starting a new church...

[Bill_Pick]

Guess you didn’t read the linked article. Paul’s words were written to St. Timothy specifically, not to the congregation in general.

Moses - “This is the blessing with which Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death.” (Deut. 33:1)

“Then the people of Judah came to Joshua at Gilgal; and Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenizzite said to him, ‘You know what the LORD said to Moses the man of God in Kadesh-barnea concerning you and me.’” (Josh. 14:6)
I was thinking this thread was about some one starting a new church

The Angel of the Lord - “Then the woman came and told her husband, ‘A man of God came to me, and his countenance was like the countenance of the angel of God, very terrible; I did not ask him whence he was, and he did not tell me his name…’ Then Manoah entreated the LORD, and said, ‘O, LORD, I pray thee, let the man of God whom thou didst send come again to us, and teach us what we are to do with the boy that will be born.’” (Jud. 13:6, 8)

Samuel - “The servant answered Saul again, ‘Here, I have with me the fourth part of a shekel of silver, and I will give it to the man of God, to tell us our way.’” (1 Sam. 9:8)

Elijah - “And she said to Elijah, ‘What have you against me, O man of God? You have come to me to bring my sin to remembrance, and to cause the death of my son!’” (1 Kings 17:18)

Elisha - “And she went up and laid him on the bed of the man of God, and shut the door upon him, and went out… When Elisha came into the house, he saw the child lying dead on his bed.” (2 Kings 4:21, 32)

David - “According to the ordinance of David his father, he appointed the divisions of the priests for their service, and the Levites for their offices of praise and ministry before the priests as the duty of each day required, and the gatekeepers in their divisions for the several gates; for so David the man of God had commanded.” (2 Chr. 8:14)

St. Timothy - “But as for you, man of God, shun all this; aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness.” (1 Tim. 6:11)

Contrary to the opinion that the “man of God” can be any Christian without distinction, Scripture itself will not allow such an interpretation, insisting that the “man of God” is a figure of authority, either commissioned by God directly through Divine Intervention (such as Moses or the Angel), or appointed by another holder of authority (such as Samuel, David, Elisha, and St. Timothy).

In other words, “man of God” is a title of authority that can in no way be taken upon oneself, but rather, it is bestowed upon a man by a higher authority. A man must be called by God to hold this title of “man of God.”

Paul’s calling was extraordinary, and so, in keeping with this, he performed “extraordinary miracles.” (Acts 19:11-12)

Catholics and Protestants agree that to be saved, you have to be born again. Jesus said so: “Amen, amen, I say to you, no one can see the kingdom of God without being born from above.” (John 3:3).

After our Lord’s teaching that it is necessary for salvation to be born from above by water and the Spirit (John 3:1–21), “Jesus and his disciples went into the land of Judea; there he remained with them and baptized” (John 3:22).

Then we have the witness of the early Church that John 3:5 refers to baptismal regeneration. This was universally recognized by the early Christians. The Church Fathers were unanimous in teaching this.

Clearly, baptism is a core doctrine. And yet, there are those who say baptism is just a symbol, that the “water” is the preached word of God. Which is it? And who’s the final authority?

 

[Erich]

Bill Pick:

I was thinking this thread was about some one starting a new church

(It took me awhile to find this comment, mixed in as it was with the rest of my previous post.)

Just a couple of random thoughts… the OP wanted to know if it would be ok to start a church, using scripture alone as his final authority (and if said church would be considered the church founded by Christ).

It all comes down to a question of authority, right? Assuming he’s not already a duly-consecrated bishop with proper apostolic succession (i.e. the normal Scriptural pattern for such things) – in which case he would be breaking off from an already-existing Church and not starting a new one – he’d have to demonstrate (via Scripturally-required signs and wonders) that he is a “man of God,” called directly by God.

That said, from the CCC we know the following about what it means to be “church”:

CHURCH: The name given the “convocation” or “assembly” of the People God has called together from “the ends of the earth.” In Christian usage, the word “Church” has three inseparable meanings: the People that God gathers in the whole world; the particular or local church (diocese); and the liturgical (above all Eucharistic) assembly. The Church draws her life from the Word and the Body of Christ, and so herself becomes Christ’s Body (752). In the Creed, the sole Church of Christ is professed to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic (811).

