quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

The church that is Christ's body will be around until Christ returns. It just does not exist under anyones banner (RCC, EOC, Presb. PCA/USA, Southern Bapt., etc.)

quote:

Where do you get this from? Was the Church immediately corrupted after the last Apostle? Has God left the Church?

quote:

I don't believe the Church is divided.

quote:

I don't think you can take this verse to apply it to the Church, or anyone else other than its intended party. Jesus was talking about the Pharisees, NOT the Church.

quote:

Isn't true that they can trace their roots to the Apostles or is that a lie? Are they still practicing the same things as the early Church did? If not, what is different? Is it doctrine? And if their doctrine is sound, then why are they not the True Church?

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

Again, you equate a certain select group as being the true church. There is no evidence of this.

quote:

It is not it just does not exist under anyones banner.

quote:

Sound like anyone who you may know? ... Most "churches" who claim they are "the church" passed down from the Apostles... and there are several.

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

There claim is no different than the RCC or several others. They all rely on self documented facts to support their claims.

quote:

Mat 7:15-18 Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. (16) You shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles? (17) Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit. (18) A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruits, nor can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

quote:

History tells of the thorns in the "catholic" church. They have added many conditions to the Good News (which Paul calls "the simplicity that is in Christ").

quote:

Corrupted by what? The man-made doctrines of the "church" that is not one and the same with the church that is Christ's body.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

quote:

ORIGINAL: walterquez
…I know we come from many different denominations, so why is your denomination the True Church and not the others?. ..

I do not consider the Denomination to which I belong to be the only true segment of the Church. There are many other Denominations and many non-Denominational groups that are part of the true Church. Most Denominations are separated not by opinions of what is redemptive, but ideas of how to worship, dress, or otherwise live their lives in areas that are not redemptive.

What do I personally think brings one into the true Church?

(Eph 2:8-10) “For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them. “

And what keeps one in the true Church?

(2Pe 1:2-10) “Grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, according as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who has called us to glory and virtue, through which He has given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, so that by these you might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. But also in this very thing, bringing in all diligence, filling out your faith with virtue, and with virtue, knowledge; and with knowledge self-control, and with self-control, patience, and with patience, godliness, and with godliness, brotherly kindness, and with brotherly kindness, love. For if these things are in you and abound, they make you to be neither idle nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For he in whom these things are not present is blind and cannot see afar off and has forgotten that he was purged from his sins in the past. Therefore, brothers, rather be diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you do these things, you shall never fall.”

quote:

…In the title I included Apostolic Succession for a reason. I believe the True Church since the beginning has always been around thru succession. Maybe I need to explain this a little bit more. By Apostolic Succession….

….Now, has this succession been broken somehow, or has it continue ever since? Is it possible that God would somehow forsake His Church for hundreds of years, and now revive it once again?...

I must tread on your other thread about which came first the chicken or the egg to give my opinion on this.

Christ instructed the Apostles to go forth and teach what he had taught them; they did a very good job of that. Paul through the instructions he received from Christ did a good job of establishing new works and an excellent job of correcting those who got away from the spoken tradition. Paul’s writings of instruction and correction of course became the major part of our New Testament.

The New Testament is THE Apostolic Tradition written down so it could not be changed; It was written at the behest of God in the same manner that God instructed Moses to write the covenant. As the Apostles died off, the writings took their place and it is still that way today. Even Peter declares Paul’s writings to be Scripture;

(2Pe 3:15-16) “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

quote:

…I know the RCC has claims to Apostolic Succession, but are they the only ones? How about the Orthodox Church?...

History clearly shows that the RCC and the OC started claiming Apostolic Succession as a political maneuver to find favor with Constantine. It is phony baloney macaroni and cheese nonsense and should be avoided like the plague. Do an honest research on the Papal succession, the RCC historians cannot even agree on that. I did one on my dissertations on this subject and the proof of either Apostolic or Papal succession is non-existent

quote:

…And if one of them IS that same Church that descends from the original, why are we not joined to her?...

They aren’t, we shouldn’t.

The true Church is whosoever will (will what? See the Scriptures quoted above from Ephesians and 2 Peter 1)

Thanks
RC

quote:

ORIGINAL: salos

"There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee. And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother." Mark 3:31-35

Who was it that Jesus said was closest to Him? Those who do the will of God. Apostolic succession means nothing, just as being in the Lord's human family meant nothing compared to doing or not doing God's will. So I'm for whatever denominations/churches search the scriptures and apply what they find clearly stated there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

quote:

Charismatic succession is one of those terms that have the potential to irritate and alienate those who you don't include within it.

