What is a "true church"?

The universal invisible body is not spiritual. It is actual. To confuse "spiritual interpretation" with the doctrine of the church is misleading. Spiritual interpretation is when you deny the literal meaning of hte words, not when you affirm it. No one is spiritualizing the meaning of these words, at least no one that I know of. We are affirming that the word "church" means the "body of Christ" as Scripture defines it. He only has one body.

In Matt 16, Christ said "I will build my church," so we see that it is only one and it is future. The church did not begin until Pentecost. So to answer your question, No, Christ did not start the church during his earthly ministry.

As for an "answer" to Rev 2 and 3, what kind of answer do you want? I affirm that those are local churches. I affirm the existence of the local church and give it high priority. But what I also affirm is the NT teaching that Christ only has one body, which is the church. It is the one body he gave himself for. Same with you comments about 1 Cor 4 and 7. I agree totally with that. I affirm the existence of local "churches."

Why didn't you answer my questions? I will repeat them:

When Eph 5:25 says that Christ gave himself for the church, which church was that? Was it mine?? Was it yours?? Was it neither? Which church was it Christ gave himself for?

In Matthew 16, where Christ said he would build his church, which church was that? Was it mine?? We have been here for 100 years so perhaps it is my church ... except there are other churches that have been around longer than that so perhaps it was their church. Tell us, which church did Christ build?

 

I'm sorry, I see above I am trying to argue two things and they are getting wrapped up in each other. Let me try to split them

1) in the Esphesian passage, the church refers to all churches, so whatever a matter of simple english (or better Greek grammer) or because of some other reason, in THIS CASE, "The Church = all churches"

2) The Ephesians passages includes not just every gathering local body of believers, but also ever believer, whether or not he is at that moment gathering because either (he hasn't had time yet) or (he is stranded on a desert island).

You can obvious agree with one and disgree with the other.

 

So what church was the Lord Jesus talking about when we get to Mt 18?

Matt 18:17
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

Thanks ----------Bart

 

REPLY: I have already stated that He built and presented His church by the time He said, "take it to the church". Mt 18 That church is still here. In the place where you assemble and worship. It is still here as it is in the place where I worship. A local visible assembly or "body".

Question:
1 Tim 3:15
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.
This verse states that "The Church" is the pillar and ground of truth. What church is this verse speaking of?

Thanks -------Bart
I hope all my spelling is correct and my grammar and whatever else as I cannot edit. Something wrong with my computer and the way it is connected to the board.

 

Thanks???? For what???? You didn't even answer the question. You cite an irrelevant passage. Matt 18 refers to the local church to be sure, but it was not yet in existence, as evidenced by the lack of Spirit baptism which is what forms the body.

But let's get back to the point, rather than chasing these rabbit trails. The question is, When Christ said he would build his church, which church did he build? Is it yours? Is it mine? Which one?? He said he would only build one (church - singular; not churches -plural) ... which one is it?

 

Think about what you just said. Christ built the church in Matt 18 (an assertion riddled with theological problems but I will grant it for the sake of argument). That local church would have been in Israel, but where precisely? According to Matt 17, he was in Capernaum. Now you say that "It is still here." Not having been to Capernaum, I can't vouch for that. It may still be. But then you go further. You say "It is still here in the place where you and I worship." Think of how ridiculous that assertion is. The church is a local church and the locality of the church Christ started (according to you) is Capernaum. Yet neither one of us are in Capernuam at that church. Therefore, according to your assertion, neither one of us are in teh church that Christ started.

See how your assertion simply cannot stand the test of the text??? We are not in the church Christ started if the church is only a local church.

The church both invisible and visible. The visible church may have unbelievers in it. In truth, many churches have distorted the truth through its preaching. Yet the deposit of truth is given to all believers who, through faithful service and ministry in their own local churches, protect and propogate the truth throughout the world.

This verse is yet another example of a verse that refutes your opinion. If "the church" is given this responsibility, I would ask "Which church?" Yours or mine?

 

"Amen" to Dr. Bob & Bart - "ecclesia" demands the ability to assemble - obviously not all believers can assemble here - there will be an "ultimate" church in glory - He's going to wash us and iron us! But for today, that dirty, wrinkled bunch on the corner is seen as perfect in His sight, with the understanding that names on the roll may not be on the "glory roll." An old friend used to say "We have ecclesiastical lockjaw when it comes to the last two letters of 'church - es' - seems we can't say it!" Charles Blair - Eph. 3:21 (ANY CHURCH where the gospel is preached and the two ordinances are kept correctly can glorify Him now.)

 

So Christ died only for those who can assemble all at one place at one time?? That doesn't make any sense at all

Both Paul and Christ suffered from this ecclesiastical lockjaw so I guess that puts us "Church Universalists" in pretty good company. I will choose that company anyday ...

