Is a church membership needed for salvation?

[mackbrislawn]

tevans9129;7899992

“Baptism automatically makes one a member of the church.”

And that, I disagree with. Would you please quote or reference the verse(s) that make such an assertion?

Of course, there is no such verse to quote; there was no need for scripture to make such an assertion because it was assumed, it was obvious. Why state the obvious? No one at that time dreamed that someone in the future could deny that baptism didn’t make you a member of the church.

However, there are some verses in Acts that bear upon the question. Before looking at them, some comments about the word “church” are in order.

The word “church” is used to translate the Greek ekklesia, which means assembly, gathering, or called-out ones. I’ve seen in one translation (NWT) where “congregation” is used where the Greek has ekklesia. Now, in regards to the word “church,” I have no idea what it means, and don’t know why the English translators use it. So, wherever we see “church,” lets think of asembly instead. I think it will clear up a lot of confusion.

According to Acts 2:41, “So then, those who had received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls…” Added to what? Well, the assembly of those who had already been baptized.

Acts 2:42: “And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship…” To do this the believers would have to assemble. The apostles would be leading the assembly.

Verses 43 to 47 continue the thought of fellowship and sharing with all, an assembly. “And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.” The assembly was getting larger.

Acts 4:23 to 32 also allude to this idea.

Verse 23, “And when they were released they went to their own companions…” The implication is that companions were assembled together.

Verse 31, “And when they had prayed, the place where they had gathered together was shaken, and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit…” A gathering, or assembly, of believers.

Verse 32, “And the congregation of those who believed and were baptized were of one heart and soul.” We could just as easily say, “And the church of those who believed and were baptized…”

So, yes, when the early Christians believed and were baptized, they naturally became part of the called-out ones, or, if you will, church.

Acts 5:11, “And great fear came upon the whole church…”
However, changing it to read, “And great fear came upon the whole assembly…”
This makes it really clear what is being talked about! The assembly of those who had believed and were baptized. Being baptized automatically made them as belonging the the assembly, the Church.

Acts 9:2, “…so that if he found any belonging to the Way…”
The word “belonging” implies membership in a group, an assembly.

I feel that I am belaboring the point, but by this, how can one deny that believing and baptism by itself doesn’t make one part of the assembly, the Church?

Continued…

 

[tevans9129]

My dear friend in Christ; allow me please to add a historical perspective that may; God Willing; aid your understanding.

 

[tevans9129]

At BEST…IFFY!

WHY?

It requires TWO THINGS: 1. PERFECT CONTRITION [in God’s understanding of “perfect.”]

Part 2 of 2

Would you quote the scripture(s) stating that there must be “PERFECT CONTRITION” to be saved?

God MUST BE FAIR and JUST; and so he is!

No argument from me with that statement. Could you explain then how someone that follows the teachings of Jesus and His apostles, and, “believes on Him” with all his heart, has confessed with his mouth that Jesus is Lord, believes that God raised Him from the dead, has confessed his sins to Him and has asked for His forgiveness and that He will be his Lord and Savior, will be condemned by God because that person is not a member of the present day CC, is fair or just? Perhaps you have a different idea as to the meanings of those two words.

THEREFORE HE MUST judge what one is able to know about the TRUTH [did you actually look up the verses I provided?] as being the SAME as knowing the truth and denying it.

I am sorry but that statement makes no sense to me whatsoever and yes, I read the verses, have you read the verses that I have referenced?

It is HIGHLY probable that your access to this Form makes you eligible to KNOW the TRUTH. Still in the end it God’s call not our to make. Like I said “IFFY.”

In your opinion, my opinion is that God’s word and the Holy Spirit divulges the real “truth”. Can one learn from the studies of others, of course, if, it agrees with scripture.

Bear

God Bless,
Pat

 

[jmcrae]

So my question is, using the definitions of “catholic, church and universal” and using scripture, how can one justify that the church as spoken of in the NT is limited to and restricted to the “Catholic Church” of today?

For the same reason that Christians in general limit it to Christianity and don’t extend it to other religions.

