The true church?

[inflyt]

My proposition is this: since the days of the Apostle Paul, church organization gradually disintegrated. During the time of the gentiles, there has been no earthly organized church body at all. There won't be again until God again pours out his spirit on a Jewish remnant during the great tribulation period. What we see passing off as "church" is Babylon (centered in Rome) with her many "protestant" daughters. Where is the true church then? It has always been a scattered and struggling group of Christians ever "coming out of her." They are often poor, sick, or ignored: the "outcasts" of Babylon.

For I was an-hungered...I thirsted..I was harbourless...I was naked...I was sick...I was in prison
Hath not God chosen the poor of this world, which are rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he promised to them that love him.
Yea and all that live godly in Christ Jesus, must suffer persecution

The true church is found in a marginalized few. God brings together two or more to form the scattered pockets of his body. The form of the early church contributed to the formation of the new testament as well as defended the doctrines of the church (before the new testament could be written and distributed). During the times of the gentiles, the new testament serves as the only rule among the outcasts of Babylon.

[Sparko]

So, I suppose you are one of the true Christians, then?

[Provoker]

Hey Inflyt:
In my opinion you are heading in the right direction, but you still have some Roman doctrine you need to scrape off...LOL
It is also my opinion that what we know as "the church" today, is not the apostolic church, but is a "paganized" religion, which was strategicly designed, for political purposes, by bishops of the universal religion of the Roman empire.
The true Christian church(messianic assembly) began in the 6th century BC when a Jewish prophet in Babylon, proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom...that a messiah would come and receive the kingdom of his father David.
That Christian church almost died out after the Babylonian captivity when the Jews returned to Judea. It enjoyed a short resurgence because of the teaching of John the baptist and Jesus, before it went underground. Constantine, the emperor of Rome, revived the name "Christianity", and applied it to a new religion called "The Universal Assembly", because it contained doctrines from every religion of the empire, and was legislated to be taught by all religious leaders in the empire. The universal religion is still alive and well today, in the doctrines of the RCC and her Protestant daughters but, if a remnant of the "true" church still survives today, I have no idea where to find it...LOL

[spl_cadet]

Hey Inflyt:
In my opinion you are heading in the right direction, but you still have some Roman doctrine you need to scrape off...LOL
It is also my opinion that what we know as "the church" today, is not the apostolic church, but is a "paganized" religion, which was strategicly designed, for political purposes, by bishops of the universal religion of the Roman empire.
The true Christian church(messianic assembly) began in the 6th century BC when a Jewish prophet in Babylon, proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom...that a messiah would come and receive the kingdom of his father David.
That Christian church almost died out after the Babylonian captivity when the Jews returned to Judea. It enjoyed a short resurgence because of the teaching of John the baptist and Jesus, before it went underground. Constantine, the emperor of Rome, revived the name "Christianity", and applied it to a new religion called "The Universal Assembly", because it contained doctrines from every religion of the empire, and was legislated to be taught by all religious leaders in the empire. The universal religion is still alive and well today, in the doctrines of the RCC and her Protestant daughters but, if a remnant of the "true" church still survives today, I have no idea where to find it...LOL

So could you please document twhat these shared doctrines were that Constantine imposed and please give a short list of the "true christian" doctrines?

[Provoker]

Hello spl cadet:
So could you please document twhat these shared doctrines were that Constantine imposed and please give a short list of the "true christian" doctrines?
During the couple hundred years that the church was underground, it obviously became divided over doctrine, or there would have been no need for the first ecumenical council. There are true doctrines, and there are false doctrines, and again, the fact that an ecumenical council was necessary, means that there were false doctrines in some factions of the church.
False doctrines which entered the church while it was underground, were "probably" picked up from the other religions of the empire, and the one doctrine which was shared by virtually all of the "other" religions of the day, was; "the virgin born, dying rising, God man", and determining whether or not Jesus was one, was the main purpose of the council, and every other council for a long time.
The official religion of the Roman empire had been the worship of Sol Invictus, the sun god, and his birthday was celebrated 3 days after the winter solstice...Dec. 25.
Astarte was the queen of heaven in several religions, under several different names, and was the festival of Easter(Astarte) venerated her.
There are many more but I suspect you have heard them all, but the true church only had one doctrine, and that was to prepare for the coming messiah, who would lead the church to the resurrection of the covenant nation/kingdom of Israel, which would restart God's everlasting(old) covenant plan to bless all the nations of the world.
This is not some kind of divine revelation...LOL, just my own honest opinion, but it is based completely on scripture, and church history as recorded by the early church fathers.
What do you think?

[semmie]

hi provoker,

welcome to Tweb! you strike me as being awfully familiar...have we spoken before?

at any rate...i'm curious about your views. are you going to tell us that "jesus" is a pagan name, too? that "christ" is pagan? that the messiah (whatever name you call him by) wasn't really crucified, dead, buried, and risen? i'm curious where it ends. you mention the virgin birth as being one of those paganisms that crept in, but the church believes in the virgin birth because of the scriptures, not in spite of them. same with the crucifixion and resurrection. perhaps you would go back to cadet's question and tell us what "true christian" doctrine is?

thanks, and again--welcome to Tweb. it's good to have ya.
~sarah

[indoctrinated]

How do the people who want to get back to the pure original church get round the idea that "history is written by the victors."?

i.e. The New Testament was preserved and handed down by the very church that you think is apostate. How do you know you have an accurate record of early Christianity or that it was ever monolithic? My understanding is that from the very beginning there were different forms of Christianity competing for supremacy.

Even within the NT there is at the very least Pauline Christianity and Johannine Christianity. Which one is the true one? Or perhaps the "judaizers" that Paul villified, perhaps they were the true church? It seems as if Peter for one had some disgreements with Paul in that area.

