|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 12:57:57 GMT -5
1) What I would like to have you show with scripture Nathan are the passages in the bible that list the REQUIREMENTS for a pastor/apostle (or worker) in regard to how they are to go about their business. I am not looking for simply examples here, but the actual REQUIREMENTS. I am trying to see how these requirements pertain to workers/pastors/priests today. ~~ New Testament church. Jesus, Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Silas, Titus, John Mark, Luke, etc... and maybe most of the 12 and 70 were unmarried as Itinerant preachers of the gospel.
A few were married Peter, as the Lord's brother, and other apostles... there were more than 12 and 70 apostles. (I Cor. 9:5)
Both singles and married apostles depended on their followers to support/supplied their needs so they could be as itinerant preachers preaching the goodnews to all nations as Jesus had commanded them.
The Catholic church in Rome priests kept the celibate ministry... and the Orthodox Church in Turkey priests allowed them to have wives.
Martin Luther was a Roman Catholic church monk who practiced celibacy but after he became a Protestant he got married so MOST of the Protestant pastors today follow his example.
~~ There have been quite a few married 2x2 workers in the past... some married workers (Bill Carroll and his wife) had a daughter in the work... It wasn't an easy kind of lifestyle to raise a family as true Itinerant preachers of the gospel, too much stress to have their children (Christie's from Hawaii) along in the work so some of them allowed the friends to raise their children for them.
I don't believe the pastors today are following Jesus' apostlic Itinerant ministry example but Martin Luther's example as married preacher, attending seminary, paid salary, etc..Well.... I guess that response simply shows that there is nothing in scripture you can point to that shows that there are any requirements in regard to how the workers go out today. Like I said, I wasn't looking for any of the many examples we read in the bible, but rather for specific requirements. The bible of course speaks of the requirements for elders and things of that nature, but those aren't really followed either all the time are they? BUT... like you pointed out, there is no requirement to be single, or to live in people's homes, or not be paid for your work (in fact there is scripture to show that those who are carrying the gospel are worthy of receiving money) and likewise no requirement that you must meet in homes, and not teach in a church ( and of course there is scripture showing that the apostles regularly went to the synagogues) If you can't show that any of those things are a REQUIREMENT, then why do you place so much emphasis on them in being important? Scott
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 13:01:29 GMT -5
~~ Between 1899-1905 WI, 500 friends and workers LEFT the their own churches denomination and decided to follow Jesus apostolic ministry and fellowship because they saw the confusion, fighting existed in the churches.
They were lead and moved by the Spirit to team up by the leading and guidance of God's Spirit to follow Jesus apostolic ministry/fellowship model.... most of them already believe or have faith in God.No different than what has taken place with other churches that were started Nathan, although for the most part on a much smaller scale. These others that started were likewise done so by men that were called by God to follow their convictions. Here is what happened with the church I attend since the 18880's: Today, the C&MA focuses on planting churches in the United States and overseas. More than 800 missionaries and workers minister in 50-plus countries planting churches and training national church leaders, providing relief and development assistance, medical and dental care, and microenterprise projects. Nearly 2,000 churches in the U.S. minister Christ’s love to their communities and cities.Weird that we also call those that labor outside the US workers isn't it??? Scott
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 13:43:48 GMT -5
~~~ As I pointed out to you a brief history of the New Testament ministry, the Catholic Church, the Orthodox, the Protestants and the 2x2 workers apostolic ministry way of doing thing... It is your choice to pick which method you want to believe or follow.... but please be sure yours and ours church is built on the Rock foundation (Christ) and not on Sand....My question had nothing to do with the Catholic church, nor the Protestants, or the workers way of doing things. My question was: What I would like to have you show with scripture Nathan are the passages in the bible that list the REQUIREMENTS for a pastor/apostle (or worker) in regard to how they are to go about their business. I am not looking for simply examples here, but the actual REQUIREMENTS. I am trying to see how these requirements pertain to workers/pastors/priests todayJesus said in Matthew 7:21-28 " And Everyone that heareth these saying of mine, and does them NOT, shall be liken unto a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand... and the rain descended and the flood came, and the wind blew, and beat upon that house; and it FELL and great was the fall of it.Very good advice from Jesus isn't it? NOT everyone that say unto me Lord, Lord shall enter in the kingdom of heaven. MANY! will say to me in that day Lord, Lord, have we NOT prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name have done many wonderful works? and then will I say unto them, I NEVER knew you, depart from me, ye WORKERS of iniquity!Yeah those WORKERS of iniquity better be careful huh? Guess there is nothing in scripture to show that how the workers go about their business is the only way to do so is there? In fact, there is much in scripture to show that there is no requirement to be homeless, unpaid, live in others homes...... Scott
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 2, 2010 14:11:42 GMT -5
Quote from Scott: Here is what happened with the church I attend since the 18880's:
I didn't know you were that old,and a biker yet!!