The teachings of Christ subsist in their fulness in the Church that He established upon Peter and the Apostles - which is the Catholic Church, headed by Peter’s Successor, the Bishop of Rome.

If there are other named churches that follow the teachings of Jesus and the apostles, where does scripture say, too bad, you do not belong to the CC therefore, you will not be accepted into heaven?

If they indeed followed the teachings of Christ, then of course it would be very unjust to deny them Heaven - however, they are rife with heresy, and teach at best a mixture of truth and falsehoods. Their followers are (mostly) not to blame for this, and have no way of knowing any better - just as anyone who belongs to a false religion, without realizing that it is false, will not be judged for that (though they may be judged for other things, and they do not have the protection of the Sacraments, especially Confession and Reconciliation) - however, those who separated from the Church to start these heretical groups will be revealed as sowers of confusion.

 

[tevans9129]

And how does one get through Jesus?

As instructed by the gospel.

How does Jesus come physically into your body to become part of you,

Would you provide scripture that asserts that Jesus comes “physically” into our body?

so that every action of yours is His action?

Wow, are you telling me that every thing that you do is what Jesus would do? I would really like to meet you.

It can only be by means of the Sacraments of the Catholic Church that He Himself established for this purpose.

If that is true, then I would think that you could provide scripture stating so, can you?

Merely wishing it does not accomplish it

Yep, I agree with that.

• saying the Sinner’s Prayer as if it were a set of magic words cannot “save” anyone

And with that.

• the person must be incorporated into Christ by means of His Sacraments.

Once again, I would like to see scripture asserting that your opinion is correct.

Perhaps I may be able to save you some typing, and that is, if you cannot provide unadulterated scripture supporting your views, I am not convinced that your views are any better than mine. Actually, I do not think they are as good, if I state something as fact, I will provide scripture(s) supporting my statement. If it is my belief or opinion, I will admit that it is my view, and not provable.

Bear

 

[tevans9129]

tevans9129,

if you don’t mind me asking, what is your ‘pillar and foundation of Truth’?

Not at all, the written word of God.

What does the Bible say?

Peace

But of course you are not asking about 1 Timothy 3:13. And yes, the Christian Church was, “…the pillar and ground of the truth” when the disciples were its’ teachers. Unfortunately, it did not take man long to cast suspicion on the dependability of the “church” being a “pillar”.

If you disagree, perhaps you would be willing to a verse-by-verse, word by word discussion of Revelation Chapters 2 & 3, and the first century was not even finished. If you would like to delve further into what a “pillar” the church became after the first couple of centuries, perhaps we could do it via PM.

Now, if you would like to show me a “church” that teaches the exact things the disciples taught to Christians, the body of Christ, the church, as written in scripture, then I would have no problem using that “church” as a “pillar” of truth.

Bear

 

[PRmerger]

Would you provide scripture that asserts that Jesus comes “physically” into our body?

We will be glad to do this, provided you show us a Scripture verse that asserts we must “provide Scripture” for all of our beliefs.

This is a man-made tradition to which you’ve succumbed; it is not found in any Scripture verse.

 

[PRmerger]

Not at all, the written word of God.

Is there a Scripture verse that states that the written word of God is this pillar and foundation of truth?

 

[tevans9129]

tevans, could you please not nest your responses? Please see this thread in order to learn how to post so that others can respond to your comments conveniently.

Thanks for the suggestion and for the thread of instructions, I am trying to learn.

Do you realize, tevans, that each and every time you quote Scripture that you are depending “on the opinions of men”, for you would not know what is Scripture were it not for some men, centuries ago, who discerned for you exactly what was theopneustos, and what was not?

That would be a true statement, if, one does not believe scriptures are the inspired word of God.

I get the impression that you place a lot of confidence in the teachings of the leadership of the CC, are those not the “opinions of men”? Have you ever looked at the history of some of those men, if yes, do you think their “opinions” were inspired by God?

Thus, the only way you know that 2 Tim 3:15 is inspired and that the Shepherd of Hermes is not is because some men–some *Catholic *men–discerned this for you?

