They also have a strong tendency toward legalism. There are likely more sermons on "tithing" at SBC churches than at most denominational gatherings. Covenant theology has been gaining ground among them as well in recent years.

But even thinking about their origins, the only reason there is a Southern Baptist Convention is because they couldn't agree with their northern brothers that slavery is wrong. So how much faith am I to have that they are theologically correct?

1. We should pool all of our money to support missions; and then

2. We need a board to oversee all that money that has been pooled; and then

3. We need staff to support the board that oversees all that money that has been pooled.

Why not just trust the Lord Jesus to call the people to whom he has given gifts to the work, and to motivate the people who are supposed to support the work to pray for those who are sent out and to help with finances?