Come Out Of Her My People

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Pliny, could you fix your post, I don't know where Renee's post ends, and your's begins.

Sorry.
Should be fixed now.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Sorry.
Should be fixed now.

Thanks

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Pliny

I assume you mean the RCC. So unless you are using a very liberal interpretation for the RCC the trinity baptism was not started by the RCC. Most (the I have spoken to) assume the RCC began when Constantine came to power and wrote the edict of Milan. This was in the fourth century. Trinity baptism was used by many long before this in the third century. Therefore, you don't know your history.


Perhaps you have never read:
Act 20:17 And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church.
Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers (G1985), to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

G1985
ἐπίσκοπος
episkopos
Thayer Definition:
1) an overseer
1a) a man charged with the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly, any curator, guardian or superintendent
1b) the superintendent, elder, or overseer of a Christian church

Jer 3:14 Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:
Jer 3:15 And I will give you pastors (H7462) according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.

H7462
רעה
râ‛âh
BDB Definition:
1) to pasture, tend, graze, feed
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to tend, pasture
1a1a) to shepherd
1a1b) of ruler, teacher (figuratively)
1a1c) of people as flock (figuratively)
1a1d) shepherd, herdsman (substantive)

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Sounds like an hierarchy to me...


Seriously?
Let's get this straight you have attacked the ministry, claimed that it was the RCC that brought in the trinity baptism and now you are attacking tithes. In those immortal words...

Good Grief!

Why in the narrative of Abraham and Melchizedek do we find Abraham paying tithes? Who told him to do this? Where is the instruction for this? It just seemingly appears out of nowhere. Then there is Jacob who promises a tithes of all he had. All before the Levitical system. Why a tithe (which is ten percent, always)? Why not five percent or fifteen percent? Why always ten percent, a tithe?

I will not get into all this because it is pointless. I will however state that tithes were paid by every ancient culture before the Levitical system and after.

Then there is:
1Ti 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour (G5092), especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.
1Ti 5:18 For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward.

It is clear that in context Paul is dealing with the monetary livlihood of the ministry and invokes that Levitical Law concerning animals that are treading the corn. The ministry is worthy of their reward!

G5092
τιμή
timē
Thayer Definition:
1) a valuing by which the price is fixed
1a) of the price itself
1b) of the price paid or received for a person or thing bought or sold
2) honour which belongs or is shown to one
2a) of the honour which one has by reason of rank and state of office which he holds
2b) deference, reverence

VWS
Double honor (διπλῆς τιμῆς)
This at least includes pecuniary remuneration for services, if it is not limited to that. The use of τιμή as pay or price appears Mat_27:6, Mat_27:9; Act_4:34; Act_7:16; 1Co_6:20...

Tithing was in fact established among all civilizations prior to the Law.
Tithing was practiced prior to the Law in the Bible.
Tithing was used during the Law.
Jesus tithed.

Because tithing was established prior to the Law and during the Law please demonstrate where Jesus said not to tithe.
Since there are no scriptures where Jesus said tithing is abolished please demonstrate where any of the Apostles declared tithing to be null and void.

You can't.


Wow is all I can say. Now it is sin to have a "church building". How absolutely absurd!
Synagogues were the early churches. For example:
Act 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;
Act 18:4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
Act 18:7 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.
Act 18:8 And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.


Facts are truly pesky things...


Let's face it. There are a lot of carnal "Christians" espousing doctrines they have no idea what they are talking about.

[Rudy]

Originally Posted by n david

I agree we don't need to abandon buildings; though the first post stated "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."

Home churches, church buildings...we're missing the point if this is what it has come down to.

At the time of the Apostles, there was only the Temple and Synagogues. I've never heard anyone say we're commanded to build buildings. Quite simply, the early church met where they could. Since at that time there were no church buildings, they met in homes and other areas. I also understand the NT church is not a building, but the people; I also agree that we're all part of a royal priesthood with direct access to God.