Oh, if only it were that simple! :lol:

[Provoker]

Hello semmie:

hi provoker,

welcome to Tweb! you strike me as being awfully familiar...have we spoken before?

at any rate...i'm curious about your views. are you going to tell us that "jesus" is a pagan name, too? that "christ" is pagan? that the messiah (whatever name you call him by) wasn't really crucified, dead, buried, and risen? i'm curious where it ends. you mention the virgin birth as being one of those paganisms that crept in, but the church believes in the virgin birth because of the scriptures, not in spite of them. same with the crucifixion and resurrection. perhaps you would go back to cadet's question and tell us what "true christian" doctrine is?

thanks, and again--welcome to Tweb. it's good to have ya.
~sarah

No, I'm not going to tell you that every thing about Jesus is pagan...LOL
Let me go over the Christian context as I see it:
While covenant Israel existed, absolutely anyone could become a covenant Israelite, simply by living within the nation and keeping the law. By the same token, a covenant Israelite could reject the nation, leave it, and no longer be a covenant Israelite.
When the covenant nation/kingdom of Israel fell(at the end of Solomon's reign), it ceased to exist, so no one was a covenant Israelite anymore. The covenant had been made with "A people", a sovereign assembly, a national assembly, etc. It was not made with individuals, so those individuals who had the spirit of the lost kingdom in their hearts, were "spiritual Israel/the spiritual kingdom". They had it in their hearts, but not in fact.
During the Babylonian captivity, a prophet proclaimed that a child would be born who would grow up and resurrect the kingdom of his father David...this was the gospel(good news) of the kingdom.
Those who were "spiritual Israel/the spiritual kingdom", then became a messianic assembly(Christian church)..."the body of Christ(the body of people who watched and waited for the messiah to come and resurrect the kingdom of David)".
When the captivity ended, and the Jews went back to Judea, many of them lost interest in resurrecting the kingdom, because they were made to feel at home, by the foreign rulers of the land. So while the Pharisees taught about the prophesy of the coming kingdom, they taught it simply as a religious doctrine, but they had no faith in it.
Judaism became a religion of vain traditions, ritually keeping redundant laws and rules from a kingdom which no longer existed, turning the Jews into the backslidden lost sheep of the house of Israel...backslidden from the goal of kingdom resurrection.
The backsliding of the Jews was a great falling away, and the body of Christ was reduced to a relatively small band of Jews who were still zealous for the kingdom(The Zealots).
Jesus came re-proclaiming the good news(gospel) of the kingdom, which had fist been proclaimed by the prophet in Babylon, some 500-600 years before.
Those who accepted the good news of the kingdom into their hearts, became "spiritual Israel/the spiritual kingdom", just as the first messianic Jews(Christians) had in Babylon.
John the baptist and Jesus were proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, in preparation for the messiah, who, when the body is large enough for him to lead successfully in a battle to take back the promised land, will come and resurrect the covenant nation/kingdom of Israel.
You asked me what the messiah would be called...he will be the "saviour king", which just happens to be a literal translation(in context), of the term "Jesus Christ".
The only doctrines of the "true church", are to watch and wait for the messiah, and to continue in love for God, and love for one another, so that when the messiah comes, his force will be united.
The resurrection of the kingdom will not be a divine, miraculous, event, but will be done the old fashioned way...by force of arms, because when covenant Israel split into two, Israel's covenant requirements(love God and love one another) were obviously broken, and God is obliged, by the terms of His covenant, to refuse His assistance in the advancement/resurrection of national Israel.
Once covenant Israel has been resurrected, without God's help, God will then make His new covenant with resurrected Israel...writing His laws forever on Israel's hearts so that all will know God, and all will do by nature the things contained in the law, thus fulfilling the everlasting(old) covenant forever.
All of this is known by virtually every bible scholar, but the preconceived dogma we have been taught for over 1500 years, has not allowed us to put it all together in context.
Remember, this is simply my own personal opinion, and I am happy to discuss it in detail:-)
What do you think?

[semmie]

wow.

i think it's good you're posting this in Unorthodox Theology. :hehe:

you said many things which i am not qualified or opinionated enough to respond to at the moment. but i wanted to further question you on this statement you made:

During the Babylonian captivity, a prophet proclaimed that a child would be born who would grow up and resurrect the kingdom of his father David...this was the gospel(good news) of the kingdom.

so the gospel has nothing to do with the crucifixion and the resurrection and the remission of sin and the grace of god?

i'm having a really hard time understanding what your stance is.

let me ask you this: in what ways do you differ from what i would recognize as a christian?

[inflyt]

In some ways, I wish I had posted this thread to "Theology 201" (or "Christianity 201", etc.). Being new to this forum, I wasn't sure if the thread might be kicked out because of controversy. This thread was directed towards orthodox believers:

1) Christ is the only God-man as the word, united as one God with the father and holy ghost.
2) Christ rose from the dead (after living a sinless life and being born of a virgin) after being crucified by wicked men. His blood is what cleanses us from all sin. Grace through faith (in the above is what this saves us).
3) The old Jewish religion is "done away with" and of itself is dead and bears no fruit. The workings of the Spirit (who is given to those who believe the above) replaces the old religion with two commandments: love Christ and love thy fellow earthling. The spirit of the old law is fulfilled in this "new" law.

What I meant by organized religion being Babylon is this (I copy the following - more or less - from a posting I made in another forum):

"Babylon" describes the source of errors found in organized religion. The Mysteries of Babylon represent the false religious system of antiquity (hence "mystery, Great Babylon") codified by Nimrod and Semiramis, the "anti-type" to fundamental biblical truth. In a certain sense, the "doctrinal interpretations" of Babylon have been consistent since before 30 A.D. Among the most significant errors of Babylon (Catholicism and Protestantism) are the almost total control that "the priesthood" has over the doctrine and lifestyle of the people it pretends to represent. Protestantism is in some ways worse than Catholicism in this regard.

In true Christianity, every believer is apart of the "royal priesthood" which has been gratefully given to us by the blood of Christ. Every believer is responsible for possessing their own souls and not allowing anyone to bring them and their faith into bondage to another (Luke 21:19, 2 Peter 2:19 Tyndale). We are commanded to standfast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free according to the new birth of Christ within us (Galitians 5:1 Tyndale). That is not to say that we will not have times in our lives in which we will struggle to free ourselves from one deception or another for "we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." (Acts 14:22 Tyndale) Those in whom the spirit of God moves concur with the true doctrine laid out in the majority text:

For all scripture given by inspiration of God, is profitable to teach, to improve, to amend and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect and prepared unto all good works. (2 Timothy 3:16 Tyndale)

And ye have an ointment of the holy ghost...And ye need not that any man teach you: but as the annointing teacheth you all things, and is true, and is no lie ( 1 John 2:20,27 Tyndale)

