Featured The City Church

I am in the same place, on all points. Firstly, my thoughts are undeveloped, which is why I was very pleased with your thread as a place to bounce these ideas off of each other would be welcome.

I'm watching a movie with my wife now, but I'll be eagerly following and posting on this thread.

 

Here is the link. Reading in context, Knollys does not deny having distinct congregations (churches) in a city!

books.google.com/books?id=DwhMAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA159

 

Please, please be careful. A credobaptist in such a church might be tempted to adopt their error of pedobaptism. It's been known to happen, I was just reading one fellow's account on the interwebs:

"I was in a non-denominational church (Baptist with a cool website) church for years and then by the invitation of some friends, I attended a PCA church in NYC. I started attended weekly right away. There was a little getting used to the minimal liturgy, but now I'm lost without it. The Presbyterians (the conservative ones) place a high priority on scripture, preaching and teaching. My wife and I wonder how we ever functioned in the churches we had been to in the past. You don't have to be on board with infant baptism to attend or even become a member. I wasn't, but I came around after some time."

Don't be that guy.

And thank you for explaining.

 

Reasonable question here: Why do you always threaten to "leave BB" when people do not respond the way you would like them to?

A mature believer, as one spoken of in Romans 12, Philippians 2, Romans 14, Romans 15, Galatians 6, Would not continually shed light on the deficiencies they see in other people. In other words, mature believers are not critical and petty.

 

I've stated that I would likely leave BB one time, and it was not a threat. To whom would it be a threat anyway?

Your post is a perfect example of why there is very little fruitful conversation here. You don't listen. You jump to conclusions. You don't reason well, and you name-call rather than present arguments.

 

There are nothing but lousy churches near me. It's a real problem. A very serious problem. They are entertainment-driven circus sideshows, more than they are churches, so I understand your point. Believe me, I do. I've visited more churches than anyone I know, because I've moved a few times, but mostly because I wanted to find a church in which the word of God was preached, rather than rock concerts and skits.

This discussion is mostly a philosophical one, as the horse has already left the barn. There are already hundreds of churches right on top of each other, and that is not likely to change.

What I would love to discuss here is regarding the ought. Should they be all of these different churches, or have they arisen from strife? Is it Okay to have 6 churches on the main street of a town, as is the case in my town? Is it Okay that Methodists and Lutherans are not united?

One argument that Roman Catholics make, which is difficult to defend, is that Protestants are divided and splintered. . .

 

Churches were named for the cities/locatiosn they were in. There was no division by distinctive, that we are made aware of by reading the texts. And we also don't get the idea that people left their area to attend a church outside of it.


Local churches mentioned in the Bible:

1. Antioch, Pisidia: Acts 13:14; Gal 1:2
   • Antioch, Syria: Acts 11:26 (Paul's home base)
   • Athens: Acts 17:34
   • Babylon: 1 Peter 5:13; Acts 2:9
   • Berea: Acts 17:11
   • Caesarea: Acts 10:1,48
   • Cenchrea: Rom 16:1
   • Colossae: Col 1:2
   • Corinth: Acts 18:1
   • Crete: Titus 1:5
   • Cyrene: Acts 11:20
   • Damascus: Acts 9:19
   • Derbe: Acts 14:20; Gal 1:2
   • Ephesus: Acts 18:19
   • Hierapolis Col 4:13
   • Iconium: Acts 14:1; Gal 1:2
   • Jerusalem: Acts 2:5
   • Joppa: Acts 9:36, 38
   • Laodicea: Rev 1:11, Col 4:15
   • Lydda: Acts 9:32
   • Lystra: Acts 14:6; Gal 1:2
   • Pergamum: Rev 1:11
   • Philadelphia: Rev 1:11
   • Philippi: Acts 16:12
   • Puteoli, Italy: Acts 28:13-14
   • Rome: Rom 1:7
   • Sardis: Rev 1:11
   • Sharon: Acts 9:35
   • Smyrna: Rev 1:11
   • Tarsus: Acts 9:30
   • Thessalonica: Acts 17:1
   • Thyatira: Rev 1:11; Acts 16:14
   • Troas: Acts 20:6-7

No mention of the "First Baptist" or "Tenth Presbyterianin" church in the list.

 

Where two or three are gathered in Christ's name, He is among them. What, then, does that body lack?

Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus . . . Likewise greet the church that is in their house.

Romans 16:5
​

One body meeting in one private residence is called a church in the Scriptures. Lee's weak in the Nee's. Lol.

 

Lol. Anyone losing any sleep over this?