OK, since it has always, at least in the NT, been men that penned the scriptures, how do you discern which are “inspired” and which are not?

May I ask you this question, which do you trust more, the writings of the original disciples, or, the writings of men centuries later?

Bear

 

[tevans9129]

Well, he planted a bunch of them!

I agree, however, were the churches made up of believers, the body of Christ, or, non believers? So, must one join a church, before he can be saved? I thought the church was those that had accepted Christ as their Saviour. However, if one must be a member before, being saved, then does that mean that the church is not made up entirely of believers?

Bear

 

[tevans9129]

Your answer is NO you do not need a membership to belong to a c hurch

Thanks for the comment Bill. However, I am somewhat confused by the wording of your reply. Allow me to rephrase the question, can a person be saved, before, becoming a member of a church?

Bear

 

[PRmerger]

Thanks for the comment Bill. However, I am somewhat confused by the wording of your reply. Allow me to rephrase the question, can a person be saved, before, becoming a member of a church?

Bear

No one is “saved” until they die, tevans. Salvation means being one with God in heaven. And that requires death.

 

[PRmerger]

That would be a true statement, if, one does not believe scriptures are the inspired word of God.

How so?

 

[PRmerger]

I get the impression that you place a lot of confidence in the teachings of the leadership of the CC, are those not the “opinions of men”?

Yes, tevans, that’s exactly my point. You place a lot of confidence in the “opinions of men”, too,* each and every time you quote Scripture.*

You place your confidence in the opinions of these men, *Catholic *men, who discerned for you that the Gospel of Mark is inspired, but that the Gospel of Thomas is not.

It is from the opinions of these* Catholic *men, bishops and popes, that you place your trust, each and every time you quote Scripture.

Have you ever looked at the history of some of those men, if yes, do you think their “opinions” were inspired by God?

Indeed, I have. One of these men even denied Christ 3 times! Yet he became our first pope.

OK, since it has always, at least in the NT, been men that penned the scriptures, how do you discern which are “inspired” and which are not?

The same way that you do: by placing confidence in the decisions of the Catholic Church which decided for you and me what was theopneustos and what wasn’t.

May I ask you this question, which do you trust more, the writings of the original disciples, or, the writings of men centuries later?

Catholics consider the teachings of the disciples to be inspired, and thus I trust them more than “the writings of men centuries later.”

We consider the Scriptures to be theopneustos, but the teachings of the Magisterium to be infallible (when declared to be, of course.)

 

[campeador]

Not at all, the written word of God.

If that is true, then I would think that you could provide scripture stating so, can you?

But of course you are not asking about 1 Timothy 3:15. And yes, the Christian Church was, “…the pillar and ground of the truth” when the disciples were its’ teachers. Unfortunately, it did not take man long to cast suspicion on the dependability of the “church” being a “pillar”.

That would be a true statement, if, one does not believe scriptures are the inspired word of God.

If you disagree, perhaps you would be willing to a verse-by-verse, word by word discussion of Revelation Chapters 2 & 3, and the first century was not even finished. If you would like to delve further into what a “pillar” the church became after the first couple of centuries, perhaps we could do it via PM.

Now, if you would like to show me a “church” that teaches the exact things the disciples taught to Christians, the body of Christ, the church, as written in scripture, then I would have no problem using that “church” as a “pillar” of truth.

Bear

And that, I disagree with. Would you please quote or reference the verse(s) that make such an assertion?

 

[jmcrae]

As instructed by the gospel.

So, by being baptized, and hearing the teachings of the Apostles (that is, by becoming a member of the Catholic Church). - Matthew 28:16-20

16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go.

• the Apostles obeyed Jesus.

17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted.

• Jesus is God. (Some of them were not yet convinced of that fact.)

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

• Jesus has the authority to confer authority on the Apostles, to be the leaders of His Church.

19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

• Baptism is essential.

20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.