When a fellow Christian rebukes another it is from a position of equality in the hope that the other will turn from error. No one has authority over another's faith (2 Cor 1:24 Tyndale). Authority is based only in the spiritual use of God's word, the witness of which is to be followed as an example and not used to stratify by an assumed position (Hebrews 13:7 Tyndale). Jesus condemned authority structures within Christianity.

ye know that they which seem to bear rule among the gentiles, reign as lords over them. And they that be great among them, exercise authority over them. So shall it not be among you (Mark 10:42 Tyndale)

Jesus constantly rebuked the Jewish religious authorities who had gone the way of Babylon by replacing the authority of scripture with their own traditions and devices of priestcraft (Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Matthew 15:6 Tyndale).
Tertullian, who represented the true afterglow of Peter, rejected the centralization of authority by those who claimed to represent the church. Those who falsely claimed authority merged Babylonian doctrine with Christianity. This is the true origin of many of the doctrines and canon of today's spiritual Babylon:

The infallibility of the office of the pontifex maximus (the high Babylonian priest) and, in the more subtle case, the "rightness" of men of "religious office" (i.e. "priest" or "pastor") over the "rightness" of the "common" people .

Transubstantiation (or Co-substantiation in the case of Protestantism) - a rather gruesome pagan tradition of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of human sacrifices. True christians see the spirit of Christ as sanctifying what is already Christ's: i.e. he holds the universe together with his spirit including the bread and wine which when received by the sanctified believer becomes part of the spiritual body of Christ.

Confession of one believer to another believer seperated "in position" (i.e. a "priest" or "pastor")from the rest - a device by the Babylonian priesthood employed to retain a psychological bondage of "initiate" to "priest." True christians are commanded to freely confess their sins one to another (James 5:16 Tyndale). Though confession as a "sacrament" may not be found in Protestantism, the way many Protestants privately confide to their "pastors" in counselling sessions amounts to the same.

The various "sinless" states of Mary - wholly blasphemous because God as father, word, and holy ghost is the only one without sin (1 John 1:8 Tydnale). Mary was blessed because she was in the position to so intimately learn from the Word of God. (Luke 11:27,28 Tyndale) Isreal had long been rebuked by God for falling into idolatry involving the "Queen of Heaven." (Jeremiah 7:18,44:17,18,19 KJV). The custom of exalting Mary has roots in the Babylonian tradition of exalting Semiramis beside Nimrod. Though not explicitly found in Protestantism, the way much of Protestantism exalts the "Virgin Mother," the spirit mirrors it.

The tradition of celibacy among the "priesthood" - "The highest orders of the [Babylonian] priesthood were bound to a life of celibacy." Scripture condemns it (1 Timothy 4 Tyndale). Some cultures which adopted the system of Babylon rejected "the yoke of celibacy," and "the priesthood were permitted to marry." In other words, the daughters of Babylon (Protestantism), like the ancient daughters of Babylon before them, happen as a matter of convenience to reject the sterner requirements of the Babylonian priesthood found in Catholicism.

Baptism -

Is Christ divied? was Paul crucified for you? either were ye babtised in the name of Paul? I thank God that I christened none of you, but Crispus and Gaius, lest any should say that I had baptised in mine own name. I bapstised also the house of Stephana. Furthermore know I not whether I baptised any man or no. For Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:13-17 Tyndale). Paul, who organized the early church, utterly rejects the superstitions and formalisms at work in the early church concerning babtism. True Christians baptise one another as an outward confession of a newly born inward state that has already occured, period. Outward confession is a part of our faith, period. Yet baptism and its superstitutions played a central role in inititation into the mysteries of Babylon.

There are many other rites and ceremonies of Catholicism and Protestantism which are steeped in the doctrines of the Babylonian mysteries. This is why the faithful after the departure of Paul, starting notably with Tertullian perhaps, have ever "come away from her." (Revelation 18 Tyndale)

[Provoker]

How do the people who want to get back to the pure original church get round the idea that "history is written by the victors."?

Hello Indoctrinated:
The way I see it, there are enough inconsistancies in the bible, that I am convinced that it is not inerrant, so the onus is on me to determine, to my own satisfaction, what parts of the bible are most likely to be accurate, and what parts are most likely to be inaccurate. I call this "Rightly dividing scripture:-)"
As an example; God, who is never changing, wanted people to commit genocide in the old testament, but He wants people to love their enemies in the new testament, so the bible appears to have a lack of continuity regarding God. because of this, I do not use the God theme of the bible, as the greater context in which to interpret scripture. I don't assume that it is all wrong, but since I can't trust it's continuity, I can't use it.
I studied until I discovered a bible theme which maintained excellant continuity from Genesis to Revelation, and I began to study the bible in the context of that continuous theme.
When I read the bible with that greater context in mind, I find that the details of scripture make a lot more sense, but they are not more orthodox...LOL
Where scripture makes a sudden, radical, conflicting, departure, from the greater context, I simply assume that there is some kind of understanding problem...either mine, or the translator's, I give a lot less consideration to those passages as I interpret.
I am satisfied that I am interpreting scripture in the best way I can, in order to transcend spurious editing.
What do you think?

[Provoker]

This thread was directed towards orthodox believers:
Hello inflyt:
What you have posted is a creed, defining a sectarian ideal for the true church. Every denomination is going to have a different idea of what the true church is, so the word "true", in this case, is just a part of a misnamed expression..."true church".
Would you rather not speculate on what the biblical definition of the ***TRUE*** church might be?

[Provoker]

wow.

i think it's good you're posting this in Unorthodox Theology. :hehe:
so the gospel has nothing to do with the crucifixion and the resurrection and the remission of sin and the grace of god?
i'm having a really hard time understanding what your stance is.
let me ask you this: in what ways do you differ from what i would recognize as a christian?
Hello semmie:
It is my opinion that the bible teaches that Jesus was crucified because he was spreading the prophetic good news that David's kingdom was going to be resurrected. Jesus would have been seen by Rome, as a conspirator against the empire, which would have to be overthrown before David's kingdom could be resurrected.
The Jews who called for Jesus' death would have been the chief priests, and Pharisees, who plotted to kill Jesus to keep the Romans from killing all the Jews.
A true Christian is the very same thing as a true Jew, as Paul explained to his gentile converts, and it did not require the practicing of Jewish rituals. It simply required a circumcised heart, the spiritual equivalent of circumcision of the flesh, which was the sign of old covenant acceptance.
A true Christian is committed to the resurrection of the Davidic kingdom, to represent covenant Israel to God, so God's everlasting covenant plan to bless all the nations of the world, can continue where it left off when Israel was destroyed in a civil war in Solomon's day.
What do you think?

