Study of Denomintions 03/28/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Homosexual Evangelists
There are many denominations today that not only accept practicing homosexuals into their groups but are even allowing them to perform the functions of the evangelist. Some are even installing homosexuals as bishops! What do the Scriptures say about homosexuals and evangelism?

The Scriptures are silent about homosexuals evangelizing, and this is not surprising since the Scriptures teach clearly that homosexuality is a sin in Romans 1:27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 :

and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.


Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Therefore, we can see that the homosexual lifestyle is condemned as sinful in the Scriptures, and we cannot expect that one who is flagrantly violating God's Word would be vested with the authority to teach it or to shepherd God's flock!

Argument: Romans 1:27 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 denounce the promiscuous homosexual lifestyle; those homosexuals living in a monogamous relationship are not condemned in these passages!

Answer: This type of distinction is not even seen in the text. There are no words spoken by Paul that condemn a "promiscuous" homosexual lifestyle as opposed to a "monogamous" homosexual lifestyle-- Paul condemns the act of homosexuality itself. Therefore, attempting to make a distinction such as this has no merit within the pages of the New Testament.

Argument: But these homosexuals in these committed monogamous relationships have love--and love cannot be wrong!

Answer: This type of answer comes from a mentality foreign to the Scriptures but common in America, where almost anything is possible in the name of "love". The Scriptures distinguish between different forms of love, however, and the Scriptures do not teach that every form of love is justified.

Furthermore, the idea of "love" justifying what God has called sin is not universally applied. Perhaps there is a man who feels that he has just "too much love" for just one woman and needs to "love" two or more, despite the fact that he is only married to one and the other relationships are adulterous! Are his actions of unfaithfulness justifiable because he has so much "love?" By no means! Just because there is a feeling of "love" between two individuals does not mean that their actions are justified by the New Testament. Therefore, homosexuality is still a sin, and thus no one who performs homosexuality can be an evangelist for Christ.

Priests

Some denominations have individuals who are deemed as priests, who fulfill various duties. Is this a Scriptural designation?

In the New Testament, we do not see anyone specifically being referred to as a priest. In fact, Peter says that we are all priests in 1 Peter 2:5 and 9 :

Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.


But ye are a elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that ye may show forth the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.


The only other priest we are told of is the High Priest, who is Christ Jesus (Hebrews 7). All Christians, therefore, represent a priesthood of believers under the High Priest Jesus Christ, who is of the order of Melchizedek.

Ordination

Many denominations go through the process of "ordaining" their evangelists and ministers. Is this a Scriptural practice?

We do not see anyone being "ordained" in the New Testament. Often we will see individuals being given the "laying on of hands," but this appears to be a blessing more than an ordination. In the New Testament, Christians evangelized without needing any special ordination or license. They would only be accepted if they taught the plain truth of Scripture, if the brethren were noble minded ( Acts 17:11 ).

The idea of "ordination", therefore, is not explicitly established in the New Testament, and the idea of evangelists being accredited as such by some form of governing authority, be it a denominational council or center of education, is foreign to the Scriptures.

Synods, Councils, Conventions, and Other Meetings

Many denominations today have meetings wherein representatives of many geographical areas and/or congregations come together at some location to discuss issues within their denomination, and very often decisions will be made at these meetings about where the denomination will stand doctrinally. These meetings have many names in different denominations, including synods, councils, and conventions. Are these types of meetings seen as a function of the church of the New Testament?

When we read the New Testament, we see that there is no such "church cooperation," for every local congregation in the New Testament is autonomous (i.e. making decisions for itself). We see this because the "governing" body of the church, a plurality of elders, was instituted at the level of the local church (cf. Philippians 1:1 , Titus 1:5 ). We do not see any form of governing body beyond the local church.

Many will turn to the council of Acts 15, however, to attempt to justify their synods, councils, meetings, etc., by saying that in this instance the "church universal" met to discuss doctrine. Let us examine Acts 15 to see if this is so.

