fine. "The people INSIDE the building"
Yes. Those who are
regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of Christ may be included as church people and Christ's body.
A normal church must in principle receive all whom Christ has received.
Therefore receive one another, as Christ also received you to the glory of God. (Rom. 15:7)
An abnormal "church" might in principle receive as members those who have not or not yet been received by Christ through redemption. They rather are encouraged to hear the gospel preached that they MAY be received after regeneration/redemption.
Now it is true that the church might make a mistake. But to make a mistake is different from having a principle or practice
of counting as members of the church the known unbelievers.
The first century church was considered a "sect" a "division" of the Nation-church started by God at Sinai. Even Paul admits that he is a member of it.
I am not certain of your point. Yes the disciples were considered a "sect". And Jesus was considered a drunkard, madman, demon possessed.
Yes the church in Jerusalem was considered a sect like the Son of God was considered a false prophet and a charlaton. And the Apostle Paul was thought of as a "ring leader" of the sect.
for concerning this sect it is indeed known to us that it is spoken against everywhere. (Acts 28:22)
What is important to us is what Christ and the church is in reality in the eyes of God.
We should see Christ and the church as through the eyes of God rather than through socialogical eyes of culture.
Yet the NT authors would still argue that they (and not the Jewish leaders) had the true pure doctrine of that Nation-church started by God at Sina and would argue that it was the main body of it that had gone into doctrinal error - and the church of Christ merely expunged the error and returned to being the pure church of God.
I think your point is that through cultural eyes of a religious/socialogical viewpoint, it is all relative.
I have to think some more about what the point is you make here.
indeed divisions can be had in a bad way -- yet Christianity itself was still deemed "a sect" of the Jews and Paul admits it as well.
Rom 11 makes the point clearly.
Here is a "division" that the Apostle Paul acknowledged is necessary. It is not a division in the body of Christ as far as the life of
Christ is concerned. Rather it is an apparent distinction between those who are overcoming and those who are being defeated.
It is an apparent noticed distinction between those approved coming up to the expected standard and those falling short.
For first of all, when you come together in the church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and some part of it I believe.
For there must even be parties among you, that those who are approved may become manifest among you. (1 Cor. 11:17,18)
Now this is not a division of life. This is division manifested between those who overcome in the normal victory supplied by grace and
those who need to rise from abnormality. The love of God towards both and the love between them should not be effected.
This the distinction highlighted seven times for each of the seven local churches in
Revelation 2 and 3.
To him who overcomes, to him I will give to eat of the tree of life, (Rev. 2:7b)
He who overcomes shall by no means be hurt of the second death. (v.11b)
To him who overcomes, to him I will give of the hidden manna, (v. 17b)
And he who overcomes and he who keeps My works until the end, to him I will give authority over the nations; (v. 26)
He who overcomes will be clothed thus, in white garments, (Rev. 3:5a)
He who overcomes, him I will make a pillar in the temple of My God,(v. 12a)
He who overcomes, to him I will give to sit with Me on My throne, (v. 21a)
So we see that even in a genuine new testament church on genuine ground of unity
there may still be manifested a distinction as a "division" between those at the standard of expected victory through His
grace and those below the standard as needing to overcome defeat.
in some cases - yes.
But the foundation and ground are simply the same for the nation-church at Sinai and for the Christian church in Acts.
Over time we get 'man made tradition' that contradicts the clear teaching of God's Word as Christ points out in Mark 7:7-13
I don't think the parallel is what I would make.
At Sinai the foundation is the Law of God given through Moses.
The ground beneath this was to be the land, the ground which was the Promised Land to which they were going.
The foundation of the churches is the living Person of Christ - and the revelation of this given to the apostles and prophets.
Each real church must lay this foundation on the gound of the locality in which they live.
A ground smaller than a city is improper for a church.
And a ground larger than a city is improper for a church.
For example, the seven local churches in Asia were not grouped together to be "the Church in Asia" or "the Asian Church."
They were "the seven churches" which were in Asia -
to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamos and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea. That is seven cities respectively in Asia.
Likewise there were a number of local churches in Judea. They were not grouped together as the Judean Church but rather
the churches [plural] of Judea (Gal. 1:22). All the Gentile Christians could not speak of the Gentile Church but the Holy Spirit reveals "the churches [plural] of the Gentiles" (Rom. 16:4)
A ground for a practical church should not be smaller than a city one hand or larger than a city on the other hand.
The ground of the nation of Israel is that area of land in the Middle East. The foundation is probably the God of Israel.
