Do any of the F&W here disagree with ...

[Audrey]

...the content of the website being discussed on the "Professing website knocks bitter exes" thread?

[InAnswerTo]

Not so sure if the apostles had the the pre-dawn Sunday breakfast. Perhaps it was to symbolize the early resurrection morning.

[jxr]

InAnswerTo said:

Not so sure if the apostles had the the pre-dawn Sunday breakfast. Perhaps it was to symbolize the early resurrection morning.

On the first Sunday, the disciples were probably gathered together, and muttering amongst themselves "Strewth Ruth, our Jesus is dead. What are we gonna do now?"

I'm sure they weren't having a Sunday morning meeting anything like as we know it. Considering they wouldn't have had anything resembling a Bible amongst them. All the written scripture was stored in the synagogues, and they weren't gonna go there!

[junia]

audrey said:

...the content of the website being discussed on the "Professing website knocks bitter exes" thread?

FWIW I strongly disagree with the contents of this website and I know of many more F&W who also disagree. I believe it will have the opposite effect of what the author intended. Stuff like this drive thinking people away. Of course Nate laps it up...

[nathan7]

junia said:

audrey said:

...the content of the website being discussed on the "Professing website knocks bitter exes" thread?

FWIW I strongly disagree with the contents of this website and I know of many more F&W who also disagree. I believe it will have the opposite effect of what the author intended. Stuff like this drive thinking people away. Of course Nate laps it up...

Just like many websites on the Internet these days, there will be those who like it and those who don't. Just the facts of life.

An interesting website I say.
home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/

[InAnswerTo]

Re JXR - not having a bible. Most folks back then had scripture of some sort, even if it was only fragmentary verses. None of the gospel was locked in any synagogue!!!!! Within a few years scraps of the gospel were all over the place.
I am sure that if there was a dawn service required of Christians, it would have been mentioned in the new testament, so I don't see that part as being relevant.
Can't see how folks would disagree with the main bulk of this web site though, because it simply details how the early church did went about its business

[Audrey]

Nate, I'm confused about your stance as well. I've read over and over again you saying that the F&W taught salvation by grace? This Phillip fellow accurately reports my personal understanding of the 2x2 doctrine, but I was surprised to see you agreeing, even by association.

[nathan7]

audrey said:

Nate, I'm confused about your stance as well. I've read over and over again you saying that the F&W taught salvation by grace? This Phillip fellow accurately reports my personal understanding of the 2x2 doctrine, but I was surprised to see you agreeing, even by association.

Here is my understanding Salvation by Grace.

Yes, most of the workers "preach and teach" Salvation by Grace= Those who accept Jesus Christ as their Savior is believing Salvation by the GRACE of God.

For the law was given by Moses, but GRACE! and TRUTH! came by Jesus Christ. (John 1:17)

For by GRACE! are ye SAVED through Faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. (Eph. 1:8)

[whois]

who is this phillips person?

[Most]

"Yes, most of the workers "preach and teach" Salvation by Grace= Those who accept Jesus Christ as their Savior is believing Salvation by the GRACE of God."

I think you are making liberal use of the word "most". The overseer of our state said that if he preached salvation by grace he wouldn't have anything else to talk about. How 'bout them apples? BTW, in 3 decades I heard 1 worker preach salvation by grace. He also made it clear that grace would draw people to the only true fold. Most theologians describe the 2x2 doctrine of salvation to be "grace plus". The 2x2s no how no way believe in salvation by grace alone.

[junia]

nathan7 said:

Just like many websites on the Internet these days, there will be those who like it and those who don't. Just the facts of life.

An interesting website I say.
home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/

It's not a matter of "liking" or "disliking" a website. It's a matter of is it true, and do the contents line up with the bible. Others have correctly noted that it teaches a grace plus form of salvation. I could never endorse this website for a number of reasons.

[pure bs]

That website merely reinforces the basic 2x2 thinking of "us vs. them" and does absolutely nothing to extend a hand of Christian brotherhood to anyone, anywhere.

[junia]

pure said:

That website merely reinforces the basic 2x2 thinking of "us vs. them" and does absolutely nothing to extend a hand of Christian brotherhood to anyone, anywhere.

Exactly. It only reinforces the beliefs of the hardcore exclusive 2x2s.

[Hope For All]

I've been gone from this board for a while now, but came back today for a peek.

This thread caught my eye.

The Phillips website makes this statement:

"The prevailing wisdom is that Christians met in private dwellings because of Roman persecution. But Christianity was not usually an underground movement - Rome was multi-cultural, largely tolerant of other religions and accepted all sorts of religious buildings across its far flung empire. (Mob attacks on private homes would have been more devastating than attacking a church building.) Roman harassment was sporadic, and strife against Christians in some provinces largely related to Jewish sectarianism or idol manufacturers."


This kind of logic drives me NUTS. To make this kind of miss-leading statement is an insult to the many Christians who died as Martyrs.

You don't have to read very much early history to see that the Christians were persecuted mercilessly for the first 300 years of their existance.