We see in Acts 15:2-6 the origin of this meeting:

And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and questioning with them, the brethren appointed that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. They therefore, being brought on their way by the church, passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church and the apostles and the elders, and they rehearsed all things that God had done with them. But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed, saying, "It is needful to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses."
And the apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider of this matter.


While Paul and Barnabas were certainly commissioned by the church in Antioch to discuss this matter with the other Apostles and the elders in Jerusalem, we see that Paul and Barnabas were certainly not the "delegation" from Antioch, but rather represented themselves. The council was comprised, as seen in verse six, of the Apostles and the elders in Jerusalem. We do not see any evidence that anyone else was involved with this meeting. It was natural for the meeting to be held in Jerusalem because such was the origin of the dispute: men from Judea had come to Antioch and had brought this teaching, and therefore it should be in Judea that the matter be settled (cf. Acts 15:1 ). The situation, then, regards persons somewhat associated with one local church visiting another local church to discuss a matter of doctrine perpetuated by members of that latter church.

We see in Acts 15:23 , 2 8 the results of this meeting:

and they wrote thus by them, The apostles and the elders, brethren, unto the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greeting...For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things.


We see here that the decision was made with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and made specifically by the Holy Spirit, the Apostles, and the elders of Jerusalem.

Now, let us return to the question: does the meeting of Acts 15 justify the modern synods, councils, and conventions of denominations today? By no means! The meeting in Acts 15 consisted of the church of Jerusalem and the Apostles-- not delegations from all churches that existed at that time. The decisions made were made on the basis of the determination of the Holy Spirit and the approval of the Apostles and the elders of the church in Jerusalem, not by a majority vote of all members present. Therefore, it is evident that the meeting in Jerusalem seen in Acts 15 cannot justify the modern synods, councils, conventions, etc. of modern denominations.

It may be argued by some of these denominations that their councils and synods are guided by the Holy Spirit and are convened by the successors of the Apostles. The difficulty with this argument is that the meeting in Acts 15 was still not a meeting of all the "bishops" of the region, but only of the church of Jerusalem along with the Apostles. The belief of inspiration by the Holy Spirit and the belief of the bishopric still does not harmonize with Acts 15. Therefore, we may see that such synods, councils, conventions, and so forth are not practices performed in the New Testament.

Study of Denomintions 03/21/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

The Deacon

The deacon is a servant; this is the exact definition of its Greek word, diakonos. Nowhere in the New Testament do we see that the position of the deacon is vested with any authority, nor is it called a position for "elders in training." We must remember this when we consider the position of the deacon.

Deacons Without Elders?

There are some who believe that churches may have deacons even if there are no men qualified to be elders. The Scriptures never speak of any such situation; nevertheless, considering that those serving in the office of a deacon are only mentioned in the context of elders, we have no reason to conclude that God has authorized any church to have deacons without elders. As long as the men of the congregation are willing to perform the tasks that are required for the church to go on, there should be no need for an official position.

Female Deacons [Deaconesses]

Some assert that females can be deacons, citing the example of Phoebe in Romans 16:1 :
1. I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church that is at Cenchreae.


In some translations, she is called a "deaconess." Does this mean that she holds the office of the deacon?

It must be first stated that the Greek term diakonos, or its feminine counterpart, diakona, means literally "a servant." As with the term "elder" (Greek presbuteros), that means either one serving in the office of an elder ( Acts 14:23 ) or simply one who is an old man ( 1 Timothy 5:1 ), so "deacon" can refer to either to one serving in the office of a deacon ( 1 Timothy 3:8-10 , 12 ), or simply as a servant. The term diakona in Romans 16:1 do not describe the office of the deacon, but simply the idea that Phoebeis a servant. This also is the same idea in Acts 6:1-6 , when Stephen and the others are appointed as servants to assist the widows in need. We can determine this to be true because Phoebe, and perhaps Stephen et al, meet the qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:8-13 :
2. Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as deacons, if they be blameless. Women in like manner must be grave, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.


