We stuck with the Bible and we got BOTH the IC and HC!

HEADER FOR Expressions

(Click picture to go back to Table of Contents)

Welcome

Enjoy... But remember
"Don't give in to winning the argument
and losing one of your eternal crowns..."

God bless you...

We stuck with the Bible and we got BOTH the IC and HC!

Forum: Theological Expressions
Re:

House Church (again!) (Christopher Yip)
Re:

Clarifications (RTC)
Re:

The NT Model is not Normative, Not Meant to be. (Christopher Yip)
Re:

Not normative? On what basis? (RTC)
Re:

And Normative on What Basis? (Christopher Yip)
Re:

On basis that such was NT practices everywhere in first 300 years (RTC)
Re:

Is that therefore biblical? (Christopher Yip)
Re:

Yes it is (RTC)
Re:

Holds no water (passerby)
Re:

You use wrong cup (RTC)
Re:

pick up the same dictionary and please enlighten us what it says about Church(n/t)
Re:

Church is building for Christian worship (RTC)
Re:

Hee...Hee...Can't you even see the obvious contradictions to your arguments???(n/t)
Re:

Hi Anon,
Re:

biblical?
Re:

Let's see if you pass the biblical test (RTC)
Re:

Easton Bible Dictionary says...
Re:

Thayer's Greek Definition of Ekklesia (Christopher Yip)
Re:

Still got more (RTC)
Re:

Not Much Point in going further ... (Christopher Yip)
Re:

The same point (RTC)
Re:

OK, One Last Shot (Christopher Yip)
Re:

Missed by a long shot? (RTC)
Re:

Perhaps it'sYou? Food for thought. (Christopher Yip)
Re:

More food on the table (RTC)
Re:

Your Food is Giving Me Indigestion :-)) (Christopher Yip)
Re:

That's because you are not chewing! (RTC)
Re:

Nope. It's Because Your Food Is Indigestible - Too Much Imagination. Will Stick With The Bible. (Christopher Yip)
Re:

If you really stick to Bible, you won't get the IC today! (RTC)
Date: 2001, Jun 15
From: Christopher Yip CKHY

++You keep forgetting one important thing, You are interacting with a person who have been in an IC setting for almost two decades and who knows full well what he's talking about, which is not void of experience.
RTC, so your experience becomes THE standard for judging the validity of the ecclesiology of the church? No wonder you cannot think straight and look beyond your own disappointments.
++ Rather it is you who have a lot of biased opinions about the HC, using the old sophistic arguments that HC is the stuff of cults, divisions, strife and bitterness etc.
But many cults ARE formed from these! If your EXPERIENCE with HC is THE standard for judging validity, then the EXPERIENCE of such cults and their devastating consequences too speak of the impotence of the house church. Obviously, such an argument is invalid and THAT's the problem with YOUR argument. You take YOUR 20 years' bad experience with some particular church or churches and decide that the ecclesiology is therefore invalid.
Can't you SEE it? You are NOT interacting with our ecclesiology but with your own concoction of what we are. That's sad.
++ And I regret that you see the problems with the HC as justification for perpetuating your own rather than to work towards the biblical model.
See? Another figment of your imagination. I DO see problems with BOTH kinds of churches but I DO believe BOTH are NEEDED. You fail even to understand my position. What I was trying to do was to show you the INCONSISTENCY of your argument but I guess I failed. Too bad.
Anyway, it really doesn't matter if you don't BELIEVE that BOTH can co-exist because the fact of the matter is that they DO. I am curious, though, to know how it feels like to stand there and insist that this is not the way of the NT church when the churches succeed to transform the cell into NT churches. It probably would be similar to someone STILL insisting that a 20-year old car won't even start while watching it start and zoom off right before his eyes.
I wish you godspeed for your house church, RTC.
By the way, it came to my attention that any gathering of more than 5 people for such a purpose without permit or registration is against the law here. Do you know that? How are you getting around this problem? For us, it's OK because we come under the umbrella of the registered church. Just for interest, my earlier mentions Sozomen and Constantine's edict which is very similar to this law of ours:
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-02/Npnf2-02-07.htm#P550_227608
Book II
Chapter XXXII.-Constantine Enacts a Law Against All Heresies, and Prohibits the People from Holding Church in Any Place But the Catholic Church, and Thus the Greater Number of Heresies Disappear. The Arians Who Sided with Eusebius of Nicomedia, Artfully Attempted to Obliterate the Term "Consubstantial."
Although the doctrine of Arius was zealously supported by many persons in disputations, a party had not as yet been formed to whom the name of Arians could be applied as a distinctive appellation; for all assembled together as a church and held communion with each other, with the exception of the Novatians, those called Phrygians, the Valentinians, the Marcionites, the Paulianians, and some few others who adhered to already invented heresies. The emperor, however, enacted a law that their own houses of prayer should be abolished; and that they should meet in the churches, and not hold church in private houses, or in public places. He deemed it better to hold fellowship in the Catholic Church, and he advised them to assemble in her walls. By means of this law, almost all the heresies, I believe, disappeared. During the reign of preceding emperors, all who worshiped Christ, however they might have differed from each other in opinion, received the same treatment from the pagans, and were persecuted with equal cruelty. These common calamities, to which they were all equally liable, prevented them from prosecuting any close inquiries as to the differences of opinion which existed among themselves; it was therefore easy for the members of each party to hold church by themselves, and by continually conferring with one another, however few they might have been in number, they were not disrupted. But after this law was passed they could not assemble in public, because it was forbidden; nor could they hold their assemblies in secret, for they were watched by the bishops and clergy of their city. Hence the greater number of these sectarians were led, by fear of consequences, to join themselves to the Catholic Church. Those who adhered to their original sentiments did not, at their death, leave any disciples to propagate their heresy, for they could neither come together into the same place, nor were they able to teach in security those of the same opinions. On account either of the absurdity of the heretical dogmas, or of the utter ignorance of those who devised and taught them, the respective followers of each heresy were, from the beginning, very few in number. The Novatians alone, who had obtained good leaders, and who entertained the same opinions respecting the Divinity as the Catholic Church, were numerous, from the beginning, and remained so, not being much injured by this law; the emperor, I believe, willingly relaxed in their favor the rigor of the enactment, for he only desired to strike terror into the minds of his subjects, and had no intention of persecuting them. Acesius, who was then the bishop of this heresy in Constantinople, was much esteemed by the emperor on account of his virtuous life; and it is probable that it was for his sake that the church which he governed met with protection. The Phrygians suffered the same treatment as the other heretics in all the Roman provinces except Phrygia and the neighboring regions, for here they had, since the time of Montanus, existed in great numbers and do so to the present day.
-------
I trust that we can close this chapter for now.
Christopher