Getting the "Left foot of fellowship" over plural marriage

[Hugh McBryde]

Well, it's a left handed example, but:

Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying; 'The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not." (Matthew 23)

He goes on to say how it is that they mess up:

For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, and love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi."

We have earthly authorities, this is clear and they are often unrighteous. Nevertheless we must submit to them. Also it says:

How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent?" (Romans 14)

It also shows that the believers continued to go to the very place that contained the authorities that condemned Christ.

And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch)." (Acts 5)

This they continued to do, until the temple was destroyed.

I don't want to go into long explanation but we receive the word FROM someone, that someone from someone else. Even the church in Rome, that Paul longs to go to that was not attributed to any work of any apostle, but to believers who dwelt in Rome, sought and submitted to the council in Jerusalem. I think it's more appropriate to ask when it was that we received the notion that we could simply go off on our own?

Denominations are simply the unfortunate aftermath of error and the fortunate aftermath of spreading the Gospel to all nations. Some divide over doctrinal errors, such as the Sadducees and Pharisees, but would you have the Pharisees submit to the error that there was no resurrection? Some divide over distance and borders as eventually the early church did after Jerusalem fell and the Roman Empire divided into districts. From this we have Coptics and other denominations such as the "Orthodox" and also the Roman Catholics.

 

[Hugh McBryde]

Well, let me know which "Bible Believing" denomination is tolerant of open advocacy/practice of polygyny, and I'll give them a shot.

 

[CecilW]

I'm still wondering where the verse is that says we gotta belong to a denomination. I try to maintain my car the way I was taught, but hardly consider myself a member of the Chevy denomination. Maserati either.

Paying attention to wise the teachings rather than the example of teachers who don't practice the ideal they preach doesn't constitute holding myself subordinate to their authority, in my book.

I still attend the Seventh-day Adventist church, as I approve of most of their theology,and welcome both fellowship and the corporate worship experience (as well as the home group fellowship experience.) But I don't hold membership. While individual congregations have been very welcoming despite my PM beliefs openly stated to pastors and church boards, another congregation withdrew my membership in the organization. *shrug* Not my problem. I simply worship at one that's glad to have me.

I see the benefit of banding together to accomplish larger purposes -- places for corporate worship, publishing, educational institutions, mission work, etc. No problem with that. Nor, to some extent, with the huge horde of believers being divided into groups that share certain differing theological beliefs. (Perhaps God hasn't spoken in a thundering cloud from heaven to clarify some of these issues because HOW we deal with the issues, remaining in essential unity or enmity, is more important than being unanimous.)

But that doesn't in the least constitute holding myself subordinate to their authority except as to the functioning of the organization.

 

[Hugh McBryde]

Any church is a denomination of and by itself, or if it is associated with other churches in a ruling capacity, those churches form a denomination. I hear people say we don't need or shouldn't have denominations all the time, except that if they "aren't part of one," they actually are. Their own.

There isn't any specific command to be part of a denomination or the use of the word, but scripture uses "sect." Scripture denotes two sects of Judaism and the only sect of Judaism surviving among believers, is oddly, the Pharisees. Paul by the way continued to rather loudly proclaim that he STILL was a Pharisee, right up until the end of his ministry, long after his conversion. The early Christians are called a "sect," the "sect of the Nazarene" or of "that way," or "the way."

Like I said, there are two reasons to have sects/denominations. One good, one bad, and both unavoidable. The good one is in submission to governmental authorities. Churches organize along national lines, like it or not, even if they are only one church and a denomination of one body only or if they are more corporate like the Presbyterians. What national law permits generally governs what you can do as a church, within limits of course, and it may make the practice of one church group different than another. Paul says, "When in Rome."

The bad reason is someone makes a bad doctrine and you can't stay. My case is a case in point. As a Pharisee in the time of Christ, I would not have joined with Sadducees for unity as Sadducees had some very bad doctrines. No Sadducee by the way, is listed among the new believers, and they are said to have died out within about 200 years of Christ.

