Re:Denominations - 2005/03/25 04:10I heartily agree that we belong to Christ. But I still think we can use that statement to be divisive. As an example, I got an email recently from a former JW, who urged me to get out of that religion and "come to Christ." He felt that he belonged to Christ, and the implication was that I did not. I see him as one of those people Paul talked about.
If you look a little more closely at the scriptural passage, you will see that Paul introduces all the "I belong to" comments with the words: "Dissensions exist among you. What I mean is this:" And then he gives examples of what they were saying, and one of the examples is: "I belong to Christ." And right after that saying, he repeats: "The Christ exists divided." So that saying was being used as a way to divide the congregation.
So I think there is a proper context for saying "I belong to Christ," and an improper one.
| | The topic has been locked.
Phi
Admin Admin
Posts: 278
Re:Denominations - 2005/03/25 05:07Hi donbodo
Can you give me an example of an occassion when the statement 'I belong to Christ' would be divisive? What that guy you mentioned said to you was, in essence, 'you don't belong to Christ', which is something else entirely. He was specific about what he thought of you and of your religion in that context.
For instance, if someone said to you, "Well I'll follow the GB no matter what", and yet on another occassion (or even in reply) you said, "Well I'll follow Jesus no matter what". How would your words be 'divisive', seeing as they actually reflect what the Bible encourages, whereas the other claim does not? We don't know that those who Paul mentioned as saying "I belong to Christ" were claiming that others didnt, the Scripture doest say that. Couldn't Paul just have been illustrating the whole divided state that existed among the brothers while including the one correct claim of 'belonging' that could also be heard among the various incorect claims?
Was, Joshua's statement - "choose for yourselves today whom you will serve....But as for me and my household, we shall serve Jehovah" - a divisive one? Was it wrong? (Joshua 24:15)
Much Philia.
Phi
Post edited by: Phi, at: 2005/03/25 05:09
| | The topic has been locked.
Phi
Admin Admin
Posts: 278
Re:Denominations - 2005/03/25 05:26Hi again Don.
I just want to restate that I didnt start this thread in order to attack those who worship within a denomination. It was started in response to some slightly negative comments that I had noticed regarding those who no longer use the name 'Jehovah's Witness' and no longer consider themselves as part of any denomination, but simply as Christians.
Let me ask a simple question, which situation do you feel that the Bible is more supportive of....
1. A worldwide brotherhood known only by the name the Bible says was given them by God - 'Christians' - who love and accept one another and can associate together despite some radical differences in doctrine, and who commit all judging of these matters and of their fellow Christians to God?
or...
2. Many thousands of (often opposed) Christian sects under various religious hierarchies, all known by various different self assigned names who have banded together in separate groups based on their differing understanding of various doctrines, and whose members have little or nothing to do with those of other Christian denominations?
Which of these do you feel is more in accord with God's will?
Much Philia.
Phi.
| | The topic has been locked.
donbodo
User Platinum Boarder
Posts: 125
Re:Denominations - 2005/03/25 14:51Phi,
To respond to your last post first, I don't think either of them reflects what God would be most supportive of. The first is great when it comes to how the Christians treat one another, but it goes to an extreme when it says that, not only should they be called Christian, but they can ONLY be called by the name Christian. The second is undesirable because the Christians do not treat each other properly, but I don't see anything wrong with them worshipping in churches that have denominational names and teach what they are most comfortable with. These cannot be the only two choices.
How about this third option: 3. A worldwide brotherhood known as 'Christians' - who, while worshipping in smaller groups that may bear names (in addition to Christian) that tell people a little bit about them, nevertheless love and accept all Christians and can associate together despite some radical differences in doctrine, and who commit all judging of these matters and of their fellow Christians to God.
In regard to those who said "I belong to Christ" in Paul's letter, this is really a minor issue, and I think we generally agree. We both think we should belong to Christ above any human or human organization. However, while it may be an appropriate statement to make to a non-Christian in order to identify oneself, what would be the point of saying it to another Christian? There would only be one reason: to set oneself apart from that other Christian. So even in your illustration, the same holds true. Someone who says "I follow Jesus no matter what" to a fellow Christian is saying it for only one reason: to set themselves apart from that person. And the point that separates them is the following of Jesus.
Forum 
