Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
An interesting point about not taking a name. You know who didn't want to take a name in the NT? The demon(s) in the man of the Gadarenes. When Jesus asked him what was his name he demurred, "Oh, there's a bunch of us, here." He didn't want to be exposed.
Then he flowed out into a bunch of unclean animals, each with its own name. "Lord's move to Europe". "Christians on Campus". "Defense and Confirmation Project". "Bibles for America". "Affirmation and Critique". Unclean animals all, each named and destined for deep waters and thence to oblivion.
And another point, about taking a names - the church in Pergamos was a name, right? A de-nomination? And Pergamos was, so the RecV tells us, a genuine church with a genuine lampstand. So why isn't the Lutheran church a genuine church with a genuine lampstand, if that's what Pergamos signifies? Or doesn't the interpretation carry that far? Why not, it doesn't work for you anymore? Or Thyatira, a genuine church, no? Real Christians, even overcomers, and the appelation 'ekklesia'. . . but not on the local ground? Then why the lampstand? If Thyatira gets a lampstand, then why isn't it a legitimate church on the proper ground (Christ)?
To me, the whole thing is just a shell game with words. Vanity and confusion.
|
Aron, do you realize you just quoted yourself and responded to yourself?
Your posts are so dramatic and extreme:
"Unclean animals all, each named and destined for deep waters and thence to oblivion"
This is not about not taking a name as in your demon example. This is about not taking a name other than Christ. Unlike your demon example, we do take a name, we call ourselves Christians. To draw a connection between the demon story and this matter is frankly absurd and irrational.
Well I think Christians on Campus is great, they do good work there. No one is going to "deep waters and oblivious". It's an appropriate name, they are, truly, "Christians on Campus". Anyway this is not a denomination but an organization or ministry and there's nothing against taking a name with that. The issue is with taking names for Christ's own Bride, much like you would be upset if your wife called herself someone else. But if your wife has her own particular business, or ministry, she can call that whatever she likes.
This is about distinguishing between who we are and what we do (ministry). When we say " I am a Lutheran Christian", we are giving ourself another name, we are identifying ourselves by that name. But if we say "my ministry is called Faith Alone Ministries", this is okay, this is what we do, not who we are.
It is more than just taking names. It is the whole man-made organizational structure that goes with it. It is about not holding onto Christ alone.
My observation is that you have all sorts of arguments for why this and why that, but as Christians we should observe how things were done in the New Testament and try and practice and follow that. On that basis, to denominate is clearly not something we should do.
If we are found to be hypocrites in trying to do this or it doesn't work out, we cannot say that everything we stood for or believed was necessarily wrong. If Lutheranism became corrupted, which it has by their adoption of homosexual marriage, we cannot say that the Reformation was wrong.
I would say that the "genuine church" is everything to do with how genuine we are ourselves individually and with those we meet together with. A church is not genuine just because it conforms to a particular model or structure.
It is possible that there is a Lutheran church that is genuine. The Reformation was genuine, there were genuine Reformed churches. But they stagnated and progressed no further. They adopted the name Lutherans and distinguished themselves from other Christians. So they became sectarian and denominational.