PS: I'd like to point out again, that the early churches were all under the authority of Jerusalem. Among other things as Jerusalem's agent, Paul directed certain actions to occur at the local church level, such as the tossing out of one member by the Corinthian church. We are commanded to fellowship so if you have to fellowship, and you can get thrown out of a church, and if a central authority can tell you to do it, you have a functioning denomination, right then and there. You as a believer must submit to their rule because you must go, and they can tell you whether or not they will let you go based on morals and doctrine.

You could argue that originally there was only one and that was best. Once someone makes another though, there is a choice and you have to pick one.

 

[Anonymous]

Denominations are necessary since men fell into error and as Mark is fond of saying, when that happens, we must "come out." I think we mean different things at least ever so slightly about "coming out," but even the apostles submitted up to a point to temple governors and authorities, and Christ even recommended it.

Yeah, I always kind of chuckle when I see that "come out of her" phrase, because few Believers seem to know what it is actually a reference to. It is a quote from Revelation.

Rev. 18:4-5: "And I heard another voice from the heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues. Because her sins have piled up to reach the heaven, and Elohim has remembered her unrighteousness."

Who is the "her" of this passage? The preceding verses identify her for us.

Rev. 18:2-3: "And he cried with a mighty voice, saying, "Babel the great is fallen, is fallen, and has become a dwelling place of demons, a haunt for every unclean spirit, and a haunt for every unclean and hated bird, because all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her whoring, and the sovereigns of the earth have committed whoring with her, and the merchants of the earth have become rich through the power of her riotous living."

So spiritually, she is called "Babel".

Rev. 11:8: "and their dead bodies lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Master was impaled."

Rev. 14:8: "And another messenger followed, saying, "Babel is fallen, is fallen, the great city, because she has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her whoring."

Rev. 16:6: "Because they have shed the blood of set-apart ones and prophets, and You have given them blood to drink. For they deserve it."

Rev. 17:6: "And I saw the woman, drunk with he blood of the set-apart ones..."

Rev. 17:3-6: "And he carried me away in the Spirit into the wilderness. And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast covered with names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup filled with abominations and the filthiness of her whoring, and upon her forehead a name written, a secret, "BABEL THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF THE WHORES AND THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the set-apart ones, and with the blood of the witnesses of Yahushua. And having seen her, I marveled -- greatly marveled!"

Rev. 18:24: "And in her was found the blood of prophets and set-apart ones..."

Revelation seems very clear as to the specific identity of the whore. She is great because of her covenantal status, but spiritually she is called Sodom, Egypt, Babylon, because she acts as God's enemy. She was supposed to be set-apart (holy) to God, but she has become the mother of whores.

Matt. 23:34-36: "Because of this, see, I send you prophets, and wise men, and scholars of Scripture. Some of them you shall kill and impale, and some of them you shall flog in your congregations and persecute from city to city, so that on you should come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Hebel to the blood of Zekar-yah, son of Berek-yah, whom you murdered between the Dwelling Place and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all this shall come upon this generation."

And it did.

In His love,
David

 

[Hugh McBryde]

Acts 5 is a particularly interesting read in view of this discussion. It starts with the believers meeting in the temple, and ends with them meeting in the temple:

They had called the apostles, and beaten them, they commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go. And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ."

I don't know how we fellowship by the command of God to do so, and can be put out of fellowship if we are all informal.

Again, Corinth is planted by the church leadership by the "sent" Apostle Paul, who can and does command the expulsion of a member as punishment for unrepented sin. "I just go there and hang out and fellowship with them because it's convenient for me and we are pretty much like minded" doesn't fit with this. "They didn't like me much so I picked up and went somewhere else" also doesn't fit well.

If you think Luther was wrong, and should have just "hung out" in another Catholic Church, then that's where we should all go by that formulation. If you think Luther was right and got thrown out incorrectly, Luther sets up another denomination.

