When Did The Church Begin

fredoheaven · Feb 6, 2017

Hi Romans to Philemon,

I think this is enough for now. 'Rightly dividing the word of truth' is for dispensetionalist but it seems it was not properly divided, of certainty it is a mix of all and confused of many things.

1. Confused about the beginning of the Gospel of Christ.
2. Confused over the Gospel.
3. The Body of Christ or the Church
4. The mystery
5. Jew and Gentile Salvation.

And by merging this all leads to confusion and doctrinal error in the name of dispensation.

Anyway, glad to meet you here but I am not saying you are not a true Christian and that you have not receive the Gospel only there has someone who are trying to pervert this gospel into another Gospel.

As long as you have trusted Christ as your Saviour then rejoice and be glad! I think I’ll leave others for other to comment.

God bless you saint!

Thanks,

OneFaith · Feb 6, 2017

Spurgeoncy said:

The promise to Abraham "All peoples (nationalities) on earth will be blessed through you" included Abraham, and those before and after Abraham. Because through Abraham came Christ- Who was sacrificed one time for all who did, or would obey God in their lifetime. In Abraham's day, because of obedience to God, their sin debt was postponed until the cross. After the cross Christ established His church- the one and only ever to be. Before the church was the tribe (Israelites).

Both are God's people, both are of Abraham whether physically or spiritually. We are both of the same vine- Gentiles had to be grafted in, and Jews had to be grafted BACK in, but we are one- God's people. Revelation tells us 144,000 were saved before Christ's established His church, and after His church was established, the number of those who washed their robes white in the blood of the Lamb were too many to number.

There is, and only has been, one church of Christ in existence. Christ came from Abraham, and we are in Christ (baptized INTO Christ Romans 6:3) therefore we are all one- God's people. The Bible says in Christ there are no Gentile or Jew, slave or free, male or female- but that Christ is in all genuine Christians. He has made the two one (Israelite and Gentile) in Him.

Therefore, if someone says today that there are two churches- one for Israelites/Jews and one for Gentiles, it is most certainly a false and man-made doctrine- not God's doctrine- which is the New Testament. Jesus commanded the apostles to teach us all that He told them to- therefore the teaching comes from Christ Himself- the apostles just wrote it down. Therefore to disobey or go against the teachings of the New Testament is to disobey or go against Christ Himself.

Angela53510 · Feb 6, 2017

RomansToPhilemon said:

Exactly! I am not arguing! But I am sincerely urging you to let go of this nonsense in interpreting the Bible.

I am suggesting strongly that you read the Bible independently, and take a course on Bible Interpretation from a reputable scholar or institution.

And I am begging you to stop with the copy and pastes, and the nut case videos.

My previous post was not at all about arguing! Just about showing you how wrong you are, in addition to hoping desperately you will break free from this near cult, wiht all its utter nonsense!

OneFaith · Feb 6, 2017

OneFaith said:

The promise to Abraham "All peoples (nationalities) on earth will be blessed through you" included Abraham, and those before and after Abraham. Because through Abraham came Christ- Who was sacrificed one time for all who did, or would obey God in their lifetime. In Abraham's day, because of obedience to God, their sin debt was postponed until the cross. After the cross Christ established His church- the one and only ever to be. Before the church was the tribe (Israelites).

Both are God's people, both are of Abraham whether physically or spiritually. We are both of the same vine- Gentiles had to be grafted in, and Jews had to be grafted BACK in, but we are one- God's people. Revelation tells us 144,000 were saved before Christ's established His church, and after His church was established, the number of those who washed their robes white in the blood of the Lamb were too many to number.

There is, and only has been, one church of Christ in existence. Christ came from Abraham, and we are in Christ (baptized INTO Christ Romans 6:3) therefore we are all one- God's people. The Bible says in Christ there are no Gentile or Jew, slave or free, male or female- but that Christ is in all genuine Christians. He has made the two one (Israelite and Gentile) in Him.

Therefore, if someone says today that there are two churches- one for Israelites/Jews and one for Gentiles, it is most certainly a false and man-made doctrine- not God's doctrine- which is the New Testament. Jesus commanded the apostles to teach us all that He told them to- therefore the teaching comes from Christ Himself- the apostles just wrote it down. Therefore to disobey or go against the teachings of the New Testament is to disobey or go against Christ Himself.