[inflyt]

Hello inflyt:
What you have posted is a creed, defining a sectarian ideal for the true church. Every denomination is going to have a different idea of what the true church is, so the word "true", in this case, is just a part of a misnamed expression..."true church".
Would you rather not speculate on what the biblical definition of the ***TRUE*** church might be?
The spirit of God reveals that Jesus is Lord and God. The bible only confirms and strengthens this belief by faith such as:

Great is the mystery of godliness: God was showed in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, was seen of angels, was preached unto the gentiles, was believed on in earth and received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God... Isaiah 9:6

If you do not believe that Jesus is God and suffered for our sins no amount of scriptural evidence will convince you. If belief by faith (to you) makes one part of "a sect," then millions of martyrs who gave up their lives with this belief through the power of the spirit of God were members of this "sect."

The old testament is only a shadow of the new testament, and without the new testament no longer bears fruit in and of itself (Jesus in fact cursed old Israel) - 2 Cor 3:7-11, Mat 21:19, Luke 13:6-9. God's commands in the old testament, that Israel "purge itself" of the gross idolatry practiced by the various peoples of the land, is now only a symbol. The body of Christ must purge itself of idolatry or perish with the idolatry.

[Provoker]

The spirit of God reveals that Jesus is Lord and God. The bible only confirms and strengthens this belief by faith such as:

Great is the mystery of godliness: God was showed in the flesh, was justified in the spirit, was seen of angels, was preached unto the gentiles, was believed on in earth and received up in glory. 1 Timothy 3:16

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God... Isaiah 9:6

If you do not believe that Jesus is God and suffered for our sins no amount of scriptural evidence will convince you. If belief by faith (to you) makes one part of "a sect," then millions of martyrs who gave up their lives with this belief through the power of the spirit of God were members of this "sect."

The old testament is only a shadow of the new testament, and without the new testament no longer bears fruit in and of itself (Jesus in fact cursed old Israel) - 2 Cor 3:7-11, Mat 21:19, Luke 13:6-9. God's commands in the old testament, that Israel "purge itself" of the gross idolatry practiced by the various peoples of the land, is now only a symbol. The body of Christ must purge itself of idolatry or perish with the idolatry.

Hello inflyt:
I won't chop your post up into separate quotes, but I will respond in point form:-)
(1)The scripture reveals, and the spirit gives witness. When we think of it the other way round, and we use single verses to build doctrine, it tends to spawn thousands of doctrinally disagreeing sects, each of which believes it's doctrines are revealed by the spirit.
(2)Everyone who has an opinion about the bible, but was not an eye witness to the events it records, holds that opinion by faith, but that does not make a sect. What makes a sect is, the continued use of the name of the organization, which one has left because he disagrees with it.
(3)Godliness, to me, is acting Godly, and when one has the spirit of God in his heart, he will act Godly, and the spirit of God will be evident in the actions of the flesh. It is a colloquial type expression which does not mean that the godly person was literally Jehovah. The passage says that God was seen by angels, but it doesn't say that God was seen by men, in the flesh or otherwise.
(4)In Isaiah 9:6, the son refered to is Maharshalelhashbaz, Isaiah's own son, and the prophesy that "he would be called God", simply means that he would command extremely high respect. "God" is a title, and titles always represent the level of respect which is demanded, and the bible clearly tells us that there are many gods and many lords. Isaiah 9:6 is not statement of divinity...heck, it's not even a statement about Jesus...LOL
(5)If I believe that Jesus is not Jehovah, it is simply because I can find no satisfactory biblical evidence that he is.
(6)Giving up one's life for a cause he believes in, is not a sign that one holds to the true beliefs, as the recent suicide bombers, and the Kamakazi pilots of WWII, clearly indicate.
(7)The pre-first century scriptures, represent the only bible that first century Christians had, and it was the context in which the apostols taught and wrote about the gospel of the kingdom. The new testament should be interpreted in the context of the old, not the other way round.
If the old testament is symbolism(metaphore and alegory) for doctrines which would not be revealed until the new testament, and the new testament makes the old testament obsolete, then one must ask the question...what was the purpose of the old testament in the first place?
What do you think?

[inflyt]

Hello inflyt:
I won't chop your post up into separate quotes, but I will respond in point form:-)
(1)The scripture reveals, and the spirit gives witness. When we think of it the other way round, and we use single verses to build doctrine, it tends to spawn thousands of doctrinally disagreeing sects, each of which believes it's doctrines are revealed by the spirit.
(2)Everyone who has an opinion about the bible, but was not an eye witness to the events it records, holds that opinion by faith, but that does not make a sect. What makes a sect is, the continued use of the name of the organization, which one has left because he disagrees with it.
(3)Godliness, to me, is acting Godly, and when one has the spirit of God in his heart, he will act Godly, and the spirit of God will be evident in the actions of the flesh. It is a colloquial type expression which does not mean that the godly person was literally Jehovah. The passage says that God was seen by angels, but it doesn't say that God was seen by men, in the flesh or otherwise.
(4)In Isaiah 9:6, the son refered to is Maharshalelhashbaz, Isaiah's own son, and the prophesy that "he would be called God", simply means that he would command extremely high respect. "God" is a title, and titles always represent the level of respect which is demanded, and the bible clearly tells us that there are many gods and many lords. Isaiah 9:6 is not statement of divinity...heck, it's not even a statement about Jesus...LOL
(5)If I believe that Jesus is not Jehovah, it is simply because I can find no satisfactory biblical evidence that he is.
(6)Giving up one's life for a cause he believes in, is not a sign that one holds to the true beliefs, as the recent suicide bombers, and the Kamakazi pilots of WWII, clearly indicate.
(7)The pre-first century scriptures, represent the only bible that first century Christians had, and it was the context in which the apostols taught and wrote about the gospel of the kingdom. The new testament should be interpreted in the context of the old, not the other way round.
If the old testament is symbolism(metaphore and alegory) for doctrines which would not be revealed until the new testament, and the new testament makes the old testament obsolete, then one must ask the question...what was the purpose of the old testament in the first place?
What do you think?
I will respond once more to you:

