The question is silly. But let's follow the silliness to it's conclusion. Here's a question for YOU: Since you affirm not only that Jesus is with the single, solitary individual, then why does Jesus need to say He is there in the midst of two or three?
SMH Because He is speaking in reference to Deuteronomy 19, and verses 15-18 in this chapter. The whole foundation of verses 19-22 are verses 15-18 -- and the root of verses 15-18 can be found in Deuteronomy 19.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
Jesus did not say nor did He mean 'my words about two or three being gathered together do not apply anywhere else or at any other time, other than when dealing with a brother who sins.'
Now you're adding to the verse and making assumptions to try and prove a point. I could as easily say, He didn't say it was about anything other than the subject He was currently discussing - verses 15-18.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
Notice THE CONTEXT of the TEXT:
18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.
See that little word 'for'? It means BECAUSE. Whatever is loosed or bound on earth is loosed or bound in heaven. Not because there were two or three witnesses. But because JESUS IS IN THE MIDST of those gathered in His name, even if it is as small a number as two or three.
1) You're going off the point, which was this verse was used to try and say as long as 2 or 3 are gathered together, God is here. It's not what the verse is about. A lot of preachers use the verse as an excuse for when attendance is down, but it's not correct.
2) You ignore verses 15-18, which is the foundation of the context. I could pick a verse or two out of a series of verses on a subject and make them what I want. It doesn't mean it's correct or in context.
3) Why would Jesus mention 2 or 3 if He's not referring to verses 15-18? It's odd that He would just make up this arbitrary number, which coincidentally is the same number as He mentioned in the verses previous, as a means of saying how many He would be in the midst of.
1) You're going off the point, which was this verse was used to try and say as long as 2 or 3 are gathered together, God is here. It's not what the verse is about. A lot of preachers use the verse as an excuse for when attendance is down, but it's not correct.
2) You ignore verses 15-18, which is the foundation of the context. I could pick a verse or two out of a series of verses on a subject and make them what I want. It doesn't mean it's correct or in context.
3) Why would Jesus mention 2 or 3 if He's not referring to verses 15-18? It's odd that He would just make up this arbitrary number, which coincidentally is the same number as He mentioned in the verses previous, as a means of saying how many He would be in the midst of.
I did not go off the point, it IS the point. I demonstrated the verse DOES prove that wherever two or three are gathered in Jesus name (in His authority) He is there, and I also showed what that meant and how it applied to the verses in question.
So now that we have dealt with the side issues, the fact also remains that God commands his people to 'come out of Babylon'.
Failure to 'come out' results in two things:
1. Participating in Babylon's sins. And,
2. Receiving the same punishments from God.
Biblical Christianity is a 'come-outer' religion.
The early church had to come out of Judaism (for the Jews) and paganism (for the gentiles). The same thing is true today (although the influence of Judaism is growing amongst professing Christians, it is still yet slight compared to the influences of paganism).
Of course, most people are not willing to 'go outside the camp'. They either want to 'reform' their compromised 'church', or they are just happy with things as they are. Some even want to further the compromise, hoping to be 'change agents' to 'modernize' the theology and faith of others.
But reform movements never succeed. They always wind up in need of reformation themselves. Witness the Methodist church, as a perfect example. They made some 'reformations', but did not go further. And so people had to 'come out' yet again... resulting in the Holiness revival. And then, they too ossified, and did not go on. So once again, when God moved, His people had to come out.
Here we are today. The pillar is moving, but many will be 'left behind' to die in the wilderness.
The call to come out from false religion, and get back to the unadulterated Word of God and the faith ONCE delivered to the saints, to the faith of the original church, and of the apostles of the Lord, is just as valid today as it was 2,000 years ago.
And meets with much of the same kinds of opposition as it did back then.
So you believe, like Renee, that church buildings were brought in by the RCC, are sinful and we should "come out" of them and form house churches?
That's the opposition in this thread, at least from me. The first post was about these things she alleges were brought in by the RCC, which are sinful and we need to "come out" from. They include church buildings, tithes, clergy, and "many other things" which weren't mentioned.
