Church government is not hierarchical

PureX

PureX

Well-known member
iouae said:
They dangle some truth in front of you.
You get lured in, wanting more.
So they feed you more.
They teach how all other churches are in error.
And in turn, you support them.
Next thing you know you believe you are the only right group.
And your leader is the only inspired one.
And your hierarchy is to be obeyed.
And it's a whole culture a few days a week of doing church things together.
And group camps.
Where every scripture in the Bible is explained their way.
And one is encouraged to forsake friends and family.
And this world's education is evil too.
And one cannot read other church literature.
And fiction is bad.
And everything in the world has pagan origins which you now wisely have escaped.
Soon your whole world is the church.
So are all your resources the church's.

It sounds so dumb now writing this.
I would still be stuck in the cult if God had not through circumstances forced me out. I did not question them. It all sounded so logical at the time.
Click to expand...
What you are describing is definitely a cult! I thank God that you were forced out!

Many years ago, an acquaintance of mine fell in with the 'Moonies'. They had only had him a couple of weeks, so myself and his best friend tried to talk him out of it. And we hammered at him for many hours. But we were unable to make much of a dent in his conviction. Fortunately, he was Japanese, and was in the U.S. on a visa. So his friend wrote to his family in Japan, and they had his visa revoked, forcing him to go home. And there, with great effort and a lot of time, they finally "de-programmed" him. But they would not allow him to come back to the U.S., ever.

Cults are no joke. Their influence is strong, and the people who get drawn into them never realize that it's happening to them. Especially children that are raised in them. And here in the the U.S., these cults are not illegal. So they can and do flourish.
 
brewmama

brewmama

New member
SaulToPaul said:
Why would he have gone there?
Click to expand...

Why on earth would he not? There is nothing in the Bible saying he didn't go to Rome. His own epistle begins with "“The Church here in Babylon, united with you by God’s election, sends you her greeting, and so does my son, Mark” , and Babylon is a common reference to Rome, used many times in the NT.

Eusebius Pamphilius, in The Chronicle, composed about A.D. 303, noted that “It is said that Peter’s first epistle, in which he makes mention of Mark, was composed at Rome itself; and that he himself indicates this, referring to the city figuratively as Babylon.”

Early Church belief:
William A. Jurgens, in his three-volume set The Faith of the Early Fathers, a masterly compendium that cites at length everything from the Didache to John Damascene, includes thirty references to this question, divided, in the index, about evenly between the statements that “Peter came to Rome and died there” and that “Peter established his See at Rome and made the bishop of Rome his successor in the primacy.” A few examples must suffice, but they and other early references demonstrate that there can be no question that the universal—and very early—position (one hesitates to use the word “tradition,” since some people read that as “legend”) was that Peter certainly did end up in the capital of the Empire.

Another early reference:
"Tertullian, in The Demurrer Against the Heretics (A.D. 200), noted of Rome, “How happy is that church . . . where Peter endured a passion like that of the Lord, where Paul was crowned in a death like John’s [referring to John the Baptist, both he and Paul being beheaded].”

So, I really don't see how you can be so certain of your opinion.
 
brewmama

brewmama

New member
SaulToPaul said:
Matthew 10:23 (KJV)
The LORD precluded it.

Good enough reason for me.
Click to expand...

WHAT exactly is your interpretation of Mt 10:23, and it's relation to Rome?

So, per typical Protestantism, you ignore other parts of the Bible, such as specific instructions to go out and preach to all nations?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
brewmama said:
WHAT exactly is your interpretation of Mt 10:23, and it's relation to Rome?

So, per typical Protestantism, you ignore other parts of the Bible, such as specific instructions to go out and preach to all nations?
Click to expand...

I am aware of Matthew 28:19 (KJV).

There is nothing to interpret. Matthew 10:23 (KJV).
You understand what it says. Do you believe it?
That's the issue.
 
heir

heir

TOL Subscriber
brewmama said:
Yes, his churches.
Click to expand...
No, Christ's body, which is the church

Colossians 1:24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

Colossians 1:25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Colossians 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

Colossians 1:27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

Colossians 1:28 Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 1:29 Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.


And I see that you don't as you aren't in the Greek Orthodox Church.
Click to expand...
Galatians 3:28 KJV, Ephesians 4:4-6 KJV
 
iouae

iouae

Well-known member
brewmama said:
You have no idea that your quotes prove hierarchy.
Click to expand...

Then sign me up for that form of hierarchy.

brewmama said:
You show leaders of the Church making the rules. Are they just letting the new converts make up their own rules? NO, absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Christ trained 12 apostles to teach others. Of course they are the ones teaching what Christ taught them. And they are not making up rules at all. They are passing on what Christ taught.

brewmama said:
The Apostles were bishops and leaders of the Church, the HIERARCHY.
Click to expand...

They were leaders to train disciples, who in turn would lead others. That is how Christianity spread. But no apostle was subject to another apostle. No newbie is subject to any apostle except voluntarily if he wanted salvation.

brewmama said:
I must add, that we go by the words of St. Vincent of Lerins (435), "that which has been believed everywhere, always, and by all" as truth. This protects the church from heretical bishops. But otherwise
they are the spiritual leaders.
Click to expand...

I quite like the little I read about the Orthodox Church which has no Pope, but has a cell structure with leaders. "Autocephalous" I think they called it.

brewmama said:
You don't even know what confirmation is.
Click to expand...

I don't know why you bring this up, so probably you are not speaking of accepting Christ when one comes of age.

brewmama said:
And James was Joseph's son, from an earlier marriage, not Mary's.
Click to expand...

Which chapter and verse of the Bible says that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top