 

That text is in reference to church discipline. Check the context

To understand exactly what Jesus means in Matthew18:20 we have to look at the context, which includes the surrounding verses in the passage, the passage before and after, the background of the book and author, including the original audience. Sometimes even just the heading of a passage can help us. The heading for Matthew 18:15-20 is, “If Your Brother Sins Against You, ” or “Dealing with Sin in the Church” in another translation. Not all versions include the phrase “against you,” but either way we can gather that this passage is about sin and discipline in the Christian community, specifically the church.

SEE ALSO: What Is Church Discipline? - Answers for Church Members - August 31

Matthew’s original audience was likely comprised of mostly Jewish believers and some Gentile believers; his gospel was also an evangelistic tool for Jews who did not yet believe as well as good news for Gentiles who did not believe. The Jews reading Matthew’s gospel would have immediately known that this passage dealt with church discipline. Why? Because the passage would have reminded them of passages in Deuteronomy, concerning the law. Deuteronomy 17 and 19 speak of 2 or 3 witnesses gathered to testify in court. The witnesses were necessary to establish a case in court.

The Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) was Jesus’ Bible, and He used it in preaching and teaching. Jewish readers or listeners would have been all too familiar with allusions to Hebrew Bible passages; they knew their Bible well. Unlike most modern Christians, they would not have needed cross-references. This is just another reason to know God’s Word well and to study both the Old Testament and New Testament, neglecting neither.

The ESV Study Bible has this to say about Matthew 18:16:

“Evidence of two or three witnesses follows the guideline in Deut. 19:15 and refers to witnesses of the subsequent confrontation described in this verse, not necessarily eyewitnesses to the original offense.” And 18:20, “Jesus affirms that he will be divinely present among his disciples as they seek unity in rendering decisions, which is rightly understood also as an affirmation of omnipresence and therefore of deity. “

The NIV Zondervan Study Bible edited by D. A. Carson similarly states about Matthew 18:16:

“This procedure comes from Deut 19:15. Taking “one or two” people with you adds up to “two or three” witnesses. Not eyewitnesses of the sin, but those who can testify as to how the attempt at reconciliation goes.” And 18:20, “While Christ is present is even the smallest gathering of his people, his point in this context is that heaven is in accord (v.19) with believers who follow his instructions regarding church discipline.”

Matt Smethurst, managing editor for The Gospel Coalition, points out another view:

“Notice in Matthew 18:20, Jesus employs that ancient Jewish principle for testifying in court—two or three have to agree with one another—and applies this legal glue to gathering ‘in his name.’ When these two or three or three thousand get together and agree they all believe in the same Jesus, his authority is present and they are a church, capable of exercising the keys. This protects the who and what of the gospel. It doesn’t leave gospel accountability to every individual.”

This view believes that when two or more Christians get together, believing in Jesus’ authority, they are a church and can exercise the keys of the kingdom, which are church government and church discipline.

Tim Chaffey continues,

“It is with this in mind that Jesus said the Father would grant the request of two or more who gather together in Christ’s name and are in agreement. Agreement on what? On disciplining the erring brother. That’s what this passage is about and yet so many Christians use it as though Jesus promises to answer their prayers when offered in certain situations.”

This doesn’t mean that Jesus doesn’t hear our prayers when we pray alone or with two or three people etc. …He does. But it means that this particular verse is not talking about Jesus’ presence in prayer, it’s talking about His presence in church discipline.

Eric Bargerhuff, author of The Most Misused Verses in the Bible, also reminds us that the original audience would have been reading this passage in the context of chapter 18 of Matthew:

“In Matthew 18, Jesus is instructing the disciples on how they and all who will follow him should handle situations of interpersonal sin and conflict. His instructions about this immediately follow his parable about the lost sheep (which emphasizes restoring someone who has gone astray) and precedes the parable of the unmerciful servant (which is about being willing to cancel and forgive an outstanding debt). Therefore, the themes that are present in this context are forgiveness, restoration, and reconciliation with a brother or sister who has sinned against you or who has gone astray. “

Bargerhuff continues,

“Jesus is saying that whenever the church is pursuing and is involved in a reconciliation process with someone who has refused to repent, they can rest assured that God’s blessing is with them in their efforts. In other words, as the church renders the judicial decisions on matters of right and wrong that are based on the truth of God’s Word, they should be confident that they are doing the right thing and that Christ himself is right there with them, spiritually present in their midst.”

Why the Context of Matthew 18:20 is Important​

 

Often Christ will utter a straightforward maxim that lends its meaning to a subject, not vice versa: A good tree cannot bear corrupt fruit, Where the corpse is the vultures will gather, etc. Paul did the same: Evil communications corrupt good manners (and, no, Menander is NOT the source material for that adage).

Where two or three are gathered is the same way.

Matthew 18 concludes with applying the universal principles that give the act of discipline its authority to all operations of the church.

Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.​

 

Here you go again.