Peter- crucified
James-beheaded
Stephen-stoned
Paul-beheaded or crucified
Iraneous-thrown to the wild beasts
Polycarp-burnt at the stake
Justin-Martryed

And I could go on and on.

John wrote Revelations from exile and quoted the spirits of the saints under the Alter saying

"And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled. "

Love,
HFA

[Hope For All]

Further to my last post, to suggest that Christians could have set up Church buildings on the corner of main and main is ludicrious. In fact churchs WERE being built by no later than 200 AD (and probably sooner) but- surprise surprise- they were all destroyed by the Roman Emporer in around 275AD. They were later built up again in about 300 AD.

HFA

[Zorro]

HFA,
I think he forgot about the Christians who lost their lives in the Coliseum, too.

[Hope For All]

To those who use this line of logic I would ask,

"Would you dare move to China or N. Korea today, and set up a Christian Church building there". After all persecution there is "sporadic" also.

Christians who stay in those countries today are afraid to meet openly. Common sense dictates that they meet privately- and where else would you do this but in a home?

I say this with all due respect, but at the first sign of trouble in foreign countries today, the workers are brought out to safety. Even though I think this is wise, I also wonder about the logic of saying that the early Christians did not meet in a home for safety reasons because there was no real danger??

It seems pretty easy for us to sit in our arm chairs and suggest that persecution of early Christians was sporadic. If it happened to as many of our own, as to the Early Christians, we may not be quite so quick to say such things.

Love,
HFA

[ClayRandall]

Regarding persecution of Christians as being "sporadic":

Even if this were true (which it is not), does it make the persecution of the early church any less significant? Did the early Christians know that their being persecuted was merely “sporadic and localized” It probably didn’t seem that way to those who suffered for their faith. It is said that the ichthus symbol was a secret greeting Christians gave each other, afraid to be publicly recognized as Christians. They met in secret in the catacombs in Rome and set up altars there. From Herod to Nero to Domitian to Severus to Decius to Diocletian to Licinius to Valerian to Maximus and beyond, state-sanctioned persecution was ordered by the Roman emperors.

In 177 A.D. The Letter of the Churchs of Vienna and Lyons to the Churches of Asia and Phrygia exposes a comprehensive oppression instead of “mob hostility”, “Now the blessed Pothinus, who had been entrusted with the bishopric of Lyons, was dragged before the judgment-seat. He was over ninety years of age and very infirm. Though he breathed with difficulty on account of the feebleness of the body, yet he was strengthened by spiritual zeal through his earnest desire to bear his testimony. His body, indeed, was already worn out by old age and disease, yet his life was preserved that Christ might triumph through him. When he was brought by the soldiers to the judgment-seat, accompanied by the civil magistrates and a multitude who shouted against him in every manner, as if he himself were the Christ, he gave the good testimony. When the governor asked who was the God of the Christians, he said, "If thou art worthy, thou shalt know." Then he was unmercifully dragged away and endured many blows. Those near him struck him with their hands and feet, showing no respect for his age. Those at a distance hurled against him whatever they could seize. All of them thought they would sin greatly if they omitted any abuse in their insulting treatment of him. For they thought that in this way they would avenge their gods. And Pothinus, breathing with difficulty, was cast into prison, and died two days later.”

From De Mart. Pal. ch. 9 we learn that, “All at once decrees of Maximinus again got abroad against everywhere throughout the province. The governors, and in addition the military prefects, incited by edicts, letters and and public ordinances the magistrates, together with generals and the city clerks in all the cities, to fulfill the imperial edicts which commanded that the altars of the idols should be rebuilt with all zeal and that all the men, together with the women and children, even infants at the breast, should offer sacrifice and pour out libations;”. In other words, edicts and public ordinances and the military prefects and generals and city clerks ALL were involved in trying to suppress the Christian movement. No, it was not just “mob hostility” by which Polycarp was martyred, and one need merely to peruse Eusebius or Lactantius; for example, "At Nicomedia ten thousand holy martyrs who were put to the sword for the confession of Christ", and on 22 June: "On Mount Ararat the martyrdom of ten thousand holy martyrs who were crucified." The first entry, found in an old Greek martyrology, translated by Cardinal Sirleto and published by H.Canisius, probably notes the veneration of a number of those who gave their lives for Christ at the beginning of the prosecution of Diocletian, in 303.

[towit]

Regarding secular history and the early church (AD 96-305)

They met in private rooms or small chapels, and organized themselves on the model of the synagogue. Each congregation was called an ekklesia- the Greek term for the popular assembly in municipal governments.

The early converts were predominantly proletarian, with a sprinkling of the lower middle classes and an occasional conquest among the rich. Nevertheless, they were far from being the 'dregs of the people,' as Celsus would claim; they lived for the most part orderly and industrious lives, financed missions, and raised funds for impoverished Christian communities.