We see that a deacon must be the husband of one wife, and the Greek term is specific for "wife," gunaikes. Therefore, Phoebe cannot be one who holds the position of a deacon, for she surely cannot be the husband of one wife. Furthermore, we know nothing of the families of Stephen et al; even if they perhaps met these qualifications, these men were given a certain task at a certain time for a certain purpose, and nothing in the New Testament associates them with the office of the deacon described later.

We can see, therefore, that while diakonos or a similar term is used often to describe servants of the church, not every use of diakonos refers to one holding the office of a deacon.

Female Elders

Some denominations have elders or other similar persons vested with authority who are female. Does such a practice originate in the New Testament?

Paul writes to Timothy the following in 1 Timothy 2:12 :
3. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness.


This, along with the requirement that the elder be the "husband of one wife" in 1 Timothy 3:2 , demonstrate that elders can only be men.

Female Evangelists

There are many denominations today (and the list of denominations grows ever longer) who now teach that women may perform the same evangelistic duties as men. Are these teachings in harmony with the Scriptures?

We do see that females were present in the work of evangelism, as seen with the example of Priscilla in Acts 18:26 :
4. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more accurately.


We have no reason to doubt that Priscilla took on some form of assistance in teaching Apollos, but it is also notable to see that her husband Aquila was also present.

We must always strive diligently to maintain the harmony of the Scriptures, and there is no exception when speaking concerning female evangelists. We have seen in 1 Timothy 2:12 above that a woman is not to have any form of dominion over a man, and this must be considered in our discussion: a woman may teach and preach to other women, certainly, and perhaps even a man according to the example of Priscilla and Aquila, but we do not see any evidence from the Scriptures that any woman took it upon herself to preach to a man. While women can assist in teaching the Gospel, women would be contradicting Paul's exhortation for women to not teach and usurp authority over men if they were to fulfill the responsibilities of evangelists to exhort and preach.

Argument: Junia was a female and she was counted among the Apostles.

Answer: We read about Junia in Romans 16:7 :
5. Salute Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also have been in Christ before me.


We see that "Junias" (Junia) was "of note" among the Apostles; while it is possible that they were considered "apostles," this need not be so. It is just as possible that they were simply well-respected by the Apostles. Even if they are to be considered "apostles", the term is just like "elder" and "deacon" in that it can refer to a specific office or simply as a term referring to a person having been "sent out". Nevertheless, this verse does not demonstrate that Junia herself was an Apostle or taught men: she is mentioned along with Andronicus, who is most probably her husband, and they probably worked together in the same manner as Aquila and Priscilla did. Therefore, there is no conclusive evidence that Junia was an Apostle or a servant of Christ different in any way from Priscilla.

Homosexual Evangelists

Study of Denomintions 03/14/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Positions of Authority


Statement of Belief
The Scriptures teach that elders were appointed in the churches,
And when they had appointed for them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they had believed who were instructed to oversee their church (Acts 14:23 ),

"Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of God which he purchased with his own blood" ( Acts 20:28 ),


and that they should meet certain qualifications,

Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, soberminded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil ( 1 Timothy 3:1-7 ).


Deacons were also appointed in the churches and were expected to conform to certain qualifications,

Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as deacons, if they be blameless...Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus, ( 1 Timothy 3:8-10 , 12-13 ).

Also we must understand silence is not the way to establish authority. Ex. “If does not say no that means yes”. That is wrong, but this is correct: Ex. We can use a hammer to build the ark but we can not use a mechanical instrument to worship God.

In Rom 4:15 (for law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. [NASU]), Paul uses a theoretical truth to get the Roman brethren to consider his point. The theoretical truth is that God has never left mankind without law by which he is to regulate his actions with other men or with God Himself. Therefore, this is not a declaration of such a condition ever existing but is instead, a truth that would exist only if such were the actual circumstance. Thus, since there has never been any occasion where man has been without law, such is not applicable where God reigns. He has always given man those statutes that He deems necessary.

