Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Church
 

If Jesus walked the earth today would He recognize the church ?
If the apostles were alive today would the church today resemble the church in their day both in practice and in structure ?

Would Jesus and The Apostles recognize the church as the church ?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

No I think they would check them out and say:

We warned this would happen. False teachers would invade the Church. The foundation doctrines we gave are nearly impossible to find. We dont see any of your so called Pastors preaching perfection. No wonder sin is so rampant.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Perfection is in the bible,yet seldom ever taught.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

my opinion,
Jesus knows all who are His. He recognizes all who are in His church. The changes in culture and technology would not be a surprise to Him.

If the apostles were transported into our day, they wouldn't recognize much of anything. Everything would be so different.

The apostles would probably be more comfortable in a small group than in our "sanctuary."

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Sadly, I don't believe very much... Even in "our" churches. God have mercy on us for how we have behaved as a faith so many times, just something to think about I guess. Would be a good sermon title?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I certainly do not want to hijack a thread on post no.6 but....
What are we teaching that the word "perfection" means?
I will check back on this, but I thought it was a word that witnessed "complete or completed/finished".

MtD...is that what you are bringing forth when you use the word?
If not, what is your meaning behind the word "perfect"?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

So when Yeshua commanded us to be perfect even as the Father in Heaven is perfect did he really mean this?

Be ye therefore completed/finished
even as your Father in Heaven is completed/finished

More likely it has the meaning Peter gives to the same concept.

14: As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15: But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16: Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. 1 Peter 1:14-16

It has to do with being like the Father.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I believe Jesus and the Apostles would think that it was a theatrical mockery of what they understood as church.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

But our being like the FATHER is accomplished by being made COMPLETE by him. It is the state of FULLNESS. It is the ALL in ALL.

To view it otherwise, would invite a person to be snared into thinking that seeks perfection as a reinvention of being righteous by the works of the law --the foolishness of the bewitched Galatians.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Perfection is relative.

My son was crawling when a baby, he couldn't stand. But he was perfect.
My son can walk now at two years old, but can't entirely talk like an adult. But he is perfect.
When he is a grown man he will have human imperfections that we all have. But if found in Christ, he will be perfect.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

So what does the scriptural use of the word PERFECT mean?
You write:
If found in Christ he will be perfect"
So what does being "perfect" mean?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

As for recognizing the church... I believe that they'd recognize this as being a church...

http://www.house2house.com/images/10...e8ef749ee19e9e

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

So it really is about people under 40!:sad
I'm doomed!

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Being all you can be for Christ... in spite of your human imperfections. It's not based on performance... it's essentially based on how God sees one through the blood.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

No. It's about intimate fellowship and discipling of individuals. Not big programs, buildings, and organizations.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Oh really? Then how do you explain this?

Rev. 3:1-5

1: And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.
2: Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.
3: Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.
4: Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
5: He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.
6: He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Had these been washed in his blood? He calls them his Church. Yet he rebukes them BECAUSE THERE WORKS WERE NOT PERFECT. Does it say somewhere here that his judgment of them was NOT based on their performance of his will? And YHWH would see the blood and pass on over?

Or is it crystal clear he was judging them on whether their works were perfect before YHWH?

What does he give as consequence if we do not overcome?

Name blotted out of book of life verse 5.

Its dramatic the difference between the words of Yeshua and what men teach nowadays.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

but the question was "what does PERFECT mean?". When scripture uses the word, what understanding are we to take away from that word usage?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I said nothing about observing the law of Moses. Think of the "finished" or "complete" definition like this:

16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. 2 Tim. 2:16-17

Paul defines it here in the sense of being completley furnished "unto all good works".

That would mean being able to do all the good works commanded us.

The scriptures are given that we may be perfect. Combined with the life of Yeshua in us through the Holy Spirit we are able to do the Lords will and be pleasing to him.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

When you say Church are you referring to UPCI? Need to know if we are to expect a bashing session to follow. I think Apostles would be appalled at how legalistic we've become -- and also how commercialized Western Christianity has become, how manicured, pop-culturized, dumbed down, simplified and far from the "mystery of godliness" that Paul wrote about. I think he'd see things they liked, and be amazed at what a nation the West lives in, but they'd be appalled at the slothfulness, the wasted wealth, the fighting and bickering over silly things, but the laziness also of those who are so selfish about their self-sacrifice for the Lord. He'd be searching for Holiness in spirit. He'd see a national fulfillment of the person of Lazarus. The Apostles would not understand the watering down of their doctrine to fill congregations of sincere people who are hungry to be obedient to Scripture.

