Church Organization

[mike]

But getting back to the topic of this thread, Paul clearly sets up a church hierarchy with church titles:
1 Cor 12:(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.

Paul also set up the church hierarchy and church titles of "elder/ bishop" or "episkopes / overseer" and "deacon" in 1st Timothy 3, contrary to what Christ taught.

Hierarchy and titles are actually not the topic of this thread. The thread topic is about churches organizing in relation to each other. These are the questions I asked at the beginning.

What are the benefits of organizing numbers of local congregations into larger units such as conferences, fellowships, districts, or other formal associations? What are the negative effects?

What are the benefits of local congregations operating autonomously or independently? What are the negatives of independence?

Must such arrangements be formal? Can they exist organically without the need for formal agreements?

What if any biblical teaching or precedent exists for forming such organizations?

Most of the recent discussion in this thread could be categorized as tangential to the last question I suppose. But I would welcome a return to discussing the topic.

[Soloist]

Yet they are the ones who canonized the Scriptures we trust. But they were never "Scripture only" because the Church began with the OT, and Oral teachings handed down until finally started writing things down. It's kind of like the discussion of Paul, if you can't trust the Apostles that accepted Paul as an Apostle- then all were deceived. If we can't trust those who canonized the Scripture, well- they were the Church which was never Sola Scriptura. They had understandings & traditions not written down I ca naccept that, because even the NT says not everything was written down. also, 2 Thessalonians 2 :15 "Therefore Brethren,
stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught whether by "word" or our epistle" indicating they were teaching orally and written. Some of the things we "thought"were contrary to Scripture were expounded on.
The falling away of the faith, happens at the end of the Church Age before AntiChrist and Christ's Second Advent.

As pointed out, you don’t actually believe what you say.

[JohnHurt]

Friends,

Here is Christ's answer to everything said so far:

Matthew 28:(19) Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

(20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The only instruction Christ gave us was to teach others to observe all things that were commanded by Christ. Not the teachings of anyone else.

The "antiChrist" is anyone that takes the place of Christ.

Christ never told us to teach Peter, Paul, James, or whether the other Apostles were deceived or not. Christ never told us to worry about Paul teaching that it is acceptable to receive "carnal things" in exchange for "spiritual things".

And all of us, including myself, are guilty of this. We don't teach Christ and His Message, only what others have said about Him.

To prove this point, when you go to church, count the number of times that the Words of Christ are quoted, and the number of times Paul or some other writer is quoted. The vast majority of quotes will not be from Christ.

I have never heard a lesson in any church, and never will, about what Christ taught about the Law in Matthew 5:17-20.

I have never heard a sermon in any church about how Christ said we would inherit eternal life by keeping the 10 Commandments in Matthew 19:16-19.

Rarely will you hear what Christ said about the rich not being able to enter the kingdom (Matthew 19:23)

Or that you have to provide shelter, food, clothing, and visit people in prison and the sick, or else you will go to "everlasting punishment". Matt 25:46. The churches don't teach it, and so no one knows to follow this teaching. They don't do anything.

No, what I hear when I go to church, is what type of headcovering should your wife wear? That women should keep silence in the church, so can a woman really teach in the nursery and usurp authority over a man child that is 1 year old, or how old does the male have to be before this is a problem?

These inane teachings of men make us go in circles and make sure that our "salt" has lost its saltiness and is good only for the garbage pit, while the Teachings of Christ - like providing food, shelter, clothes to other people as our primary mission - would change the world.

We don't teach Christ, because we don't want to change. To teach that Christ said the 10 Commandments are necessary for eternal life (Matt 19:16-19), means that we would have to restore the 4th Commandment, and return to resting on the 7th day of the week, and meeting on the 7th day as it is the day of the "holy convocation" (Leviticus 23:3)

The writings of Paul were rarely quoted by Justin Martyr and the early church fathers, because he was considered a heretic. Constantine elevated the writings of Paul in the Canon because Paul taught against keeping the Sabbath day. Constantine wanted the Sabbath to be abolished and all worship moved to Sunday, the day of Mithras, the Sun God. December 25th is the birthday of Mithras, when the sun begins to gain power each year. The halos around the paintings of Christ - this is the sun disk of Mithras. Constantine worshipped the Sun God Mithras, and had his coins with inscribed with "Committed to the Invincible Sun". That is why we worship on Sunday.

To follow the Words of Christ means you have to address the Sabbath Day, and many other things.

And if you do, they will throw you out of their churches, as Christ predicted. Matthew 10:17

[JohnHurt]

But getting back to the topic of this thread, Paul clearly sets up a church hierarchy with church titles:
1 Cor 12:(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.

Paul also set up the church hierarchy and church titles of "elder/ bishop" or "episkopes / overseer" and "deacon" in 1st Timothy 3, contrary to what Christ taught.

Hierarchy and titles are actually not the topic of this thread. The thread topic is about churches organizing in relation to each other. These are the questions I asked at the beginning.

What are the benefits of organizing numbers of local congregations into larger units such as conferences, fellowships, districts, or other formal associations? What are the negative effects?