How does this relate to men going beyond what God has stated? God's clear dominion dictates that He is the Lawgiver. This means that, even where some particular statute seems to be absent, such as a hammer, the number of or what emblems to be used for the Lord's Supper or the use of mechanical music in our singing, what God has ordained must be considered to be sufficient.

John addressed this principle in 2 John 1:9 (NASU): “Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son.”

It is a matter of whether or not God has spoken to a particular matter, not whether He has specifically forbidden anything. Since God has already spoken to the matter of the Lord's Supper, we have no liberty to expand upon what God has already spoken. We can neither add to nor take from His Word (Deu 4:2; 12:32; Pro 30:6, Rev 22:18-19).

Therefore, our question must be, "Has God already addressed this category of our behavior?" If He has, then we'd best listen to Him. If He has not, then we are at liberty to use our best judgment. That's the difference between doctrine (i.e., law) and opinion. I can only use my opinion (“think so”, “as I see it”, “I see nothing wrong”, “it does good”, etc.) if God has not spoken of the category (ex. tools, worship, work, or organization).

Sections
● Who is the Pastor?
● A Hierarchy of Bishops
● Elders Determining Doctrine?
● Widowed or Childless Elders?
● The Deacon
● Deacons Without Elders
● Female Deacons [Deaconesses]
● Female Elders
● Female Evangelists
● Homosexual Evangelists
● Priests
● Ordination
● Synods, Councils, Conventions, and Other Meetings


Who is the Pastor?
Many denominations today have one pastor or a staff of pastors having various functions who function as church officers and as evangelists/ministers in some form. Do we see that ministers are equivalent to pastors in the New Testament?

We have seen above in 1 Timothy 3:1-8 , Acts 14:23 , and Acts 20:28 , along with many other places, that the New Testament establishes an office for one called either an "elder" or a "bishop" (also translated "overseer"). Acts 20:28 demonstrates that the "elders" have been made "overseers" of the flock by God; this indicates that "elder" and "bishop/overseer" represent the same office. In Greek, the terms involved are episcopos for "bishop" and presbuteros for "elder". The former term is used above in 1 Timothy 3:1 ; the latter term, most often used to refer to this position, is used in Titus 1:5 and 1 Peter 5:1 , among others.
The term "pastor" is derived from the Greek poimon, which is literally a "shepherd." We understand from Acts 20:28 that the elders are to be shepherds of the flock. Therefore, we can also see that this term refers to the elder or the overseer. This term is not used in the New Testament to refer to one who is an evangelist or minister.

We can thus see that the Scriptures teach that there are persons charged to shepherd God's flock, having met certain qualifications. These individuals are called elders, overseers, bishops, presbyters, shepherds, and pastors. We do not see in the New Testament anyone who is simply an evangelist referred to as one of these elders (or pastors). Now, an evangelist can be an elder if he is sufficiently qualified; Peter was one, as seen in 1 Peter 5:1 :
The elders therefore among you I exhort, who am a fellow-elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, who am also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed.

An evangelist is not automatically a pastor/elder on account of his position; he must reach the same qualifications as any other elder. The only authority that an evangelist has is the ability to appoint elders, as seen in Titus 1:5 :
For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge.

Therefore, using the term "pastor" to refer to any evangelist is not in harmony with God's concept of offices within the church.

A Hierarchy of Bishops

Some denominations teach that the church should be overseen by bishops, with one bishop presiding over a set of churches. Those bishops tend to be overseen by an archbishop, who himself oversees a large geographic area. In some instances, there are even higher authorities. Do we see such a hierarchy in the New Testament?

There is no example in the New Testament of any positions of authority existing over more than one church. Furthermore, as far as we are able to see from the Scriptures, each church had a plurality of elders, not just one over many, as seen in Philippians 1:1:
Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons.

Beyond the elders in the local congregation, the only presently living authority is the head of the Body, Christ Jesus:
...and Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the savior of the body, (Ephesians 5:23 ).