Now where will you go? Catholic, or Lutheran? And so it goes.

If Luther is not wrong, then we state he gains his authority from being in the church, rightly confronting it, and being cast out of it incorrectly. The formula is then "Stay where you are planted, until you get tossed out." Respectfully, I'm not seeing anyone offer anything other than "I like Burger King, not McDonalds, but I don't owe either, anything, I just go where I want."

The ability to discipline and the command to fellowship define a church body. It must exist, and you must submit to it.

 

[DavidinBulgaria]

I have been booted out of the Church of Christ not once but twice, partially because of my belief in Scriptural Polygyny. I grew up in the CoC, attending both Freed-Hardeman University and the Memphis School of Preaching, both being the polar opposite of the vastly liberal ACU. I have served as a COC minister in several states here in the US, but after the second time of being booted, the Lord worked with me personally to completely open my eyes. I would love to talk with anyone who has either been booted out or is still int he COC.

Scott

Scott,

I was "fired" from a preaching position in the churches of Christ because of my belief that polygyny is withing the will of God. I'd be willing to chat with you anytime.

In His service and yours,
David in Bulgaria

 

[Mark C]

I would have thought my Sabbath observant brethren would have embraced a polygamous family, but i was wrong. Some did, but the "powers that be" would not, and we were told not to attend services anymore unless the additional wives and their children were out of our family.

Yeah, I always thought it was strange as well that the Messianic groups and those that observe more of the Tanakh would be open to the idea of plural marriage, but that just hasn't been the case in the local groups around the area. Even the Jews too.

FWIW, Todd, my experience with "truly" Torah-observant types (either Messianic OR Orthodox) has not been that way at ALL - with one important proviso:

What people will talk about with you openly and privately is not at ALL the same as what they will do in response to public pressure.

For example, in my own case, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the elders and pastors in the Messianic fellowship of which myself and my two wives were founding members were individually and privately quite supportive of our family, and what the Bible teaches. They still teach it correctly.

But COLLECTIVELY they would not allow us to continue to worship with them as a family! The fear, and risk of public pressure, was too great.

I have seen something very similar with almost all of my observant Jewish friends (particularly the most Orthodox, although the "public" aspect has not been an issue, since most of such discussions have been one-on-one). They simply acknowledge that what the Torah says is clear. At least I don't hear that "Jesus did away with the Torah" from them.

Perhaps that is why I favor small, and in particular NON-State-created fellowships. Pressure to serve the "prince of this world" seems to increase along with the collectivist pressure.

 

[Mark C]

Don't quite follow you, Hugh:

Bible says the head of a woman is the man; head of the man is Christ; head of Christ is the Father.

That's a pretty simple line of authority. I can follow that.

But where does a denomination, or an ancient line of denominational authority fit into that chain? Isn't there that I can see.

Agreed, Cecil - I see the "denomination authority" being clearly broken when that "authority" sold out to Constantine in exchange for a reprieve from "persecution" and agreed to change His Sabbath to sun-god-day in the process. Far from there being only "two denominations" in the Bible (Sadducees and Pharisees) the history of the apostles shows far more. In Acts alone (15:5, for example) there are "sects" with disagreements, and Yahushua certainly wrote SEVEN letters to "seven churches", which obviously had great differences, even before the first century was out. Certainly Paul's letters, addressed to groups of people with FAR different backgrounds and understandings, make this point as well - even if his words have been "wrested" over time! Power corrupts, whether it's Pharisees, Popes, or Pastors (especially the mega-type).

I still contend, of course, that the problem arises from serving "another master" -- and that this transformation is inevitable, to quote Rev. 2:4, whenever one leaves their "first love", which is service to Him, and "Him alone", and starts picking, choosing, and adding to His Word.


