Elements Of The True Church?

[teddyaware]

I'm not sure what you mean by "our apostasy" - I don't know your religion and/or the basis for which you assume that I believe in apostasy.

 

Re Christians who "went wrong in following a hierarchy" again, I'm not sure I know what you're speaking of.  As Karl Kertelge and Wayne Meeks have pointed out, church roles did not become fully institutionalized until the turn of the century as shown in the letter of Clement to Rome, letters of Ignatius, etc.  The Book of Acts and the Pauline letters make no mention of formal offices in the early Pauline congregations.

 

Really? What do you make of the following?

1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.

2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. (Acts 13)

21 And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch,

22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed. (Acts 14)

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. (Acts 15)

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? (1 Cor 12)

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: (Ephesians 4)

Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons: (Philippians 1)

5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; (Titus 1)

 

We must be living in parallel universes.

 

[saemo]

DanielWoods can correct me if I am wrong, but he is coming from a Protestant doctrine, that views the One Body of Christ as an invisible Church, there being no visible Church required, needed or even Biblical to believe that the Body of Christ (the Church). is visible.

Catholic doctrine is, there is both a visible (hierarchal) church and an invisible church, in which all share in Jesus' offices of Prophet Priest and King, by virtue of our baptism.

Mormonism denies the invisible church.

[mfbukowski]

Notice the words though to the church of Thyatira:

 

"²⁰ Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. ²¹ I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. ²² So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. ²³ I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds."

 

 

Notice it doesn't say, "my authority, John... will do this and that..." nope. It states very clearly, "I [Jesus] will... " do this or that... 

 

To his own master he stands or falls. We have only one master. Jesus.

Oh my gosh. I'm done.

[mfbukowski]

It is utterly astonishing to me that you seem to miss the very obvious point that the only reason why we know anything that the Lord had to say, in this instance, is because His words were given to us by a Prophet of God named John. Don't you get it? Apostles and Prophets don't speak for themselves, they speak and disseminate the word of the Lord to the congregations of the Church. Don't you see you wouldn't have these words of Jesus if it weren't for the Apostle John who was one of the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ?

 

You act as if Jesus came down from heaven, called a worldwide press conference, and arranged to have television and radio stations from around the world there to broadcast the live media event... It was John, not Jesus, who gave these words of Christ to the world. The revelation was given to John and he, in turn, gave the words of the Lord to us. In other words, generally speaking, the words of Christ are given to the world through duly ordained and empowered Apostles and Prophets. This is how God chooses to run his Church. Read for yourself:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

4 John (not Jesus) to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; (Revelation 1)

9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

10 I (John) was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. (Revelation 1)

17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; (Revelation 1)

Thanks. I just could not do it again. It's that old bible falling out of the sky again. Watch your head!

[mfbukowski]

I'm not sure what you mean by "our apostasy" - I don't know your religion and/or the basis for which you assume that I believe in apostasy.

Well see there was this little thing called the "Reformation", and it was done because your non-existent leadership decided Rome was wrong.

So if the Nicene Creed was correct, which you believe, and then later the originators Protestantism decided the church was no longer correct, then something must have happened in the interim.

That would have been called an "apostasy". Get it now?

[mfbukowski]

I really wish we had someone here who could represent the EV position correctly.

It can't really be this bad.

[mfbukowski]

Really? What do you make of the following?

1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.

2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. (Acts 13)

21 And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch,

22 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.

23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed. (Acts 14)

5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. (Acts 15)

27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

29 Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? (1 Cor 12)

10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

11 And he agave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: (Ephesians 4)

Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons: (Philippians 1)

5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; (Titus 1)

 

We must be living in parallel universes.

Excellent quotes

Unfortunately they are more perpendicular than parallel

Edited May 2, 2014 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

Mormonism denies the invisible church.

Looks like a potential siggy to me.

[teddyaware]

I really wish we had someone here who could represent the EV position correctly.

It can't really be this bad.

The problem is we humans can get so wedded to particular ideas that we can develop a tunnel vision that renders the mind incapable of being penetrated by light, logic and evidence. That's when the near infinite human capacity for rationalization and reasoning things away kicks in, and that's when the illogical and highly implausible become the "logical" and very probable.

In all fairness, considering we're human too, there must be areas of commonly held belief where we Latter-day Saints develop a similar capacity for irrationality and imperviousness to logic and evidence. I'm going to think about this and report back later if I can come up with some area (or areas) of collective blindness where we Mormons are similarly afflicted. Can you think of any?

Edited May 2, 2014 by teddyaware

[Gervin]

I really wish we had someone here who could represent the EV position correctly.