Regarding clergy, there are God-given roles within the body of Christ, as Paul writes of in Ephesians 4. It does not mean they are "special ones," but they are there "...for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." And he gives a reason they are needed: "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive."

I agree.

[renee819]

Originally Posted by renee819

And what the RCC has put into place has led to sin. It was sin in the first place, because, …Constantine, for Political reasons, a Pagan until he died, took churches away from Pagan Priests and gave them, to the Christians. Which sounds great, but at what price? They had to compromise, agree to baptize in the Trinity.

It is a sin to compromise with False Doctrine.

Quote:

Constantine built the first church in Constantinople, which is documented. It's also documented that he considered himself a Christian and was baptized later in life. Not saying he was right, only that history states he was influenced by his mother and declared himself to be a Christian. Where is it written that in order to have the churches, they had to agree to baptize in the Trinity?

Could he be a Christian and also a Sun Worshiper? Which he was all of his life. He was baptized on his death bed.

Originally Posted by renee819

Of course Tithes were in the OT

.

Quote

You gave a list of a few things you claimed were started by the RCC, you listed tithes among them; my point was not to debate whether or not it should be in practice today, the point was it was not something started by the RCC. The origins were in the OT

.

If you remember, I also said that Constantine, combined Paganism, Old Testament and Christianity together.
The Early Church did not practice Tithing, and most of the things that were in the OT. But some of those things the RCC, in starting a Universal Religion, started those things again..

TheRCC didn't start the Trinity. Almost every Pagan Religion has a Trinity of gods, a Mother (Queen of Heaven) Father and Son. But they authorized it into the Church, where if you baptized any other way, you had your property taken away, whether a church or a home. Many were jailed, and many martyred.

Originally Posted by renee819

Again to find Priests, and Synagogues, you have to go back to the Old Testament.

Quote

What was Jesus doing, and where was he doing it when he went missing for several days as a child? He was teaching in the Synagogue. That's NT. There are several stories of Jesus and the Apostles which show them being at the Temple or Synagogue.

Of course Jesus went into the Synagogues. The OT was still in effect. Jesus came to fulfill the OT, and it was in effect until the Cross. He could not set up the New Covenant, until the Old was fulfilled.
And as far as the Apostles, they went where the people were. But they were not the leaders of the Synagogues. And many times kicked out, or arrested.

Quote

As for clergy being a "sin" we've taken from the TCC, Paul disagrees in Ephesians 4

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

You mentioned that the hierarchy of Clergy and Laity was started by the RCC, and while they do have their positions, it does not mean that all churches are in sin because they have a Pastor over them with other church leaders as well. Why would Paul speak of these ministries and positions as being given by God, if it were not to be implemented and followed?

I don't believe that I said that the Clergy was sin. "Which sounds great, but at what price? They had to compromise, agree to baptize in the Trinity. It is a sin to compromise with False Doctrine."
And the way that it is being used by the Clergy, is sin. As little Kings over little Kingdoms. Pride in THEIR CHUCH. Ran like a business. Some pastors are Dictators, I've had a few. A stage with performers, with spectators instead of participating. That's just a few.

Quote:

Originally Posted by renee819
Jesus told the Apostles,...

Matthew 20:25-26 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;

Quote

You are taking this out of context and meaning. This was in response to a mother who wanted her two sons to be seated at the right and left hand of God. This is not speaking about the church.

Although, that is what started the argument, if He had just been settling the argument, He would have called those three over to talk to them. But He used it as an example of how those in Leadership, should not exercise “dominion' over each other.

Originally Posted by renee819

I've met many ministers that claim to be humble, and are there to minister to the people, but if you try to point out what you think is not right, see what happens. I have seen it happen over and over again. For instance, there was a big split in the church that I belonged to, for over 30 yrs. Over toeless shoes.

Quote:

This takes me back to something you mentioned in your first post above...