1) That is your opinion (1 John 2:27)
2) You called my core beliefs as those of "a sect," so I obliged you.
3) Pertaining to 1 Timothy 3:16. As I said before, you don't have the Holy Ghost, so you deny that Jesus is "God shewed in the flesh." There are other verses which clearly reveal Jesus is God, but I'm not goint to bother.
4) Same as (3).
5) Same as (3). You do not believe Jesus is Jehovah because you do not have the Holy Ghost.
6) Millions of Christian martyrs gave up their lives in a spirit of love for the truth, i.e. in meekness and lowliness. Even talking about you examples in this context is repulsive.
7) My repsonse is the same. The purpose of the old Jewish religion and the old testament was to lead people to rely completely on the mercy of God (fully revealed through Jesus Christ) by the enactment of a holy law of God which no one could live up to. The old religion is now spiritually dead (to be used symbolically in support of the new testament) and the law is now fully fulfilled in Jesus's two commandments.

[Gospel Minister]

The true church is the Body of Christ, and it exists both on earth and in heaven:

Eph:1:10: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

Jesus is the true church, as ALL believers become part of His body when they are saved.

1Cor:12:13: For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Since this is a biblical fact, no denominational, independent, or non-denominational church body or corporation, is the true church. While it is important for Christians to worship and fellowship AS a local church body, the local church is only a gathering of those who are members of the Body of Christ. (and others who are seeking God's truth regarding salvation, etc.)

Col:1:18: And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Until we understand this biblical concept, the church as we know it will remain a weak and flawed representation of the true church...

http://sky.prohosting.com/bocmin/

We do not allow advertising of personal web sites in post. However, if you wish to place a link in your signature you are more than welcome to do that.

[inflyt]

All Christians will agree that there is only one universal, spiritual body of Christ whose head is Christ in heaven. The question is what constitutes a member of his body, i.e. a local church, on the earth. Is she simply two or more individual believers in fellowship, or is she, as in the case of Catholicism and Protestantism, a construction based on Babylonian principles? Such Babylonian constructs penetrate most translations of the word of God and can warp our understandings in significant ways regarding what it means to be "Christian":

"Let us not forsake the fellowship that we have among ourselves" - Hebrews 10:25 Tyndale

"Let us not give up meeting together" - Hebrews 10:25 NIV
"Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together" - Hebrews 10:25 KJV


"They had their conversation with the congregation" - Acts 11:26 Tyndale

"They assembled themselves with the church" - Acts 11:26 KJV
"Barnabas and Saul met with the church" - Acts 11:26 NIV

Translations of the word of God as well as expressions of "a church" must be led by the Holy Ghost to counter the sorceries and heavy-handedness of Mystery, great Babylon which has ever claimed to be the true church. Though "central doctrine" may remain untouched, the fruits of that doctrine (such as the meekness and lowliness of God in Christ) reflected in our lifestyles are massacred. Doctrine which does not express itself in our lives is dead.

[indoctrinated]

Hello Indoctrinated:
The way I see it, there are enough inconsistancies in the bible, that I am convinced that it is not inerrant, so the onus is on me to determine, to my own satisfaction, what parts of the bible are most likely to be accurate, and what parts are most likely to be inaccurate. I call this "Rightly dividing scripture:-)"
<snip>

I am satisfied that I am interpreting scripture in the best way I can, in order to transcend spurious editing.
What do you think?

I am quite fascinated! Thank you for explaining your beliefs so clearly. I agree with you that the bible is not inerrant and that we need to interpret it to the best of our ability with all the tools available to us.

I do not agree with your interpretation but it seems to me to be a reasonable and consistent one. The main reason I do not agree is that I have studied the bible at university and am influenced by the historical-critical method of interpreting the Bible.

Are you a member of a "church"? Are there others who believe like you or have you come to this on your own? Because of some of the things you have said I am wondering whether you are connected with or influenced by the "Jehovah's Witnesses."

Have I understood correctly that you are waiting for a messiah who will lead those who believe as you do to establish a literal kingdom on earth in the country presently known as Israel/Palestine? Do you have a time scale for this, e.g. will it be within 10 years, 1000 years or is that unknown? What do you think will happen to the present inhabitants of the land, Jews or Palestinians?

Are you a pacifist? If so, how do you reconcile that with the idea of an end-time battle?

[indoctrinated]

In some ways, I wish I had posted this thread to "Theology 201" (or "Christianity 201", etc.). Being new to this forum, I wasn't sure if the thread might be kicked out because of controversy. This thread was directed towards orthodox believers:


There are many other rites and ceremonies of Catholicism and Protestantism which are steeped in the doctrines of the Babylonian mysteries. This is why the faithful after the departure of Paul, starting notably with Tertullian perhaps, have ever "come away from her." (Revelation 18 Tyndale)

Hi inflyt,

I have sympathy with your antipathy towards institutionalised and hierarchical religion. The problem with the word "orthodox" is that one needs a method of defining it, an authority. That is usually done by some sort of institution! This is how the RC church operates, and actually how many of the "protestant" denominations do too.

My impression is that you want to replace institutional authority by the Bible. Have I understood you correctly? The problem is that Provoker's or anyone else's interpretation of the Bible is as honest and sincere as yours. So how do you know which is right? I think that this is the reason why there are so many Protestant denominations.

Are you Brethren? Independent Evangelical? Or does your group not have a name? If you have no organisation how do you find other believers who think like you?

Please don't misunderstand my questions. I in no way wish to score points or "convert" you. Nor do I want to be "converted" to your way of thinking. But I do sincerely wish to understand it! I respect that both you and provoker are sincerely and honestly trying to follow the Bible. I respect that you have thought through what you believe.

[mickiel]

[QUOTE=inflyt]My proposition is this: since the days of the Apostle Paul, church organization gradually disintegrated.


Excellent , very well written. Prepare yourself for the onslught of christians who must distort the truth.

I only disagree with one point, God willnot pour out his Spirit on a Jewish remnant, it will be on a mixture of all of humankind.

Peace, Mickiel.

[indoctrinated]

I've just realised that I have asked others on this thread about their religious affiliation and haven't given mine.

