Local Church

Maybe the more appropriate term is ecclesia which is the greek translation of church, which means a religious congregation. It can also include the Saints in Heaven. You are right though. The bible does not have the modern term "local church"

In the same vein Missionary is not a term used in the bible either. The correct word is "Apostle"

 

Jim,

As far as I can recall, you are correct in saying that there is no set of Greek words used of the church in the N.T. which would be directly translatable into English by the words "local church." However, I think you may be in danger of what some have referred to as a word vs.concept fallacy, i.e. of assuming that just because such specific wording is not used that the concept is not there. But this is clearly not the case. Each time Paul refers to the church in a particular locale, such as in a particular city or even a particular home, he is clearly referring to what we would call a "local" manifestation of the Body of Christ, and therefore what may accurately be spoken of by us as the "local church." This is why so many of us pastors use the term "local church," namely because it is an accurate reflection in English of a Biblical way of viewing the church, along with the equally Biblical understanding of the Church in a larger sense (which is often referred to by a term such as "universal church"). Thus, I am one pastor who will keep using the "local church" language whenever appropriate to do so.

Pastork

 

Also thinking that the term "local church" could carry the idea of others located in the immedaite area. However, the recently established new Churches ,by the apostle Paul, was possibly the only one for many, many miles around, therefore, the term "Local" was understood and not necessary.

 

There are many terms we use today which are not in the Scripture... Trinity, Rapture, Local Church, Missionary, etc. The words themselves may not be there but the teaching is, and the terms simply describe the Biblical teaching. The word Church (ekklesia) is used over 110 times. Over 90 times it is used with out question concerning a "local" Church (referring to a body of believers meeting in a specific location) Ex. "the church of God at Corinth" etc. Only twice is it without question referring to the universal Church, and the others theologians can fight over. Don't dismiss the term to describe a Biblical teaching just because the term itself is not in the Scripture.

 

jimslade said in an earlier post:

Okay, I'm not trying to be contentious, but with that line of thinking, pastors should also stop using the words "The Trinity" since they are not in the Bible either. The implication is there, but not the words themselves.

So to all pastors who are talking about "The Trinity," shame on you

God Bless!!!

Adam

 

The word "Bible" is not to be found in the Word of God, but I will neither stop bringing it to my gathering with His Body of localised believers, nor will I cease to study, reference, nor to honor this precious work.

The rock or foundation of the church is the confession (ultimately the doctrine) of the apostles, which became normative for the true church.

The word church (Greek ekklesia), means literally “ a chosen or called out assembly”. Thus the use of the word as a technical term for an assembly or group of believers in Christ was quite natural. It was not viewed as an external organization, denomination, or hierarchical system. The New Testament Church is a local autonomous congregation or an assembly which is a church in and of itself. John writes to 7 churches, in His Revelation, not to one.

May God so bless His precious children.

A servant of Christ,
Drew

Psalm 51:10
Create in me a clean heart, O'God, and renew a right spirit within me.

 

Yes, Paul's teaching had application to other churches. But this does not negate the fact that Paul was writing specifically to the Corinthians, in response to questions that they had raised with him. Much of Paul is quite difficult to understand unless we interpret his words in light of the context He wrote them to, that is, the Corinthians.

The historical fact that letters like the Corinthian correspondance were circulated beyond the borders of their intended recipients in no way means that there was no such thing as "original reicpients". There was a local church at Corinth.

I understand the point you are trying to make viz. unity. But you are overstating your case. You are in fact making a mistake. Local churches did exist in the NT. Just look at the churches in Revelation. Each of thoese churches had specific issues being addressed.

 

As a matter of scriptural fact, the local church is the only ordained assembly. The so-called universal church is a rather nebulous one..it neither ordains ministers nor calls them out. It does not teach, minister or send out others.......it will assemble one day in Glory, but not here on earth.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Okay, I'm not trying to be contentious, but with that line of thinking, pastors should also stop using the words "The Trinity" since they are not in the Bible either. The implication is there, but not the words themselves.

So to all pastors who are talking about "The Trinity," shame on you

God Bless!!!

Adam </font>[/QUOTE]That was not the point and that statement was cold blooded. I pray you do not mock the Trinity.
In Christ Angie

 

If we were to accept your point that all believers on this board are the body of Christ, why would that negate the fact of local bodies of believers meeting in a specific place being a "local church"??

 

Please tell me chocolate is in the bible! And donuts. And hymnal!
Gina