Blessings,
Mark

 

[Anonymous]

Hugh

Just wondering does your church believe at all in Christian Discipline that is laid out in Matt 18? If so did they follow every step of it in order? The topic of Christian Discipline is something that is not all practice in spineless, seeker friendly, prosperity driven, motivtional seminar Churches today. I think this topic deserves its own thread.

Robert

There are scriptures in the OT that refers to Christian Discipline. I purposly used the Matt 18 verse for those that think Christian Discipline is not needed cause of the grace they think that started in the NT.

 

[Hugh McBryde]

Just wondering does your church believe at all in Christian Discipline that is laid out in Matt 18?"

In terms of lip service? Yes.

If so did they follow every step of it in order?"

No, they did not, so in reality, the answer to your first question is really "no." What they did do was go to civil authorities and invoke trespassing laws which has the desired effect from their point of view. In effect I have been treated as all protesters who have a case in the church are treated. The rules/laws/procedures are overlooked because they would not produce the desired effect.

The topic of Christian Discipline is something that is not all practice in spineless, seeker friendly, prosperity driven, motivtional seminar Churches today."

It's like divorce. There is no need if everyone does what they should. For sinful men, divorce defines in part, what marriage is, for sinful men, church discipline defines what a church is. They sort of "paint the target."

There are scriptures in the OT that refers to Christian Discipline. I purposly used the Matt 18 verse for those that think Christian Discipline is not needed cause of the grace they think that started in the NT."

I think we agree here Robert, if I understand you correctly. Grace was in place when Paul told the Corinthians to toss out the man who had his father's wife. Again, it might be a fuzzy bit of business to discuss the authority of denominations and their place, but unless we're all cut loose and wandering, I don't know how you can enforce discipline in a church without an authority structure and submission to those in office. Those in office must derive their office from Authority, however weakened and diluted that authority might be by our rebellion. There must be a preacher, or we cannot hear. He must be SENT. If people just hang out with each other, and are accountable to no one, there is no discipline.

So that brings me to Mark's remark:

I see the 'denomination authority' being clearly broken when that 'authority' sold out to Constantine in exchange for a reprieve from 'persecution' and agreed to change His Sabbath to sun-god-day in the process."

God's people and his church have always messed up, almost from the moment they are called into being or into belief. I don't see this as breaking the line, God preserves the line. If Grace were not applied, we would all be consumed. He is the LORD, he does not change, therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. He is faithful.

Besides that, if the line is broken no one has been "sent," and there is no "preacher" for us to hear.

Far from there being only 'two denominations' in the Bible (Sadducees and Pharisees) the history of the apostles shows far more."

I mentioned the Essenes. Scripture only mentions two. The gnostics are not a denomination, they are unbelief.

Again, I point out the unbroken line back to Jerusalem, and Christ and his Apostles. Even the Apostles themselves were not free from error as we have Paul chiding Peter. What they wrote that is recorded as his word is free from error.

The Early Church was governed from JERUSALEM by Peter and James and Paul. Apparently Paul and Peter went out and about, and James stayed at home. The Early Church supported Jerusalem with their giving. Jerusalem sent out letters of instruction to the churches. The Apostles to the Circumcision and to the Uncircumcision went out and planted. They were SENT, they PREACHED. The authority of the local bodies was derived from Jerusalem's authority in all matters.

This is the pattern. I don't know where scripture says it changes. Constantine is just a screw up and screw ups like Constantine eventually give birth to the "Luthers" of the world and send them out (albeit unwittingly) to reform and renew. You may sincerely believe that when Byzantium did dumb things it released you from the pattern of scripture, but I don't see scripture saying that.

Hence, this is where I am. The Jews and the Priests tossed out the Believers of "the Sect of the Nazarene." Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed. The church became organized along the only Godly lines they could be organized, in submission to governors and authorities.

Denominations.

Those denominations inevitably erred as we as believers have always done.

Luther.

Successors to the RCC are Luther and the "reformers" or "Presbyterians." I will not say these are the only successors, but they are some of them.