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 14:39:35 GMT -5
Quote from Scott: Here is what happened with the church I attend since the 18880's: I didn't know you were that old,and a biker yet!! HAHAHA!!! Yeah, I go back a loooong ways.....
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 14:44:48 GMT -5
~~ If it wasn't a requirement or important why do you think there has always been men and women who guided by the Spirit to follow the pattern of Jesus apostolic ministry= without homes of their own as itinerant preachers, unpaid monthy salary, live in others homes, for the sake of Christ's gospel for 2000 yrs?
The requirement you seek are in the Bible.... READ the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and Study the life and ministry of Jesus as an Itinerant preacher of the gospel... The majority of the apostles who have followed in Jesus footsteps for centuries because they follow His example as an Itinerant preacher of the gospel.
I figure that those who feel that the way they worship do so because they feel a conviction to do so. No matter how they go about it. Now, to put the truth fellowship into perspective with the CMA church I posted the info above from, do you see that there are many more that have been touched by the gospel message through the CMA church than have been by the truth fellowship? It doesn't mean that the CMA is the 'right' church because of all the numbers of members, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of all the good that it is doing around the world, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of how many people attend it. What it is.... is another church where Christians gather together to worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and one that is doing lots of charitable works around the world. It also doesn't mean that 'my church is better than your church'. Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2010 14:45:41 GMT -5
Scott, please re-read Lin's post. I think you go forward a very long way!
|
|
|
Post by prehaps on Feb 2, 2010 15:05:44 GMT -5
I figure that those who feel that the way they worship is right do so because they feel a conviction to do so. No matter how they go about it. Now, to put the truth fellowship into perspective with the CMA church I posted the info above from, do you see that there are many more that have been touched by the gospel message through the CMA church than have been by the truth fellowship? It doesn't mean that the CMA is the 'right' church because of all the numbers of members, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of all the good that it is doing around the world, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of how many people attend it. What it is.... is another church where Christians gather together to worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and one that is doing lots of charitable works around the world. It also doesn't mean that 'my church is better than your church'. Scott i must have missed some of your posts, scott. many times it seems that the reason you attend where you currently attend, is because it is the same or better than other groups (f&w) just wondering if you sense how your posts come across? perhaps my posts are equally 'biased' ..
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 15:51:12 GMT -5
i must have missed some of your posts, scott. many times it seems that the reason you attend where you currently attend, is because it is the same or better than other groups (f&w) just wondering if you sense how your posts come across? perhaps my posts are equally 'biased' .. Ha...! I am not real sure how my posts come across. I don't go to the church I do because it is the same or better than other churches. I go there because I enjoy it! My wife and I miss a lot of church during the summer because of our motorcycle club, and all the weekend campouts we go on. It is nice to have the pastor ask how our motorcycling trips were, without it ever feeling like we were being 'bad' for missing church. We are taught there that it is our own personal relationship with Christ that matters, and not the church we attend. We are also taught that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ regardless of our church affiliation (Christian churches of course) I don't consider either the church I attend or myself to be better than someone else or their church. Scott
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 2, 2010 16:51:38 GMT -5
~~ Thanks, Snow.... Between 1899-1905 WI, 500 friends and workers LEFT their own churches denomination and decided to follow Jesus apostolic ministry and fellowship because they saw the confusion, fighting existed in the churches in their days.
They were lead and moved by the Spirit to team up by the leading and guidance of God's Spirit to follow Jesus apostolic ministry/fellowship model.... most of them already believe or have faith in God.