It can't really be this bad.

 

I wish for an LDS poster who isn't snarky and judgmental.  I guess we can't always get what we want.

[Gervin]

Well see there was this little thing called the "Reformation", and it was done because your non-existent leadership decided Rome was wrong.

So if the Nicene Creed was correct, which you believe, and then later the originators Protestantism decided the church was no longer correct, then something must have happened in the interim.

That would have been called an "apostasy". Get it now?

 

I've not said leadership was non-existent. 

Did Luther say that Rome was wrong in everything? Was it his intent to establish, raise, or otherwise bring back the one true church?  I think not.

Edited May 2, 2014 by Gervin

[Vance]

I've not said leadership was non-existent.

It does seem logical that if there is no true church then there is not true church leadership either.

Your claim of no true church implies no true church leadership.

 

Did Luther say that Rome was wrong in everything?

But was wrong enough to ASSUME leadership and form his own church?

 

Was it his intent to establish, raise, or otherwise bring back the one true church?  I think not.

Did he not establish his own church? Edited October 16, 2014 by Vance

[danielwoods]

It is utterly astonishing to me that you seem to miss the very obvious point that the only reason why we know anything that the Lord had to say, in this instance, is because His words were given to us by a Prophet of God named John. Don't you get it? Apostles and Prophets don't speak for themselves, they speak and disseminate the word of the Lord to the congregations of the Church. Don't you see you wouldn't have these words of Jesus if it weren't for the Apostle John who was one of the leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ?

 

You act as if Jesus came down from heaven, called a worldwide press conference, and arranged to have television and radio stations from around the world there to broadcast the live media event... It was John, not Jesus, who gave these words of Christ to the world. The revelation was given to John and he, in turn, gave the words of the Lord to us. In other words, generally speaking, the words of Christ are given to the world through duly ordained and empowered Apostles and Prophets. This is how God chooses to run his Church. Read for yourself:

1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

4 John (not Jesus) to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne; (Revelation 1)

9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

10 I (John) was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,

11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. (Revelation 1)

17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

19 Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter; (Revelation 1)

 

Not sure you should be astonished at something I haven't denied. I have never said that John wasn't a prophet, nor that the revelation came from John. I agree with you on those points. 

 

The point is that Jesus was disciplining this person directly. Notice how Jesus talks about his dealing with the false prophet. That was my point. I didn't mean to imply that John wasn't also revealing his will. 

 

You seem to imply that Jesus can only work through leaders? This passage demonstrates that to be false. 

[danielwoods]

Hi Daniel.

 

I find church discipline, as it is mentioned in Scripture, to indicate that we are forced to identify human authority that is presumably approved by God. The fact of church discipline, which is not practical if as soon as one is disciplined, the believer can just go running off to another church, played a large part in my conversion from an invisible church guy (Baptist minister), to a one true church guy, and finally to a Catholic. It took years. Nobody changes in a day.

 

I guess one can apply this to an individual church, but I tend to think it implies that God's ministers all cooperate together. They abide by the same laws and recognize each other's sacraments/ordinances. They honor the disciplinary actions of their fellow authorities/prelates/pastors. Of course we have to obey Jesus, as you said, but He is so closely identified with His Church that when He met Saul on the Damascus Road, he asked Saul, who had been persecuting the Church after Christ had ascended to the Father, "Why persecutest thou me?" Huh, Saul thinks? In addition to this pivotal moment of grace in the life of St. Paul and the Church, it was a theology lesson. Christ is the Head of the Mystical Body, His Church, and they are inseparable. If we persecute Christ's Church we persecute Christ and when we obey God's Church we are obeying Christ our Lord:

 

"Remember your prelates who have spoken the word of God to you; whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation...Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you." (Hebrews 13:7, 17)

 

I am not trying to be argumentative danielwoods. I speak up because I was impressed with your willingness to concede to Miserere that maybe there was some history you didn't know. It seems like a good heart that admits a thing like that in a public forum. Without a one true Church concept, in my opinion, the Christian is in the dangerous position of finding the church that fits, and is more easily tempted to go somewhere else when he doesn't want to obey.

 

I'll give a practical contemporary problem. Some churches, maybe most, never make any inquiries regarding divorces and remarriage. My church had a little trouble when we concluded that we can't just accept every civil divorce and remarriage. But the "faithful" will just "go Henry VIII" on you and find some "church" that won't make a fuss about it. In my opinion, remarriage while the spouse lives seems too important to be decided "in the moment", when you want to marry, or you already have. What a fearful thing to open the Bible, in a time of passion when it is difficult to be recollected, with no human guidance at all, to find your way through knotty questions of very practical and often very personal significance. To obey Jesus we have to try to identify His prelates/pastors/overseers. I found I was hard put to see the kind of obedience spoken of in Hebrews 13 in the "invisible church made up of all regenerated believers". How do you obey who you can't see? Anyway, God bless you on your journey of faith.