Originally Posted by renee819

And this makes my 3rd Sunday to a Pentecostal Church. I talked to the Pastor a few minutes after church, and told him, I didn't believe in man-made laws for the church. But we didn't have time to discuss it.
It seems they may be pretty strict on the UPC rules, although I believe they are Independent. I told the Pastor that we, he, his wife, and I, need to set down and have a talk. But we haven't yet. Any suggestions?

Quote

On your 3rd visit to a church, you tell a Pastor that you don't believe in man-made laws for the church and that you, him and his wife need to have a talk...? What are you hoping to gain from this?

I've seen church splits as well. They're mostly started by someone who starts coming to a church, who disagrees with what the Pastor is preaching/teaching and instead of removing themselves from the church, they demand to speak with the Pastor to give their thoughts about how he's wrong....and then when the Pastor doesn't give in to their demands, they go through the church, causing division.

So this is your suggestion. That I was out of order for inquiring what their standards are? And are you insinuating, that I was there to cause a split?
I was hoping to gain information as to what they believe? What Organization if any that they belong. And I was being transparent, maybe they won't want me there. I could feel the coolness last Sunday, I probably won't go back.


.

[n david]

Originally Posted by renee819

If you remember, I also said that Constantine, combined Paganism, Old Testament and Christianity together.
The Early Church did not practice Tithing, and most of the things that were in the OT. But some of those things the RCC, in starting a Universal Religion, started those things again.

Again, the point wasn't whether they practiced it or not, it was that you stated it started (originated) with the RCC. It did not.

Originally Posted by renee819

TheRCC didn't start the Trinity. Almost every Pagan Religion has a Trinity of gods, a Mother (Queen of Heaven) Father and Son. But they authorized it into the Church, where if you baptized any other way, you had your property taken away, whether a church or a home. Many were jailed, and many martyred.

So the RCC baptizes in the Mother, Father and Son? Never heard of that before.

Originally Posted by renee819

Of course Jesus went into the Synagogues. The OT was still in effect. Jesus came to fulfill the OT, and it was in effect until the Cross. He could not set up the New Covenant, until the Old was fulfilled.
And as far as the Apostles, they went where the people were. But they were not the leaders of the Synagogues. And many times kicked out, or arrested.

So where is it in the Bible where the NC established home churches as the way? I really don't see this on God's list of important things, and it's mentioned nowhere in scripture. Jesus used a mountainside, a boat, the home of a sinner, and other venues to get his message out. If you want to start a house ministry, by all means do so. But don't try to say it's a sin to have a church building.

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.

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.

Originally Posted by renee819

I don't believe that I said that the Clergy was sin. "Which sounds great, but at what price? They had to compromise, agree to baptize in the Trinity. It is a sin to compromise with False Doctrine." And the way that it is being used by the Clergy, is sin. As little Kings over little Kingdoms. Pride in THEIR CHURCH. Ran like a business. Some pastors are Dictators, I've had a few. A stage with performers, with spectators instead of participating. That's just a few.

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.

It's on your list of sins you claim were brought in by the RCC.

There may be some power-hungry Pastors, but they're not in the majority. It certainly doesn't mean the role is sinful.

Originally Posted by renee819

Although, that is what started the argument, if He had just been settling the argument, He would have called those three over to talk to them. But He used it as an example of how those in Leadership, should not exercise “dominion' over each other.

The reason he called them to Him was because the Bible says the other disciples were filled with indignation against the two; so Jesus addressed the issue with them all. You used this scripture to try and enforce your argument that priests or clergy were just from the OT.

Again to find Priests, and Synagogues, you have to go back to the Old Testament. Jesus told the Apostles,...

That scripture doesn't support your belief that the hierarchy of the clergy is wrong. The verse is speaking of humility, not a ban on clergy. Paul reflects this when he writes in 1 Peter 5 that a minister should not "lord over" their flock.