There was nothing self-righteous or delusional these early workers had done... they were sincere, honest, true worshipers of God who just wanted to follow Christ and His teachings written in the Bible. Nathan, and I applaud those who stood up for something they believed in and even started a faith where they could walk the path they believed was true. But, here is the question, did the originators of the "truth" ever once think it was the only way to be saved and get to heaven? Or did they simply believe it was the way "they" wanted to honor their god and Jesus. They may not have agreed with the ways other churches worshipped, and obviously they didn't, but that doesn't mean they didn't believe other demoninations of Christianity weren't going to heaven did it? It was that belief that ultimately turned me away from all religions for many years. It has always seemed wrong to me and continues to this day. I see god so differently from many religions I guess. I don't see the wrathful exclusive god most religions paint. I just can't. It doesn't feel right in my heart.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 2, 2010 16:56:12 GMT -5
~~ If it wasn't a requirement or important why do you think there has always been men and women who guided by the Spirit to follow the pattern of Jesus apostolic ministry= without homes of their own as itinerant preachers, unpaid monthy salary, live in others homes, for the sake of Christ's gospel for 2000 yrs?
The requirement you seek are in the Bible.... READ the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and Study the life and ministry of Jesus as an Itinerant preacher of the gospel... The majority of the apostles who have followed in Jesus footsteps for centuries because they follow His example as an Itinerant preacher of the gospel.
I figure that those who feel that the way they worship do so because they feel a conviction to do so. No matter how they go about it. Now, to put the truth fellowship into perspective with the CMA church I posted the info above from, do you see that there are many more that have been touched by the gospel message through the CMA church than have been by the truth fellowship? It doesn't mean that the CMA is the 'right' church because of all the numbers of members, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of all the good that it is doing around the world, nor does it make it the 'right' church because of how many people attend it. What it is.... is another church where Christians gather together to worship our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and one that is doing lots of charitable works around the world. It also doesn't mean that 'my church is better than your church'. Scott Good post imo
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 2, 2010 17:00:26 GMT -5
Snow; From my conversations with some of these early people and you stated it properly they felt it was the way they wanted to honor God. They did not see it as the only way. An old worker from Canada Horace Cullwick told me he never heard about the only way until he was in the work about 15 years or so. William Irvine may have been the originator of this teaching and others bought into it.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 2, 2010 17:05:07 GMT -5
Snow; From my conversations with some of these early people and you stated it properly they felt it was the way they wanted to honor God. They did not see it as the only way. An old worker from Canada Horace Cullwick told me he never heard about the only way until he was in the work about 15 years or so. And that would make more sense to me anyway. Thanks Lin. My parents professed back in the early 30's and they held that belief quite firmly, that the truth was the only way to salvation. So it must have started out as a way to worship and slowly transformed into the "only" way to worship.
|
|
|
Post by prehaps on Feb 2, 2010 19:48:56 GMT -5
I am not real sure how my posts come across. I don't go to the church I do because it is the same or better than other churches. We are taught there that it is our own personal relationship with Christ that matters, I don't consider either the church I attend or myself to be better than someone else or their church. , maybe we got a little in common. I go to the 'church' i do, because i was asked to go there. I don't think our little mtg is any better than other mtgs., nor do i think than i am better than you. yet it seems the 'collective' beliefs of your group, might make either of us uncomfortable, aint it good that we are all individuals , and we both find a place where we ARE most comfortable, even if it is with agnostics, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2010 20:19:57 GMT -5
snow, according to the information available about the early workers, the originating group did not start off as "the only way". In fact, the very first years involved the workers preaching then sending their converts off to local churches. In 1901, they began to separate their converts into home churches. Still, there is no strong evidence that this was specifically done because they felt they were "the only way", but most of the early workers left mainstream churches because of their dissatisfaction with them. When they decided to separate their converts, they found evidence in the bible of home churches so decided to start that up. It was not long after that "the only way" grew stronger. It's difficult to pinpoint when it changed although the idea of "The Living Witness Doctrine" is reported to have been introduced by Joe Kerr after his disgust upon attending a mainstream church group and became convinced they were wrong. I think that was at one of the first conventions either 1903 or 1905, can't remember offhand. However, we can say for certain that "the only way" was firmly set in place by 1907. This is recorded in the John Long III Journal in which he, as a worker, was removed from the ministry because he refused to denounce John Wesley (and hence all clergy) as unsaved. 1907 wasn't when the idea was introduced, but it is clearly the date in which it was firmly and officially established. There were, I believe, about 200 workers at that meeting so the policy of "the only way" was instantly known to all the workers in Ireland. Snow; From my conversations with some of these early people and you stated it properly they felt it was the way they wanted to honor God. They did not see it as the only way. An old worker from Canada Horace Cullwick told me he never heard about the only way until he was in the work about 15 years or so. And that would make more sense to me anyway. Thanks Lin. My parents professed back in the early 30's and they held that belief quite firmly, that the truth was the only way to salvation. So it must have started out as a way to worship and slowly transformed into the "only" way to worship.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 2, 2010 20:37:35 GMT -5