They'd be pleased with the spread of the Gospel. They'd be pleased with the desire of worshippers. They'd be pleased with the popularity of Christ. But they'd have more regrets than anything, and let's just assume they understood the times, culture and technology... they'd still be blown away. I think this question posted is an important question, because it helps us stay on track with what we should strive for. We aren't perfect or perfected, except through the blood of Christ, but we are so wayward, fallible, and far from where God wants us. The prophets of old helped confront the church, and now most would rather rebuke the "legalists" than let a prophets voice speak to its churches with a mirror in hand. America is ready for an Awakening.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I like this. I like this picture a lot.

Aquila, but now that we aren't an underground sub-culture, threatened with death, bankrupt and poor, would we be expected to build larger gatherings for the saints? In other words, did they meet this way because of doctrinal reasons or simple logistics?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Their garments were defiled because they were not washed in the blood of the lamb. When one depends upon their works for salvation... they are then judged according to their works (for that is what they rely upon for salvation). And no man's works are "perfect".

Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Now go back and read the passage you gave to me again. ;)

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Deep questions.

739 // artiov // artios // ar'-tee-os //

from 737 ; TDNT - 1:475,80; adj

AV - perfect 1; 1

1) fitted
2) complete, perfect
2a) having reference apparently to "special aptitude for given uses"

We can be complete in Christ, fitted for the master's use. I guess if I were to choose a patterned to live by for guidance sake... I'd choose the Ten Commandments (the Moral Law).

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Running around the pews? Nope...plus they had no pews

Loud fast pumping music? Nope...neither rock nor blue grass had been invented yet...let alone drum sets

Screaming or yelling at the top of their lungs? Nope

Platform standards? Nope....no platforms

Sunday School? Nope...wasn't invented yet

Jumping up and down and out of control? I doubt it....it would be hazardous in such a small meeting packed with members (remember they were in homes).

Women can't wear pants, men can? Nope...men were still wearing robes

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

This is a great question. Paul laid out how a church meeting should be...

I Corinthians 14:26-40
26What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church. 27If anyone speaks in a tongue, two—or at the most three—should speak, one at a time, and someone must interpret. 28If there is no interpreter, the speaker should keep quiet in the church and speak to himself and God.

29Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 30And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. 31For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. 32The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets. 33For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.

As in all the congregations of the saints, 34women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

36Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord's command. 38If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored.[i]

39Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 40But everything should be done in a fitting and orderly way.

Here we see everyone bringing something to offer: a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All were to be done in order for the strengthening of the church. If there was an utterance in tongues it was to be limited to three individuals at most to maintain order... but a member present had to provide an interpretation. If no interpretation came forth after an utterance... they were to cease speaking and disrupting and simply pray to God. Two or three anointed preachers (prophets) were to come prepared to speak and teach and the listeners gathered were to seriously weight what was said that they might be built up in Christ Jesus. However, if something were revealed to a listener present, the speaker was to stop speaking and let the brother share his understanding. This way, though two or three prophets governed the meeting, all were allowed to prophesy (teach and share anointed thoughts and messages) in turn. They were sharing their understandings and teaching one another like a round table discussion. However the two or three elders functioning in the meeting were to have spiritual authority over anyone who wished to speak... the spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets. Women were not permitted to interrupt the elders when teaching with questions (remember women were largely unlearned in those days). If they had a question they were to ask their husbands at home. For a woman to interrupt or challenge teaching was disgraceful. Paul then asks them where they got the authority to do things their way and get out of order. They are then admonished if anyone believes they are a prophet or spiritual that they are to know that these are THE LORD'S COMMANDS. And if any saint ignored this general order of worship and gathering he was to be ignored.

