Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
You are straining at the analogy while missing the point. Paul used the analogy of a body with constituent parts (hand, foot, head, eyes, etc.) to demonstrate that we need each other. When you argue that it does not apply to groups of Christians relative to other groups of Christians is to insist that it may not be OK to belittle or dismiss a single member, but doing it wholesale to an entire group is OK.
|
I agree that Christians need each other. So why the divisions/denominations? That is a much stronger argument for my view than yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
So cutting of a single member is a travesty that Paul spoke against, but if you can do it on a grand scale, like spiritual genocide, it is entirely OK. Arguing that the hand/foot/finger/head analogy does not properly fit is far from Carte Blanche to engage in such genocide. I was hoping that you had better reasoning skills than a 7th grader that might not even be able to grasp the idea as a person as being represented by a foot. Instead, you are unable to take an example that we understand and broaden it, even if it does not seem to fit because of the nature of the words.
You seem OK with the idea that the one body might have multiple feet, hands, etc. Even many more than the typical number in a real body. You don't have fits over the idea that an assembly might have 50 people that could all be referenced as hands. Yet you get your mind blown at the slightly errant use of the analogy when applied on a grander scale because it implied that a particular assembly might just be feet, or one foot. Pull your head out! Accept the limitations of the analogy and work with it. So an assembly is not simply a foot. But it is a collection of hands, feet, eyes, ears, and on and on, that is part of the body of Christ.
|
I am sure that Paul was not thinking about denominations when he wrote about the different parts of the body. Your fault, for misapplying the verse out of context.
I can easily show that my view is logical and yours is not.
Imagine there is a city with 1000 Christians. We believe it is one church with 1000 Christians. That number can grow as more people are converted.
With your view, suppose there are 10 denominations and exactly 100 people in each denomination. You would say there are 10 churches in the city. Assume the number of denominations grows, up to 20 denominations, but the number of Christians remains the same at 1000. There are now 20 churches with 50 in each church.
Take it to the limit - it is possible to have 1000 churches with 1 person in each church. That 1 person in each church is likely to be the pastor of each church, waiting for his church to grow in numbers so he can preach to some congregation and a conduct a church service. It might seem an unlikely, even silly, suggesting to contemplate - but the fact is that
your definition of church allows for such a possibility, and mine does not. Therefore my definition is superior and yours is logically flawed.
Which of these two views are better representing the body of Christ that Paul talked about? Is it 1000 churches with 1 person in each church? Or is it 1 church of 1000.
Your view cannot handle the extreme cases - unlikely to happen, but possible.
Your view must also, by default, accept the LGBT churches, for example, as being a different "part of the body".
Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
In other words, you are looking for reasons to invalidate Christians. Lots of them. In fact, most of them. They don't follow the teachings of your taste, which come from a very singular and certain teacher. His name adorns your bookshelves. Yet you think that you do not violate Paul's admonition of being too much for one teacher. (One which does not invalidate you or your group, but points to an error that needs correction.)
|
As Drake alluded to, the denominations themselves, even their very existence, divides them. They invalidate themselves, when they stray from the New Testament way.
I can ask you a simple question which I know you cannot answer - give us one good bible verse that gives a biblical reason why the Baptist and Presbyterian churches should not be one church. Is the Bible their basis for division or is it something else?