Clearday:This is pretty much the way it has been told to me from those that were involved with those early days. I also knew some who left the work at this time because of this teaching. A lot of what we know as doctrine now was in a flux stage for a while and then was agreed upon as common thought. The sad thing about our history is the most of the history is documented by negative authors. Which leaves questions of the purity. It would be like trusting the news media for an unbiased report
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 2, 2010 20:44:35 GMT -5
snow, according to the information available about the early workers, the originating group did not start off as "the only way". In fact, the very first years involved the workers preaching then sending their converts off to local churches. In 1901, they began to separate their converts into home churches. Still, there is no strong evidence that this was specifically done because they felt they were "the only way", but most of the early workers left mainstream churches because of their dissatisfaction with them. When they decided to separate their converts, they found evidence in the bible of home churches so decided to start that up. It was not long after that "the only way" grew stronger. It's difficult to pinpoint when it changed although the idea of "The Living Witness Doctrine" is reported to have been introduced by Joe Kerr after his disgust upon attending a mainstream church group and became convinced they were wrong. I think that was at one of the first conventions either 1903 or 1905, can't remember offhand. However, we can say for certain that "the only way" was firmly set in place by 1907. This is recorded in the John Long III Journal in which he, as a worker, was removed from the ministry because he refused to denounce John Wesley (and hence all clergy) as unsaved. 1907 wasn't when the idea was introduced, but it is clearly the date in which it was firmly and officially established. There were, I believe, about 200 workers at that meeting so the policy of "the only way" was instantly known to all the workers in Ireland. And that would make more sense to me anyway. Thanks Lin. My parents professed back in the early 30's and they held that belief quite firmly, that the truth was the only way to salvation. So it must have started out as a way to worship and slowly transformed into the "only" way to worship. Thanks for that clearday. It does seem like it happened very early, and your post confirms that. My grandmother professed in the 1920's and my parents in the early 30's so it would have already been what was being taught to all of them. It would make sense then why they believed it so strongly.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Feb 2, 2010 20:45:44 GMT -5
I am not real sure how my posts come across. I don't go to the church I do because it is the same or better than other churches. We are taught there that it is our own personal relationship with Christ that matters, I don't consider either the church I attend or myself to be better than someone else or their church. , maybe we got a little in common. I go to the 'church' i do, because i was asked to go there. I don't think our little mtg is any better than other mtgs., nor do i think than i am better than you. yet it seems the 'collective' beliefs of your group, might make either of us uncomfortable, aint it good that we are all individuals , and we both find a place where we ARE most comfortable, even if it is with agnostics, right? Wouldn't make much sense to go hang out with people that make us uncomfortable would it? (unless it happened to be where we work..... ) Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2010 20:53:45 GMT -5
We'll do almost anything for money eh?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2010 20:55:51 GMT -5
Absolutely snow, the idea was deeply entrenched by then. All 4 of my grandparents professed between 1911 and 1919 and I gather they all had "the only way" idea pitched to them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 2, 2010 21:06:02 GMT -5
Clearday:This is pretty much the way it has been told to me from those that were involved with those early days. I also knew some who left the work at this time because of this teaching. A lot of what we know as doctrine now was in a flux stage for a while and then was agreed upon as common thought. The sad thing about our history is the most of the history is documented by negative authors. Which leaves questions of the purity. It would be like trusting the news media for an unbiased report I agree about the bias Lin and I wish there was more made available. There is one major account that I am aware of which was written by someone within the church but is being withheld from being available. It's disconcerting to me that such would be withheld.....I know of no good reason why. Personally I place a lot of stock in the John Long III Journal. It is a journal, so as such, it is much the same as an insider history. Besides, anyone who takes the time reading John Long III will recognize a gentle Christian spirit throughout his writings and a strong attempt to be fair to all. His human side does show through occasionally but that's what makes it so authentic and trustworthy to me......it's not a bunch of self-aggrandizing writing fluff to make himself look great.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 2, 2010 21:26:34 GMT -5
~~ Thanks, Snow.... Between 1899-1905 WI, 500 friends and workers LEFT their own churches denomination and decided to follow Jesus apostolic ministry and fellowship because they saw the confusion, fighting existed in the churches in their days.
They were lead and moved by the Spirit to team up by the leading and guidance of God's Spirit to follow Jesus apostolic ministry/fellowship model.... most of them already believe or have faith in God.