Obviously we need to "come out" from the world and paganism. I would argue there are hundreds, if not thousands of churches which have done so. But her stated resolution: "And the only way that I see “to come out of her” is to start Home Churches by those that are completely dedicated to God," I disagree with.
I did not go off the point, it IS the point. I demonstrated the verse DOES prove that wherever two or three are gathered in Jesus name (in His authority) He is there, and I also showed what that meant and how it applied to the verses in question.
You simply don't like it, and that's fine.
It's not that I don't like it, I disagree with it because you're completely ignoring (even with your response above) verses 15-18 and Deuteronomy 19.
Answer this: Is Matthew 18:15-22 about how to deal with trespass and sin, or is it about how many people God is with? 15-22 is the context. You cannot separate 15-18 from 19-22. They are inseparable.
I don't recall the sister saying church buildings are sinful.
Obviously, you are quite adept at creating straw men and then knocking them down, instead of dealing with what people actually post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renee819
Come Out Of Her My People
Let's face it. We are ruled in the churches by Pagan Christianity. It was the Catholic Church that brought in the Trinity baptism.
The hierarchy of Clergy and Laity.
The paying of tithes. Church buildings
And many other things.
And the only way that I see “to come out of her” is to start Home Churches by those that are completely dedicated to God.
Yet, if we know better.
This isn't just a suggestion, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” I believe that we should forsake all the things that SHE brought in, and go strictly by the Bible.
You were saying? This was the original post. I'm not making some straw man. I was dealing what what the post stated. "be not partakers of her sins...forsake all the things that 'she' brought in (church buildings is mentioned as one of those things)."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
As for the Matthew 18 passage, I already made my points, you just repeated your cries of 'no it's not!', so we are at an impasse.
You're completely ignoring (even with your response above) verses 15-18 and Deuteronomy 19 to make your points. Your points are incorrect when placed into the frame of the full passage of Matthew 18:15-22 and Deuteronomy 19.
Answer this: Is Matthew 18:15-22 about how to deal with trespass and sin, or is it about how many people God is with? 15-22 is the context. You cannot separate 15-18 from 19-22. They are inseparable.
Timmy, arguing about buildings is pointless. however, I did bring up the fact in a list of other things, The RCC helped the Christians to have Church buildings but to do so, the Christians had to give up, especially Jesus name baptism and embrace other Paganistic practices, plunging the Church into the Dark Ages.
AND THIS IS VERY NUCH WORTH DISCUSSING. if people could discuss it with a level head.
With Luther starting the Reformation, even though he kept many of the RCC rules, it was a step out of the Darkness.
Today, if Time would permit, Pentecost is heading into Darkness again. Paganism, is just one of the problems. Worldliness is the other. and both are caused by lack of dedication.
I believe that God is calling all of those dedicated to TRUTH, tired of programs, building funds, talent show, etc, to, COME OUT OF HER MY PEOPLE.
Renee, the RCC did not magically appear in 325 AD. It evolved over the course of a few hundred years.
As wrong as the RCC is in my opinion, much of your information and opinions seem to be nothing more than anti Catholic rhetoric.
The building is just one example I addressed. None of your "list" did you ever bother to substantiate. In simple terms, it's not true just because you say so.
Finally, in the course of quoting "Internet websites" one of YOUR quotes that you used as an authority, claims that among other things being PAGAN, was the idea of the virgin birth and the death of the Son.
I even posted your quote for you but you never commented
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
BUT!!! You can read a History book, and accept that?
The Internet is a Library at your finger tips. And just as you must wade thru misinformation in History books, so also you check your facts on the internet.
If nothing you read is true, or doesn't fit your understanding of things, do you dismiss it? Then you can't believe anything.
And I believe very little of what I read, unless it fits the Word of God. Or is verified by more than one witness (writer)
Renee, History books are written by Historians who have studied ancient texts. A real and credible History book will also include where that information comes from and even provide direct quotes.
I went through one of your proof websites and they had a lot of quotes but not one that actually supported the assertions it made about Constantine!
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
This was the original post. I'm not making some straw man. I was dealing what what the post stated. "be not partakers of her sins...forsake all the things that 'she' brought in (church buildings is mentioned as one of those things)."
Linear Mode