I forgot to add that the church began at Pentocost- after Christ purchased the church with His blood, and Peter first used the keys to the kingdom (repent and be baptized) in Acts 2:38.

pottersclay · Feb 7, 2017

zone said:

Not exactly zone this was a covering, John the Baptist said behold the lamb of god that takes away the sins of the world.
Eve could be seen as the church but the difference of a blood covering and a blood purchase is established in scripture.

Spurgeoncy · Feb 7, 2017

OneFaith said:

The promise to Abraham "All peoples (nationalities) on earth will be blessed through you" included Abraham, and those before and after Abraham. Because through Abraham came Christ- Who was sacrificed one time for all who did, or would obey God in their lifetime. In Abraham's day, because of obedience to God, their sin debt was postponed until the cross. After the cross Christ established His church- the one and only ever to be. Before the church was the tribe (Israelites).

Both are God's people, both are of Abraham whether physically or spiritually. We are both of the same vine- Gentiles had to be grafted in, and Jews had to be grafted BACK in, but we are one- God's people. Revelation tells us 144,000 were saved before Christ's established His church, and after His church was established, the number of those who washed their robes white in the blood of the Lamb were too many to number.

There is, and only has been, one church of Christ in existence. Christ came from Abraham, and we are in Christ (baptized INTO Christ Romans 6:3) therefore we are all one- God's people. The Bible says in Christ there are no Gentile or Jew, slave or free, male or female- but that Christ is in all genuine Christians. He has made the two one (Israelite and Gentile) in Him.

Therefore, if someone says today that there are two churches- one for Israelites/Jews and one for Gentiles, it is most certainly a false and man-made doctrine- not God's doctrine- which is the New Testament. Jesus commanded the apostles to teach us all that He told them to- therefore the teaching comes from Christ Himself- the apostles just wrote it down. Therefore to disobey or go against the teachings of the New Testament is to disobey or go against Christ Himself.

Agreed. But the Church was founded on the prophets.

Do you count the foundations of your hosue as being part of your house? I do.

Therefore the Church started with Abraham, Enoch, and the prophets, of whom Christ is the cornerstone, as he is the first Prophet.

Spurgeoncy · Feb 7, 2017

Thank you Zone.

Jesus was the first Prophet, obviously, here prophesying that Eve (the Church) will be at war with Satan:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

Adam was the second prophet, as he also speaks prophetically of Eve as the Church:

20 [FONT=&quot]And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.[/FONT]

RomansToPhilemon · Feb 7, 2017

Angela53510 said:

Exactly! I am not arguing! But I am sincerely urging you to let go of this nonsense in interpreting the Bible.

I am suggesting strongly that you read the Bible independently, and take a course on Bible Interpretation from a reputable scholar or institution.

And I am begging you to stop with the copy and pastes, and the nut case videos.

My previous post was not at all about arguing! Just about showing you how wrong you are, in addition to hoping desperately you will break free from this near cult, wiht all its utter nonsense!

Not an argument.

RomansToPhilemon · Feb 7, 2017

fredoheaven said:

I am sorry my friend but you are mistaken by this one objective, not subjective, fact in our bible. That if what you say is true Christ would NOT have been crucified. 1 Cor 2.6-8

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Hebrews 2.2-5 states that the church back there in Acts started first by the Lord.

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

It was first spoken by the Lord and confirmed to them over there in Peter. Which is the fulfillment of the prophecy from Joel.

Acts 2.15-16
For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

See, Peter says it's now confirmed. As it states in Hebrews 2. Now lets compare two verses that state what Peter preached is NOT what Paul preaches.

