Apostolic 101

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

Man, I was responding to someone's else's question to me. Essentially is quite a word. So is presumptuousness. How many do you Pastor or teach to weekly.. away from the Internet?

Maybe I misunderstood you. I don't entirely buy into the age of accountability thing.

I'm not a "pastor" or "preacher" per se. For about four years I was a preacher on rotation with a minister's team in a UPCI church. Today I frequent a network of house churches sharing the reality of Jesus to whoever will listen. I don't really believe in buildings or religious institutions of this world. Essentially, to me, a "pastor" (I prefer "elder) is a spiritual father and/or mentor who has a burden to teach and guide believers. Not an official of a given organization or denomination. I frequent three different house churches. One had about 22 people and has split to form another house church. The other has about 15 adults in regular attendance and is planning for multiplication soon by preparing more elders.

We shoot for depth... not so much numbers. The key is making disciples of Jesus. Not converts. Our retention is very good at the moment. Our house churches refuse to claim "members". We are spiritual waystations along a believer's journey should they need us. Yet, most people who experience the house church experience love it and wish to stay. Our meetings are modeled right after the the discussion based meetings ordained by Paul among the Corinthians in I Corinthians 14.

[Hoovie]

Originally Posted by HRea

Sorry, got the wrong impression from your exchange with acerrak.

Yeah, but the "$400 suits and their wives behives 12 ft. tall" is still unnecessary sarcasm IMO

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Yeah, but the "$400 suits and their wives behives 12 ft. tall" is still unnecessary sarcasm IMO

I'm just trying to drive a point home. It doesn't matter how slick and polished a preacher is... and it doesn't matter how long a woman's hair is. The key is... are they like Jesus??? I was drawing from Christ's rebuke of the Pharisees and their taking pride in the broad boarders of their garments etc. We don't wear broad boarders on our garments. But we do often fall into a pride about our standards. No direct offence was intended.

Not all preachers are bad preachers. But today... I do believe we have a shortage of good solid men of God who are walking after the Spirit. Too many are walking after the manual to be accepted by the orgs they are a part of.

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I'm just trying to drive a point home. It doesn't matter how slick and polished a preacher is... and it doesn't matter how long a woman's hair is. The key is... are they like Jesus. I was drawing from Christ's rebuke of the Pharisees and their taking pride in the broad boarders of their garments etc. We don't wear broad boarders on our garments. But we do often fall into a pride about our standards. No direct offence was intended.

Not all preachers are bad preachers. But today... I do believe we have a shortage of good solid men of God who are walking after the Spirit. Too many are walking after the manual to be accepted by the orgs they are a part of.

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by Hoovie

Yeah, but the "$400 suits and their wives behives 12 ft. tall" is still unnecessary sarcasm IMO

Hmm...

[Aquila]

The over all point is that we mustn't drift into a Phariseeical elitism... especially to the point of lying about history.

[Aquila]

My second point is that legalists often agree that we must have "works"... but when questioned about "what works" we must have... they break into disagreement because some would denounce wedding bands, another demands head coverings, one allows television, the other doesn't. One allows internet, the other doesn't. When nailed down they profess that we must "obey" certain rules and keep certain standards... but they cannot agree with any certainty as to what they are. Therefore, legalism becomes a paper tiger. All hat and no cattle. We find ourselves adrift on a sea of standards with a lot of verbose chest beating. I don't get legalism. Logically it fails the test.

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by Aquila

My second point is that legalists often agree that we must have "works"... but when questioned about "what works" we must have... they break into disagreement because some would denounce wedding bands, another demands head coverings, one allows television, the other doesn't. One allows internet, the other doesn't. When nailed down they profess that we must "obey" certain rules and keep certain standards... but they cannot agree with any certainty as to what they are. Therefore, legalism becomes a paper tiger. All hat and no cattle. We find ourselves adrift on a sea of standards with a lot of verbose chest beating. I don't get legalism. Logically it fails the test.

I think everyone ALLOWS internet, just no TV...

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

The gates of hell has never prevailed against the Church. Since the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 there has always been a One God, baptized in Jesus name tongue talking group of believers.

There has always been a church (assembly), ever since a group of two or more people gathered in the name of the Lord and were blessed by His presence.

Adam, Eve and God the Word (Logos/Memra/Angel of YHWH) were a "church" as they fellowshiped in the Garden of Eden according to the way I understand Matthew 18:15-20.

Jesus and His disciples gathered together in Matthew 16:13-20 were a church/assembly and Jesus promised them that He would edify/build/build up His church. This was approximately 6 months before His death.

Stephen referred to Moses and those called out of Egypt unto YHWH in the wilderness as "the church/assembly" (Acts 7:38). And this group did not even practice circumcision for a period of about 40 years (ref Joshua 5:1-9)

God has always had a church/assembly/group/family. It might just be Noah with his wife and family in the ark with Jesus. It might be captives in Babylon where there was no temple or sacrificial system (reference Jeremiah chapter 29) or it might be those who gathered in caves and catacombs in Rome to escape persecution by local officials.


God's church has always been made up of those who believe that He is the only one true God and God's Church has always had His presence with them, but they did not always practice water baptism in His name/authority and they did not always speak with tongues. Some in God's church in the first century and some in God's church in the last couple centuries may do that but and Spirit baptism have not ALWAYS been practiced/experienced by God's Church.

[acerrak]

Originally Posted by Aquila

My second point is that legalists often agree that we must have "works"... but when questioned about "what works" we must have... they break into disagreement because some would denounce wedding bands, another demands head coverings, one allows television, the other doesn't. One allows internet, the other doesn't. When nailed down they profess that we must "obey" certain rules and keep certain standards... but they cannot agree with any certainty as to what they are. Therefore, legalism becomes a paper tiger. All hat and no cattle. We find ourselves adrift on a sea of standards with a lot of verbose chest beating. I don't get legalism. Logically it fails the test.

cmon aquilla we do have it on paper, David bernard has given us two books on practical holiness. it is the modern christian version of the jewish Halakhah.