Please excuse my bad manners! :blush:

I am currently a member of a Methodist church, but hold my denominational affiliation rather lightly! I don't like labels but I can probably best be described as a liberal Christian; but I have a fundamentalist Christian background.

I have often been involved in non-denominational or "ecumenical" activities and have friends in many different denominations and none!

I have recently been studying in the religions and theology dept of a university, where I also made friends with people of various faiths (not just Christian) and none!

[Provoker]

I will respond once more to you:

Hello Inflyt:
Just a couple of points:-) Since all believe by faith and not knowledge, everything that you and I believe regarding God, is simply opinion. Your opinion is orthodox enough that it is probably a result of your indoctrination by those who held your opinion before you. My opinion is my own, because I studied the scriptures without sectarian bias, and formed my own opinion according to the spirit within me, which urges me to search for the truth of the scriptures. The way that you and I formed our opinions, does not make either of us right or wrong, but it does imply which one of us is most likely to have the holy spirit.
"Holy" basicly means righteous, or right, and "holy spirit" is "the inner voice which urges one on towards rightness. When one's inner voice(spirit) urges him to put away sectarian bias, and study the scriptures to form opinions on what is actually written, he actually has the "Holy Spirit", and not a version of the Holy Spirit which is carefully constructed out of individual verses.
A person who simply agrees with the doctrines he is taught, does not necessarily have the spirit to be right, but simply to spirit to conform.
I am not saying that I have proven anything, or that I have the truth about anything. What I am saying is that my inner voice tells me that I need that no man teach me, and that I should form my opinions based on what the scriptures say, not on traditional opinions which were conceived when the earth was flat.
Incidently, I did not say that your core beliefs were that of a sect, because the core Christian beliefs are common to all Christendom. When an organization forms beliefs which differ from the core beliefs of Christendom, but retains the name of the core organization, it makes it'self a sect-ion of the core organization.
All groups which refer to themselves as Christian, are sects of the official, universal, state religion, of the 4th Century Roman Empire.
I hope you will continue to respond:-)

[JackC]

You have hit the mark with your definition of Babylon, Inflyt! Babylon is the intellectual errors that man commits when he sees only with his mind. The pharisees were Babylon and so is the modern day Christian church.

They both lost heart connection with God, mistaking thinking that by thinking they will know Him. Hogwash. You can read and study and discuss all you want, but you will never know until you experience.

Unfortunatly, Inflyt, you too have fallen victim to some of the intellectual errors dominating the present day. You havent really come out of her yet, only expanded the walls of your prison a bit wider than the typical Christian.


Jack

[inflyt]

I am both narrow minded and broad minded. I am narrow minded about certain beliefs which are essential to my eternal salvation. With these essentials (I loosely used the word "orthodox" for these essentials), there is (I hope) no compromise, no retreat, no debate allowed in my mind, heart, spirit, or body. I received them with joy and a complete washing of spirit, the only complete joy in my life, and I want to finish the race in this joy (though I have not been without my significant personal failings in the faith). If I am uncompromising in these, it's because I serve a God who is uncompromising with these. Matthew 7:14, John 8:24 If that is, to some, "a prison" of the mind, then so be it. I am a servant of Christ. 1 Corinthians 7:22

At the same time, I am broad minded when it comes to identifying enemies to the simple essentials of Christ. 2 Cor 11:3 Whether I am narrow minded or broadminded, it is of, for, and in Christ. Romans 11:34-36, 1 Cor 3:21-23.

Babylon retains two sets of oracles which they try to confuse: The truths of scripture and the Mysteries of Babylon. The continual witness of believers "out of her" has preserved the integrity of scripture and the simple doctrines of Christ. Confronted by the stream of believers departing her, always protesting her monsterous authoritarianism and blasphemous doctrine by a quiet example of the truth, Babylon is consistently checked and forced to keep her darker ways subjected behind a facade of truth.

God used the hands of Peter and Paul to create an early earthly church organization able to temporarily stall the forces working to envitably absorb all earthly religious organization into Babylon. Paul knew this was the case as witnessed in Acts 20:28-30 (as it was even while Paul was alive (2 Tim 1:15)). The temporary earthly organization was necessary to develop and propagate the new testament writings widely and numerous enough to establish a cannon. Once this cannon was established, God gave up the defense of an earthly church organization and began to draw out a continual witness against Babylon.

Perhaps starting with Tertullian and the Montanists around 200 A.D., the organizational forces of Babylon were fiercely attacked. These Individuals made a clear distinction between the Catholicism practised by Rome and those standing in the truth of the Holy Ghost. The Leonists about 300 A.D. (later to become the Waldensians (1170 A.D.)) drew a continual stream of witnesses out of the superstitions and authoritarianism of Roman Catholicism. The clear division between the "wandering Leonists" and the "centralizing Papists" is seen in their use of scripture. The Leonists, and those sympathetic to them, used the "Itala text" (probably based on the early Syrian or Byzantine textual witness), and the Papists used the Vulgate based largely on Jerome's Alexandrian textual sources.

During the Reformation, huge numbers lost their lives in pursuit of the spiritual freedom which is in Christ. Charles V and his son Philip II of the Netherlands massacred more than 100,000 for reading the Bible contrary to the edicts of the Roman Catholic inquistion. In France, during the Huguenot Wars, 200,000 Protestants were murdered by a Romanist Royalty and Jesuits who persuaded the faithful to murder "the heretics." In Bohemia, 3,200,000 primitive Protestants were slaughtered by the Hapsburgs and Jesuits. Likewise, in Austria, Hungary, Poland, Italy, Germany, Bohemia, Belgium, Translyvania (Romania) corrupt rulers with the aid of the Jesuits brutally slaughtered millions of primitive Protestants.

What organization the early church did have through the off and on again authority exercised by Paul and Peter is contrasted with the strong role that "family churches" had as well (Romans 16:5, 1 Cor 16:19, Colossians 4:15, Philemon 1:2). These "personal churches" are not like the so-called "home churches" advocated by some today (which are really just a repackaging of the Babylonian model). A Christian is a member of the royal priesthood of all believers, or he is not a Christian. This means that every household with a believing husband and wife, or a close friendship between two believing people, is a church (Matt 18:20)

The major concern of Christians should not be against obvious heretical views (e.g. those who deny the Godhead of Christ), but against more challenging heresies such as those who would attempt to centralize church authority on earth. Spiritual freedom in Christ is the great treasure to be protected.

