Feedback on the above article:
( Page 9 of 9.
B. Lever (Guest) (12/06/2012 20:39)
The word disciple, discipleship etc are biblical and therefore a biblical approach to the term is required. Pastors are under shepherds for the Good Shepherd, and again the only valid approach to this call is biblical.
What you have done is highlighted the biblical ignorance in far too mnay of our churches.
Seumas, Tobermory (Guest) (12/06/2012 23:02)
Thee word "discipleship" does not exist in the bible. Do a search on biblegatway.com - it isnt in the NIV or the KJV.
The word "disciple" according to various dictionaroes means a follower (of Jesus on this case) which is so vague and malleable an expression as to be almost meaningless.
The word "biblical" itself is meaningless. Do you mean KJV? NIV? Or one of the plethora of versions which seem to litter the eccleiastical landscape? According to the KJV, the final part of Marks gospel is "biblical" According to the NIV it isnt. Which is it?
If you are going to constrain yourself by a particular frame of reference, then the first thing that needs to be done is to define that frame of reference. All these "versions" just muddy the waters.
B. Lever (Guest) (13/06/2012 08:47)
For the true disciple and follower of The Lord Jesus Christ none of what you have described is a concern. Discipleship, although not appearing in the bible is nonetheless a reality because it relates to the personal responsibility of following Jesus.
The semantics that you refer to are no more than a smokescreen.
Editor (13/06/2012 10:26)
Just for clarification, the Gospels and Acts is shot through with the word 'disciple/disciples' e.g. Matt 27:57; Matt 28:19. (In fact it is probably the very best word to use in terms of those 'disciples' who follow the life and teachings of Jesus Christ and the word of God - in it's various translations.)
So it is perfectly valid to use the term 'discipleship'
However, given the lead article is not about 'discipleship' per se, I have posted a question/discussion thread which can be used for this (discipleship) question - please use it as you wish; leaving this thread to carry questions about what is 'biblical church'.
Thanks for your help.
B. Lever (Guest) (13/06/2012 11:29)
Strange that you are divorcing discipleship from what it means to be 'biblical church', particularly given that the Church is made up of people and not buildings!
1 Pet 2: 5 "...you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ"
Editor (13/06/2012 14:15)
I am not "divorcing discipleship from what it means to be 'biblical church". Discipleship is a component (and if you want to discuss it then please do so on that thread).
In this context I have re-located your 13:05 posting to that place.
(Guest) (17/06/2012 20:39) "What to look for in a church"
How do we define the word 'church'? Is it;
1. A building?
2. A group of people who gather together?
3. A combination of both?
Editor (18/06/2012 14:26) "How do we define the word 'church'?"
A very good question. Since the 2nd century - and the Reformation didn't have any impact on this - the term 'church' has been corrupted to mean either a denomination, or a building, or (typically) the religious routines and structures surrounding the 'one holy day in one holy building for one holy hour with one holy person wearing holy clothes and performing a holy set of rituals'.
In its biblical meaning the term 'church' is simply a group of Jesus's followers. It is this (lost and subverted) simplicity which many are seeking to recover.
In meeting together a building can be convenient, but a building is never a 'church'; and in the pages of the New Testament, the buildings were merely the homes of believers were groups of disciples met.
The imperative for the follower of Christ is to meet together with other believers for encouragement, teaching, prayer, fellowship, etc. etc. - and to do this where ever, when ever and with whomsoever you can.
B. Lever (Guest) (18/06/2012 20:54)
"...the religious routines and structures surrounding the 'one holy day in one holy building for one holy hour with one holy person wearing holy clothes and performing a holy set of rituals'."
Not much different to the OT then! The comparison is an interesting one, when you consider that it didn't suit the Israelites to have direct dealings with God, they were happy to have a priest mediate for them. Many Christians are the same today, they seem to think that this obsolves them of any responsibility if they go via a minister or priest!
Editor (19/06/2012 11:46) The 'temple/priest:mediator/building' model has been carried lock, stock and barrel into the NT church. The only 'priest' which Christians need today is the high-priesthood of Christ whose sacrifice brings believers into a royal priesthood.
Jer 5:30 says: "A horrible and shocking thing has happened in the land.
The prophet then continues in the next to outline an ungodly complicity which everyone is happy to maintain - each for their own purposes; but concludes with a sharp warning.
P.S. Note to B. Lever: those you wish to make regular contributions to the site are encouraged to register. Registered users have the facility of adopting a psuedonym if they wish.
( Page 9 of 9.
© 2013 Christians Together
High Accessibility Version
Full Graphics Version