"those who you don't include within it" ???

Herein lies the problem (error) that has been passed down from those who created the whole idea to elevate their claim to fame.

Christ builds His church (sometimes He even allows us to help). The "church" has taught that it can include/exclude people. The scriptures say that the Word is the power. This same Word that the church kept from the common man to facilitate their power/control.

God preserved His people and His Torah just as He preserves His church (the body off Christ) and His Word today.

The "church" invented/adopted these things after the Apostles were gone (IMO to help maintain its power (position/status) ).

Luk 11:49-52 Therefore also the wisdom of God said, 'I will send to them prophets and apostles; and some of them they will kill and persecute, (50) that the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; (51) from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary.' Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation. (52) Woe to you lawyers! For you took away the key of knowledge. You didn't enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in, you hindered."

The "church" kept the Word (key) from the common man to facilitate their power/control.

Eph 2:17-20 He came and preached peace to you who were far off and to those who were near. (18) For through him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. (19) So then you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God, (20) being built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief cornerstone;

On this foundation the church (the body of Christ) is built. The true "church" is not built on the foundation of the RCC or the EOC, etc.

quote:

ORIGINAL: walterquez

quote:

ORIGINAL: sdaw

No, I do not. However, that does not prohibit the Apostolic Succession continuing "outside the True Church" for the reasons I have already given.

But this is not scriptural or taught by the Church thru out the ages.

IBM sends out their own reps to do their job, and at the same time there is another company sending reps who say they are IBM employees. Get my point?

quote:

You mean there is no evidence of denominations with the early Church. Basically, anyone who came out of the Church were no longer part of it.

quote:

But when the real sons and daughters make the claim that they are the true children, it doesn't make their claim invalid just because others are making the same claim. Or just because everyone is making the claim, we are going to refuse the claim to everyone, including the real children.

quote:

Then how? None who came out of the early Church were considered part of the Church by the Apostles. They were apostates.

quote:

You mean there is no evidence of denominations with the early Church. Basically, anyone who came out of the Church were no longer part of it.

quote:

Both Clement and Polycarp were horribly martyred for the cause of Christ. So much for position and status. Make sure before you condemn that you are not condemning somebody unjustly.

Of the first 35 "popes" who succeeded to "leadership" I believe 34 were horribly martyred for the cause of Christ. So much for power and control. So much for claims to fame.

Have you ever studied about the Council of Nicea ? Have you studied how these men made their way to meet many of them tortured for the cause of Christ; missing limbs, eyes gouged; some disfigured for refusing to change their profession to the cause of Christ? These were humble men, some actul shepards with flocks, others humble workers many very poor [and some very rich] who came together for the cause of Christ. So much for power and control. So much for claims to fame.

As to witholding the word - the ancient world and Europe attests to the fact that the Church transmitted the word to an overwhelmingly illiterate population. Take a look t what we now call art, look at the old churches, and more.

Study your history, and see how the church preserved the word from the Barbarians, Goths, and other pagans look to the history of the East and the West and see how your statements smack of calumny.

Have you shed even one drop of blood for the cause of Christ so that you can defame one who has?

quote:

ORIGINAL: salos

"Conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear; Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you Who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead..." (I Peter 1:17b-21a, NKJV)

quote:

Salos, what was the purpose of your post?

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

quote:

But when the real sons and daughters make the claim that they are the true children, it doesn't make their claim invalid just because others are making the same claim. Or just because everyone is making the claim, we are going to refuse the claim to everyone, including the real children.

If they all provide the same "self documented" proof then they can all be judged equally.

The "church" does not determine who are the children, the Father calls those who are His... the sheep hear His voice. There is no mother church but there is a father God. We are all the bride of Christ, collectively.

There is one mediator and it aint the "church".

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

quote:

Both Clement and Polycarp were horribly martyred for the cause of Christ. So much for position and status. Make sure before you condemn that you are not condemning somebody unjustly.

Of the first 35 "popes" who succeeded to "leadership" I believe 34 were horribly martyred for the cause of Christ. So much for power and control. So much for claims to fame.

Have you ever studied about the Council of Nicea ? Have you studied how these men made their way to meet many of them tortured for the cause of Christ; missing limbs, eyes gouged; some disfigured for refusing to change their profession to the cause of Christ? These were humble men, some actul shepards with flocks, others humble workers many very poor [and some very rich] who came together for the cause of Christ. So much for power and control. So much for claims to fame.