The USA splits from England.

The American Presbyterians.

They issue forth the OPC, by expelling unjustly John Gresham Machen.

The OPC Expells ME.

I have the sanction to form a new Church/Denomination or we are all bound to older churches like the Coptics, the RCC or the Eastern/Greek Orthodox. I'm probably not the only one, but I'm the only one I know of at the moment. I fully expect to find others with such moral authority, especially if I keep saying "I'm the only one that I know of."

 

[Hugh McBryde]

The churches planted by Paul were off base on doctrine from the moment they were brought into being, and stayed that way. At times, they were closer to the mark than at others, and the allegiance to good doctrine and practice of good behavior varied between churches. One need only look at the Revelation of John to see that each church had failings and good points.

It seems that you think there was a "church age," and it was over before the Apostles died, that we now live in a time of scattering and dispersal in which we cannot obey commands of scripture to discipline, the appointing of elders. Such would make many of the instructions of Paul's letters moot. Even this advice he gives to Timothy is useless; "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine."

What sort of doctrine do you teach? Only "evangelism?" How do you exhort? Of what value is 1st Corinthians 6? To be in our out of a church a church must have definition as to what is "inside" or "outside" of it. To toss out, to restore, to exhort, there must be office. For there to be office, one must be appointed to it. Once thing leads to another, or more accurately, each thing Timothy is exhorted to do, has it's antecedents.

You seem not to be reading what I am saying, since I am proposing no longer to seek a church, but to help build one. Those that have proposed here that we stay in churches where we must hide truth are the ones that do not want a new one, stating instead that we have too many already.

Frankly, churches that have strayed so far from the truth so as not to be recognizable as "Christian" can multiply all they wish. They are in actual fact, one church, and a false one with many faces. If there are a million bad denominations, I would not refrain from founding a true one because of the question of number.

 

[Memphis Dwight]

DavidinBulgaria,
brother, your christian courage is inspiring. I too am from the churches of Christ.

I may be giving the boot to my local congregation soon. I may even videotape my meeting with the elders. If so, I will post it here.

Keep the faith.

 

[DavidinBulgaria]

Re: Getting the "Left foot of fellowship" over plural marria

DavidinBulgaria,
brother, your christian courage is inspiring. I too am from the churches of Christ.

I may be giving the boot to my local congregation soon. I may even videotape my meeting with the elders. If so, I will post it here.

Keep the faith.

Dwight,

Thanks for your encouraging words. I truly hope your meeting with the elders goes well. The Sunday after my wife left me I asked the men of the congregation where I preached to meet with me. I needed their encouragement and support. Instead I got an inquisition. They began to hurl questions at me in a group that they'd never ask me in public. I had shared my understanding of PM with several of them before and they hadn't ask questions or challenged my understanding. In the meeting one guy pulled out some copies of material I'd given him about the meaning of "mia" from 1 Tim and Titus and began yelling at me. You can imagine how I felt in a time of need when my brothers in Christ, who I'd been leading in study in God's Word for almost six years, suddenly turned on my like mad dogs.

I don't know if you're a preacher at your congregation or "just a member" but I wish you luck. In my experience most people have already had their minds made up (by preachers and elders) and you won't be able to confuse them a bit with the biblical facts. Yes, let us all know how it goes.

In His service and yours,
David in Buglaria

 

[welltan]

Re: Getting the "Left foot of fellowship" over plural marria

In my experience most people have already had their minds made up (by preachers and elders) and you won't be able to confuse them a bit with the biblical facts. Yes, let us all know how it goes.

In His service and yours,
David in Buglaria

Very true, they do not want truth if it is outside their comfort zone.

I think marriage beliefs are usually shared best one to one with equal footing. Why submit to questions anyway? I had a preacher want to talk to me once. I only did it after he told me he would take me out to dinner while we talked. The conversation went as expected and the food was better than expected.

 

[Shimon]

I'm still wondering where the verse is that says we gotta belong to a denomination.