Acts 3.21
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Rom 16.25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Now lets wrap all this up. Paul says Christ would not have been crucified if the mystery was revealed before given to him. Hebrews tells us that the church in Acts started with Jesus and was confirmed to Peter. Peter tells us that what he preaches is that prophecy from Joel. Prophecy is opposite of mystery. Peter also states that what he preaches was spoken since the world began. In contrast, Paul states in Romans that what he preaches was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN!

fredoheaven · Feb 7, 2017

RomansToPhilemon said:

Just for a simple discussion we don't need to rush things. Don’t be in a hurry; let us examine the passage of your proof text. Does this verse s the fulfillment of the prophecy from Joel? Let’s learn to divide the word of truth then.
Peter’s point is that of similitude or analogy between what the Holy Spirit will do in the future with the nation of Israel and what He was doing in the first century when the church needs more building not founding. The usual word in any fulfillment of the prophecy is not ‘this is that’ but rather ‘As it is written’. Here are examples of fulfilled prophecy:

Matthew 2:5 And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet,

Luke 3:4 As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Mark 1:2 As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

So, this is just the similarity though I think there is a partial fulfillment. The question ask here is did the Holy Spirit poured upon all flesh? If so it can be counted as fulfillment but it’s not. It only concerns the Israelites. Do these passages speaks of the remnant? No my friend.. Were there blood moon occurred in Acts 2? None my friend, the common thing to that of Joel’s is ‘it is just like’.

Another, Is that truly the verse says in the one you cited as proof text? That this mystery waits the Apostle Paul just to reveal on time? It does not. Where is that mystery that awaits Paul? This mystery only was hidden in the ages past until it was revealed in due time unto the glory of the Apostles(“our glory”) of which none of the princess of this world knew. For if those in Authority knew that Christ is the King of kings and Lord of lords they would have not crucified Him.

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Again I see another loophole in your proposition; you said the church in Acts started with Jesus when? It seem you are placing now church in Acts 2 where you said 'the church in Acts confirmed to Peter' thus no longer in Acts 9. Either way, they fall short of the simple meaning of eklessia ie. Calling out.

God bless.

John146 · Feb 7, 2017

RomansToPhilemon said:

I am sorry my friend but you are mistaken by this one objective, not subjective, fact in our bible. That if what you say is true Christ would NOT have been crucified. 1 Cor 2.6-8

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Hebrews 2.2-5 states that the church back there in Acts started first by the Lord.

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

It was first spoken by the Lord and confirmed to them over there in Peter. Which is the fulfillment of the prophecy from Joel.

Acts 2.15-16
For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

See, Peter says it's now confirmed. As it states in Hebrews 2. Now lets compare two verses that state what Peter preached is NOT what Paul preaches.

Acts 3.21
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Rom 16.25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Now lets wrap all this up. Paul says Christ would not have been crucified if the mystery was revealed before given to him. Hebrews tells us that the church in Acts started with Jesus and was confirmed to Peter. Peter tells us that what he preaches is that prophecy from Joel. Prophecy is opposite of mystery. Peter also states that what he preaches was spoken since the world began. In contrast, Paul states in Romans that what he preaches was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN!

Romans 16:7, Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

I'm not satisfied with any answer you have given on this verse. These people were in Christ before Paul. They were in the same body before Paul. Paul says he's part of the same body as Andronicus and Junia. He just came after them. How do you reconcile that?

Depleted · Feb 7, 2017

RomansToPhilemon said:

I am sorry my friend but you are mistaken by this one objective, not subjective, fact in our bible. That if what you say is true Christ would NOT have been crucified. 1 Cor 2.6-8

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Hebrews 2.2-5 states that the church back there in Acts started first by the Lord.

How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him;

It was first spoken by the Lord and confirmed to them over there in Peter. Which is the fulfillment of the prophecy from Joel.

Acts 2.15-16
For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

See, Peter says it's now confirmed. As it states in Hebrews 2. Now lets compare two verses that state what Peter preached is NOT what Paul preaches.

Acts 3.21
Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Rom 16.25
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Now lets wrap all this up. Paul says Christ would not have been crucified if the mystery was revealed before given to him. Hebrews tells us that the church in Acts started with Jesus and was confirmed to Peter. Peter tells us that what he preaches is that prophecy from Joel. Prophecy is opposite of mystery. Peter also states that what he preaches was spoken since the world began. In contrast, Paul states in Romans that what he preaches was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN!

Do you know why there aren't any salespeople selling ice cubes to Inuits or electric blankets to people Tahitians? Because salespeople know who to target.

Do you know why there are salespeople selling cars, cell phones, and clothes to Americans? Because sales people know who to target.

