Would Jesus And The Apostles Recognize The Church

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

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.

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.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by tbpew

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

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).

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

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 ?

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

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by GrowingPains

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?

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.

[Sister Alvear]

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

[Sept5SavedTeen]

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

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Aquila

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.

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.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Aquila

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).

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.

[Aquila]

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.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Aquila

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.

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?