Originally Posted by renee819

So this is your suggestion. That I was out of order for inquiring what their standards are? And are you insinuating, that I was there to cause a split? I was hoping to gain information as to what they believe? What Organization if any that they belong. And I was being transparent, maybe they won't want me there. I could feel the coolness last Sunday, I probably won't go back.

And this makes my 3rd Sunday to a Pentecostal Church. I talked to the Pastor a few minutes after church, and told him, I didn't believe in man-made laws for the church. But we didn't have time to discuss it.
It seems they may be pretty strict on the UPC rules, although I believe they are Independent. I told the Pastor that we, he, his wife, and I, need to set down and have a talk. But we haven't yet. Any suggestions?

I didn't insinuate anything. In fact, I asked what you hoped to gain from what you wrote above. You said on your third visit you told the Pastor you didn't believe in man-made laws for the church. It's an odd way to gain information about anything. Then you said you told the Pastor that you, him and his wife need to sit down and have a talk. Again, the way it's written makes it appear like you were doing more than simply asking what they believe or what their standards are. Sorry if you were offended, but the way it's written above made it sound like you were putting him on notice first, then wanting to talk about it.

My comment about splits was based on what I've seen in the church my father Pastored and another church. It wasn't aimed directly at you; you mentioned splits and I responded. In the church my father Pastored, there were several people - one a "retired" Pastor - who came through, trying to divide the church.

[NotforSale]

The Book of Revelation was added to the Canon in 397 A.D., reluctantly. Its deep symbolisms, fierce judgments, and the inability to prove the future ideals represented, led many in the early Church to reject its content and authorship, which they are still uncertain of to this day. When Jesus said, “It is finished”, adding Revelation only complicated the end result of Calvary, leaving people in the despair of hideous concepts that revel in fear and damnation, not love and compassion needed for the weak or those who don’t understand the realms of Faith we might adhere to.

Abuse, using this book bound in the mythical boundary of previous Pagan Religions, was a great concern of early Christians who saw this book as a return to the Old Testament, where bloodshed and severe suffering replaced mercy. Even the ignorant, who might become repulsed by the liberties of others, they could use this book to manipulate or pressure those of different convictions, placing them in the Church of their choice, found in the first few chapters where God is giving people the ultimatum to repent, “Or else!”

Since manipulation is the number 1 cause of deceit, people must find a plausible source of Faith that gives people Hope, not Despair. Calvary within itself does this, as Jesus said when he was dying, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” This alone concludes the condition of our Planet, where people have no real idea that they could be in the “Wrong” when trying to decipher the unseen realms that none of us are certain of.

Revelation attempts to open this door, but only to the Hopeless, where a majority of the Human Race will suffer without end, which completely contradicts the Commandment(s) of Forgiveness, Love, Patience, and Mercy; which were absolutes found in the Gospels and Epistles. Revelation leaves people with the idea that this World will burn and purge the faithless thugs who despise “The Church”, giving people full reign to condemn anyone who disagrees with the Religious Box they live in.

We must also reflect on the teachings of the early Church, where Revelation wasn’t even considered a Document, and, wasn’t added to the Canon until the Catholic Church had reached great power and authority over the Christian World. This “Tool” was implemented at a time when people had no ability to question its use, or its valid meaning.

Remember, MEN have told us that we MUST accept this Book, and there are many today in the Christian Faith who do not believe this book is necessary or applicable in our attempt to follow the message of Jesus Christ. Revelation is also the greatest book of controversy in the New Testament, where no one can interpret the depth of mystery which entwines the imagination of the reader.

[Steve Epley]

After reading this I understand why Paul said "I suffer not a woman to teach."

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

After reading this I understand why Paul said "I suffer not a woman to teach."

I can handle them teaching. . . . It is the whole voting thing that concerns me.

[NotforSale]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

I can handle them teaching. . . . It is the whole voting thing that concerns me.