What is the Purpose of the Local Church

OOPS!!! I just realized this thread is the original one ---- my bad.

 

Atheism means without God, not necessarily unbelief.

bro. Dallas

 

Billy,

This was the diversion thread. I am still waiting to hear from Dr. Bob and Helen in either one of the threads. It matters not to me.

Joseph Botwinick

 

It has been 4 days since I posted the original question and still no response from Dr. Bob or Helen. It reminds me of this Simon and Garfunkel song...."Listen to the sound of Silence"....

Joseph Botwinick

 

I believe a church has many functions. Typically, Sunday Morning is a message for the lost and dying world and those of us who sin daily while Sunday nights are geared toward those who are already saved. Discipleship training goes on in many churches on Sunday nights. Wednesday nights are for prayer and edification and children's ministries (which actually reach a LARGE number of unchurched parents by a trickle down effect).

The church is a hosptial for sinners and all we are like sheep gone astray. Our altars are open during every aspect of our service and are used. We have people who feel led that will go up and just pray with or for someone who has gone to the altar. We have trained counselors who will also offer to take the person to a salvation counseling room.

1 Timothy 1:15 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.

We're SBC and not Calvinist and believe in Free Will.

Diane

 

Dr. Bob,

I am sorry.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I feel for you JBot. I am going through the same thing with Dr. Bob in some other threads.


Guess maybe we should see the silence for the truth it proclaims?


Jim

 

JBot, you have nothing to apoogize for.

 

Diane,
While I am not free will, I believe you made an excellent post.

Joseph, what is your question? I have forgotten

Bro. Dallas

 

Maybe Dr. Bob is waiting for someone to say something interesting...

...accurate

...challenging

...or funny.

Maybe he expects us all to dig into our Bibles for the answer to questions.

 

Or he is visiting his grandkids in a dangerously cheesy midwest state, somehow I think I'm right!

Don't take it personally, Dr. Bob does have a life, occasionally

 

I don't know about the atheist label, but clearly, if we are living in unrepentant habitual sin, we are living as if God does not exist, or as if he has whatever characteristics we choose to give him. Many people do not recognize who God really is, and it seems silly to call yourself a follower of Christ unless you actually obey his commands.

 

I think that is the point. Spurgeon made that statement. That a professing Christian who esteemed men higher than God so as to keep his habitual sin secret from men, as if denying the ability of God to see them openly, is comparable to the atheist, who openly denies the existence of God.

(paraphrased)

Bro. Dallas

 

How about both. The fact is that most Christians like their church but not well enough to invite their unsaved friends.

 

Reminds me of a saying about a Keyhole, both eyes, and not haveing to squint.

 

Agreed.

Only saved are part OF the church itself, of course,[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

but we cannot STOP an unsaved person from coming to an open meeting. That's federal law![/QUOTE]

I am not so sure I agree here. Isn't the Church considered by law to be a private entity? I am not sure the government can force a private religious organization from not allowing someone to come. Please educate me as to how this federal law applies to a private religious entity.

We CAN stop them from coming to a closed meeting (like some have baptism, communion, foot washing, etc, just for members).[/QUOTE]

Legally, I would say that you could stop them from coming to any Church service. But, again, I could be wrong.

The principles of the Word are 100% clear: It NEVER, NO WHERE, EVER shows the unsaved as a "part" of the local assembly of believers.[/QUOTE]

What is this principle that is so clear? Does this include children and youth who are unsaved?

People disdain an "argument from silence" because they don't want to believe it.[/QUOTE]

Actually, people disdain an argument from silence because it is a weak argument which proves nothing. For example, I could very well state as a Biblical standard / principle that nowhere in the Bible does it say that Christians ever chewed gum. This does not, however, constitute a prohibition from scripture against chewing gum. (silly example, I know, but I think it shows rather well the folly of arguing from silence). If I am to argue from silence, the other part of that is that I have to insert my own man-made philosophy into scripture to do so.

But it IS a valid (though not as weighty) an argument.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't disagree with you more. It is not even a valid argument.

The Bible doesn't say anything about many subjects but DOES give principles. When EVERY scripture about the assembly is talking about saved folks, it seems obvious to me that the assembly is about saved folks!![/QUOTE]

I don't see a Biblical principle here? Again, do you apply that line of thinking to your children and youth? Do you not allow them to attend church until they are saved?

Wonder what your agenda is, Jbot, to fuss so much (and call on me so often)?[/QUOTE]

My agenda is to challenge the notion that the lost should not be allowed in a Church Service to hear the Word of God Preached based on some "Biblical" principle that is argued through silence in the Bible. I am, however, sorry for calling on you so often. As I mentioned to you in private earlier, I was not aware of your situation when I posted those posts calling you out so often, and I am pretty sure I apologized to you privately and I know for sure that I did so publicly right here on this thread. I will do so again, here, right now. If I had known your situation, I would not have done that. It is no hidden agenda, just that this is a debate forum, and that is the way I debate when I issue a challenge and it goes unanswered for so long. I am not alone in this style of debate on this board I am sure.

Joseph Botwinick

 

In response to the last post of jbot.

HOLY COW!

I Have not read one post that says that anyone should forbid the lost from coming to church. That is why the majority of churches use Sunday Morning as an evangelistic meeting and then Sunday evening as teaching and encouragment and Wednesday as children's time and prayer and teaching. In all of these the gospel is present in some form and the lost (at least in the churches I am a part of) are always welcomed no matter how long they come.

What we are saying is that they are NOT a PART of the church. That means that they do not have membership or the rights of membership until they demonstrate that they have recieved Christ in a manner set forth by that local body of believers. It is absolutely absurd that we post gaurds at the front doors to keep out the lost because they don't have a soul card I.D. tag.

The purpose of the church is many in what it attempts to fulfill. However, the ultimate purpose of every thing that the church does is to fulfill the Great Commission! The training, discipleship, encouragement, fellowship, and all the other things flow towards one ultiimate purpose, to reach the world with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That church must reach their Jerusalem first, then Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost part of the earth. But the hitch is, it is responsible for all of them all at the same time! That is why the church must be a safe haven for all of its members and have an open door for those who are not.

 

Jshurley,

Please allow me to put the thread into its original context. This thread is an outgrowth of a previous thread called Christians and Homosexuals? in which I made the following statement about how the Church should deal with homosexuals:

Helen responded with this quote:

This is where the bone of contention began. I hope this helps clarify some of the context of this thread which may have been lost.

Joseph Botwinick