Featured Is the Church local, universal or both?

As an afterthought to this earlier post, I was reviewing a forward from Francis Chan's book "Crazy Love" & this jumped out at me.....

I will paraphrase....he has been going to college students asking "How many of you have read the NT & wondered if we in the church are missing it" ....he has had over 20,000 students raise their hands affirming it!"

 

What you described is a mission field. Lift up your eyes and behold the fields that are white unto harvest. You do what you can do with the tools that the Lord has made available to you.
Our command is to carry out the Great Commission:
To witness and disciple, after salvation to baptize, to teach all things (disciple some more). If you are not able to carry out everything in that Commission pray for help. Since the ordinance of baptism is given to the local church you need someone to help you plant a church that they can be baptized into a local church.
But you can witness; disciple.
2 Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

 

Nice try, but nope, it was merely a parallel argument demonstrating the lack of validity in the argument which the opponent presented to show that it had no logical value in drawing out the truth by its conclusion.

Unless you and he would like to hold to following as logically true:

The Trinity is a man-made term.
The Trinity is not found in the Bible.
Therefore, the Trinity is unscriptural and thereby false.

No, a red herring would involve throwing something into his argument as to create a smokescreen or to detract from the issue, I did no such thing, I addressed the issue directly pertaining to the construct of his argument, his claim and conclusion and I merely demonstrated the fallacy of trying to uphold such an argument – BTW, which fallacy you now have become a part of by further trying to defend it. :laugh::laugh:

 

Don’t want to ruin your day, but wrong again, when Jesus said: Mat 28:18 … “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” I’m afraid you are interpreting this while making the presumptuous mistake of going about to divide and separate these power in regards to only coming from a physical earthly entity, the power of the local church.

Further, on another front it should be clearly observed that Jesus was speaking to His disciples of all nations, not a local body. This was concerning two branches of general design, both Jews and Greeks, all nations were to be taught of the revelation of Jesus Christ and the means of salvation (power) coming from above and they were to be baptized for belief together in Him into the spiritual universal body of Christ – this commission had nothing to do with individuals and in and of itself is instruction to demonstrate the universal application of one Gospel, one covenant and one way of salvation for all. There is no call for division toward singling out a local church body here – the good news message is about the fulfillment of the promise (covenant) to all and that all those of faith will rise in One body, through one seed as sons and joint heirs in Christ.

Rom 8:14-17
(14) For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
(15) For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
(16) The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
(17) And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.

There is no separation of the body of believers between the things of earth and heaven or the means of which they came or must come or of the peoples (seeds/sons in Christ/disciples sent) for all are reconciled together in one body, the universal church:

(Col 1:20) And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

(Heb 2:10) For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.

(Heb 10:10) By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

In the GC Christ commands His disciples to teach all nations to observe all things and this is regards to one baptism for all:

1Co 10:1-4
(1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
(2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
(3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;
(4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

It is therefore quite a stretch attempt to interpret that the GC is merely given as instruction about going forth through dividing the church into separate local church authorities to carry out this commission and that it would not be inclusive of all things, to one unified body of believers that are to spread this message, to and from the universal church.

 

When one studies the doctrine of Eccesiology, he must arrive at a definition of a local church. Most come up with a definition something like the following:

A local church is an assembly of baptized (immersed) regenerated believers who have voluntarily associated themselves together for the purpose of obeying the Great Commission and carrying out the two ordinances of Christ (baptism and the Lord's Supper).