We also should heed the authority of the Apostles of old (Matthew 18:18 , Ephesians 4:11) through their instruction in God's Word.

Furthermore, some of these denominations have bishops that do not even conform to the New Testament standards, for they are required by their denominations to be unmarried. Paul, however, speaks to the contrary when discussing the qualifications of elders in 1 Timothy 3:2 , 4-5:
...the husband of one wife...one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

It is clear that the bishop/overseer (elder/presbyter/pastor) must have a wife and a family so that his ability to effectively shepherd the church of Christ is made evident.

The hierarchical concept of authority was a digression from New Testament teaching, beginning with one "bishop" over "presbyters" over a congregation, then digressing to having a bishop over other bishops in a larger metropolitan area, which then developed into the various systems seen today. We have seen that such was not God's intention in the New Testament for the oversight of His church.

Elders Determining Doctrine?

There are some that teach today that elders have the responsibility to determine doctrine through their examination of the Scriptures. Do the Scriptures teach this?

When we read in the Scriptures concerning the duties of elders, we see nothing of them being told specifically to determine doctrine or to interpret Scripture as an authority for a congregation. We are told, in fact, that we are all to examine ourselves and our beliefs in 2 Corinthians 13:5 :
Try your own selves, whether ye are in the faith; prove your own selves. Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in you? Unless indeed ye be reprobate?

Paul further states in 2 Timothy 2:15 that we must be diligent to make sure we are handling God's Word properly:
Give diligence to present thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth.

The elders of a congregation are bound just as the members themselves are to examine themselves according to the Word of God and to make sure that their doctrines conform to the word of truth.

The only persons in the New Testament church vested with the ability to establish doctrine are the Apostles, and indeed whatever they established had been previously established by God in Heaven, as is made clear in a proper translation of Matthew 18:18 (seen here in the NASU):
"Truly I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."


We have no indication that this authority was transferred to anyone else. We can see, then, that elders have no authority to establish doctrine. As shepherds of the flock they perhaps will be called upon to establish a practice of the local congregation in regards to a matter of liberty, and such is within their right; to establish any such thing as doctrine, however, has not been given to them.

Widowed or Childless Elders?

Some have argued that an elder who is widowed or who loses his children in some way or another can still serve as an elder, especially since the death of his wife and/or children is something beyond his control and does not speak against his character. Is this idea and reasoning acceptable in the Scriptures?

When we look at the qualifications of elders in 1 Timothy 3:1-8 and Titus 1:5-7 , the Greek is very specific about the nature of those qualifications. As Paul begins the listing of qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:2 , he begins by saying, quite literally, "it is necessary for the overseer to be...". The verb "to be" here is the Greek einai, which is a present active infinitive. The present tense, especially in an infinitive, carries with it a "progressive" or "repeated" aspect. An expanded, but no less accurate, translation would be "it is necessary for the overseer to be being," or "to continually be". Paul, therefore, specifically charges that elders continually be qualified. An elder, therefore, must continually be the husband of one wife, and must continually have faithful children.

While it is lamentable when good elders, by no fault of their own, are no longer qualified, we must remember one of the preeminent qualifications: an elder is to be above reproach. The existence and good standing of an elder's wife and children demonstrate that he is above reproach; without such, there are many aspects of the work of the elder that would be nearly impossible to do, and questions could be raised about his competence in shepherding. It is perhaps for this reason that Paul requires that elders continually meet the qualifications; regardless, the Scriptures are clear that any elder who is widowed or becomes childless or whose children fall away is no longer qualified for that position.

Study of Denomintions 03/07/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

The Salvation Army : The Salvation Army was established by William Booth in England in 1865 as essentially a modified form of Wesleyan Methodism, focusing on the need for benevolence while literalizing the metaphors in the Bible concerning "military" organization within the church.