 

Best,

 

Rory

 

 

The question is whether the "one true church" is a physical organization (like the LDS, Catholic, Orthodox...etc.) or is the "one true church" as you put it, "invisible" to all except Christ, who knows who all are his? 

 

I appreciate the feeling that one feels like there's no discipline when one can just go to another church or what have you. Yet, isn't that what happens in either case? What I mean is, even in the "one true church organization" group, a disciplined person, either submits or leaves. The same is true in the other camp as well, the difference is when they leave, they go to a different church, but as I stated earlier, to his  own master he stands or falls. Ultimately, it isn't our burden to create the "true" church on earth. Ours is to be light in a dark world. 

 

Now, I agree with Hebrews, we ought to emulate and obey our leaders, that is what people do when the spirit of God is active in their lives. 

 

All the best. 

[danielwoods]

 

This statement is false. It was the Head of the Church, Christ himself, that saw to it that his church was established, and grew. Peter was simply the person Christ used at that time. 

 

I agree that Peter and the other Apostles were leaders. I disagree that the church was intended to be limited to only that church in one geographic area. Or that somehow that centralized church was to be seen as the one true organization to which all others would submit to.

 

"To his own master he stands or falls...." Our only master is Christ alone. 

Daniel,

 

In the above post you once again seem to miss the obvious point. In the highlighted portion you say my statement about Peter is false because it's the Lord who runs his Church and not men (a point of doctrine which, by the way, Latter-day Saints believe to be true). But why did you not continue on in the narrative of Acts 1 which says that Christ revealed His will to the eleven Apostles by revelation. By this means (divine revelation) the Lord revealed to the eleven that Matthias was his choice to fill the vacancy left by the death of Judas. Observe how the Lord guided His Apostolic Church by giving heavenly revelation to the Apostles who stood at the head of the Church:

24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. (Acts 1)

 

Again, the Lord is the head of the Church, but His chosen and duly authorized leaders learn and disseminate the Saviour's will by revelation from heaven.

 

Are you claiming that Christ is limited to only working through his leaders? 

[mfbukowski]

Not sure you should be astonished at something I haven't denied. I have never said that John wasn't a prophet, nor that the revelation came from John. I agree with you on those points. 

 

The point is that Jesus was disciplining this person directly. Notice how Jesus talks about his dealing with the false prophet. That was my point. I didn't mean to imply that John wasn't also revealing his will. 

 

You seem to imply that Jesus can only work through leaders? This passage demonstrates that to be false. 

This is the kind of logic that just defies description.

 

Here Jesus is telling his last surviving, most senior apostle, the remaining prophet on the earth, that the churches were going wrong and were in apostasy, and you see this as demonstrating that Jesus does NOT work within leadership??

 

I cannot fathom it.

[mfbukowski]

It does seem logical that if there is no true church then there is not true church leadership either.

You claim of no true church implies no true church leadership.

But was wrong enough to ASSUME leadership and form his own church?

Did he not establish his own church?

No.

 

Lutherans do not exist, nor do they have leadership.

 

Baptists do not exist, do not have leadership, and do not think their doctrine is true.

 

You really have a lot to learn.

 

There are no Presbyterians or Methodists either, none of them are churches, and disagree about nothing because Christianity is one church, which is not the true church.

 

Others who THINK they are Christian really are not because they worship a different Christ.

 

You have a lot to learn.

[mfbukowski]

The problem is we humans can get so wedded to particular ideas that we can develop a tunnel vision that renders the mind incapable of being penetrated by light, logic and evidence. That's when the near infinite human capacity for rationalization and reasoning things away kicks in, and that's when the illogical and highly implausible become the "logical" and very probable.

In all fairness, considering we're human too, there must be areas of commonly held belief where we Latter-day Saints develop a similar capacity for irrationality and imperviousness to logic and evidence. I'm going to think about this and report back later if I can come up with some area (or areas) of collective blindness where we Mormons are similarly afflicted. Can you think of any?

Sure it happens all the time.

 

I will accept any thought model of pretty much anything as long as it is a coherent statement. 

 

The only reason I stir the pot is to get people to think through their position, and I do that with everyone, LDS or not.

[Vance]

The point is that Jesus was disciplining this person directly.