Where do you find that in the Bible. Just as you don't find "trinity" in the Bible, one studies the Bible, and takes what the Bible says about the local church and puts forth a cogent definition.
The purpose of the local church is to carry out the Great Commission. The Great Commission was given to the Apostles shortly before his ascension into heaven. Then, just after that Pentecost happened when the First Baptist Church at Jerusalem was formed, that very same day with over 3,000 members added to it. The Lord added to the local church in Jerusalem daily such as would be saved. In Acts 4, 5,000 more believe and were added to the membership of the First Baptist Church of Jerusalem. There was no universal church. Such a concept was unheard of. They didn't speak English, but Greek. The word ekklesia has but one meaning--assembly. The church assembled together, and when they (on a daily basis), they:

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
--This is not the function of a mythical, esoteric, existential, metaphysical, so-called invisible universal church which doesn't exist.
Ekklesia means assembly. It is impossible to have an unassembled assembly.
But this assembly assembled every day.
They learned the apostles doctrine.
They fellowshipped together.
They broke bread together.
They prayed together.
--All these things are impossible with any so-called universal church/assembly.

You are right in one sense, that any one can witness; share the gospel; etc. But to do ALL that Jesus commanded is beyond the scope of a single individual unless that individual is qualified as Paul was qualified, (or a missionary), with the intent of starting local churches. That is what I believe Jesus had in mind and is communicated by Jesus either directly or indirectly through the Holy Spirit.

 

Your posts are some of the best thought out on the board, and even when I do not agree with them, they are at least civil and tell thought out. I never recall you calling me a heretic or a believer in false doctrine.

As I believe a local church is the main instrument for spreading the Gospel on earth. I also believe the "Kingdom of God" or universal church for lack of a better term, is what we will be in eternity. The Bride of Christ comes from the assembly of believers in eternity. At that point (not at that time, as there is no time), the local church will cease to have any meaning.

However, this is the here and now, and as long as the Lord sees fit to continue the age of grace, it continues to be what we belong use to reach others for Christ.

The greatest abuse of the term universal church or one true church is without a doubt the Roman Catholic Church, who not only believes they are the church Jesus Christ founded, but use their hierarchy and infrastructure to spread their false doctrine and worldly ideas. In reality, there is no such thing as a local church even at the smallest parish.

 

Ben.....Quote, from Scripture please what the "Great Commission" was:

Ignore your pre-suppositions for a second, and simply quote the so-called "Great Commission"...
My post was Dead-on....you DIDN'T carry it out, nor can you....you are as incapable of doing so as I am. You did NOT perform the work of the "Great Commission" here.
The Local Church ALONE is capable of performing the work of the "Great Commission"...the "Universal Church" can't do it...You didn't, it doesn't, and no random Saint of God is capable of carrying on the "Great Commission"....

The "Great Commission" is to: "Make Disciples, to Baptize and to teach"... You absolutely did the right thing to serve as a "witness" for Christ, as all of God's "Saints" should...but that isn't the "Great Commission"...that is the job of the "Church"....just read the Scriptures as they are written, it is NOT complicated.
You have no authority to Baptize, you have no authority to ecclesiastically make a disciple or to "teach"....nor were you "sent" by your church to do so....

If you DO have said authority.....it was granted you by your LOCAL Church, and not some ethereal non-entity as the Universal Church....The Universal Church (to the extent that it even exists) does NOTHING.

You shared Christ with someone...But that is NOT the "Great Commission"...and the Great Commission was given to the "Church" not YOU.....nor ME.

As a quick liner-note....buddy...(and I love you)... no passage you just quoted mentions the "Church"...it won't..

Scofield may be the Devil in your mind...but, he won't post a passage about the "Church" wherein the "chuch" is not mentioned.

 

A couple of thoughts:

I hold that Jesus established His church during his earthly ministry. By the time Pentecost arrived, The little band had already grown to at least 120. It had observed the ordinances, baptism and Lord's Supper; It had already had a business meeting and a vote to replace Judas.

During Jesus' ministry they evangelized, they baptized, received teaching on how a church should operate (including how to resolve disputes); It had power over Satan and the demons. It had a Head (Pastor). It had already done mission trips, and already had a Commission (marching orders).

Everything that was done in those early days was done under the auspices of a local, visible, congregation. There was no such entity as the Universal Church.

On the day of Pentecost, 3,000 were added to an already existing church. And they were added by water baptism.

On Pentecost, the Holy Spirit fell on an assembled congregation, empowering in the sane way Jesus did during his earthly ministry.