Pentecostalism/The Charismatic Movement : Pentecostalism originated in the beginning of the twentieth century from the Wesleyan Holiness movement of the nineteenth. It was believed in 1901 that a woman received the "baptism of the Holy Spirit," because of which she supposedly spoke in tongues and demonstrating the gifts of the Holy Spirit as seen in the time of the Apostles. In 1904 this movement took off in Los Angeles with a revival in a building on Azusa Street, and many individuals were strongly impacted by the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" that occurred there. Many denominations, such as the Church of God in Christ (COGIC), the Assemblies of God, many of the Churches of God, and others began around this time because of these events.

Some of these Pentecostals began to believe around 1914 that baptism ought to be administered in the name of Jesus alone, since all of the features of God may be found in Christ alone. These individuals became known as the Oneness Pentecostals, and the United Pentecostal Church and some other groups are a part of this movement.

Beginning in the 1950s and 1960s, many members of other denominations began seeking the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" and many found it, and began to preach the ability to have the gifts in their own denominations. This was to be known as the Charismatic Movement, from the Greek word charis, meaning "gift."

Finally, in the later years of the twentieth century, many televangelists and others began to synthesize the gifts of the Holy Spirit with standard Evangelical-type theology, creating the "third wave" of Pentecostalism. This is seen especially with the proliferation of televangelism and also many churches such as the Vineyard Association of Churches.

International Church of Christ : Also known as the Boston Movement or the Crossroads Movement, the International Church of Christ began with Kip McKean, who, in 1979, established a congregation near Boston, MA, based upon his teachings, which were a combination of the doctrines of the Crossroads movement (which taught the idea of "discipling") and his own beliefs. Originally tenuously accepted by other congregations of churches of Christ, McKean's doctrines soon demonstrated themselves to be too far to be accepted by other congregations. The ICOC has gone through significant tumult since 2002 after the dissolution of the head leadership and the departure of Kip McKean; he has recently begun the "Portland Movement," attempting to return to the original concepts within the ICOC. These churches may go by the name "International Church of Christ" or "International Christian Church."

Movements
During the twentieth and twenty-first centuries we have seen a large growth in movement-based Christianity. The popularity of ecumenism in this postmodern environment has led many to cross denominational boundaries and establish trans-denominational movements that are very popular.

Evangelicalism : The Evangelical movement finds its origins in the eighteenth century with the impetus to go out and promote the Gospel (or evangelize) that was shared by many denominations. Wesleyanism, Baptists, some Calvinists, and some Anglicans initially took part. The movement has continued to the present day. The Evangelical movement is based mostly on a "faith only" belief system, with most believing in some form of the "once saved, always saved" doctrine. Evangelicals tend to be dispensational/premillennial in eschatology, and at different times have been instruments for progress and conservatism in politics.

Ecumenism : The ecumenical movement was first organized in 1910 at the International Missionary Conference in Edinburgh, Scotland. The movement attempts to unify divergent Christian denominations by emphasizing shared beliefs while minimizing differences. The movement is best manifest in the World Council of Churches and the National Council of Churches, organizations devoted to inter-denominational dialogue and action. As postmodernism and relativism have grown in popularity in the past fifty years, so more and more denominations are becoming a part of the ecumenical movement.

Fundamentalism : Fundamentalism is a movement within Evangelicalism that began in the late nineteenth century as a reaction to the "liberal" tendencies in many Protestant denominations that undermined confidence in the inspiration of the Bible. Other evangelicals and fundamentalists parted ways in the 1940s; today, fundamentalism is marked by passionate defenses of the perceived "fundamentals" of the faith, often involving as much tradition as it does substantive Biblical truth.

The Community Church Movement : Community churches are first seen explicitly in the 1920s, although financial necessity may have compelled various members of denominations in small villages to meet together in times past. The Community Church movement is a consequence of the evangelical and ecumenical movements: if denominational boundaries are not going to be considered important anymore, the impetus is there to have an organization without any such denominational affiliation, and therefore we have community churches. While community churches profess having no denomination, the doctrines of denominations, particularly those present within the Evangelical movement, abound.