You're selling Sasquish food and don't seem to realize why it's not selling.

No Bigfoots on this site.

Not an argument.

BeyondET · Feb 7, 2017

Well you won't find the word church in manuscripts before English ones.

To begin with, the King James Bible translation uses the word “church” 112 times, having translated the word ecclesia to mean “church.” First let’s look at where they got the word church. The word comes from the Old English and German word pronounced “kirche.” In Scotland and Northern England it was “kirk” and meant what we think of as church. Funny to think of someone, like Kirk Douglas as being named Church Douglas, especially since he was actually Jewish, but that’s where the name Kirk derives from.

In the earlier Greek it was pronounced “ku-ri-a-kos” or “ku-ri-a-kon.” a word that doesn’t remotely resemble the Greek word “ecclesia” which it somehow replaced. The meaning of “ku-ri-a-kos” is understood by its root, “ku- ri-os,” which means “lord.” Thus, “kuriakos” (i.e., “church“) means “pertaining to the a lord.” It refers to something that pertains to, or belongs to, a lord, not necessarily ‘the’ Lord. The Greek “kuriakos” eventually came to be used in an Old English form as “cirice” (pronounced kee-ree-ke), which evolved to “churche” (pronounced kerke), and eventually to “church” as we use it today. A church, then, is correctly something that “pertains to, or belongs to, a lord.”

The word “church” would have been an acceptable translation for the Greek word “kuriakos.” But the translators inserted the word “church” in the English versions, even though they were not translating the Greek word “kuriakos.” The word they were supposed to be translating was “ecclesia.” Even the most liberal translator today would never find “church” as the acceptable translation for the Greek word “ecclesia.” “Ecclesia” is an entirely different word with an entirely different meaning than “kuriakos.”

The Greek word “kuriakos” actually only appears in the New Testament two times. It is found once in I Corinthians 11:20 where it refers to “the Lord’s supper,” and once again in Revelation 1:10 where it speaks of “the Lord’s day.” In both of those cases, it is translated “the Lord’s..,” not “church.” Even though the word does not appear again in the New Testament the word “church” as it has come to be known in the English language has replaced “ecclesia.”

Does any of this really make a difference? It does if we want our understanding to be what Matthew, Luke, Paul, Peter and John envisioned when they each referred to what we think of as “church.” So, let’s now look at the correct meaning of the word, “ecclesia“. This Greek word is found in the New Testament approximately 115 times, and that’s just in this one grammatical form. It appears also in other forms. There are three exceptions in the King James translation where it is properly translated. They are found in Acts 19:32, 39, 41. Here the translators used the word “assembly” instead of “church.” But, the Greek word is exactly the same as the other 112 entries where “church” was used.

In Acts 19, “ecclesia” is a town council, a civil body of people gathering together in Ephesus. So you can see that “church” wouldn’t work there as they had nothing to do with gathering as a body of believers. Still, 112 other times the translators used the word “church” when translating “ecclesia.” The Greek word “ecclesia” is correctly defined as “the called-out (ones)” The term “ecc” in Greek means “out”; kaleo means “call.” So you can see how this word was used to indicate a (civil) group of select (called or elected) people and really doesn’t have anything to do with them being Believers in Yeshua.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica: In the New Testament, “ecclesia” is the only single word used for church. It (ecclesia) was the name given to the governmental assembly of the city of Athens, which ‘called out’ proper officers possessing all political power including even juridical functions.

Maynard · Feb 7, 2017

How arbitrary all of your answers are. None of you even know when Christ's church began. That's both funny and sad at the same time.

RomansToPhilemon · Feb 7, 2017

fredoheaven said:

The Joel prophecy was fulfilled - in part. The outpouring of the Holy Spirit did happen. This is how it was CONFIRMED. The verse says it WAS confirmed.

Heb 2.4
God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?

These parts of Joel's prophecy WERE fulfilled. The sun and moon darkening and the wrath to come didn't...let's find out why. And there is precedent for prophecies to be fulfilled partially. Jesus said and did so himself.

Luke 4.20 Compare it with Isaiah 61
And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

I go through that process because you may try to say that prophecies can't be fulfilled partially. According to Jesus they can.

