Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregon
I'm not trying to hurl insults Igzy. I'm reading all the posts here and following what people are saying. I'm just not going to accept human logic that conrtradicts the Word of God. I don't care how many people or elders have made mistakes in this locality or that locality. The Word is the Word and that is the authority to me.....not human reasoning.
Show me in the Word where there are various denominations etc. Use the Word of God to tear down the oneness of believers in a locality....not your logic as to why nobody can decern who the real elders are. If you can show me in the Word that it's OK to divide the church up into all these various different types of assemblies then your arguements will carry some weight. Human failure will never be a valid reason to disregard what is in the Word.
|
I'm quoting
Oregon, but this is also a response to
Gubei (who has argued that
Igzy is making a prescription).
At the end of the day, one can't establish that the Scripture prescribes multiple "denominations" in a city, etc. I'm not sure that's the point. I don't think
Igzy is saying there
should be multiple congregations in a city. He is saying that the Scripture doesno't
prescribe that there shouldn't be.
I grant that there's pretty robust
description of one church in each city in the New Testament.
Thing is, there are several possibilities for this: its prescribed by God; its the beginnings of a new faith and thus there won't be many variants just yet; it was more feasible given political, historical and geographic realities at the time.
Each of these are possible. But you can't go to the Scripture and
prove any of them
wrong - and thus
each remains
possible. Thus, appeal to the SCripture cannot resolve this matter definitively. Given that we are governed by the Scripture and the inward Spirit, we are left to the inward convicting of the SPirit on this matter. Some will be convicted to take a "locality" stand and some will not. But there is no grounds to insist or judge the stand the other is making.
As an anology. Are electric guitars prescriptively prohibited by Scripture? I don't see it. And thus, if my brother tells me that he has the peace and grace, even leading to have a "band" to lead praise, I have no grounds to restrict him by the Word. You can't come to me and say, "Show me where the Scripture
permits electric guitars." That's not how it works. We have
freedom in Christ unless the Scripture says otherwise.
Its like the law. I am free to do whatever I please in a free society
unless there is a law which prohibits it. If I feel like eating cornflakes on Sunday, you can't come to me and ask "What law authorizes you to do that?" (unless you're in certain small towns in Tennesse - in which case, it might in fact be prohibited). I am free to do so unless there is an express legal prohibition.
There will be some things where the Scripture grants liberty, but the Spirit does not
for me. But I would be skeptical if anyone says that the Spirit convicts
you that
I should be restricted.
Here's a Scriptural puzzle:
In Acts 19-21, Paul was "bound by the Spirit" to go to Jerusalem. However In Tyre, the disciples told Paul "IN THE SPIRIT" not to set foot in Jerusalem (Acts 21:4). ANd then, those with Paul, including Luke, in Caesarea, entreated Paul not to go to Jerusalem. (Acts 21:12).
Paul was "bound by the spirit" to go to Jerusalem. The brotherstold him "in the spirit" NOT to go to Jerusalem. How should we understand this? To my mind, the only way to tease this out (other than saying the Spirit is schizophrenic) is that when the Spirit convicts
you personally it trumps a leading of what
others think is prescribed for you.
In short, given the lack of confirmable Scriptural prescription for one-city-one-eldership, feel free to follow that model, but there is little place to judge others for not buying into it.
Make sense? Sorry for the rambling, divergent, round-about way of expressing it...
In Love,
Peter