Note that the CCC makes a distinction between “church” (i.e. Catholic or Orthodox) and “ecclesial community” (i.e. lacking one or more of the visible bonds of unity with the Church that Christ founded). Strictly speaking, I’d be hard-pressed to see how any such “church” would be considered the church founded by Christ

 

[schaick]

That said, from the CCC we know the following about what it means to be “church”:

Note that the CCC makes a distinction between “church” (i.e. Catholic or Orthodox) and “ecclesial community” (i.e. lacking one or more of the visible bonds of unity with the Church that Christ founded). Strictly speaking, I’d be hard-pressed to see how any such “church” would be considered the church founded by Christ

Is this man defining what you think Jesus meant by "I will build my Church."

Is this a man-made tradition, tradition documented by any of the Apostles, Scripture based?

Where did the Catholic Church come up with this meaning of “church”?

 

[gtrenewed]

Guess you didn’t read the linked article. Paul’s words were written to St. Timothy specifically, not to the congregation in general

.

While he wrote to Timothy, the principle applies to all, Scripture leads to salvation not just for Timothy, that is why it is in Scripture for us all. Bad logic Erich.

Contrary to the opinion that the “man of God” can be any Christian without distinction, Scripture itself will not allow such an interpretation, insisting that the “man of God” is a figure of authority, either commissioned by God directly through Divine Intervention (such as Moses or the Angel), or appointed by another holder of authority (such as Samuel, David, Elisha, and St. Timothy).

In other words, “man of God” is a title of authority that can in no way be taken upon oneself, but rather, it is bestowed upon a man by a higher authority. A man must be called by God to hold this title of “man of God.”

Agree that baptism is a core doctrine. Most Protestant denominations baptize. Even if they don’t really understand it, they do it out of obedience to the Scriptures as the final authority. Hence, the baptism of desire. If the heart of the believer in Jesus is to obey but because they can’t fully understand the theology behind the doctrine, they meet the criteria of baptism. That is why converts are not rebaptized.

 

[loneviking]

2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach?

Would my hypothetical church be considered the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Well, let me direct you to Mark 9:38,39:

And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in your name, and he follows not us: and we forbade him, because he follows not us.

But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is on our part.

Notice that there is no questioning by Jesus of where this man obtained his authority to do these deeds. There is no question asked of which Rabbi the man was trained under. This guy just shows up out of the blue, doing the same work that the disciples were commissioned by Christ to do and the disciples get rather bent out of shape over it. But Christ says ‘Forbid him not’.

So, my conclusion is that yes, one could start a church using Sola Scriptura as a final authority for teaching.

Would that church be a part of the church Jesus founded? Well, it depends on what the church is teaching, but that church certainly could be a part of the universal church that Christ founded…

 

[Bill_Pick]

No and No And SS is a false teaching

 

[Bbigam]

2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach?

Would my hypothetical church be considered the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Just a little nit-picking with your wording…

Most Protestants that I know do not consider their local congregation to the THE church founded by Christ. Rather, they consider it to be part of the “church catholic” or “church universal” or some such.
So I would phrase it this way:
Would my hypothetical church be considered a part of the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Of course, as one about to swim the Tiber, my answer to the question, either way, is an emphatic no.

 

[joe370]

Just a little nit-picking with your wording…

Most Protestants that I know do not consider their local congregation to the THE church founded by Christ. Rather, they consider it to be part of the “church catholic” or “church universal” or some such.
So I would phrase it this way:
Would my hypothetical church be considered a part of the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Of course, as one about to swim the Tiber, my answer to the question, either way, is an emphatic no.

**No one is really responding anyway. What made you finally decide to make the swim, if you don’t mind me asking? **

 

[Bill_Pick]

**No one is really responding anyway. What made you finally decide to make the swim, if you don’t mind me asking? **

What will you name your church,the church of whats happing now

 

[GalaxyofGOD7]

2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach?

Would my hypothetical church be considered the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Joe in one word…NO!

Only one Church has been founded, all others are pretenders, no matter how well intentioned they are. You have no more authority to establish a new church outside of the Catholic Church as I have the right to declare myself the king of England.

 

[schaick]

**Annie, I am asking you, or anyone else who responds. So, Jesus, who said: “I will build my church…” would have no problem with me saying: Jesus, instead of belonging to your church, (as long as I have access to His church) - “I will build my church…?” **

NO, you just changed completely the parameters of what you were asking which was:

That belonging part you are disowning Jesus as the head of your church.

