Denomination

[nebula]

What a can of worms those questions can open

I know!

But it's one thing to denounce denominations. But to explain how to break down the walls, to define what "church" should be like - the service, the interpretation of Scripture, etc. isn't as easy as some would have us believe.

Minus the claim that we don't need the fellowship of believers....

[UncleAbee]

Nebula wrote - "What I mean is people are saying we need to get away from denominationalism and return to the way Christ's church (assembly) was in the Bible - but no one can define what that was like."

See, the Apostles understood that we need to agree on what is spiritual but we can disagree on non-spiritual issues. Baptism is spiritual. Christ and the Apostles taught it but many do not teach it. Singing, praying, preaching are also spiritual for the same reason. Being quiet or loud, animated or not, are non-spiritual issues. How your church is organized (one Pastor, multiple pastors, etc) are non spiritual issues. The quality and type of your leaders is a spiritual issue.

We are to promote the spiritual items only as church practice. For instance instrumental music is not spiritual. Christ nor the Apostles taught it. You can't find in the NT where Christ or an Apostle taught other christians to play an instrument during worship. This makes it non spiritual. The church erred on two ends.

1 - Some churches made it spiritual. They put the instruments up front. They play them during every song and through every prayer. They hire musicians. They made something into church practice that is not.

2 - Other declared it a sin. They tell you if you play one while you worshipping you are hell bound. They outlawed any use of it.

The end result was that churches split over a non spiritual issue. One side said I want and I'm going to keep it no matter what it does to the unity Christ desired. I will not divide from my brother over a non spiritual issue. I just won't engage in the activity. Most division in the church occurs over matters of judgment.

Edited February 21, 2011 by UncleAbee

[nebula]

See, the Apostles understood that we need to agree on what is spiritual but we can disagree on non-spiritual issues.

<snip>

The end result was that churches split over a non spiritual issue. One side said I want and I'm going to keep it no matter what it does to the unity Christ desired. I will not divide from my brother over a non spiritual issue. I just won't engage in the activity. Most division in the church occurs over matters of judgment.

Denominations are split over both things, though - spiritual and non-spiritual.

And if you want unity, you have to figure out how to keep the splits from keeping each other apart.

Can you do this?

[TXDisciple]

I will go ahead and throw a guick note out......

In regards to what an original "church" service or assembly was like and what we can know, just what does everyone here expect to find? To me, the answer to that question is the stumbling block - people are expecting to find something that is not there. It's the simplicity of what the original assembly of believers was like that seems to be what many overlook due mainly to how that simplicity has been lost for generations.

Jay

[nebula]

I will go ahead and throw a guick note out......

In regards to what an original "church" service or assembly was like and what we can know, just what does everyone here expect to find? To me, the answer to that question is the stumbling block - people are expecting to find something that is not there. It's the simplicity of what the original assembly of believers was like that seems to be what many overlook due mainly to how that simplicity has been lost for generations.

Jay

Awesome dodge to the question!

[TXDisciple]

I will go ahead and throw a guick note out......

In regards to what an original "church" service or assembly was like and what we can know, just what does everyone here expect to find? To me, the answer to that question is the stumbling block - people are expecting to find something that is not there. It's the simplicity of what the original assembly of believers was like that seems to be what many overlook due mainly to how that simplicity has been lost for generations.

Jay

Awesome dodge to the question!

It was merely a quick note to the topic and believe it or not, a very sincere statement. It was not my main reply which will be forthcoming despite the sarcasm.

Jay

[sdktlk]

I will go ahead and throw a guick note out......

In regards to what an original "church" service or assembly was like and what we can know, just what does everyone here expect to find? To me, the answer to that question is the stumbling block - people are expecting to find something that is not there. It's the simplicity of what the original assembly of believers was like that seems to be what many overlook due mainly to how that simplicity has been lost for generations.

Jay

Awesome dodge to the question!

It was merely a quick note to the topic and believe it or not, a very sincere statement. It was not my main reply which will be forthcoming despite the sarcasm.

Jay

Simple concept ... "And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.' (1Tim 2:5) I would say if we all could, before the Lord, discover what is meant by that then we could be on our way to the "unity of the faith."

[nebula]

Simple concept ... "And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.' (1Tim 2:5) I would say if we all could, before the Lord, discover what is meant by that then we could be on our way to the "unity of the faith."

Yeah, first I need an English major to translate 16th century English into modern English for me....

[Fez]

Maybe......

Maybe we should start by looking at similarities with each other here on Worthy, instead of differences, as a start.

Is even that possible?

[sdktlk]

Simple concept ... "And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.' (1Tim 2:5) I would say if we all could, before the Lord, discover what is meant by that then we could be on our way to the "unity of the faith."

Yeah, first I need an English major to translate 16th century English into modern English for me....

Why so snippy? We do have available to us the tools to understand what is written do we not?