Churchwork
05-14-2008, 02:05 PM
Barsabbas and Matthias were already Apostles. One was selected to replace Judas, that is all. There was no appointment of an Apostle who was not already an Apostle. This is only done for the purpose of establishing the original 12 and need for today to reclaim Scriptural locality. Beyond that you do not need a succession of Apostles because an Apostle is directly chosen by God. He is not chosen by man. Believe it, for it is true and fully proven in God's Word.
There is no record in the Bible the church (city locales of believers) ever being called apostolic churches. They were just churches set up by the apostles. I am sure someone could draw a succession of a certain belief system of individuals over the past 2000 years, but that doesn't make them right. You have to check their teaching with Scripture.
I don't agree the majority of the church believes apostles don't appoint elders of a locality. When really asked this question deeply and sincerely, most Christians would not agree. The scope of what many consider the church is obviously different than what spiritual Christians believe.
In terms of Scriptural reality I am right because I can prove it. We find no basis for denominations in the Bible since the Word of God is clear, don't say I of Cephas, I of Apollos or I of Christ. The latter is another way of being an independent non-denominationalist. That will not do because it divides the body of Christ inappropriately, not according to the only way, Scriptural locality.
"They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us ..." (1 John 2:19) easily applies to denominationalism and congregationalism that bring us our corporations today or evangelists on tv who sell their products. Anything goes. An evangelists is suppose to be a local worker, not a global worker. There is no global workers in the body of Christ. Only apostles are workers regionally and even then not globally. God knows the flesh all too well, so there is not allowed archdiocese's of whole countries like USA, nor popery which has its equivalent in the Eastern Orthodox system also. Don't place much faith in popular men such as Graham who owns an expensive home in every major city of the world.
You can test me in everything I say by the Scriptures to know I have told you the truth. I am an Apostle. Like Elijah was told, there were 7000 others. We may not be easy to find but we exist. And I can tell you who is an Apostle too because I am one. You got to be one to know one.
Consider these 3 points.
(1) If each church is locally governed, and all authority is in the hands of the local elders, there is no scope for an able and ambitious false prophet to display his organizing genius by forming the different companies of believers into one vast federation, and then satisfy his ambition by constituting himself its head. Rome could never sway the power it does today had the churches of God maintained their local ground. Where churches are not affiliated, and where local authority is in the hands of local elders, a pope is an impossibility. Where there are only local churches there can be no Roman Church. It is the federation of different companies of believers that has brought such evils as dabbling in politics into the Church of God. There is power in a federated "church," but it is carnal power, not spiritual. God’s thought for His Church is that she should be like a mustard-seed on earth, full of vitality, yet scarcely noticed. It is federation that has brought the Church of today to the state of Thyatira. The failure of Protestantism is that it has substituted organized churches—State and Dissenting—for the Church of Rome, instead of returning to the Divinely-ordained local churches.
(2) Further, if the churches retain their local character, the spread of heresy and error will be avoided, for if a church is local, heresy and error will be local too. Rome is a splendid illustration of the reverse side of this truth. The prevalence of Romish error is because of Romish federation. The sphere of the federated churches is vast, consequently the error is widespread. It is a comparatively simple matter to "quarantine" a local church, but to isolate error in a vast federation of churches is quite another proposition.
(3) The greatest advantage of having locality as the boundary of the churches is that it precludes all possibility of sects. You may have your special doctrines and I mine, but as long as we are out to maintain the scriptural character of the churches by making locality the only dividing line between them, then it is impossible for us to establish any church for the propagation of our particular beliefs. As long as a church preserves its local character, it is protected against denominationalism, but as soon as it loses that, it is veering in the direction of sectarianism. A believer is sectarian when he belongs to anyone, or anything, apart from the Lord and the locality. Sects and denominations can only be established when the local character of the church is destroyed.