*"2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach?

Would my hypothetical church be considered the church founded by Jesus Christ?" *

A person starting a church following Scripture as their guide would be the Church Jesus is building.

 

[Bbigam]

**No one is really responding anyway. What made you finally decide to make the swim, if you don’t mind me asking? **

I was drawn toward it initially through the liturgy, structure, and traditions and history in general. What really got me was the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Reading John 6 in Dave Armstrong’s book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism really got me to the point that I suddenly believed (through the workings of the Spirit, of course!)

I’d be happy to tell you more about it in another thread or PM if you’re interested. I see you are a convert too. That’s great!

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach?

Would my hypothetical church be considered the church founded by Jesus Christ?

Can someone really start a new church apart from Jesus Christ? I guess someone can rent a building, put an add in the paper, and teach and preach… but are they really starting a new church? Granted… many non-Catholics abuse sola scriptura with no consideration of historic church tradition which is sinful and wrong. But, I don’t believe that is consistent with sola scriptura. Didn’t the Protestant Reformers submit to church tradition as a secondary source of authority, making them very Catholic too in much of their core beliefs?

 

[Erich]

Didn’t the Protestant Reformers submit to church tradition as a secondary source of authority, making them very Catholic too in much of their core beliefs?

Only to the extent they:
a) kept the same New Testament Canon,
b) kept an unqualified reverence for human life from conception onward,
c) condemned polygamy, and
d) maintained as a rock-bottom, non-negotiable belief that public revelation closed with the death of the Apostle John…

…though of course, they hardly ever admitted it.

 

[T_More]

I was drawn toward it initially through the liturgy, structure, and traditions and history in general. What really got me was the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Reading John 6 in Dave Armstrong’s book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism really got me to the point that I suddenly believed (through the workings of the Spirit, of course!)

I’d be happy to tell you more about it in another thread or PM if you’re interested. I see you are a convert too. That’s great!

John 6 was for me also one of things that drew me to the CC.

Being a former JW, reaching out for the CC was a great stretch for me in many respects. At least most Protestants share some common ground with the CC (Holy Trinity, Heaven for all, etc.). But there is almost NOTHING in common between the WTS and the CC, so I had a few more hurdles to leap. In all honesty, I couldn’t reach any other conclusion that the CC was the Church that Christ founded.

Sorry, Joe, I didn’t mean to derail the thread.

 

[One_in_Christ_1]

Only to the extent they:
a) kept the same New Testament Canon,
b) kept an unqualified reverence for human life from conception onward,
c) condemned polygamy, and
d) maintained as a rock-bottom, non-negotiable belief that public revelation closed with the death of the Apostle John…

…though of course, they hardly ever admitted it.

My point is that the Protestant Reformers were much more Catholic than your typical Protestant today.

 

[joe370]

What will you name your church,the church of whats happing now

LOL…I left the Lutheran church to belong to the only church founded by God, on Pentecost, in Jerusalem, circa AD 33 - the Catholic Church.

 

[joe370]

Joe in one word…NO!

Only one Church has been founded, all others are pretenders, no matter how well intentioned they are. You have no more authority to establish a new church outside of the Catholic Church as I have the right to declare myself the king of England.

I agree with you. :thumbsup:I never understood how any of the Protestant churches, founded in the 16th century, at best, could claim to be the historical church founded by Jesus Christ, in the first century. Perhaps that is why no one (non-Catholic that is) - will address the question.

 

[joe370]

**

*"2 questions for any non-Catholics: hypothetically speaking, would it be OK for me to start a church, using sola scriptura (scripture alone) - as my final authority, to teach? ***

 

[joe370]

I was drawn toward it initially through the liturgy, structure, and traditions and history in general. What really got me was the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Reading John 6 in Dave Armstrong’s book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism really got me to the point that I suddenly believed (through the workings of the Spirit, of course!)

It was the Eucharist and the belief of the early Catholic church regarding the true presence in the bread and wine (true sacrifice) - that won me over too.

I’d be happy to tell you more about it in another thread or PM if you’re interested. I see you are a convert too. That’s great!

I will PM you; I have a few questions that I would like to ask you, regarding your journey home.