As to witholding the word - the ancient world and Europe attests to the fact that the Church transmitted the word to an overwhelmingly illiterate population. Take a look t what we now call art, look at the old churches, and more.

Study your history, and see how the church preserved the word from the Barbarians, Goths, and other pagans look to the history of the East and the West and see how your statements smack of calumny.

Have you shed even one drop of blood for the cause of Christ so that you can defame one who has?

Martyred?? - Many are martyred everyday for lies and false gods. Not a measure of truth.

Calumny to one is standing firm to others.

All who are under a banner (RCC, EOC, etc.) are not bad they have just chosen to allow the church to stand between them and God. There is no church to belong to other than the body of Christ. All others are from man... ALL.

Taking up ones cross is costly in many ways not only by shedding of blood. My walk with Christ has cost me (almost my life on three occasions... the last time I was hospitalized for almost a year). But...that is between Christ and me. I do not have to advertize to show that He is my Lord.

Man typically looks to the outside to measure another man... God looks at the heart.

Walk by faith not by sight.

The church is self documenting regarding it's claim to fame.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meep meep

quote:

ORIGINAL: i_believe

quote:

But when the real sons and daughters make the claim that they are the true children, it doesn't make their claim invalid just because others are making the same claim. Or just because everyone is making the claim, we are going to refuse the claim to everyone, including the real children.

If they all provide the same "self documented" proof then they can all be judged equally.

The "church" does not determine who are the children, the Father calls those who are His... the sheep hear His voice. There is no mother church but there is a father God. We are all the bride of Christ, collectively.

There is one mediator and it aint the "church".

what is "documented proof" ?
What does that mean?

If it is the Bible - which version;
If it is the Bible why are there so many "truths" that have sprung up?
If all that have sprung up are led of the Spirit, why are they so different one from the other?

What you espouse in your postings is completely in opposition to what the Apostles and the early church taught - and I don't mean the RCC.

Meep

quote:

7 But when he saw many Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bear fruit worthy of repentance. 9 Do not presume to say to yourselves, "We have Abraham as our ancestor'; for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. 10 Even now the ax is lying at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

quote:

Is there any church today that still follows the tradition of the early Church?

Can anyone of you claim that your denomination is the Church? Anyone other than unworthyseraphim?

If unworthyseraphim is wrong, why is he? Isn't true that they can trace their roots to the Apostles or is that a lie? Are they still practicing the same things as the early Church did? If not, what is different? Is it doctrine? And if their doctrine is sound, then why are they not the True Church?

Sorry unworthyseraphim for picking on you. You're the only one who was brave enough to say, hey, the Orthodox is the Church. Most others can only trace their roots a few hundred years, a far cry from the time of the early Church. I am surprised no Roman Catholic made the same claim. Oh well. But, I think maybe we need to pick on the Orthodox Church for now. Why or why not is the Orthodox Church the True Church

quote:

ORIGINAL: salos

I believe in succession in the church when it is a lineage of truth and integrity. Successions based on family (as in some Pentecostal churches) or on the apostolic succession theme are fine as long as truth and justice abide.

quote:

As soon as that line turns away from clear Scriptural teaching, it becomes a tradition of men, and is merely aimless conduct as the above verse mentions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: alasoosie

Does the Orthodox church practice the same things as the early church? Well, depends how early you want to go! They don't come anywhere close to the practices outlined in the NT and neither does the Catholic church. The practices of the Orthodox and Catholic church are totally foreign to the New Testament. That is how I know that their idea of apostolic succession is totally not true.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

quote:

You mean there is no evidence of denominations with the early Church. Basically, anyone who came out of the Church were no longer part of it.

I believe there is ample evidence of "denominations" with the early Church. Up until the time of Constantine the Churches in the different parts of the world used some different "books" in their Churches (mostly the cannon we use today, but some used "Clement" or "The Sheppard of Hermes", etc.). This would certainly qualify then as different denomination. The Syriac Church would definitely qualify as a different denomination, as do the Orthodoxies.

The attempt of unification of the "Real, mother Church - read RCC" was a political move to join the RCC with politics (Constantine) and to prove to him that there was a Papal and Apostolic succession and that they (RCC) were it. It seemed to work as Constantine and successors made the RCC extremely wealthy and gave them extreme control that is never mentioned in Scripture.

This of course was done by "establishing" that Peter was the first "Pope" in Rome (no evidence) and that there was a solid succession (no evidence), but Constantine bought it and that was the goal.

Yes there have always been some "denominational" difference, and that is a good thing, not a bad thing; because it has helped keep the truth out there.

Thanks
RC