 

The argument that Christ's use of the singular in Mt. 16:18 requires a "universal invisible" intrerpretation does not stack up, either grammatically or biblically. Christ referred to the church 23 times. Mt.16:18, Mt. 18:17, and the rest in Revelation 2 and 3. All are clearly local church. If Mt. 16:18 is the exception, then Christ said He was going to build something, then never again reffered to it. Why would He, in that one statement use a term (ecclesia) differently from the way the disciples and anyone else had ever heard it used before, but not define it, then never use it that way again?

If Mt. 16:18 and Eph. 1:22, etc. require a universal invisible church because they are singular, then to be consistent, Larry, et al, would have to teach us about the universal, invisible man and woman from I Cor. 11:3, "The head of the woman is the man." Which man, Larry? Which woman? Obviously, it is quite normal in language to use the singular in a generic sense to refer to all of that type.

 

Thank the Lord for the help here. I thought I was going to have to take it on the chin from the Universalist's all by myself.

Ok-----Pastor Larry you have your answer now from PastorGreg and he poses the same question to you that I have already cited and we have no answer yet about the universal man and woman.....waiting...

Thanks -----------Bart

 

You do not know that this is true. It is quite possible, even probable, that Christ referred to it elsewhere. We do not have the sum total of his words. We have only parts of them. You ask why he would use it in a way tht they had neve heard without defining it. Notice how you proceed from your conclusion back to the point of the text. You do not know that he had never used it that way. My question would be, Why would you assume that they thought he was talking about local churches?? I have pointed out places where ecclesia is used in a sense that cannot possibly be local (Matt 16:18; Eph 5:25; Col 1). It is simply theological stretching to try to work your "local only" church into that framework of the text. I noticed how you conveniently skipped over the questions.

If Christ started a local church, then we are not a part of the church that he started. If he died for the local church, which church was it?? You cannot simply pretend like these exegetical obstacle are non-existent.

Your thinking is confused. I admit the individual and typical use of the generic singular (or collective noun as it is usually called). That means nothing in this discussion because it is grammatically and theologically unconnected.

How many bodies do you think Christ has?? If he has more than one, why didn't he say so? If he has only one, who is it?? Why not just deal with those questions for the time being instead of skipping over them??

 

But his answer, as I have shown, is extremely inadequate. In fact, neither him nor you have yet dealt with the questions I have put forth. Please identify the church that Christ started and the church that Christ died for. I fear that you and I are not a part of that church. Explain for us the teaching of the unity of the body, regardless of location, and explain what that unity forms?? What do we call the unified body across all the church age in this world? Please answer these questions.

You have to remember that I do not deny the existence and priority of the local church. In fact, I have come to recognize that my view of the local church is in the vast minority. Most people view it much differently than I do. So trying to make me sound as if I think every occasion of "ecclesia" is a "universal" usage is a misrepresentation. However, there aer clearly some that must be interpreted in a universal, invisible sense to avoid completely twisting the text and theology. I would encourage you to give a substantive answer to the questions raised by these texts.

 

I still wish Pastor Larry's questions to be answered but I would like to look at this at a different angle. Eailer, our own stud Dr. Bob was apt to say,

with reference to every believer in the church age. So there is some title for this group, it exists as SOMETHING. What great harm is there if the term church is also used to identify this body in a few passages. In other words, what Dr. Bob again says,

what exactly are they misled into?

By the way, the term "invisible Church" is not a RC term but one from the reformers. The RC declaredt that they were the universal church, namely everyone who came to there buildings, submitted to their authority, and was visible by everyone. But there reformers protested by saying that the true church is everyone WHO ACTUALLY BELIVES in Jesus Christ. They are "invisible" in that you can not determine they actually believe just because they go to church (especially a catholic church and especially during that time).

 

Just out of curiousity - what happened to my post of yesterday on "ecclesia"? Seems that some items get left up for weeks, far beyond 10 days, while others disappear very quickly - in this case at least, not because of any sort of attack, and it even agreed with the Moderator!

If some posts are to be "dropped in Orwell's Memory Hole" quickly, while others stay around a lot longer, what happens to the continuity?

Best in Him - Charles Blair - Ro. 8:28

 

You mean THIS ONE on page 2 of this thread?

 

Mr. Blair - I found one post from yesterday that matches your description that still exists:

http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=10;t=002941;p=2#000027

The moderators in this particular forum do not subscribe to Orwellianism very often.

 

Dr. Blair, it was on a previous page.

You'll all have to excuse my dear brother and mentor, Dr. Blair. My dear brother is a tremendous secular historian, particularly about the Civil War (which some say he witnessed personally), and church historian, and he is a master theologian, but he is fairly new to the fine language of computerese.

 

1 Cor is addressed to the local church but that is not the unity of the body I was talking about. Scripture talks of only one body of Christ. You have yet to identify that for us. Are you and I a part of that one body? I already answered 1 Tim 3:15. Churches that teach heresy are churches out of order, just as are churches that preach the biblical gospel but sprinkle, churches that have improper form of government, etc.

But there is a problem with all of your answers. They keep missing important questions. How do you miss these questions?????? Please answer them. I am not sure how you are missing them. They seem to be in pretty prominent locations but you are just skipping right over them for some reason (most likely because you don't have an answer for them ... )