That God became a man. And that man became
a life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45) to create in Himself the
"one new man"
Water baptism by immersion can be found in the NT without any difficulty at all.
baptism by sprinkling or baptism of infants can't be found at all in the NT (as even R.C. Sproul admitted in his discussion with John MacArthur)
Don't misunderstand me. Of course baptism by immersion is in the New Testament.
And Christians should obey the Lord to practice baptism.
A Baptist Church based on the practice is a sect, a division, a work of the flesh, and a faction.
In other words God sees a church in Baltimore or a church in Vancouver.
But a First Baptist Church and a Second Baptist Church in the city is a faction because one city should be matched with one local church.
A Southern Baptist Church in a area of a country is also a division because its is ground larger than a city.
Saying that a NT practice is a "source of division" is not logical.
It would be naive to think a legitimate and scriptural "right" practice could not be a cause of a division.
In Ephesians Paul writes -
Until we all arrive at the oneness of the faith and of the full knowledge of the Son of God, at a full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, That we may be no longer little children tossed by waves and carried about by every wind of teaching in the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error, But holding to truth in love, we may grow up into Him in all things, who is the Head, Christ, (Eph. 4:13-15)
You see a
"wind of teaching" might be a heretical teaching, indeed.
But it also could be an over stressed biblically right teaching used to blow division into the Body.
Suppose because "speaking in tongues" is a perfectly legitimate matter in the New Testament, which it is.
To establish a "Tongue Speaking" church which only receives Christians with this gift is a
"system of error."
We in a local church should receive whom we recognize in Spirit have been received by Christ. (Rom. 15:7)
" We only receive those who speak in tongues" is a wind blowing about the immature into division.
This is only one example. Many perfectly biblical teachings may become a smaller ground to receive other believers than
the Lord permits. Even if a well meaning teacher says "We only receive those who are victorious and prevailing, overcomers, into our
church." This is
a wind of teaching developed into a
"system of error."
We can find overcoming in the New Testament as we can find the presbytery, or baptism, or gifts of the Holy Spirit, or missionary outreach, or immersion, etc. . . . all biblical matters. But the subtle enemy of God can instigate these tobe utilized to divide the Body.
Suppose I rise up and say "we only receive those who believe in one city/ one church". That too can be a local sect rather than
a local church. That too might become a wind of teaching or a wave hindering us from growing up into Christ the Head.
In the locality the believers should place no other qualification to be churched together except that Christ has received us all to the glory of God.
Therefore receive one another, as Christ also received you to the glory of God. (Rom. 15:7)
Here is the cross to cross out our preferences. And here the cross terminates not the truth but rather our old man.
We cannot make it to be one without the prevailing grace and love in Christ living within us all.
The fact that they use that form of church organization that we find in the Bible cannot be the source of "error" or the detail that demonstrates anything at all - negative about the Presbyterian church.
The ground is larger than a locality. It is a ground of a biblical and scriptural form of plurality of overseers.
A plurality of shepherding overseers is desirable and biblical.
To have this rather than the locality as the ground of oneness is off the mark for the basis of fellowship as a church.
The apostles established churches according to cities. And elders for a church were established for each city.
Compare:
For this cause I left you in Crete, that you might set in order the things which I have begun that remain and appoint elders in every city, as I directed you: (Titus 1:5)
And when they had appointed elders for them in every church and had prayed with fastings, they committed them to the Lord into whom they had believed. (Acts 14:23)
in fact the Holy Spirit is the one that inspired scripture and the church of God is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit. Being led by the Holy Spirit, having the gifts of the Holy Spirit (just as we see in the NT church) is not in any way a "source of error" for Pentecostal or Charismatic churches.
Again, we must see that of course a non-biblical teaching might be a wind of teaching. But also a scriptural matter can also
become a wind of teaching and a system of error.
You know it may be pleasant to have your little boat blown along gently in a wind. It might be exciting.
But the growth of the believers up into the Head might be hindered by something that is "right" but over stressed in a divisive way.
We Christians certainly want to be scriptural. But we do not want to be "dead right" finding "churches" upon right things as thier ground
for receiving one another.
Now there are a few things in the NT for which someone was put out of the church.
Denying Jesus as the Son of God, chronic idolatry, chronic fornication, and maybe two or more matters.
But other things which we deem perfectly biblical are rarely reasons to not receive a believer if he does not hold that belief.
The elders as the leading examples and overseers of the local assemby must discern in thier spirit and conscience in the Holy Spirit -
"Now if Christ has received this person we too must receive him."
This is not to say there is absolutely no discipline in the church life.
It is to recognize that many things on which we would not receive a brother or sister are not adaquate reasons to reject
them coming to the Lord's Supper or assembling along with the congregation.
I have to suspend my fellowship here leaving some things unreplied to.