So, through a letter from an Apostle is "directly"?

Who knew?

[Vance]

You seem to imply that Jesus can only work through leaders? This passage demonstrates that to be false.

So, Jesus working through a leader demonstrates that Jesus doesn't work through leaders?

Who knew?

[Vance]

No.

 

Lutherans do not exist, nor do they have leadership.

 

Baptists do not exist, do not have leadership, and do not think their doctrine is true.

 

You really have a lot to learn.

 

There are no Presbyterians or Methodists either, none of them are churches, and disagree about nothing because Christianity is one church, which is not the true church.

 

Others who THINK they are Christian really are not because they worship a different Christ.

 

You have a lot to learn.

Yeah, I guess I really am having a hard time grasping the concepts being presented here. => sad face

[mfbukowski]

DanielWoods can correct me if I am wrong, but he is coming from a Protestant doctrine, that views the One Body of Christ as an invisible Church, there being no visible Church required, needed or even Biblical to believe that the Body of Christ (the Church). is visible.

Catholic doctrine is, there is both a visible (hierarchal) church and an invisible church, in which all share in Jesus' offices of Prophet Priest and King, by virtue of our baptism.

Mormonism denies the invisible church.

Lest someone actually believe this is correct, let me say that it is not. I don't have time to list all the references, but a two minute search on LDS.org will yield many quotes such as these:

 

In the great diversity of peoples, cultures, and circumstances, we remember that all are equal before the Lord, for as Paul taught, “Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

“And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” 11

We do not lose our identity in becoming members of this church. We become heirs to the kingdom of God, having joined the body of Christ and spiritually set aside some of our personal differences to unite in a greater spiritual cause. We say to all who have joined the Church, keep all that is noble, good, and uplifting in your culture and personal identity. However, under the authority and power of the keys of the priesthood, all differences yield as we seek to become heirs to the kingdom of God, unite in following those who have the keys of the priesthood, and seek the divinity within us. All are welcomed and appreciated. But there is only one celestial kingdom of God.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1995/04/heirs-to-the-kingdom-of-god?lang=eng&query=body+of+Christ

 

Whatever the reason for their separation, their souls are of infinite worth. They are vital members of the body of Christ.

In his first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul compared the body of Christ, or the Church, to the body of a man. In the Church, he said, as in the human body, each member is essential. “The eye,” said Paul, “cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee.” (1 Cor. 12:21.) Each member has something to contribute.

.....We must understand and seek out those who have lost contact with the Church. Whatever the reason for their separation, their souls are of infinite worth. They are vital members of the body of Christ.

 

https://www.lds.org/liahona/1987/09/caring-for-members-who-are-not-very-active?lang=eng&query=body+of+Christ

[Gervin]

The problem is we humans can get so wedded to particular ideas that we can develop a tunnel vision that renders the mind incapable of being penetrated by light, logic and evidence. That's when the near infinite human capacity for rationalization and reasoning things away kicks in, and that's when the illogical and highly implausible become the "logical" and very probable.

In all fairness, considering we're human too, there must be areas of commonly held belief where we Latter-day Saints develop a similar capacity for irrationality and imperviousness to logic and evidence. I'm going to think about this and report back later if I can come up with some area (or areas) of collective blindness where we Mormons are similarly afflicted. Can you think of any?

 

I'm certainly guilty of following a line of New Testament scholars, like Dr. Wayne Meeks, who paint a picture of the early urban Christian governance as not following a cohesive or consistent governance system.  Are there any LDS New Testament scholars who have written on early church governance structure? 

[danielwoods]

DanielWoods can correct me if I am wrong, but he is coming from a Protestant doctrine, that views the One Body of Christ as an invisible Church, there being no visible Church required, needed or even Biblical to believe that the Body of Christ (the Church). is visible.

Catholic doctrine is, there is both a visible (hierarchal) church and an invisible church, in which all share in Jesus' offices of Prophet Priest and King, by virtue of our baptism.

Mormonism denies the invisible church.

 

Yes, for lack of a better term "invisible" it is. 

 

ETA: It appears that the LDS don't deny the invisible church after all. 

Edited May 3, 2014 by danielwoods

[danielwoods]

This is the kind of logic that just defies description.

 

Here Jesus is telling his last surviving, most senior apostle, the remaining prophet on the earth, that the churches were going wrong and were in apostasy, and you see this as demonstrating that Jesus does NOT work within leadership??

 

I cannot fathom it.

 

I can't fathom it either. Because that's not what I said. As I noted Jesus was working both through his prophet, and directly disciplining the offending false teacher. You deny the later?