The House Church Movement: While Christians have met in houses since the beginning (cf. Philemon 1:2), and there is no stigma to meeting in houses per se, in the latter part of the twentieth century there has been a movement to rid churches of many of the vestiges of traditionalism, and many such persons have established "house churches". The difficulties with such movements are not in meeting in houses per se, but the other doctrines that tend to go with such groups.

The Megachurch Movement : While there have been many churches of large size before the modern day, beginning in the 1950s, America and other "Christianized" countries saw the emergence of very large churches having many thousands of members, now called "megachurches". Half of existing megachurches are not affiliated with a particular denomination but have connections to the Evangelical and Charismatic movements. Many megachurches develop as cults of personalities surrounding popular preachers. Megachurches tend to emphasize services heavily influenced by modern forms of entertainment and focus on self-empowerment through small groups and inspirational literature. Megachurches are also known for their large buildings, support groups, coffeehouses, bookstores, and other forms of marketing and materialism.

Emergism : The twenty-first century has seen the birth of the emergent movement, a diverse group of individuals, mostly of the Evangelical movement, who seek to communicate to the postmodern world using postmodern conceptualizations of Christianity. While the members of the movement would like to bridge the divide between "liberal" and "conservative" branches of Protestantism, there is much concern regarding their wholehearted embrace of postmodernism and its ideals.

Conclusion
We have now reached the present time and can see, if only quickly and without exhaustive detail, the development of the denominations and movements that we currently see in the "Christian" world today. The path is difficult to determine and very confusing, yet we can see that the majority of these denominations were established on the basis of new ideas of men and those who would follow them. The rest of the study will focus on the ideas and doctrines which are in harmony with the teachings of the Scriptures.

Positions of Authority


Statement of Belief
The Scriptures teach that elders were appointed in the churches,
And when they had appointed for them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they had believed who were instructed to oversee their church ( Acts 14:23 ),

"Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of God which he purchased with his own blood" ( Acts 20:28 ),


and that they should meet certain qualifications,

Faithful is the saying, If a man seeketh the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. The bishop therefore must be without reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, soberminded, orderly, given to hospitality, apt to teach; no brawler, no striker; but gentle, not contentious, no lover of money; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (but if a man knoweth not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) not a novice, lest being puffed up he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have good testimony from them that are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil ( 1 Timothy 3:1-7 ).


Deacons were also appointed in the churches and were expected to conform to certain qualifications,

Deacons in like manner must be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them serve as deacons, if they be blameless...Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have served well as deacons gain to themselves a good standing, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus, ( 1 Timothy 3:8-10 , 12-13 ).

Sections

● Who is the Pastor?
● A Hierarchy of Bishops
● Elders Determining Doctrine?
● Widowed or Childless Elders?
● The Deacon
● Deacons Without Elders
● Female Deacons [Deaconesses]
● Female Elders
● Female Evangelists
● Homosexual Evangelists
● Priests
● Ordination
● Synods, Councils, Conventions, and Other Meetings


Who is the Pastor?

Study of Denomintions 02/28/2010

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Pietism . Pietism is a movement that began within the Lutheran church in Germany in the seventeenth century. The members of this group desired to have a deeper personal faith as opposed to the often cold liturgical faith of the Lutheran establishment. Although many pietists remained within the Lutheran fold, many others branched out and founded churches of their own. The Moravian Brethren are the supposed founders of the movement, dating back to the time of Jan Hus in the 1450s, although it is possible that the Hussites adopted the Pietist philosopies in the seventeenth century. The Church of the Brethren, the Brethren in Christ, and many other churches came out of this Pietist movement. There is also a group of Pietists that combined with some Mennonites, known as the Mennonite Brethren.

Wesleyanism . Wesleyanism derives from John and Charles Wesley, members of the Anglican church. In 1729, they performed missionary work in America, and on the trip back to England, John learned of the faith of the Moravian Brethren. When back in England, the brothers founded a Methodist society and began to speak about the need of personal faith, sanctification, and "personal holiness," the continual development of maturity in Christian faith. The brothers desired to preach the need for personal faith within the Church of England attempting to reform it. This worked well in England, but when the message spread to America, the Methodists split off from the Church of England and formed their own church. Wesleyan holiness theology was very persuasive in nineteenth century America, and many "holiness churches" were founded. Many of these churches consolidated in the twentieth century to form the Church of the Nazarene.