There was nothing self-righteous or delusional these early workers had done... they were sincere, honest, true worshipers of God who just wanted to follow Christ and His teachings written in the Bible. 1) Nathan, and I applaud those who stood up for something they believed in and even started a faith where they could walk the path they believed was true. But, here is the question, did the originators of the "truth" ever once think it was the only way to be saved and get to heaven? Or did they simply believe it was the way "they" wanted to honor their god and Jesus. ~~ VERY Good questions. I believe first of all they want to honor Christ's teachings, Christ's apostolic ministry and fellowship.2) They may not have agreed with the ways other churches worshipped, and obviously they didn't, but that doesn't mean they didn't believe other demoninations of Christianity weren't going to heaven did it? It was that belief that ultimately turned me away from all religions for many years. It has always seemed wrong to me and continues to this day. I see god so differently from many religions I guess. I don't see the wrathful exclusive god most religions paint. I just can't. It doesn't feel right in my heart. ~~~ According to John Long's journal... In 1907 200 of the early workers and friends didn't believe other denomination of Christianity were following the apostolic teachings of Jesus so in their eyes they weren't saved.
Well, most of them saw the unrest, confusion among the church they were members of so they came out from the Catholic Church, and many differnt Protestant denomination churches themselves but John Long and Mr. Pattison were the only two persons believed differently them most of them... Eventually, John Long was excommunicated for not agreeing with the whole group.
Jesus saves us... When we are SAVED by Him then we want to follow His teachings, be lights in this dark world as His witnesses in love to all.
I am very thanksful for Jesus being so exclusive in ONE way to God is through believing in Him and in Him only. This way it leaves no confusion to those who believe and follow Him. There is NO other savior but Jesus ONLY.
The servants asked the master should we pull the tares in the field which planted by the enemy? He said NO! leave them be and at the harvest time God will send his angels to separate the tares from the wheat..... so to the servants KEEP on sowing good seeds in the world.So it was approximately 10 years from the founding that things started to change to "the only way". Thanks for clarifying that Nathan. As far as being saved goes, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 2, 2010 22:19:10 GMT -5
NB: Dr. J's book came out in 2003 - not 2002 Nate: Are you talking about these "dots" Dr. J connected?
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 21:02:38 -0500 (EST) From: cornelius jaenen Subject: CHRISTIANS I have the E-mail; that was forwarded from the History department at the University of Ottawa where I am an Emeritus Professor long retired but active in graduate and post-doctoral studies, etc. I have noted carefully your research and thoughts and will confess there was a brief period when I too thought there was an unbroken apostolic succession of "workers" from the first century to our day. One of the workers who disabused me of that idea was Stanley Lee, our overseer in Manitoba at the time. Of course, I then paid much more attention to the teaching given by Jack Carroll, George Walker, and especially Wilson Reid. The write-up under my name you refer to is unscientific and undocumented and should not be in circulation. I encourage you to read carefully, in short sections at a time or it becomes undigestable, "The Apostles' Doctrine and Fellowship..." that sets out from documents the nature of the early church [not always what restorationists have imagined] and a "chain of witnesses" of efforts over the centuries to restore, regain, reconstitute, renew, retain, etc. the original faith. There was no unbroken consistent line of "workers" from the first century to our day [even the Roman Catholic succession is tenuous at times] but the Spirit was always working in the world to retain faith until Jesus returns. And so there were almost certainly "true believers" in every age and century somewhere but not in the sense of a constant visible community or fellowship. I have tried to formulate from the mediaeval documents the characteristics of such a spiritual people and tradition. "Hold fast the tradition you have been taught." Faith expresses itself in an ideal, a life-style, not always through a visible institution and hierarchy such as our fellowship at present since 1897. We are grateful that there has been this full restoration in our day, but our faith is not based on our organization or an unbroken lineage. We and what we believe is not the Way - Jesus is still THE WAY and He is THE TRUTH. Warmest greetings and good wishes, Cornelius J. Jaenen
Please note most specifically that Cornelius himself admits that his "Following Up..." statement "is unscientific and undocumented and should not be in circulation." We should remember that even the most learned and professional scholar still has his or her bias, and that historical "facts" can be selected and presented in such a way to support any hypothesis. If Cornelius is the "foremost authority" on the historical question, as another editor has written in the article, we should recognize as he himself has stated, that our present fellowship does not date back before the 1897 start date. He calls our fellowship a "full restoration" and not a "continuation." Eddie Tor 23:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
