Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

1611mac

Are You Familiar With "local Church Only"

Recommended Posts

To all... The reason I am curious as to this issue is because I recently left my church due to it. 

 

I ask you to read these three articles in order and leave comment if you so choose:

 

1.) http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/are_you_baptist_brider.html

2.) (page two) http://www.bbc-cromwell.org/Updates/BBCUpdate101513.pdf

3.) http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/iron_sharpening_iron_review_of_strouse.html

Edited by 1611mac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm getting confused... is the idea put forth in these documents that the local church only position (as opposed to universal church) is the equivalent of the baptist brider position? Or that it shouldn't be?

What a muddle. I confess that I'm not 100% solid on how the doctrine of the local church (vs a 'universal' church) is supposed to work. OBviously one cannot have a universal church on which church discipline is enacted, and the organization for churches in the Bible is always on the local level. On the other hand, exactly how many bodies does Christ have? The Bible says He is the Head of the Church (singular) - not multiple heads!  I'm going to have to read through those documents more thoroughly when I have time and compare what they are saying to Scripture. Either way, I don't really think it's a huge issue to separate over. I'd separate from Briders, ecclesiastically speaking, but does it really matter whether one believes solely in a local church or in the existence of a current or future universal church - just so long as they believe in the independent liberty of that local church to serve God as they see fit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salyan.....  

referring to prev post...

To all... The reason I am curious as to this issue is because I recently left my church due to it. 

 

I ask you to read these three articles in order and leave comment if you so choose:

 

1.) http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/are_you_baptist_brider.html

2.) (page two) http://www.bbc-cromwell.org/Updates/BBCUpdate101513.pdf

3.) http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/iron_sharpening_iron_review_of_strouse.html

 

Bro. Cloud wrote article #1.  Bro. Strouse rebutted with #2.  Bro. Cloud replied to the rebuttal with #3.  Bro. Strouse is what some call "local church only."  Bro. Cloud holds my particular view which is explained well in both Bro. Cloud's articles. 

 

What troubles me is the very narrow view of the "local church only" people as expressed in article #2.  With some of them, if you don't join with them 100%, then you are are the same place as the protestant who holds the 100% Universal Church view.

 

I

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is a "niche" teaching or not. The term "IFB" encompasses such an enormous amount of real estate that it would be difficult to say how large or small of a group actually follows this teaching "hard core." The IFB's I grew up around certainly did not believe it, allowing for the Bride of Christ in prospect. However, if I remember correctly, it seems that the Hyles group were the most prominent ones to promote this doctrine (I could be wrong.)
Having said that, just to clarify, I do believe in the primacy of the Local Church, meaning that it is the God-ordained institution that He has chosen to carry out His work in this age.

When Dean Miller, who I believe is openly a Brider, spoke at a conference at HAC, the after math damage control was to explain the Brider position, and iterate that it was not Hyles-Anderson College, nor FBCH's position.
Of course, having been there, the students' positions were as varied as a true cross-section of Baptists would be, so the Briders were there.
But Hyles was a Southern Baptist, and the church was Northern Baptist Conventional, not American Baptist, so we had a whole slew of built in heresy, Brider not being one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not an "either - or" proposition. All three aspects of the church are present in the New Testament scriptures, "local Church", "visible church" and "universal church". They are all simply referred to as "the church" and a simple reading of the context clarifies things.

 

It is an easy concept, actually. We use it in English all the time.

 

My last name is Noel, and I come from a very large extended family that has been in North America since the 1600's. If I say "the Noel family", what am I referring to? Only context will tell.

 

"The Noel family lives on the corner of Sherman and 2nd Street". Aha! Local Noels, those who are physically abiding at that location. We are judicial (no other Noels control us) and visible (you can see us) but not universal. It's just us.

 

"The Noel family is having a family reunion in September in Kentucky" OK. I get it. That is all of the Noels who are living today, spread all over the world. Not local, certainly not judicial, definitely not universal, but plainly visible and just as legitimate.

 

"The Noel family began in Gaul in the year 1126 with a man who survived some OBscure battle that took place on Christmas Day and so took the name "Noel" in gratitude" Not local, not judicial, surely not completely visible, but absolutely universal since it is referring to all of this particular family who have ever existed, both living and dead.

 

All of these means of addressing the "Noel Family" are perfectly legitimate, if held in proper context. It is the same with "the Church" in scripture.  The only thing worse than holding false Roman Catholic (Universal) Church doctrine is allowing it to rOB you understanding true doctrine because we threw the baby out with the bath water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WW,

 

While I understand the point you are making with your illustration of your family, I don't think we can make the same analogy when it comes to the word "Church". When the word "Church" is used in it's singular form in our Bible it is speaking of a particular church, such as, "the church at Antioc." The only exception to this is when the word "Church" is spoken of in the generic sense, meaning the church as an instituion...the "one being put for all".

 

I gave this illustration here recently. We say the automOBile is a wonderful invention. We do not mean any one automOBile, we mean this as a class in and of itself. When the Bibe speaks of "Churches" in the plural it always ads the plural form of "es."

 

You mentioned Local; visible; and universal. I would submit that a church (singular) is always local, therefore visible. The very word "church" means an assembly, in order to have an assembly it must be assembled, hence local. Dealing with local and visible as I have will completely negate universal, there can be no such thing because the real meaning of the word mandates that it be local and if local, must be visible.