So back on topic, the signs and wonders were a sign to the Jewish believer for confirmation. This is why Paul says clearly, the Jew REQUIRE a signs, but we preach Christ crucified 1 Cor 1.22. Why do you think Ananias and Sapphira were judged by God the way he did? This was AFTER the death of Christ; after the cross work. They were part of that Church which started FIRST began by the Lord. So much for all sins forgiven correct??? Why did God judge them that way. If we do something worse than they did, do we get struck down by God as well? No. God judged them with death because they had the tasted the powers of the world to come; tasted of the heavenly gift. They had the OUTPOURING of the Holy Ghost!

Heb 6.4-6
For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Ananias and Sapphira had that outpouring of the Holy Spirit and that foretaste of the power to come. They then blasphemed the Holy Ghost.

Mark 3.28
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation:

Is this true for us today? Of course not. Paul says I was a blasphemer 1 Tim 1.13. How did God save him? Two competing truths. Two competing wisdom's here you must grasp. You can't have one verse say those who blaspheme the Spirit have no forgiveness and then have Paul say that he was a blasphemer and God saved him.

This cannot be reconciled unless you rightly divide the word of truth and understand that the people in Acts were under a DIFFERENT gospel message. Their's was under works and faith. Ours is NOT of works.

So yes, those people over there in Acts did have Joel's prophecy come true for them, but only partially. And this begs the bigger question then, WHY did only part of it fulfill. Where was God's wrath? Where was the anti-Christ? Where is the kingdom? All these things followed that prophecy. Peter says 'this is that' spoken by the prophet Joel. What happened????

This is why you must understand that in Acts 9, God INTERRUPTS that Earthly kingdom gospel message and brings in a NEW DISPENSATION. And forms a NEW CREATURE. A NEW GOSPEL! What part about NEW CREATURE is hard to understand? If it's a new creature, those people over there in Acts were something else. As it says, they ADDED to them 3000. What can you add to if it's does't exist yet? It did exist, which is how they ADDED to the already present church.

Paul says his message is new, a mystery, a secret hid in God. But you want to defy Paul and say "no Paul, it's over here too! You are just mistaken Paul"....This is what you are saying, whether you realize it or not.

And you STILL ignore the objective fact in the bible were Paul tells you that there are some mystery truths over here in my epistles, that had they been revealed before him, Christ would NOT have been crucified. And as a hint for you. It's not ONE mystery, its a bunch of mysteries. Everything from Romans-Philemon is a mystery; not just the body of Christ.

BeyondET · Feb 7, 2017

Maynard said:

What are we missing, Mr Theophilus,, fill us in,, this should be interesting, I haven't given my thoughts yet though if you want it here it is,

it never did start..

RomansToPhilemon · Feb 7, 2017

John146 said:

Being IN Christ is not part of the mystery revealed by Paul. There is no issue here for me. I am not sure why that verse is an issue for you? Maybe better explain your concern for me?

People over in the Old Testament were IN Christ. You have to be found IN Christ to be saved. It makes complete sense that Paul says they were in Christ before him. He is just referencing them as believers saved under Peter's gospel. The Little Flock weren't forgotten people; God didn't just cast them aside and say good luck. Paul worked with them in the sense that because they had sold all of their possessions, they were extremely poor. Because remember, the Little Flock, were waiting for a kingdom. Christ said sell all your possessions and follow him for the kingdom is at hand. What a surprise for these believers to now realize that Paul tells them that kingdom has been put on hold and brings in a new dispensation.

The issue with the Little Flock is that they can't cross over into our dispensation (meaning they can't be part of the body of Christ), because they were saved under Peter's gospel message. Maybe this is were you are having an issue. If so, I can expand upon this because I had this question a few years ago about what happened to the believing remnant from Acts 2 church.

Luke 12.32
Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Sell that ye have, and give alms; provide yourselves bags which wax not old, a treasure in the heavens that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, neither moth corrupteth.

1 Cor 16.1-3
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.

Rom 15.25-27
But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints. For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem. It hath pleased them verily; and their debtors they are. For if the Gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things.

Also, you said that Paul says he is part of the same body as Andronicus and Junia. He never says that. You are reading that into the text.