From Wikipedia Talk: ChristianConventions en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Christian_Conventions#Cornelius_Jaenen.27s_role_as_church_historianWiki Terms of Use: You can re-use content from Wikimedia projects freely, with the exception of content that is used under "fair use" exemptions, or similar exemptions of copyright law
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 2, 2010 22:27:07 GMT -5
Clearday: The sad thing about our history is the most of the history is documented by negative authors. Which leaves questions of the purity. It would be like trusting the news media for an unbiased report Hostility cannot change the truth or facts. Truth Is Truth, Regardless Of:Who perceives it, or fails to recognize it; Who understands it or misunderstands it; Who agrees or disagrees with it; Who believes or disbelieves it; Who accepts, objects or rejects it; Who is convinced or unconvinced of it; Who accuses or excuses it; Who proves it or seeks to disprove it; Who opposes, challenges, questions or doubts it; Who misinterprets, misconstrues, perverts or distorts it. Whether it is spoken, written or acted out; Whether it is withheld, omitted, falsified; Whether it is expressed, suppressed, or unexpressed; Whether it is disputed, contested or tried; Whether it is covered up or uncovered; Whether it is revealed or concealed. For Truth is Truth...independently of man.If it is the truth, what does it matter who says it? (Anonymous) Truth is truth, no matter who states it.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Feb 2, 2010 23:30:44 GMT -5
So Nate, are you agreeing or disagreeing with what Dr. J said above?
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Feb 3, 2010 0:03:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 3, 2010 0:19:19 GMT -5
So it was approximately 10 years from the founding that things started to change to "the only way". Thanks for clarifying that Nathan. As far as being saved goes, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one. ~~ Things began to change in 1899 when different preachers left their denomination churches such as John Long, Edward Cooney, May Carroll, Willie Jamieson, and 200 workers teamed up with WI's apostolic New Testament ministry experiement...
It came to a head on between WI and John Long during a convention. John L. wasn't fully agree with the whole group belief.... WI felt John was hindering their progresses by dragging his feet so he asked John to denounce John Wesley (and hence all clergy) as unsaved. John Westly was the founder of the Presbyterian denomination which he had been a preacher before he joined with WI.
Nate, a bit off topic, but my father used to talk about Willie Jamison a lot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2010 4:22:47 GMT -5
These people met in a house. (Acts) Jesus condemned the temple (all Gospels) The temple had fulfilled its duty (Romans, Hebrews etc) The Holiest of Holies was now open to all (Romans, Hebrews etc) The disciples preached where ever the Jews congregated (ie temple, synagogues) Paul showed his respect for the temple against the Jews accusing him of disrespect. The sign of death hung over the temple in AD70 (Halleys comet) Signs were given to the Jews in the clouds (Josephus) Strange voices cried in the temple, "We are leaving, we are leaving" (Josephus) The Romans destroyed the temple and God did not stop them.
from our website.
After the crucifixion the "veil of the temple" was torn. The heavy fabric was ripped from the top to the bottom. This key event ended the role of the Temple, "The Holy Ghost thus signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing."
The Temple was destroyed during the Jewish Roman wars. It's main function was sacrifice, but seeing "there is no more offering for sin" its role had been fulfilled.
After Jesus' crucifixion the disciples and their followers continued gathering in homes, large building or even outdoors.
Jesus gave his approval by gathering with them. There is no record of Jesus attending either the Temple or the synagogue again. In Acts 1:4, "(Jesus) being assembled together with them," and a congregation "about an hundred and twenty ... they went up into an upper room... these all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication..." And in Acts 2:46, "And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house," On the day of Pentecost the spirit of God appeared to the congregation as "cloven tongues like as of fire," filling them with the Holy Ghost. "... suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting." This is significant: the Pentecost home gathering had the same seal of approval as had the Tabernacle and the Temple when God appeared in the cloud.
Prior to the Jewish Roman wars the Gospel was preached in the Temple. There are occasions when they preached in Diaspora Synagogues. Most likely this was in early times, "... for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue." Jewish Christians were allowed to hold onto their Jewish heritage. In one case Paul entered the Temple to perform a "Nazarene Vow." The symbolism was important because some felt Paul was disrespectful to the Law of Moses. Paul said it was wrong to do "... anything whereby thy brother stumbles, or is offended, or is made weak" Thus the disciples respected the Temple as a still standing institution to God. They were not worshipping in total accord with the old Law, but preaching the new: "And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ."
|
|