• To hear the teachings of the Apostles is essential. Jesus’ Church has visible, human authority that is derived from the authority given by Jesus to the Apostles. Since only Jesus could give authority to the Apostles, and since only the Apostles could confer that authority on to subsequent generations (since Jesus did not return from Heaven in every generation to do it Himself) we therefore know that the leaders of Jesus’ Church can trace their line of succession in a direct line back to the Apostles.

And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

• Notice that Jesus says, “Always.” Not “sometimes.” And notice that the “you” He is speaking to is the Apostles. Therefore, those who are with the Apostles (that is to say, the Catholic Church) are those with whom Jesus remains, until the end of time.

This authority does not rest with every person who likes to pretend that every “you” in the Bible is directed towards them, personally.

The “always” and the fact that He was speaking to the Apostles tell us that Jesus’ Church is that one Apostolic Church that has been in continuous existence since His Ascension into Heaven until now. (Not something that began to exist, say, in 1050 AD, or later.)

Would you provide scripture that asserts that Jesus comes “physically” into our body?

John 6:53-59

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.” 59 He said this while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.

• It seems pretty self-explanatory to me, but if you need help with it, just ask.

 

[tevans9129]

Hi Bear, a bit strong on the reaction their my friend

Hey Pat, sorry if I came across unfriendly, I only meant to express my sincere feelings, not to offend anyone.

No the OT book JUST LIKE THE NT BOOK ARE INSPIRED BU GOD AND AUTHORED BY MEN CHOSEN BY GOD FOR THAT TASK.

I have no problem with that statement, I believe likewise.

That said; to try to make lite of the CC contribution to the bible seems to me a bit silly.

It is not my intent to diminish the contribution made by anyone to the bible. I think the big problem that I have is the CC of today claiming to be one and the same of the first century church of Christians. If, one wishes to make that claim, then I would like to see all of the dogmas, the papal bulls, doctrines, Roman Catholic Code of Canon Law, rituals etc of the Catholic leadership, as being written and practiced by Jesus’ disciples in the first century. Can you prove those practices with scripture?

As THE ONLY Christian Faith for at least 1,000 years after Cgrist Death and Ressurection; the Cc assambled the Ot Books, AND AUTHORED THE ENTIRE NT 100%.

Could you provide your source that would support your claim? What faith did those classified by the CC as “heretics” claim to be, was it not Christian? Who decided they were not and what was the decision based upon?

It is the CC that assembled the Bible; Codifed it and shares it with the WORLD today. And these my friend are HISTORICALLY proveable facts.

OK, then surely the CC should be able to prove their doctrine with the Bible that apparently they are solely responsible for, would you say?

As for Scripture that say’s you have to be amember of the CC to be saved: READ these again

Mt. 16:15-19 especially v. 19; John 20;19-23 with emphasis on 21: That Christ bestoyed on His Church the very Powers that God Himself has; v.22 Guided by the HS, v. 23 Power to Forgive with a MANDATE TO DO SO, sins THROUGH GOD. And then READ: John14:16-17 “FOREVER” and John 17:15-19 Where Jesus Gives Hiself LITERALLY as warranty of the truths of the CC.

Pat, would you be interested in quoting one of your references, Matt 16:15-19 as an example, and then discussing that passage word by word? I am having much difficultly accepting your statement, “That Christ bestoyed on His Church the very Powers that God Himself has”. That could be a very lengthy subject all of its’ own.

Your fianl comment IGNORES the FACT that since the time of Christ Visitation we; all of us; are under a new CCovenant which voids the old ones. And yes my friend that too is Biblical.

If this is the comment you are referring to, "Pity those poor souls before anyone ever heard of the CC and the Bible that it “compiled”, if so, then I fail to see where I have “ignored” anything. I am fully aware that many, if not most, Catholics say that Jesus’ disciples were Catholic, that is something that I do not believe that you can prove. Just because Peter and Paul supposedly appointed the first Bishop of Rome and from the best data that I can come up with, the Christians were not known as “Catholic” until the second century. Now if you can provide documentation stating otherwise, I would certainly like to see it. Claiming something is so, in my mind, does not equate to it being so. If you wish to believe it, that is certainly your right to do so, OTOH, if you would like to convince me that it is so, then some documentation, other than that of the CC is required.