I'd say that when a group becomes too large to facilitate this functionality of body ministry it's too big. If all cannot share and discuss openly, it's too big. If only one man has the constantly... it's unbiblical. The church isn't just a meeting... it had a purpose. It's purpose was so that saints could all edify and instruct one another under the guidance of two or three elders. It was an open forum, a round table discussion, anointed by the Spirit and covered in prayer. They also broke bread together for the Lord's Supper... it wasn't this tinny tiny wafer and thimble of grape juice. The Lord's Supper was a feast of fellowship, remembering the Lord and looking forward to his coming when we will all sup with him at the marriage supper of the lamb.

When a church gets so big it's problematic to allow everyone to participate and relegates the majority to being spectators watching a trained preacher and trained singers... it's too big. It will fail in it's purpose. You'll have immature saints and big bills that bog the church down. You'll have unfulfilled ministries and men who never get used. You'll have... a big building where people meet and spend only an hour listening to one man and then everyone goes their marry way until next week or mid week. No real fellowship, confessions, weeping together, laughing together, teaching together.

So yes... it's a commandment from the Lord. When a church body becomes a theater and ceases to be a holistic meeting where all present can share and edify one another per Paul's words... it's too big and unbiblical.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Buildings can be a blessing or a curse...depends on our spirit and attitude.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I've really liked what Aquila and Michael the Disciple have written.

Me and Bro. Mike were chatting once about what we have seen in a few assemblies, and what Aquila mentioned in his quote from Corinthians, where everyone in the church gathering brings (or is at least free to bring) something to edify the whole body, also known as "body ministry."

I got to experience this this past Wednesday in my own assembly and it was GREAT! We used no instruments (although some of the children played tamborines), and anyone was free to start a song. Prayers were offered up between songs, and Scripture reading and exhortation was done by a few of the brothers. Then our elder prayed and began his lesson, and it was open for comments, questions and thoughts, and he acted, mainly as a moderator. There were about 50 of us (we have a few more on Sundays), and we sat in a circle, and the elder did not stand in the middle or direct things during worship, he simply started the first song, and it was "free-form" from then on. Service on Wednesday lasted between 1.5-2 hours.

I felt that the apostles could recognize what was done at the apostolic assembly in Biddeford, and I was really blessed to be apart of it, and I can not WAIT to go back to service tommorrow night!

-Bro. Alex

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Yes what you believe is what most believe for sure.

Were these people washed in the blood? John addresses them as the Church in Sardis. No one is in the Church unless they are washed in the blood. Why is he bothering to try to straighten them out if they are not his?

Yeshua very specifically says "strengthen the things that remain that are ready to die".

No doubt they had been washed in his blood.

Also their names were IN THE BOOK OF LIFE. It cannot seriously be argued they were not his.

Yet the very reason Yeshua rebukes them is because they have failed the one true standard of living for every single disciple.

Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect. Matt. 5:48

Their works were not perfect. This would be simple for the Apostles to understand because they taught the same thing. Matter of fact it was the very purpose of the ministry to present every man perfect in Christ.

28: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:
29: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily. Col. 1:28-29

So again when Yeshua sees the Churches of our day teaching OPPOSITE of what he taught no he does not recognize them.

Most of the modern Churches may never have been as deep in Christ as the Sardis believers. At least they had the truth taught to them in their day even tho they were failing as disciples.

Todays Churches teach up front you will continue to sin.

Many wonder why the Churches of today are so far off. They cannot see the obvious.

There is no standard of perfection being taught. The standard for them is "we all sin". They are thereby justified in their own minds. The effect of such teaching is dramatic.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I have an eight translation New Testament by Tyndale Publishing. It has the King James, Living Bible, New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, Todays English Version, Revised Standard Version, Phillips Modern English and the New English Bible.

In Matt. 5:48 seven of the eight versions use the word PERFECT. The only variant is the New English Bible.

Why do seven of eight versions use perfect?

Because it is a perfectly valid translation.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Perfect is relative to maturity. For example a baby may not be able to walk... but it's perfect. If he's still crawling at 10 years old there's a problem. Being perfect simply means being all you can be for God. It doesn't mean that you have to be "perfect" in the sense of flawless or sinless. We all have flaws and we all sin. Prayerfully as we mature in Christ sin plays far less a role in our lives.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

All you can be for God and yet contining to sin? All you can be for God sounds pretty good but then sadly you say it does not mean you have to be sinless.

How does God feel about sin? Why did Yeshua die?

