1Timothy 3:15 "Church" meaning question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sword_Brethren
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sword_Brethren said:
A non-Catholic stated this to me about what “church” means in 1 Timothy 3:15. How do I respond to this?

"The primary meaning for the word “church” in the bible is people not a building or a religious organization. It’s individual believers the called out ones. So the proper interpretation for 1Timothy 3:15 is “the house of God, which is the believers of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. Reference 1 Peter 2:5 You also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. So you see the pillar and ground of the truth is nothing more than the believers themselves not a religious organization. Do a word study on what words in context mean in scripture and you will know what a particular verse means.”
Click to expand...
Which Church is THE Church of the Bible? Let’s see what the Bible says…

Also, scroll through this series on “Church” for the Scripture Shorts (One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic…)
daves-ahumbleservant.blogspot.com/search/label/Church
 
I found this on a non-Catholic site, "The Oxford Dictionary also has an interesting entry under “congregation”:

…used by Tyndale* as a translation of ‘ecclesia’ in the New Testament, and by the sixteenth century reformers instead of “church.” (*William Tyndale was the fifteenth century reformer and Bible translator murdered by the church)

Tyndale was willing to die for God’s word and truth. He didn’t like the word “church.” Instead, he used the word “congregation.” Now that tells us something! Godly Tyndale, and other sixteenth-century reformers who were more reputable, did not like the word “church.” They used other words like “congregation,” “governmental assembly,” etc.

When you consider the fact that an “ecclesia” was “a civil body politic”, this is strong proof that the Christian ecclesias we read about in the New Testament were independent civil bodies of Christians -independent from worldly kings and governors, ruled by the Theocratic government of God’s Spirit. They wanted freedom to serve King Jesus. They weren’t building and attending churches! Please understand! The pattern laid down in the New Testament bears no resemblence to what we know today as “church”. God’s people are meant to live by the ecclesia pattern -together in communities, holding all things common, under the government of God through His anointed leaders. Quit saying “church” when it is supposed to be “ecclesia”! It’s an important step in retrieving your brain from the trap of religious confusion. "

Please respond. Thank you for all the great responses so far.
 
Sword_Brethren said:
I found this on a non-Catholic site, "The Oxford Dictionary also has an interesting entry under “congregation”:

…used by Tyndale* as a translation of ‘ecclesia’ in the New Testament, and by the sixteenth century reformers instead of “church.” (*William Tyndale was the fifteenth century reformer and Bible translator murdered by the church)

Tyndale was willing to die for God’s word and truth. He didn’t like the word “church.” Instead, he used the word “congregation.” Now that tells us something! Godly Tyndale, and other sixteenth-century reformers who were more reputable, did not like the word “church.” They used other words like “congregation,” “governmental assembly,” etc.

When you consider the fact that an “ecclesia” was “a civil body politic”, this is strong proof that the Christian ecclesias we read about in the New Testament were independent civil bodies of Christians -independent from worldly kings and governors, ruled by the Theocratic government of God’s Spirit. They wanted freedom to serve King Jesus. They weren’t building and attending churches! Please understand! The pattern laid down in the New Testament bears no resemblence to what we know today as “church”. God’s people are meant to live by the ecclesia pattern -together in communities, holding all things common, under the government of God through His anointed leaders. Quit saying “church” when it is supposed to be “ecclesia”! It’s an important step in retrieving your brain from the trap of religious confusion. "

Please respond. Thank you for all the great responses so far.
Click to expand...
They are tying themselves into pretzels to keep their personal theology from falling apart.

They are missing the forest for the trees. The letter is written to St. Timothy from St. Paul. St. Timothy is the bishop. St. Paul is teaching him how to handle his parish/diocese/parishioners in the letter. He’s instructing him on how to be a bishop. He instructs him on how to handle those who dissent from him and how to handle discipline in the congregation.

How does it make ANY sense for Timothy to “know how to behave” by remaining in his congregation, if the congregation is the one who needs correction from HIM?!?!?

Like I said, they are twisting into pretzels so they don’t have to admit their personal theology is false.
 
zz912 said:
They are tying themselves into pretzels to keep their personal theology from falling apart.

They are missing the forest for the trees. The letter is written to St. Timothy from St. Paul. St. Timothy is the bishop. St. Paul is teaching him how to handle his parish/diocese/parishioners in the letter. He’s instructing him on how to be a bishop. He instructs him on how to handle those who dissent from him and how to handle discipline in the congregation.

How does it make ANY sense for Timothy to “know how to behave” by remaining in his congregation, if the congregation is the one who needs correction from HIM?!?!?

Like I said, they are twisting into pretzels so they don’t have to admit their personal theology is false.
Click to expand...
Either that, or they’re just meandering on about nothing.