Such Spirit-baptism was not to place them in the Universal Church. It was to empower the congregation, which was pretty timid until He arrived on Pentecost.

And, still today, 2000 years later, water baptism is still the door to the local church, which Paul admonished to guard the ordinances. Paul went on to give instructions on the proper (and improper) way to observe the Lord's supper.

In First Corinthians 12:13, Paul clearly said said that in one spirit, we're water-baptized into the body.

By the way, Paul described FBC Corinth as THE body of Christ.

Paul also wrote to FBC Ephesus that husbands should love their wives with the same intensity as Christ loved the church, and died for it. That's not a universal wife. It's a real, visible living wife. And a real visible, living assembly, not some invisible entity nobody has every seen, worshipped at, or baptized a convert.

Just a few random thoughts to shoot at. Release the hounds.

 

You must be one of those who try to rewrite church history. Me too. There are not many left. The First Lawful Assembly of Jesus Christ was called out on the shores of Galilee--by Jesus himself. She functioned as a called out assembly with a purpose several years before Pentecost. Thanks for taking a stand.

The premise of this thread leaves out: local and visible only. There is only one correct answer--certainly not universal of any sort.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

I have contacted a few orginazitions regarding church plants......to them its too costly. Now if I was to establish something, then they would be more than too happy to step I. and take over. Right!

 

Bro. James, I think all of us could come to some sort of consensus as to the reasons for the existence of the local church Some have already been mentioned. Even if we didn't see completely eye to eye about the function and role of the local church, we would agree that it does have a function.

On the other hand, I have yet to find satisfactory answer to the question, just exactly what does the U-church DO? As far as I can see, the answer is, nothing.

Some have rhapsodized about how the Universal Church is one body, unified. How can that be? Are there saved Roman Catholics? They believe error? Is it possible that the U-Church has some saved Mormons? They believe error. I could go on an on, but the point is, that the U-church is not the least bit unified. It is fractured and riddled with error.

And it regularly disobeys the admonition of the writer of Hebrews, who told us to "forsake not the assembling of yourselves together." (10:25)

 

Perhaps the larger issue here is in attempting to understand the role and function of the universal Church. This seems to be giving us trouble.

I would say that the universal Church has no formative function in the world but is only a collective identity and serves as an eschatological body consumated and revealed in the eschaton.

Now, that's better.

 

Two things: First, I’m merely seeing a ton of rhetoric here that you would not appreciate me replying to and I don’t think it worth my time to sift through it, break it down and try to further spell “all things” in regards to it. Second, I’d suggest you do more study on the “Priesthood of the Believer” and compare that to the power and authority you attempt to proclaim the local church has over a member of the Body of Christ; I believe your indoctrinated practices of Scofield division have lead you into common historical error of misplacing authorities and powers onto earthly entities.

:1_grouphug:

 

so if a person has decided not to participate in a local church for various reasons, would they be saved, and what Church would they be part of if indeed saved?

 

There is no "Church" only churches.
If he was not baptized he would be disobedient, but not lost.
If he was not a member of a local church he would be disobedient, but not lost.
Our salvation does not rest upon our obedience, but rather our standing before God--whether we have been justified.
Once saved, one becomes part of the family of God, the Kingdom, the bride of Christ. There is no need to use the nomenclature of "The Church" when there isn't one.

 

So you agree with the concept of the "Universal church", but not to use church to express it, using more like the Universal Bride/Body?

 

I agree with DHK. He has it right.

 

DHK can answer for himself, but he drew a distinction between the Kingdom and what some call the Church.

I believe there will come a time when the Kingdom and the Church will be merged into one entity--at the Great General Assembly in heaven.

 

Not every organization claiming to be a church can quality, even though some of its members may, in fact, be saved.

There are many religious groups which hold to disqualifying gross error regarding soteriology, ecclesiology and a myriad of other things. Those groups may have saved people as members, but they are not part of a true New Testament Church.