Why do people resist the simple truth that YHWH expects us to cease from sin? And while proclaiming such a concept they wonder why the Church is a mess.

If the eternal spirit is cool with the doctrine "we all sin all the time" why did the apostle write this?

11: Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom. 6:11

How can you count yourself dead to sin if your faith says we cannot cease from it?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Does anyone believe we should continue to sin? Doesn't every Christian strive to lead a life that is pleasing to God?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Why no teaching on "Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in Heaven is perfect"? Why do people instead try to change the meaning of the word perfect?

The problem is people have been conditioned to believe sin is normal for disciples of Yeshua. Therefore it has become normal.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Are you sinless Michael?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Its funny. When I teach on this its so predictable. Instead of examing the word and our relationship to it I always get asked if I am sinless. However I will bite.

Im not aware of any sin in my life.

If one has sin in their life I believe they should be very afraid. Yeshua said:

19: As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent. Rev. 3:19

As long as the sin is unrepented of one would be in danger of the chastening of the Lord. Yes Christians have forgotten about that. Yet its just as valid today as it was in the first century.

Now some will say I preach a message of fear. Now youre catching on!

First off I will say our fellowship with Christ is the deepest and most passionate one we will ever know. His lovingkindness is better than life. If he is real to you at all you know this is true.

To abide in him is the purpose and answer of life to a disciple. Yeshua says if we love him we will keep his commands. The passion and feelings should be real to you. Yet if its not backed up by a life of consistent obedience it is mere emotionalism that does not last.

If a believer does commit sin they can confess and ask forgiveness and move on. Yet if sin lingers and you are truly a child of Elohim he will search you out to punish you to the end you may turn from it and back to him.

So one cannot teach the whole counsel of Elohim without teaching both the love and fear of him.

Nothing has hurt the Church more in past few decades than the doctrine of "unconditional love".

Thats what the devil wants us to believe. There is no conditions on the love of Yeshua. He however said the opposite:


21: He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. John 14:21

10: If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. John 15:10

The reason many have a "faith crisis" is because they have never consistently walked in the light as he is in the light. Therefore they have not known his personal love.

Or maybe once they did and now are not walking close like before and cant find him in that special intimacy.

Yeshua says he will MANIFEST HIMSELF to those who keep his word. He said if we keep his commands we will abide in his love. So indeed there are conditions to his love.

Abide in him. Be perfect with his teachings. Be blessed.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

I don't know of a single serious Christian who thinks it's okay to sin.

Unconditional love means that God will forgive you. Not that it's okay to sin.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Michael, I wasn't meaning to be antagonistic. But you've said it well... you're unaware of any sin in your life. Hey, good news. I'm not aware of any sin in your life either! LOL

I think sometimes this debate goes off the tracks because people define "sin" differently. For example, for some folks nearly anything is sin. If you look at a beautiful woman or gaze at a nice care you'd like to have you've sinned (they claim it's covetousness). Even though you never acted on anything or went crazy. Others (the school I'm most closely tied to) would say that sin is strictly defined by the Ten Commandments. If that's the case, I can honestly say that I have no sin in my life either at this point.

So it all boils down to, how do you define "sin" and what "sins" are to be avoided? What are your thoughts brother?

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

You know what that means? We are normal Christians!

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

lol

What's "normal" about being a Christian? ;)

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Missing the mark. Knowing to do good, but not doing it. Failing in obedience to Christ. Sin is both solitude action and a collective lifestyle. Sins are arrogance, slothfulness, deceit, covetousness, envy, jealousy, gossip, and on and on. The more I write the list, the more I agree with Paul that "all have sinned, and all fall short of God's glory." This doesn't mean I preach a Gospel FOR sin, on the contrary, the Gospel saves us as well as empowers us to avoid sin.

Re: Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Chu
 

Aquila, no doubt the larger the church gathering, the more weighty the challenge, but you seem to believe we can't accomplish 1 Corinthians 14:26-40 through a larger church dynamic. Small group ministries, through the encouragement of large churches, have been quite successful at helping disciple thousands. While I share your burden for these special times of apostolic gathering, I don't think building a church center for corporate worship is necessarily the wrong thing -- nor, do I believe, one person speaking to the church at a designated time is less than what God wants. I don't see it as either-or. We can have both! Families should be more encouraged to bring church to their homes IMO.