What are the benefits of local congregations operating autonomously or independently? What are the negatives of independence?

Must such arrangements be formal? Can they exist organically without the need for formal agreements?

What if any biblical teaching or precedent exists for forming such organizations?

Most of the recent discussion in this thread could be categorized as tangential to the last question I suppose. But I would welcome a return to discussing the topic.

Mike,

When they set up your "Church Conference", they will elect someone to "guide" it and give him a high "church title", and that person, or a "council of persons" will "exercise lordship", or "exercise authority" over everyone else while at the same time being called a "benefactor", just as Christ predicted. Luke 22:25.

If you are having questions about this arrangement, perhaps Christ is trying to tell you something.

Like "Don't Do It".

[Soloist]

Justin Martyr says they met on Sunday.

Contrary to what you say, I have never heard a sermon on

No, what I hear when I go to church, is what type of headcovering should your wife wear? That women should keep silence in the church, so can a woman really teach in the nursery and usurp authority over a man child that is 1 year old, or how old does the male have to be before this is a problem?

I have heard a sermon on

Christ taught about the Law in Matthew 5:17-20.

I have never heard a sermon in any church about how Christ said we would inherit eternal life by keeping the 10 Commandments in Matthew 19:16-19.

Rarely will you hear what Christ said about the rich not being able to enter the kingdom (Matthew 19:23)

Or that you have to provide shelter, food, clothing, and visit people in prison and the sick, or else you will go to "everlasting punishment". Matt 25:46.

Why are Gentiles among the elect then?

But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mat 15:25  Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
Mat 15:26  But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
Mat 15:27  And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
Mat 15:28  Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Did Jesus say I came to save the Gentiles?
How do you know we can be saved? After all, Jesus didn’t teach it.

[Sudsy]

So, bottom line is, everyone that does not obey keeping Saturday as a holy day and not Sunday is breaking one of the 10 Commandments and will end up in hell. So everyone here, except John Hurt is on their way to hell. Actually, all of the early church and those following who met on the first day of the week, if they regarded this as replacing the Sabbath, are hell bound also. Sounds to me like the 'few there be that find' this straight and narrow gate will be a number we can count and not the number Revelation speaks of. I'm not sold yet on 'Hurtism'.

[Soloist]

So, bottom line is, everyone that does not obey keeping Saturday as a holy day and not Sunday is breaking one of the 10 Commandments and will end up in hell. So everyone here, except John Hurt is on their way to hell. Actually, all of the early church and those following who met on the first day of the week, if they regarded this as replacing the Sabbath, are hell bound also. Sounds to me like the 'few there be that find' this straight and narrow gate will be a number we can count and not the number Revelation speaks of. I'm not sold yet on 'Hurtism'.

Congratulations Sudsy, you just presented a clear argument for how denominations start. You created one.

[Bootstrap]

What are the benefits of organizing numbers of local congregations into larger units such as conferences, fellowships, districts, or other formal associations? What are the negative effects?

What are the benefits of local congregations operating autonomously or independently? What are the negatives of independence?

Must such arrangements be formal? Can they exist organically without the need for formal agreements?

What if any biblical teaching or precedent exists for forming such organizations?

Speaking as a non-plain Mennonite ...

Our teaching is distinctly different from what most Protestants teach. We believe in the things spelled out in the 1995 Confession of Faith, and that's getting lonelier, not just because of our stance on war, but also because of our stance on LGBTQIA+ and gay marriage. It's refreshing to spend time with others who "get it", who see the world we do, who are working for the same goals.

I doubt that we could have ever pulled the 1995 Confession of Faith together in a single congregation. Or MCC.

But now we are very much at odds with some neighboring Mennonite congregations and with a significant portion of MC-USA. And we tend to focus on building our own congregation and living things out here. We associate closely with our district, which is close to us in beliefs. We watch and pray. But this tension hurts, it's a drain.

Even our conference is divided. We feel we are missing out on something we used to have when we were in close fellowship with all of the other Mennonite churches in our area. We don't know what will happen in the next year or two. We have relatives and friends in these other congregations, conservative or not. I don't think it's good for a congregation to be on its own, but we have had periods where we felt very much on our own, and we are hoping to see new structures emerge that we will want to be closely associated with.

[Josh]

I believe Evana affirms 1995 and if I recall correctly a few other groups do now too (FEBP or FEC)? Evana seems to be doing good things; their conferences look lively and they’re cheap too.

[Josh]

Mike,

When they set up your "Church Conference", they will elect someone to "guide" it and give him a high "church title", and that person, or a "council of persons" will "exercise lordship", or "exercise authority" over everyone else while at the same time being called a "benefactor", just as Christ predicted. Luke 22:25.

If you are having questions about this arrangement, perhaps Christ is trying to tell you something.

Like "Don't Do It".

Someone has to preside over a meeting. You can call them a President, a Presider, El Presidente, a chairman, a moderator, a manager, but it makes no difference.

Some organisations in use a rotating chairman and rotating committees (such as my own church). This avoids any one person accruing too much power.