In the wisdom of God He has decreed that all His churches be local. This is the Divine method of safeguarding them against sects. Obviously it can only protect the Church against sectarianism in expression. It is still possible for a sectarian spirit to exist in a non-sectarian church, and only the Spirit of God can deal with that. May we all learn to walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh, so that both in outward expression and inward condition the churches of God may be well-pleasing to Him.
There is no record in the Bible the church (city locales of believers) ever being called apostolic churches. They were just churches set up by the apostles. I am sure someone could draw a succession of a certain belief system of individuals over the past 2000 years, but that doesn't make them right. You have to check their teaching with Scripture.
I don't agree the majority of the church believes apostles don't appoint elders of a locality. When really asked this question deeply and sincerely, most Christians would not agree. The scope of what many consider the church is obviously different than what spiritual Christians believe.
In terms of Scriptural reality I am right because I can prove it. We find no basis for denominations in the Bible since the Word of God is clear, don't say I of Cephas, I of Apollos or I of Christ. The latter is another way of being an independent non-denominationalist. That will not do because it divides the body of Christ inappropriately, not according to the only way, Scriptural locality.
"They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us ..." (1 John 2:19) easily applies to denominationalism and congregationalism that bring us our corporations today or evangelists on tv who sell their products. Anything goes. An evangelists is suppose to be a local worker, not a global worker. There is no global workers in the body of Christ. Only apostles are workers regionally and even then not globally. God knows the flesh all too well, so there is not allowed archdiocese's of whole countries like USA, nor popery which has its equivalent in the Eastern Orthodox system also. Don't place much faith in popular men such as Graham who owns an expensive home in every major city of the world.
You can test me in everything I say by the Scriptures to know I have told you the truth. I am an Apostle. Like Elijah was told, there were 7000 others. We may not be easy to find but we exist. And I can tell you who is an Apostle too because I am one. You got to be one to know one.
Consider these 3 points.
(1) If each church is locally governed, and all authority is in the hands of the local elders, there is no scope for an able and ambitious false prophet to display his organizing genius by forming the different companies of believers into one vast federation, and then satisfy his ambition by constituting himself its head. Rome could never sway the power it does today had the churches of God maintained their local ground. Where churches are not affiliated, and where local authority is in the hands of local elders, a pope is an impossibility. Where there are only local churches there can be no Roman Church. It is the federation of different companies of believers that has brought such evils as dabbling in politics into the Church of God. There is power in a federated "church," but it is carnal power, not spiritual. God’s thought for His Church is that she should be like a mustard-seed on earth, full of vitality, yet scarcely noticed. It is federation that has brought the Church of today to the state of Thyatira. The failure of Protestantism is that it has substituted organized churches—State and Dissenting—for the Church of Rome, instead of returning to the Divinely-ordained local churches.
(2) Further, if the churches retain their local character, the spread of heresy and error will be avoided, for if a church is local, heresy and error will be local too. Rome is a splendid illustration of the reverse side of this truth. The prevalence of Romish error is because of Romish federation. The sphere of the federated churches is vast, consequently the error is widespread. It is a comparatively simple matter to "quarantine" a local church, but to isolate error in a vast federation of churches is quite another proposition.
(3) The greatest advantage of having locality as the boundary of the churches is that it precludes all possibility of sects. You may have your special doctrines and I mine, but as long as we are out to maintain the scriptural character of the churches by making locality the only dividing line between them, then it is impossible for us to establish any church for the propagation of our particular beliefs. As long as a church preserves its local character, it is protected against denominationalism, but as soon as it loses that, it is veering in the direction of sectarianism. A believer is sectarian when he belongs to anyone, or anything, apart from the Lord and the locality. Sects and denominations can only be established when the local character of the church is destroyed.
In the wisdom of God He has decreed that all His churches be local. This is the Divine method of safeguarding them against sects. Obviously it can only protect the Church against sectarianism in expression. It is still possible for a sectarian spirit to exist in a non-sectarian church, and only the Spirit of God can deal with that. May we all learn to walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh, so that both in outward expression and inward condition the churches of God may be well-pleasing to Him.