[video=youtube;zPX7hTGux68]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1265&v=zPX7hTGux68[/video]

Romans 11:3-7 <-- Grace and the Remnant video

BeyondET · Feb 7, 2017

Maynard said:

Don't be shy Maynard let's hear your opinion, on this matter what are Christians missing, or are you of the shoot and run school of thought..

BeyondET · Feb 7, 2017

The Church has always belonged to God and is of God so that's makes the church with no begin time, he is the Alpha and the omega the beginning and the end..

RomansToPhilemon · Feb 7, 2017

BeyondET said:

Well you won't find the word church in manuscripts before English ones.

To begin with, the King James Bible translation uses the word “church” 112 times, having translated the word ecclesia to mean “church.” First let’s look at where they got the word church. The word comes from the Old English and German word pronounced “kirche.” In Scotland and Northern England it was “kirk” and meant what we think of as church. Funny to think of someone, like Kirk Douglas as being named Church Douglas, especially since he was actually Jewish, but that’s where the name Kirk derives from.

In the earlier Greek it was pronounced “ku-ri-a-kos” or “ku-ri-a-kon.” a word that doesn’t remotely resemble the Greek word “ecclesia” which it somehow replaced. The meaning of “ku-ri-a-kos” is understood by its root, “ku- ri-os,” which means “lord.” Thus, “kuriakos” (i.e., “church“) means “pertaining to the a lord.” It refers to something that pertains to, or belongs to, a lord, not necessarily ‘the’ Lord. The Greek “kuriakos” eventually came to be used in an Old English form as “cirice” (pronounced kee-ree-ke), which evolved to “churche” (pronounced kerke), and eventually to “church” as we use it today. A church, then, is correctly something that “pertains to, or belongs to, a lord.”

The word “church” would have been an acceptable translation for the Greek word “kuriakos.” But the translators inserted the word “church” in the English versions, even though they were not translating the Greek word “kuriakos.” The word they were supposed to be translating was “ecclesia.” Even the most liberal translator today would never find “church” as the acceptable translation for the Greek word “ecclesia.” “Ecclesia” is an entirely different word with an entirely different meaning than “kuriakos.”

The Greek word “kuriakos” actually only appears in the New Testament two times. It is found once in I Corinthians 11:20 where it refers to “the Lord’s supper,” and once again in Revelation 1:10 where it speaks of “the Lord’s day.” In both of those cases, it is translated “the Lord’s..,” not “church.” Even though the word does not appear again in the New Testament the word “church” as it has come to be known in the English language has replaced “ecclesia.”

Does any of this really make a difference? It does if we want our understanding to be what Matthew, Luke, Paul, Peter and John envisioned when they each referred to what we think of as “church.” So, let’s now look at the correct meaning of the word, “ecclesia“. This Greek word is found in the New Testament approximately 115 times, and that’s just in this one grammatical form. It appears also in other forms. There are three exceptions in the King James translation where it is properly translated. They are found in Acts 19:32, 39, 41. Here the translators used the word “assembly” instead of “church.” But, the Greek word is exactly the same as the other 112 entries where “church” was used.

In Acts 19, “ecclesia” is a town council, a civil body of people gathering together in Ephesus. So you can see that “church” wouldn’t work there as they had nothing to do with gathering as a body of believers. Still, 112 other times the translators used the word “church” when translating “ecclesia.” The Greek word “ecclesia” is correctly defined as “the called-out (ones)” The term “ecc” in Greek means “out”; kaleo means “call.” So you can see how this word was used to indicate a (civil) group of select (called or elected) people and really doesn’t have anything to do with them being Believers in Yeshua.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica: In the New Testament, “ecclesia” is the only single word used for church. It (ecclesia) was the name given to the governmental assembly of the city of Athens, which ‘called out’ proper officers possessing all political power including even juridical functions.

Yes, the church means called out ones....

When Did The Church Begin

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

pottersclay

Guest

Banned

Banned

RomansToPhilemon

Guest

RomansToPhilemon

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Depleted

Guest

BeyondET

Guest

Banned

RomansToPhilemon

Guest

BeyondET

Guest

RomansToPhilemon

Guest

BeyondET

Guest

BeyondET

Guest

RomansToPhilemon

Guest