Babylon has obviously modified its ways from the days of the Reformation. The battle over access to the Bible has been lost, so they now attack the truth by multipling translations skewed in their favor and by implicitly extending their corruption into the work environment (which conveniently keeps their "tithes" rolling in). Since the lifesytle of a Christian is as important as their doctrine, they force many Christians to become hypocrites in the work place. The gang-like mentality "below" (i.e. "workers", "the lay") and the love of worldly position "above" (i.e. "management," "the select priesthood") dominates industry. Small scale private agricultural and trades, once a mainstay for primitive Christians, is largely dead. Also, "new frontiers" which once may have offered primitive Christians an opportunity to break out of entrenched occupations are also either rare or so complex that they can drown a Christian in a sea of dependencies. Yet, I believe God today gives, to a few faithful (always a remnant), the wisdom of a serpent necessary to weave their way through the maze to the finish (i.e. which often ends in martyrdom through poverty, or the judgement of God through sickness because of Christian backsliding due to the great subversions by Babylon. James 2:5, James 5). It is the same war with Babylon, and yet always a new war, with a constant stream of causalities and "blood." (Matt 10:34, Matt 11:12) As Babylon grows in the subtlety of attack, the Holy Ghost more clearly articulates how to defend against it. The faith of each believer, as well as the expression of the word of God, moves from faith to faith (Roman 1:16-18, Hebrews 6:1-3).

Today, we have an expressive peak in the word of God through Tyndale (1534 spelling updated for modern usage) and the Geneva bible (1599 spelling updated for modern usage) translations which makes the time for personal churches, i.e. the unstructured fellowship of two or more believers, though always a mainstay of the church, now fully mature. These translations are based on the word through the Syrian and Western (European Old Latin) texts, and they also confront perhaps the most important attack to the faith by Babylon: authoritarianism. This is the local church to which I belong. Our authority is equally by the Holy Ghost and the word of God. There are obvious heretics (e.g. denials of the Godhead of Christ, inerracy of the archtype of the word of God which archtype has been sufficiently revealed through Tyndale and Geneva, the virgin birth, the manhood of Christ, the sufficiency of faith in Christ's sacrifice though grace (though the necessity of bearing the proof of this faith through fruits of the spirit), etc.) who likewise claim "the Spirit" and the word of God, but they are no concern of ours (as far as our own faith is concerned) because they remain outside our church. In addition, the more subtle heretics of Babylon (e.g. those that claim a unique priesthood or authority) also remain outside our church.

With regard to Mickiel's point concerning the end of the "times of the gentiles:" The "latter rain" spoken of by James would seem to be likely centered around a Jewish remnant during great tribulation (though as you pointed out the outpouring may include scattered gentiles) because this is the pattern of the "early rain," i.e. during the days of Paul and Peter. Paul seems to support this view in Romans 11:23-32 as well.

Good to hear the voice of peace - peace and blessings to you, Mickiel - CL.

[Provoker]

I am quite fascinated! Thank you for explaining your beliefs so clearly. I agree with you that the bible is not inerrant and that we need to interpret it to the best of our ability with all the tools available to us.

Hello indoctrinated:
I am not associated with any church, although I have associated with many. I have never been "indoctrinated" by any organization, and my opinions are mine alone.
I can only categorize myself as a non-aligned bible scholar...LOL
I do not have a creed or a statement of faith, because I believe that to have one, is to close one's mind.
My method of interpretation, is to use the smooth progression of the consistant theme which runs through the whole bible, as context in which to interpret bible details, and I do not base my opinions on the convenient wording of individual verses, or passages, because the bible was not written in verses, but it was written in context...LOL
I do not have a dogma, I simply have a considered opinion regarding what the bible teaches.
I would be happy to discuss any bible subject with you:-)

[JackC]

I am both narrow minded and broad minded. I am narrow minded about certain beliefs which are essential to my eternal salvation. With these essentials (I loosely used the word "orthodox" for these essentials), there is (I hope) no compromise, no retreat, no debate allowed in my mind, heart, spirit, or body. I received them with joy and a complete washing of spirit, the only complete joy in my life, and I want to finish the race in this joy (though I have not been without my significant personal failings in the faith). If I am uncompromising in these, it's because I serve a God who is uncompromising with these. Matthew 7:14,

Hello inflyt,

You have mentioned a scripture close to my heart - Matthew 7:14:

But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

And if I may offer you another one that holds a similar place of importance - Mark 10:25:

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a man with worldly wealth to enter into the kingdom of God.

And these from Mark:

Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

Children, how hard it is for those who trust in wordly wealth to enter the kingdom of God!

Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.

I am feeling to offer this to you, inflyt, this day, though you may not be able to hear or understand. It is gift for you to use as you wish...

Eyes of needles and narrow roads and small gates all bring one thing to mind: the need for nakedness and carrying small loads.

Children are innocent and eager, not set in already established ideas and opinions, but moldable, shapable by the One they are following. To follow Jesus, to enter into the Kingdom, we must be the same. We must be as though we are naked. Not holding to anything, not anything of this world including any thought, opinion or idea.

We must believe in Christ and Him alone. Not in the world and not in ourself and certainly not in our opinions and ideas.

We must serve Christ and Him alone. He must be our only Master and not anything of this world. Not our family, friends, our church or community. Not our self and again certainly not our ideas and opinions.

If you truly want to enter into the small gate, walk the narrow path, you must do it alone, inflyt, just you and Christ, leaving all behind.

You may not be ready to hear this now, it may even sound repugnant to you. Perhaps someday you will hunger for this knowing and so I pass it along this day.


Jack

[judge]

Matthew 18:28 (http://bible.cc/matthew/18-20.htm)

[inflyt]

A note on authority:

I believe in strong temporal authority because goverment is an important protection of our spiritual freedom. If that means at times making temporal sacrifices, I support (under conscience in Christ) the execution of such authority. I believe government represents the best God can do for an earth bound people. The worst government is better than a "government of clergy." This said, governemt has been thoroughly corrupted by Babylon (and her daughters). Spiritual despotism often reigns in the workplace in the form of gangsterism and priestcraft with little protection from goverment. When the spiritual subversion within goverment is complete, God, we hope, will return.