Phase IV: 1800 to the Present
The nineteenth century saw the rise of America as a power in the world, the first government founded on the principles of freedom. The freedom of religion enjoyed in America led to a vast number of new ideas and thus divisions.

Plymouth Brethren : The Plymouth Brethren began in 1827 in Ireland by four individuals who did not agree with the denominational attitudes of the "churches" around them and thus worshiped by themselves. This mentality spread, and the group (who simply are known to each other as the Brethren) had a large following in the town of Plymouth in England, and thus received their name. They are notable for dispensational/premillennial belief system that would pervade much of nineteenth century American Christianity along with the modern Evangelical movement.

The Restoration Movement : The Restoration Movement fully began in the 1820s in America by the preaching of Thomas and Alexander Campbell and Barton Stone. These men recognized that denominations had departed from the message of the Scriptures with their creeds and doctrines and therefore desired to return to the faith of the Apostles. To this end, the Campbells established the Disciples of Christ and Stone the Christian Church. These two groups soon merged, forming the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ). In the 1920s, as a response to what was viewed as growing liberalism in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) churches, many such churches split off and became independent Christian Churches.

By the end of the nineteenth century, many within the Restoration Movement began to question some of the doctrines of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), especially regarding missionary societies and instrumental churches, and these Christians thus returned to the faith of the Apostles as given in the New Testament and took on the description of the Churches of Christ. Unfortunately, in the middle of the twentieth century, many such churches reverted to many doctrines of denominations, and many divisions have occurred as a result.

Mormonism : Officially the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS), Mormonism began with Joseph Smith, who claimed to receive a special vision in upper New York state in the 1820s, but the official beginning of the denomination was in 1830. He supposedly found plates written in "Reformed Egyptian" and tools by which to translate these plates. The resulting work was the Book of Mormon, used as additional Scripture by the LDS. Smith would later write other works, The Pearl of Great Price and The Doctrines and Covenants. The LDS believe in continuing revelation through their leaders; however, at the death of Joseph Smith and the declaration of Brigham Young as President, many Mormons departed from that denomination and established groups based either solely on the works of Smith or on the works of Smith combined with revelation given to their leaders. The most significant such group is the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (RLDS), now known as the Community of Christ, which uses only the texts of Smith.

Seventh-Day Adventism : The Seventh-Day Adventists began with some of those deemed Millerites, individuals who believed in the prophecies of William Miller who believed the world would end in 1844. When 1844 came and went, many deemed this the Great Disappointment; one such adherent, Ellen White, believed that she was given a prophetic gift and urged men and women to still prepare for the second coming of Christ (the Second Advent). Seventh-Day Adventism is also known for holding to many portions of the Law of Moses, including the Sabbath and dietary restrictions.

Christian Science : Beginning in the 1860s, a woman named Mary Baker Eddy believed that she was having revelations of truths kept silent since the Apostles concerning the illusion of reality and the superiority of "Mind" and spirit. Her work, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, posited that pain, illness, and even reality are merely mental conditions and that through correct discipline and training, one could control illness and disease. Through these beliefs she established "Christian Science" and the "Church of Christ, Scientist".

Jehovah's Witnesses : Jehovah's Witnesses (officially the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society) originate around 1872 with Charles Taze Russell, who created the Watchtower Society to promote his beliefs. They derive their name from their practice of witnessing to others concerning the power in the "name" of God, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) incorrectly translated as "Jehovah". The New World Translation of the Scriptures was made by the Jehovah's Witnesses to support their doctrines concerning the name of God, the lesser divinity of Jesus Christ, the lack of person of the Holy Spirit, and the perpetual existence of the earth.

The Salvation Army :