The Story of Civilization III- Caesar and Christ; Will Durant p596

[in his defense]

In defense of this Phillips web site: the first Christians were not instructed to create temples, synagogues or any such thing. They rejected “temples built with hands.”
The Jew, loathed throughout the ancient world, created synagogues whereever they went, as did many pagan religions.
Martyers. Some of the disciples died at the hands of the Jews (ie James and Steven.) Some died at Roman hands to please the Jews (ie Jesus.) Some died at the hands of some emperors (ie Paul and maybe Peter to the much loathed Nero.)
As many Catholics now acknowledge, the martyrdom of many of their “saints” has been exagerated, if not contrived – and there are few reliable witnesses to what became victor’s history.
Some Roman administrations took the view, quite rightly as it turned out, that the early Catholics were seeking political power in their own right, and would wield that power as the Roman’s did.

[Audrey]

Jesus changed the whole concept of "temple," because before He came God DID reside in ... the ark, the Holy of Holies, in temples. With Jesus, that all changed because HE became the pathway by which we could know God and the Spirit could actually dwell within all believers instead of a select few (in the OT only kings, prophets experienced the individual guidance of the Holy Spirit). So, yes, God no longer dwells in temples made with hands. Does that mean that Jesus forbade us to meet in buildings?

[Pete]

"As surely as palmipeds are found upon the sea, the jaguar helps fertilize the jungle floor !"

Gene Nelson - 2001 (To a group of ladies having tea on the lawn, tittering over the extinction of the Great Auk)

Audrey I think you have your answer in Gene's words ? Just because the jaguar is not to be found upon the sea, nor is the jungle the home for ocean going palmipeds, this does not mean that the Euphrates river is devoid of fish ! Perhaps you don't see it that way ?

[in his defense]

Letter to Audrey
Hi Audrey. Yes, I am one of those so-called F&W’s. Yes, I read that new web-site. There are two aspects to this site :
1) the Opinions about the so-called VOT’s, and
2) the facts about the original church.
I agree on most, but not all, of the Opinions. But you and me agree on the Facts about the church because this material was sourced direct from the bible.

I noticed this natan7 guy copied and pasted a section from that web site into this board. The subect was what name the church had. The topic was simple, easily handled and an important key in understanding why my faith had no name – Audrey, why was there little interest?
Another entry, titled something about “Nathan missing meetings” garnered huge interest. Clearly this board is not about searching for truth, but validating opinions or attacking figure heads.
Regards the issue of being “Saved by Grace” This means different things to different people. I am reminded of an argument which raged over a thousand years ago about TRANSUBSTANTIATION , ie is Christ in the bread and wine, or symbolized by it? You can get pretty well worked over it, and it ultimately split the church into east and west. But like the Trinity issue it has no real resolution, and distracts from the far simpler, resolvable and more important issues which involve our daily lives.
Thus I did enjoy the references in this web site to the “foundation church.” Anyone who wants to pick at some point of that text ought to be honest and adress it in its entirety. We need to ask why people today don’t see that church example as being something they could or should aspire to emulate.

[Interesting]

"distracts from the far simpler, resolvable and more important issues which involve our daily lives."

Could you explain what issues are more important than salvation (your dismissal of “Saved by Grace”) or who God is (your dismissal of the Trinity). Perhaps knowing the "foundation church"? This is why the 2x2s have such deep, pervasive problems and a doctrine tossed to and fro. The only thing you can find agreement on is the ministry and home mtgs. All other issues are blowing in the wind. And that's a fact.

[Hope For All]

Dear "In his defense",

You stated that, "Anyone who wants to pick at some point of that text ought to be honest and adress it in its entirety. We need to ask why people today don’t see that church example as being something they could or should aspire to emulate."

I personally believe meeting in a home IS something to aspire to.

What I object to is defending this as a doctrinal requirement by stating that Church buildings could and would have been built by the early Christians without any fear of the Romans if they wanted to.

All I have to go by is what scripture says. Nowhere can I find meeting in a home a commandment of Jesus. I do read where it states clearly that the first church met together in homes "FOR FEAR OF THE JEWS".

Love,
HFA

[Audrey]

reply to "in his defense:"

I only get "worked up" about the main points of the gospel, i.e. who Jesus is, why He came and died, how can we be saved. Where believers meet is of little importance to me. I think it's another way of diverting attention away from the truly important stuff. Jesus looks through the outward stuff into our very hearts.

With respect to "immulating" the early church, well, if a church is going to do that they need to get busy with other stuff in addition to meeting in homes. They need to pool their financial resources, for one. They need to start taking daily meals together also. Just to name a couple.

Like I said, that's all well and good, but it's not the "saving point." It's not even on the LIST of saving points. In other words, there's nothing wrong with meeting in homes. But there's nothing wrong with not meeting in homes either. Meeting together with Jesus is what's important, be it in field or building.

Blessings.

[in his defense]

To Hope For All
Hi, I have enclosed a link to a nice little web site on the subject of martyrs. My suspicion is that early Christians (as opposed to Catholics!) were not only left alone within most of the Roman Empire, but perhaps respected for not involving themselves in the affairs of the state, paying their taxes etc.. Seems the persecution seriously started in AD 250, and was later ramped up by Christian Romans (ie the Catholic church) themselves.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/why/martyrs.html

[in his defense]

To Audrey
er... thanks for answering my post