A note on heresy:

I do not use the word "heretic" in a presumptious way. Under a severity of afflictions and tribulations (Acts 14:22, 2 Timothy 3:12), I went through a time in which I denied essentials of the faith after being enlightened through them. At the time, I didn't think things could get any worse. The Lord clearly showed me that things can always get worse. I subsequently entered a time in my life when the previous afflictions seemed like a walk in the park (Hebrews 12:6-7). I am thankful for the Lord's chastisement. Things can always get worse. I do not overlook my own errors, nor do I paint fictions concerning the truth. As god is faithful to uphold his truth, he must thereby be faithful to uphold his mercy (he can not deny himself): If we knowledge our sins, he is faithful and just, to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost is a state of denial of the spirit of truth, a continued hardening. (Matt 12:31). At what point someone has hardened against the truth, the doctrine and lifestyle of Christ, and grown in darkness to be unmovable to the truth, God knows. God also knows to whom much is given: "For unto whom much is given, of him shall be much required." Luke 12:48 We live in a time of greater deception than during the times of the Apostles or even a century ago (2 Tim 3:13). If you see that you have failed the Lord, then that is the first sign of success. Take heart and bring to remembrance the days of your first love in the Lord (Hebrews 10:32).

[inflyt]

If we are renewed in our first love, we are also must continue to grow in this knowledge and understanding - Hebrews 6:1-3, Peter 3:18. There is only one way and one unity of knowledge in the faith which can continually bring us the childlike joy and renewal in the Lord despite all persecution and deception. (Ephesians 4:1-13). Children are distingished by the singularity of faith that they have in the things which give them joy and renewal. Vain and fair speeches which obscure doctrine (which doctrine is vital: Acts 2:42, 1 Timothy 4:1,13,16,6:3, 2 Timothy 3:16, 4:3,Titus 1:9,2:1,2 John 1:9) do not help the pure in heart who must cling to the simple essentials in Christ (which essentials bear the fruits of holiness in our lives - Hebrews 12:14) while distinguishing the sorceries of Babylon (1 Peter 4:18). If we are able, we are commanded to grow to full maturity (while retaining the childlike joy and faith) in fruit and doctrine - Ephesians 4:13, Hebrews 5:12-14.

[Provoker]

Hello Inflyt:
Regarding post #29, I agree with you on the authority issue. The only legitimate reason for the passage of any law, can only be to maintain a civil society, and human nature being what it is, laws are absolutely necessary. It is interesting to note the bible principle, that if one has the law in his heart and mind, and he does by nature the things contained in the law, he is not under the law any more. The law will be kept, but not as a law, but as a heartfelt desire. The corruption of government is manifested in laws made for reasons other than the maintenance of civil society. However, since one's spiritual life is lived in his heart and mind, a corrupt government should have no effect on it.
What do you think?

[Provoker]

God willnot pour out his Spirit on a Jewish remnant, it will be on a mixture of all of humankind.
Hello Mickiel:
Let me offer you my opinion on this statement, based on my particular method of interpretation:-)
"Judaism" began during the Babylonian captivity, and "Jews" were anyone who was committed to the messianic resurrection of the kingdom of Israel.
The Jews which backslid from faith in kingdom resurrection, became "nominal Jews", as opposed to the "true Jews" which Paul defines, and which included his gentile converts.
The "Jewish remnant" is not a racially or ethnicly recognizable group, but it is "whosoever will" accept "the gospel of the kingdom", making a heartfelt acceptance of the everlasting old covenant(circumcision of the heart), which he will literally come under when the covenant nation of Israel is resurrected.
Nominal, racial, ethnic, genialogical, Jews, do not comprise the group known as the "seed of Abraham" which will become the citizens of resurrected Israel. That seed of Abraham will be "true Jews"(the heart circumcised people of every nation), who are known variously as: true Jews, Christians, the church, the body of Christ, spiritual Israel, the spiritual kingdom, etc, etc.
This is simply my own opinion, based on using the Chronological panorama of bible history, as the greater context in which the bible story was written. What do you think?

[mickiel]

Hello Mickiel:
Let me offer you my opinion on this statement, based on my particular method of interpretation:-)
"Judaism" began during the Babylonian captivity, and "Jews" were anyone who was committed to the messianic resurrection of the kingdom of Israel.
The Jews which backslid from faith in kingdom resurrection, became "nominal Jews", as opposed to the "true Jews" which Paul defines, and which included his gentile converts.
The "Jewish remnant" is not a racially or ethnicly recognizable group, but it is "whosoever will" accept "the gospel of the kingdom", making a heartfelt acceptance of the everlasting old covenant(circumcision of the heart), which he will literally come under when the covenant nation of Israel is resurrected.
Nominal, racial, ethnic, genialogical, Jews, do not comprise the group known as the "seed of Abraham" which will become the citizens of resurrected Israel. That seed of Abraham will be "true Jews"(the heart circumcised people of every nation), who are known variously as: true Jews, Christians, the church, the body of Christ, spiritual Israel, the spiritual kingdom, etc, etc.
This is simply my own opinion, based on using the Chronological panorama of bible history, as the greater context in which the bible story was written. What do you think?



Well I understand you, but I wouldnot put a label on the calling of God for the last church, no matter what terminology is used. Because if you use Jews, then that opens certain doors that can open other doors that has already caused the presentday Jews to believe themselves Gods annointed. Simply call it what it will be, Gods annointed church. God will pick them from peoples spread out all over the earth, which signifys a melting pot of people, not a name of one tribe.

Peace, Mickiel.

[Provoker]

...I would not put a label on the calling of God for the last church...
Hello Mickiel:
When a single bible concept is known by so many different names, it tends to spawn a legion of doctrines, each based on one of those names...LOL
If we could use ocham's razor, and cut away all the confusion of different names for the same thing, the bible might be a lot easier to understand.
"Assembly" comes to mind as one of the most confusing, because it is found in the bible as; "a people", "tribe", "synagogue", "church", "2 or more gathered together", and probably many more that I just can't think of off hand...each of which is the basis for more doctrines.
If our English translations of the bible were more consistant in the use of words which mean the same thing, I'm sure that Christianity would not be divided into so many sects with different labels.
Unfortunately, we have used untranslated, improperly translated, transliterated, and misunderstood, terminology for so long, that the true church, if it exists at all, may be an unrecognizable assembly.
What do you think?