Robert writes .........

" But, what you leave no room for is the prophetic and for the watchman."

And the reams of warning Scriptures about wolves and false prophets and the writer of two thirds of the Scriptures calling many people out, to their faces and by their names. Of course, in all of this we have not spoken about the 800 pound gorilla in the room, what is the Church? Of course the proper question is who is the Church? We know its not buildings and and we know its not denominations, so the whole thing is moot unless we have definition of terms. So, my challenge to Greg and others, define, using only Scripture, the Church and how they should gather, only Scripture mind you.........bro Frank

Brother Anton, from the other thread writes in reply to Greg.............


" Frank is right. This is not "for any reason". These men have been proven, over and over, to be false prophets. And the issue here is not whether we speak out against them but Chan's endorsing men who are proven false prophets and teachers while lambasting the body of Christ for rejecting that which the Scripture calls us to reject.
I do not know what is in Chan's heart, but I must judge what he teaches by his words and his actions. He claims to speak prophetically and “Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge.” (1 Corinthians 14:29)
If we are to embrace Bill Johnson, Mike Bickle, the Kansas City prophets etc, then we MUST embrace Catholicism, JW's and Mormons as legitimate expressions of The Faith.
What Chan, and his supporters are advocating is not Christian charity, but ecumenism and it is this mixture of holy and profane that all of Scripture warns against.
“Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.” (Revelation 2:20)

And of course bro Anton is totally correct and what Greg and others are advocating for is Ecumenism which, totally ironically, is profaning the sacred and the Holy, the very charge they are leveling at others. So, in the interests of clarity Greg, since bro Anton has corrected your erroneous view, can you say that for instance, Catholicism is not part of the Body of Christ? I know Mike Bickle would not say that, I know the Kansas city prophets would not say that and neither many of the charismatic organizations. What say you?.........bro Frank

I am part of a local body of believers whom the lord is building as a local body of Christ in a city in USA. As I work more in the body doing my part which the Lord has shown me, I have also developed great respect for other churches. I may not agree with them doctrinally nor will I be willing to be part of their meetings, but I have respect for them.

It is like when you start raising kids, you will understand and respect others who have wayward kids. You will stop judging them unrighteously. Same way when you play your part in building local body of Christ, there will be a concern for those who are doing a similar job in the light that the Lord has given them. They may not have the light that I have about Church hence they build with hay and straw. But it is for the Lord to reveal the quality of their work by fire. It is not my job. I have to make sure I build using precious things which will stand fire.

But to criticize other churches when you do nothing to build a local body of believers in your locality is a lazy criticism. Such people will never grow spiritually and will be bringing destruction upon themselves.

_________________
Sreeram

It cannot be substantiated from Scripture that God's people are to follow leadership even when that leadership is in error.

Christ commended the Ephesian church for having "tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars..."

So it is not wrong to do this. Neither is it wrong to withdraw from established church authority when that authority is no longer leading in the ways of the Lord. Of course there are always some who are rebellious and will submit to no authority but themselves. But by far the most who withdraw are not being rebellious; they are sheep seeking to hear and be faithful to the voice of their Shepherd.

I recommend Feed My Sheep, Chapter Two, by George Warnock on this matter. Well worth reading.


http://www.georgewarnock.com/feed2.html

_________________
Allan Halton

Good word bro Allan, here is a quote from George Warnock...............

"In times of spiritual crisis in the Church, when the people of God are being shaken concerning their relationship to established institutions within the Church structure, there is always a tightening of the strings of leadership in an attempt to keep the ecclesiastical systems from falling apart. This seems to be what is happening today, and we are persuaded that this present emphasis on Church leadership and Church structure indicates a certain fear that ecclesiastical hierarchies are being shaken. This fear is well founded, for the time is upon us when judgment must begin "at the House of God" and God always begins with the "ancient men"... the elders, and the leaders, when He begins to judge His Sanctuary. (See Ezekiel 9:6; 1 Peter 4:17). It is the shepherds, not the sheep, that trample down the meadows and foul the waters with their feet. It is the "priests of the LORD" that God calls upon to "weep between the porch and the altar," and their concern is not: "Let the sheep learn to follow me..." but rather, "Spare Thy people, O LORD, and give not thine heritage a reproach unto the heathen, that the heathen should rule over them..."

