Ecumenical doesn’t sound bad at face value, unless he’s trying to build the one world religion under an/the antichrist, or even this pope (same thing), but I’m not familiar with it.
If we were doing it right there would only be one body of Christians, per Matthew 12:25. Very narrow road to that end, though. It wouldn’t be 1.2 billion of us ending there, and it would be a bottom up hierarchy, not top down one.
Those are definitely the Hegelian endpoints, and i agree even the likely outcomes even if we were to just get everyone to accept each other without fixing at least some of the underlying doctrinal issues we currently have. I do still think that ideally, the body of Christ would not be divided.
The other day someone on here taught me a new term: "The Invisible Church" and said it came from Luther. Idk about that but from what I can tell from the Bible the true church IS technically invisible. It is the collective body of all who believe in Jesus for their salvation, worldwide. I contended with them that it is not, never has been, and cannot be contained within any institution on earth, and that doing so has always resulted in corruption of Christ's teachings followed by persecution of true believers and agnostics / those with questions, and also those who reject it. But Christ didn't pursue the unbelievers with a drawn sword!
I also contended that there are topics of disagreement which aren't crucial for salvation and so are not worth dividing over and I believe the true church IS unified if you can look beyond these issues.
I don't understand how people can't see this stuff. Maybe I need to do a better job of laying out my points, idk. What are your thoughts on this? I still need to reply to your other post lmao
I also contended that there are topics of disagreement which aren't crucial for salvation and so are not worth dividing over and I believe the true church IS unified if you can look beyond these issues.
100%. I tend to believe that even on major doctrinal issues like whether we should try to keep the law, there can still be cohesion so long as unintentional adherence to the greater matters of the law is largely kept intact. I wouldn’t accept someone who disagreed teaching my local congregation, (presenting a case would be fine), but cooperating with them and treating them as brethren should still be in place.
The new thing with LGBT acceptance into even the clergy, though? Nope. Way too far. Denounced. Rebuked. Warning, and if not heeded, the dust will be knocked off my shoes atop their blasphemous Ishtar pulpit.
State as god-lite? Lots of “progressive” churches will absolutely advocate this. Nope. Rebuked. Accept it and denounce your intel “clergy” or dust off sandals.
I’ve actually seen a “churxh” (the x was an accidental typo, but I like it) in a hundreds years old building, with a giant sign taking up their entire exterior wall, blocking view of the stained glass windows telling the story of Christ, with the sign reading “PROTECT TRANS KIDS.” Maybe it’s Jonahish of me, but I won’t even rebuke those fiends.
Personally, I want to see the spirit start moving again. NOT seeing that happen is probably a major part of the falling away, and not seeing that movement happen is probably also a sign of our disobedience. We clean up, we repent, we start to see the fruits, people convert en masse. Nothing can stop what’s coming.
Frankly, as we’ve already seen, it only takes one, so if anyone wants, they can blame me. I can’t say it wasn’t my fault.
Ecumenical doesn’t sound bad at face value, unless he’s trying to build the one world religion under an/the antichrist, or even this pope (same thing), but I’m not familiar with it.
If we were doing it right there would only be one body of Christians, per Matthew 12:25. Very narrow road to that end, though. It wouldn’t be 1.2 billion of us ending there, and it would be a bottom up hierarchy, not top down one.
Ecumenical as I understand it is meant to unify the religions under the anti-christ (papacy, as I understand it)
The "goyim" see: oh great we can be frens
The esoterics see: oh great we can make them all frens under our rule
Those are definitely the Hegelian endpoints, and i agree even the likely outcomes even if we were to just get everyone to accept each other without fixing at least some of the underlying doctrinal issues we currently have. I do still think that ideally, the body of Christ would not be divided.
The other day someone on here taught me a new term: "The Invisible Church" and said it came from Luther. Idk about that but from what I can tell from the Bible the true church IS technically invisible. It is the collective body of all who believe in Jesus for their salvation, worldwide. I contended with them that it is not, never has been, and cannot be contained within any institution on earth, and that doing so has always resulted in corruption of Christ's teachings followed by persecution of true believers and agnostics / those with questions, and also those who reject it. But Christ didn't pursue the unbelievers with a drawn sword!
I also contended that there are topics of disagreement which aren't crucial for salvation and so are not worth dividing over and I believe the true church IS unified if you can look beyond these issues.
I don't understand how people can't see this stuff. Maybe I need to do a better job of laying out my points, idk. What are your thoughts on this? I still need to reply to your other post lmao
I haven't forgotten, just been busy as can be!
If you get a chance, or have children, there’s a good cartoon called The Story Keepers that is precisely about the invisible early church.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=m-vNpyavrfc
100%. I tend to believe that even on major doctrinal issues like whether we should try to keep the law, there can still be cohesion so long as unintentional adherence to the greater matters of the law is largely kept intact. I wouldn’t accept someone who disagreed teaching my local congregation, (presenting a case would be fine), but cooperating with them and treating them as brethren should still be in place.
The new thing with LGBT acceptance into even the clergy, though? Nope. Way too far. Denounced. Rebuked. Warning, and if not heeded, the dust will be knocked off my shoes atop their blasphemous Ishtar pulpit.
State as god-lite? Lots of “progressive” churches will absolutely advocate this. Nope. Rebuked. Accept it and denounce your intel “clergy” or dust off sandals.
I’ve actually seen a “churxh” (the x was an accidental typo, but I like it) in a hundreds years old building, with a giant sign taking up their entire exterior wall, blocking view of the stained glass windows telling the story of Christ, with the sign reading “PROTECT TRANS KIDS.” Maybe it’s Jonahish of me, but I won’t even rebuke those fiends.
Personally, I want to see the spirit start moving again. NOT seeing that happen is probably a major part of the falling away, and not seeing that movement happen is probably also a sign of our disobedience. We clean up, we repent, we start to see the fruits, people convert en masse. Nothing can stop what’s coming.
Frankly, as we’ve already seen, it only takes one, so if anyone wants, they can blame me. I can’t say it wasn’t my fault.