On another website I once got into a debate with a Protestant who made a point of calling it “ekklesia “ instead of “church”. I said something like, Okay, call it what you like, ekklesia, congregation, assembly, beit knesset – literally house of assembly, which is Hebrew for synagogue. What word you choose in English isn’t important. That’s only a question of language, not of religion. The important thing isn’t what it’s called, it’s how it works. He never replied.
 
=Sword Brethren;13068077]A non-Catholic stated this to me about what “church” means in 1 Timothy 3:15. How do I respond to this?
Click to expand...
"The primary meaning for the word “church” in the bible is people not a building or a religious organization. It’s individual believers the called out ones. So the proper interpretation for 1Timothy 3:15 is “the house of God, which is the believers of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. Reference 1 Peter 2:5 You also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. So you see the pillar and ground of the truth is nothing more than the believers themselves not a religious organization. Do a word study on what words in context mean in scripture and you will know what a particular verse means.”
Click to expand...
You might begin with these teachings:

2nd. Peter 3: 14-17 “Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, beware lest you be carried away with the error of lawless men and lose your own stability

2nd. Peter 1: 16-21 “You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

John 5: 37 “And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life [Speaking of accepting the entire WORD of GOD]. I do not receive glory from men .[Meaning disobedience is rampant!] But I know that you have not the love of God within you. I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me” [Obey Me!]

The definitive use, application and meaning of “church” is its FIRST use, which is by Jesus Himself.

Mt. 16:15-19
"Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.
[18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church***, “MY Church” singular.

and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

“IT” also singular; and clearly not speaking of just the people; rather of a New Faith, a New Religion, in a single organization to be led by Peter.👍

And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The above position is clearly verified by this passage.

And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."

WITHOUT people there would be no need for a “church.” So in the sense that the “Church” exist to LEAD souls God’s way to heaven is essential; one cannot separate God’s One Church from God’s NEW One Chosen Peieople…

And NO I am not saying that their is no salvation “outside of the RCC”; rather that ALL salvation ,must and does mysteriously flow through Christ One Catholic Church; if for no other reason than it is the ONLY Church instituted by Christ and existed ALL BY ITSELF for about 1,000 years before the Great Eastern Schism of 1054.

God Bless you,

Patrick
 
I was not familiar with the whole ecclesia church discussion till this non-Catholic mentioned it. The definition of ecclesia is basically assembly, then there is Tyndale’s translation with the word congregation. The Church has the word ecclesia in the Vulgate but with the Douay Rheims Bible ecclesia is translated to the word church. But the word church has several meaning. It just doesn’t mean a building but also means a whole body of Christians, a body or organization of religious believers, etc. Those meanings are very similar to the meaning of congregation and an assembly. I don’t really see a big difference between the meanings. The assembly, congregation and church is the laity and the priesthood. Christ giving the keys of the kingdom of heaven to Peter, the power to bind and loosen in heaven and earth to Peter and apostles. Also, giving them the power to retain sins or remit them, the historical writing of the Early Church Fathers showing the existence of the priesthood all show them as part of the assembly. Then there are the examples you my brothers and sisters have mentioned also. Are my thoughts on the right path? The Catholic path?
 
Sword Brethren,
I’ve seen people from other churchs who are trying to do their best in serving Jesus, and they are quite sincere in their love and effort. So they do have Jesus in their heart and do try to follow his way and in many ways are quite good at what they do. And they have done so much good.

But even tho they are brothers and sisters of us in their love of Jesus and in their discipleship, they are for the most part missing out greatly in so many graces they would be receiving if they understood what Jesus really wanted for them in the Catholic church…his church…the only one he gave us…from the very beginning.

Jesus himself said that a kingdom divided cannot stand. And looking at all the churchs around us, Jesus described it well. It does harm to be divided for it hurts spreading his kingdom because of the confusion this brings. Think of all the resourses all the churchs spend on trying to attract people to their church, which could be avoided if we had only one. All the time we spend on apollogetics with one another could have been spent in a better way. All the searching by switching around. And not to mention again the solidarity that is destroyed by teaching opposing theology. All the conflit and bad feelings, predjudices, and pride it causes, when Jesus said we should be known for our love for one another.

It is no wonder that Jesus prayed in the Garden for all of us, and very little about himself. He wanted that union to be good and strong, and was his last wish prayer. His heart cannot be pleased with all the differences among us. And yet every church is about doing his will and loving him, which requires fulfilling his last wish. Yet that passage of scripture somehow got lost. How many sermons have not been preached on this.

Just emagine if every last christian beat one drum what effect that would have for bringing about his kingdom. It would have a emense impact on the world and on ourselves…as well as peace.

Ecclesia denotes unity above all…Christ’s thought concerning all of us.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top