Their is more Bear, if you REALLY are seeking the truth?

I appreciate your comments and efforts trying to explain your position, however, I do not accept the word of Catholic or Protestant, unless, it can be supported by unadulterated scripture, scripture that one does not need to jump through hoops to come up with the meaning they are looking for. That is why I much prefer Bible discussions verse-by-verse, phrase-by-phrase and word-by-word, as it minimizes cafeteria style religion, IMO.

That being said, I am fully aware that there are symbolisms, idioms, types, models, figures of speech and parables, in some passages, that one must consider and it all must be taken in context. OTOH, there are many simple, straightforward scriptures that mean exactly what is written and does not need other scripture to get the picture.

God Bless you my friend,
Pat

Thanks Pat, and to you also.

Bear

 

[PRmerger]

I am fully aware that many, if not most, Catholics say that Jesus’ disciples were Catholic, that is something that I do not believe that you can prove. Just because Peter and Paul supposedly appointed the first Bishop of Rome and from the best data that I can come up with, the Christians were not known as “Catholic” until the second century.

If they weren’t Catholic, tevans, what were they? There was no Methodist Church at that time. Nor were the Presbyterians around.

Indeed, none of these were around:

Cachar Hill Tribes Presb Synod
Calvary Chapels International
Calvary Charismatic Centre
Calvary Charismatic Centres
Calvary Church
Calvary Church of God in Christ
Calvary Church of the Coastlands
Calvary Churches
Calvary Grace Churches of Faith
Calvary Ministries
Calvary Pentecostal Church
Calvary Pentecostal Mission Church
Calvary Temple
Calvary United Church of Christ
Calvinist Protestant Church of South Africa
Cameroon Baptist Convention
Cameroon Bible Mission
Canaan Fellowship Int
Canadian Baptist Conference
Canadian Baptist Ministries
Canadian Holiness Mission
Caribbean Light & Truth
Cathedral of Tomorrow
Catholic Apostolic Church (Irvingites)
Celestial Church of Christ
Centers of Christian Love
Central Africa Church
Central Africa Pioneer Mission
Central Baptist Association
Central Church of God
Central Japan Pioneer Mission
Central Jerusalem Church in Korea
Central Taiwan Lutheran Church
Centre Chrétien
Centro Biblico
Centro Carismatico Mundial
Centro Crist Casa de Oracion
Centro de Formación Cristiana
Centro Evan e Miss do Feijó e Missoes
Centro Evangélico Pentecostal
Centro Misionero Bethesda
Centros Culturas Calacoaya
Centros de Amistad Cristiana
Centros de Fe Esperanza y Amor

nor these:

Madras Pentecostal Assembly Church
Mahon Mission
Mahon Mission Churches
Mai Chaza Church
Makisua’s Church
Malabar Basel German Mission Church
Malabar Independent Syrian Church
Malayalee Christian Congregation
Malaysia Baptist Convention
Mambilla Baptist Convention
Mana-Igreja Crista
Manantial de Vida Eterna
Manchester City Mission
Manchira Monthly Meeting
Manchu Churches
Manipur Baptist Convention
Manna Church
Manna Full Gospel Churches & Ministries
Manus Evangelical Church
Maonan Church
Maori Evangelical Fellowship
Mara Christian Church
Mara Independent Evangelical Church
Maranatha Baptist Church
Maranatha Christian Churches
Maranatha Church
Maranatha Churches
Maranatha Full Gospel Churches
Maranatha Pentecostal Church
Maranatha Revival Church
March of Faith
Margaya Fellowship

see here for more churches that weren’t around when Sts. Peter and Paul preached.

 

[WCH]

If they weren’t Catholic, tevans, what were they?

Jews.

 

[WCH]

It is my opinion that it matters not to which “church” one belongs to, or any church for that matter, as to salvation, only the condition of the heart and if one has sincerely accepted Christ as their Savior. What says you and do you have scripture supporting your answer? Bear

In truth, as a result of salvation, one is placed into the true church by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:12-13).