I agree Cecil. The Bible says nothing of denominations and does encourage us to remain in fellowship. I too would like to find an open minded fellowship to gather with. I trust it will happen in God's time. Of late I have found that patience and acceptance come much more easily once I accept that He does everything He wills, in His time. If I am to surrender to his will, I must be willing to accept His timing. I am hoping that He will bring other Christians willing to accept PM into our circle of friends and that we will be able to begin a home church along the pattern of the early Church. With the miracle of the internet we will be able to stay in touch with others of like belief with sending folks out on the road. Christ told us that we would be known for our love. I believe that is what will ultimately bring acceptance for PM. When our neighbors observe the love in our households, their eyes may be opened to the reason. Just MHO.

Love all
Dave

 

[sweetlissa]

Re: Getting the "Left foot of fellowship" over plural marria

Dave,
If you ever get down to Dallas/Ft. Worth we have a church beginning here. We have about 5 families that we are in association with, but we have yet to get all of us together at the same time in the same place. Mostly it is three families on Sundays and two or three families on Thursdays.

SweetLissa

 

[Hugh McBryde]

The Bible says nothing of denominations and does encourage us to remain in fellowship."

I disagree and say that scripture mentions three sects. One is the Pharisees, another, the Saducees, and last, they mention the sect of the Nazarene or "that way." Some of the sect of the Nazarene seem to be also of the sect of the Pharisees. These are denominations. You could even point to the fact that Paul was the apostle to the uncircumcision, and Peter the circumcision, and claim those were denominations.

 

[Shimon]

Re: Getting the "Left foot of fellowship" over plural marria

Dave,
If you ever get down to Dallas/Ft. Worth we have a church beginning here. We have about 5 families that we are in association with, but we have yet to get all of us together at the same time in the same place. Mostly it is three families on Sundays and two or three families on Thursdays.

SweetLissa

Sounds great. I'll definitely take you up on that if we get that way. I have a daughter and her family down in Ft Hood so we travel thru occasionally.

Dave

 

[Shimon]

The Bible says nothing of denominations and does encourage us to remain in fellowship."

I disagree and say that scripture mentions three sects. One is the Pharisees, another, the Saducees, and last, they mention the sect of the Nazarene or "that way." Some of the sect of the Nazarene seem to be also of the sect of the Pharisees. These are denominations. You could even point to the fact that Paul was the apostle to the uncircumcision, and Peter the circumcision, and claim those were denominations.

You're right Hugh. I expressed myself poorly. What I meant was that nothing in The Bible seems to support the dividing of the Church inherent in splitting off into denominations. This kind of divisiveness is what led to the ongoing slaughter of non-catholics during the middle ages. I don't believe anything Jesus said supported the Pharisees, the Sadducee, or the Essene. He did not attack them directly even though He did criticize their behavior. But He did not come to tear down the Jewish institutions, however un-Biblical, he came to provide our salvation on the Cross. I would never say Peter or Paul headed different denominations, only that each had a mission given to the by the Lord. Yes, divisiveness happens; we humans are a contentious lot with a drive to be right and have others recognize the fact. My brother is a pastor and you should hear the two of us go at it sometimes. He believes in women pastors for instance. He takes the stand that Paul's instructions were based on the times and that the times have changed. I disagree - often. That doesn't mean that it's healthy, or what God intended for us. I think I can steal from Chuck Missler on this: "ever since the Fall, mankind has been engaged in a process of devolution - not evolution." What he was saying is the we live shorter lives, engage in increasingly self-destructive behavior, are more susceptible to disease, and are even arguably less intelligent as a species. I'm never sure I follow him completely, but do you know of anyone who has lived a totally land-locked life, who could have built an ark? with only 3 adult men to help? with only hand tools and no formal system of measurement or mathematics? I don't. I think our divisiveness is another symptom of that devolution, or maybe Satan at work in our lives.

Dave