 

The body of Christ is the church, of which, He is the head.  Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; This is where the Universal church folks go wrong. They cannot reconcile Universal and local, and rightly so because there is only one body as to kind.

 

Jesus did not start a universal church, His church was local and visible.

 

We are members of His body. When we are assembled we are His church. A bunch of arms, legs and hands scattered all over the world cannot logically be said to be a body. They must be assembled and then they are a body, or church. There was no church until Jesus assembled it.

 

For instance a pile of logs out in the woods cannot be called a house until they are assembled into an actual house.

 

This is sort of off the topic of "local church only", and for this I am sorry, I just felt that I needed to respond to Weary Warrior.

Edited by Jim_Alaska

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 114 times the word church or churches appear in the Bible, a good number is the word churches - you can not have universal churches.
Of the rest (church), the overwhelming majority are indicative of a particular local assembly (the church of. ...... for example).
Of all the mentions of the word church in the Bible, an amazing minority are in such a context as to be vague, but NOT ONE instance is clearly indicative of universal understanding.

Feel free to post EVERY VERSE that you feel clearly shows a universal understanding. It won't take much room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May have already been stated, but the view of "local church only" is that those who possess certain talents such as singing or playing an instrument are not being sent out all over the churchianity crowd as mere performers vs their being available in their local church as key in worship.

 

I know many pastors who go all over the country preaching meetings and have the applause of the " brethren", you know, the BIG preachers who seem to attract the BIG crowds to receive BIG offerings

 

I'm just a "bloom where God planted you" local church guy who sees one shouldn't be easily uprooted by fame and vain glory......

Edited by Salyan
Please watch your choice of language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard of it only this way since I was saved.  I haven't heard this preached for about 5 years now, and my church is currently changing in culture.  Never put the two together until I read this question.  I am a KJV, local church only, specifically local New Testament church believer; sorry if that isn't accepted on an IFB forum????  I am also pro life, and against gay marriage, is that also something we no longer agree on?  What is happening to the saints?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most IFB churches are still on the conservative side of things, but there are some who have drifted away in some areas.

So far as I know, all IFB churches are still pro-life and against homosexual "marriage". Most also believe strongly in the idea of the local church being independent and that local Christians should be members of such a church and support it.

Most churches outside of IFBs have become very liberal in many areas. Some are virtually nothing but secular, twisted images of an actual Christian church. Some IFB churches are drifting, that's a fact. Yet since IFB churches are independent, each stands on its own and one doesn't represent another we can't misjudge all IFB churches based upon the few that have gone astray or the few others which are drifting now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, years ago my future wife and her bother visited an "Independent Baptist Tabernacle" near here. Thinking it was an IFB like they were accustomed to, they came in and sat down. But when the "service" got underway the folks were "speaking in tongues, rolling on the floor and the women were dancing with the pastor....and they quietly left.

They might have been independent and practiced baptism, but their fundamentals were way out of whack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dmedicinus, I understand your frustration.  Sadly, the world and worldly ways are creeping into many churches now days.  And make no mistake, our faith IS being attacked! Yes, the music, dress, other  corrupt "versions" of the bible are being used, and it's all to please the lusts of the world.  The words "old fashioned" used to mean a good thing (and they still do to me), but now many churches want to be "modern" and their excuse is that they will draw in more people, but you have to wonder what they are drawing them in WITH and what are they drawing them in FOR?  If the motivation is anything other than winning souls for Christ, then it's the wrong motivation.  Apostasy has reared it's ugly head and the best advice I can give is what John81 said above: Pray!!! Remain faithful! I also may add if it's possible for you to speak to the deacons or senior members of the congregation and bring to the pastor your concerns and if others share your concerns as well it MAY help. There was a time growing up (I went to IFB church growing up) that the neighbor kids went to a Methodist church, and there weren't huge differences back then. But NOW that same methodist church the neighbor kids used to go to has a lesbian female "pastor", and many other horrible things going on there. I wonder why they even bother going to church since they've corrupted the word of God so wrongly, maybe they go just to say "I went to church... see I'm a good person"? You can count on the devil getting his foot in the door any way he can and then it leads to more and more degradation.  2nd TImothy 3:5 tells us of the perilous times to come, and many (if not all) of those attributes can be found in society today.  Verse 5 states: "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away". And that sums up many churches today.  I'll keep you in my prayers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one question that ones up in the area of local church only, is when Jesus says He will build His churc, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, if we are purely local church only, then that can only be applied to the church He began in Jerusalem, that particular local church. Thus, no other local church in history could claim that promise for their church, then or now. Or did the 'church' Jesus began encompass ALL faithful local churches?

Of course I understand the danger of the universal, invisible church idea-this is why the Catholics have had their power for so long, and why groups like Mormons, JW's, well, even many mainstream protestant denominations have their power-they are considered 'the church': the Presbyterian 'church', the Methodist 'church', etc. It is dangerous and it works against the biblical, independent, local church pattern. However, I DO believe in a universal church, but I don't believe it is realized yet, as a church only becomes a church when it is assembled-thus, the universal church of ALL believes can only be a 'church' when we are all assembled and that won't be for a while, yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Local only means every independent baptist church is autonomous/ self governing. Meaning that there is no other entity, convention, association. other church etc has rule over it. It also includes only members of that local body can take part in the Lords supper and that members can only vote in church meetings and when one wants to be a member of that local church.

Edited by Kleptes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...