The church called Church of the Resurrection just five minutes from my house is the largest Methodist church in the world. It has an estimated 24,000 members. Before the year is out they have announced they will be marrying gay people. The Church of England and the Church of Scotland now support gay marriage. The local Presbyterian church has begun to preach that there is more than one way to heaven. I could go on, but Chan and Greg and others fully support the Methodist church and would not criticize it, given what they have just shared. The truth is the major denominations around the world have fallen away in this gross heretical teaching. Whitfield sent out a circular letter claiming almost all of the clergy of the church of England knew nothing of the new birth. Not only did God not destroy him, he used him mightily. Ravenhill claimed that in his opinion only 7% of professing believers were saved. So, he is condemning 93% of professing believers, under Chan and Greg's thinking, he was in danger of being killed by God. Paul Washer, every saint who has ever criticized Roman Catholics, JW and Mormons, all condemned because of "unity." There can be no unity without truth. Unity for unitie's sake is nothing more than Ecumenicalism and humanism..........bro Frank

Much fear indeed............bro Frank

Here is a comment by an Eric Tozzi at Francis Chan's message. I say Amen to it:

"Pastor Chan, I took your advice from one of your previous messages--to test everything, even things you say from the pulpit, and carefully compare them to God's Word. In so doing I read not only the verses you mentioned in 1 Corinthians 3, but the entire chapter, and the entire book. And in reading those verses 16, 17 and ALL THE OTHER verses around them in the entire chapter and book, it is very clear that what Paul the Apostle was talking about were false teachers bringing false doctrine into the Church and thus sowing corruption and immorality that in turn divided the church. Calling out false doctrine is not the same as gossip, not by a long shot. Unity that is anchored in false or even faulty doctrine, is not true unity. Ken Copeland, who is a certifiable false teacher, wants unity with Pope Francis and the Catholic church and calls the Reformation a "church split" and rebellion. Should I listen and submit to him who refers to himself as "i am too," just for the sake of unity? It really breaks my heart to say this because some of your previous messages were so on point. But this is totally out of context. I want to thank you, however for your advice about testing everything I hear next to God's Word. Otherwise I may have been deceived and thought what you preached in this particular sermon was accurate. I see many, many others with similar comments about the context of the scripture you're referencing. Will you please consider the possibility that there is validity to our concerns? I do hope so."

_________________
Allan Halton

I see good points on both sides here.

I used to be more divisive in the past than I am now. Case in point, I used to believe that anyone who holds to annihilationism, universalism, or open theism must not be saved, but I've now come to be more accepting of Christians who may hold to those views though I disagree with them. I used to be quicker to call down fire and brimstone on Christians with whom I disagree doctrinally. I believe this change of perspective is due to the Lord’s work of refining me and exhorting me to be more gracious and accepting of fellow believers.

Though I do not personally endorse Roman Catholic teachings or ministries, I do believe there are many true believers involved in that system at this time; I’ve come to a place where it seems undeniable to me. It does seem that many Roman Catholics in recent times have been highly influenced by Protestant Evangelical beliefs and practices (though there are still multitudes who are still foolishly and ignorantly caught up in idolatrous falsehood and works-righteousness). As an official, religious system I still see it as a false and apostate system, but I’m not as quick to cast all Roman Catholics out of the kingdom as before.

The same would go for certain other groups with whom I disagree doctrinally; for example, groups such as NAR followers and 7th Day Adventists. I would draw the line with certain other aberrant groups such as Mormons and JWs because imo they blatantly teach and promote another Jesus. I believe groups like RC, Adventists and NAR have enough of the truth to allow true believers to be involved therein and remain there; though I’d hope and pray they don’t remain there because I believe certain of their doctrines are harmful to one degree or another; I would try to lovingly and respectfully reason with them concerning those things, without being quick to pronounce them unsaved.

I personally don’t think I’d be able to fellowship in an NAR church due to certain doctrines and practices with which I strongly disagree. But I wouldn’t go so far as too call Francis Chan out for preaching at such churches. I would fellowship with Chan himself, being careful not to ascribe to him guilt by association. From being aware of Chan’s beliefs over the years, I know he disagrees with some of the things that are taught there, but I suppose he’s trying to be a good influence there and to be a peace maker, though some see it as complete compromise on Chan’s part.

I know of one sister on Facebook who would spend much of her time trying to expose the NAR, Hillsong and other groups with whom she disagreed; she seemed to have a highly critical spirit; I used to be like that, but I now realize it wasn’t a good place for me to be spiritually; it caused me to be bitter and to have a constant negative outlook.

Having said all that, I do also understand the concern for remaining undefiled by false teachings and practices. There is a time to speak out against false doctrine and false religious authority, and it does seem biblically warranted to do so publicly at times and not just privately.

In some ways, this thread and debate seems to go back to the old “Institutional Church vs House Church” debate (though it’s not exclusively about that). I’ve come to realize it doesn’t matter that much whether we meet in a home or a building. Though I’d personally prefer meeting in homes for the most part, it’s not a hill to die on for me anymore as it was at one time. I say it doesn’t matter “that much” because I do believe certain church settings (such as in mega churches) do hinder authentic body life if one is not proactive in seeking out closer fellowship with other believers.

Much of the time both parties, both those who believe in meeting in buildings (or being part of denominations) and those who don’t, are guilty of putting down and dividing from those they disagree with in this regard.

May we seek unity in the essentials which unite us as Christ’s Body.

_________________
Oracio

Excellent answer by Eric Tozzi, he says it much better than me.................bro Frank

I appreciate the things that both of you guys write about, Greg and Frank. I wish you could post your writings more on here Greg. As others are able to do.
David

_________________
David Keel