Question about looking for a local church...

[Alimantado]

On 02/08/2017 at 3:43 AM, swathdiver said:

Only a New Testament Church of the kind that Christ began during his earthly ministry can establish another New Testament Church.  It starts through much prayer, a pastor and his family is called and sent into the area that the sending church has a burden for. 

On 04/08/2017 at 10:52 AM, Alimantado said:

A related question--happy to move it to a new thread if needs be--that occurs to me is how diligent should somebody be about researching this information if they're thinking about attending/joining a church? I hear plenty of good advice about checking a church's teachings and practice, and indeed it should be easy to find out who they are fellowshipping with at the time, but finding out how that church started if it's, say, 150 years old might be quite difficult (I've never even tried). And then do you check that the church that established it was in turn established by a New Testament church 50-100 years further back and so on and so on...? Obviously nobody can trace a lineal timeline back 2,000 years, but how far is sufficient?

On 04/08/2017 at 3:21 PM, DaveW said:

I understand your question, and it can cause some consternation among some, but rather than start a debate about that end of things (which can get very heated) in this thread, I would prefer to keep it about the process of starting a church today, rather than the history of a particular church. Another thread specifically about the history of existing churches would gain some notice I am sure.

This is a fork of the discussion thread here. The question and context are above--happy to hear any thoughts from folk. Ta, Carl

[swathdiver]

A church can start out wrong and become a New Testament Church.  As a practical matter, the candidate should look at the history and the qualifications of the sending church, but what really matters is if that church today is of the kind that Christ started during his earthly ministry.

Consider this.  A NT church plants another in a nearby town.  However, the pastor they chose has only one child.  After several years the pastor has multiple children.  So when the new church was planted it did not have a qualified pastor but in time he became qualified and the church is now scriptural.

A well established NT Church that fell away with regards to music makes repentance and once again honors the Lord with scriptural music.  

I believe an historical example might be Charles Chiniquy and his flock.  He was a Catholic Priest that saw the error of his ways and brought his entire congregation out of Popery and into what I believe then became a NT Church.

Edited August 10, 2017 by swathdiver

[Salyan]

35 minutes ago, swathdiver said:

A church can start out wrong and become a New Testament Church.  As a practical matter, the candidate should look at the history and the qualifications of the sending church, but what really matters is if that church today is of the kind that Christ started during his earthly ministry.

Consider this.  A NT church plants another in a nearby town.  However, the pastor they chose has only one child.  After several years the pastor has multiple children.  So when the new church was planted it did not have a qualified pastor but in time he became qualified and the church is now scriptural.

A well established NT Church that fell away with regards to music makes repentance and once again honors the Lord with scriptural music.  

I believe an historical example might be Charles Chiniquy and his flock.  He was a Catholic Priest that saw the error of his ways and brought his entire congregation out of Popery and into what I believe then became a NT Church.

I agree with the point on churches that start out 'wrong', or adopt wrong practices, can become 'good' again. The past history of a church is less important than where it currently stands (although that history might give some good context - a long-standing sympathy with Reformed doctrine, over-leniency with church membership, etc.)  I disagree with the idea of a pastor needing to have more than one child - but I'll take that to another thread. ;)

Last night, I was reading the account from Jonathan Goforth on the revival in Korea in the early 1900's. He told of an incident in Korea where a rural man visited a city during the revival, heard the Gospel preaching and obtained a Bible. He took that Bible back to the county with him, and read it to his friends, until about 50 of these rural people believed (the story doesn't say when exactly the first man got saved). They understood from the Scriptures that they should be baptized, and part of a church body, but they weren't sure how to go about it (seeing as there was no missionary, pastor, or even original evangelist). After reading and praying extensively, they came to the conclusion that they should all go home and have a bath, and then meet back and start a church. :D 

That method of church planting is not one we would plan to follow, and most of our churches would probably rebaptize those folks 'in the name of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit' if they came to their fellowship, but I hardly think God was displeased with the honest attempt of these folk to obey the Scripture they best they knew how.

 

[HappyChristian]

I do agree that churches may start out wrong and right themselves. There have been churches that began in the Southern Baptist Convention and then pulled out to become Independent. We know a man who was assistant pastor at a pentecostal church. Both he and the pastor, through study and prayer, realized the error of the teachings and became Baptist (the church did, too). He is now, after pastoring for many years, an evangelist). 

When people sincerely seek the Lord, He will right errors.

[Jordan Kurecki]

Lineage is not what we look at to determine whether or not something is a New Testament Church, but it's doctrines and practices are.

I had a discussion of this type with a Baptist Brider type years ago, like has been said already, we really can't trace any of our churches back to the time of Christ.

8 hours ago, Salyan said:

I agree with the point on churches that start out 'wrong', or adopt wrong practices, can become 'good' again. The past history of a church is less important than where it currently stands (although that history might give some good context - a long-standing sympathy with Reformed doctrine, over-leniency with church membership, etc.)  I disagree with the idea of a pastor needing to have more than one child - but I'll take that to another thread. ;)

Last night, I was reading the account from Jonathan Goforth on the revival in Korea in the early 1900's. He told of an incident in Korea where a rural man visited a city during the revival, heard the Gospel preaching and obtained a Bible. He took that Bible back to the county with him, and read it to his friends, until about 50 of these rural people believed (the story doesn't say when exactly the first man got saved). They understood from the Scriptures that they should be baptized, and part of a church body, but they weren't sure how to go about it (seeing as there was no missionary, pastor, or even original evangelist). After reading and praying extensively, they came to the conclusion that they should all go home and have a bath, and then meet back and start a church. :D 

That method of church planting is not one we would plan to follow, and most of our churches would probably rebaptize those folks 'in the name of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit' if they came to their fellowship, but I hardly think God was displeased with the honest attempt of these folk to obey the Scripture they best they knew how.

 

Are you sure Goforth was speaking about Korea? because he was a missionary in China as far as I know.

Edited August 11, 2017 by Jordan Kurecki

[DaveW]

Wr have a lady at our church currently who many years ago was saved in a congregational church. Then some time later, the pastor there anniunced to the church that he had been doing some serious study and realised that they were not bibical for many reasons - he spent some time talking with a local baptist pastor, and this church decided that about half of them would fo for a special meeting at the Baptist church and get baptised properly, then they began a new church.  The other half stayed at the old Congregational church, having rejected the Pastor's new path.

By studying his Binle he came to the conclusion that they needed to be baptised with proper authority and sought out someone who he belived had that authority.

But the reason they "started a new church" was because there were some who would not follow this path, and he did not feel it was right to force them out considering it was his change, not theirs.

I personally think the argument over the history of it is a pointless argument - the process a church should use today is clear in the Bible: churches are started under proper authority, and that authority rests in the church sending the man.

There are some who say that you must be able to prove full lineage, but I have never met any man who can do so - it becomes an intellectual argument only, and therefore nigh on useless..... words to no profit, one might say.

[Salyan]

29 minutes ago, Jordan Kurecki said:

Are you sure Goforth was speaking about Korea? because he was a missionary in China as far as I know.

Korea's really close to China. He visited. ;)

Yes, I am. Check it out! https://www.gospeltruth.net/koreafire.htm

[Alimantado]

5 hours ago, DaveW said:

I personally think the argument over the history of it is a pointless argument - the process a church should use today is clear in the Bible: churches are started under proper authority, and that authority rests in the church sending the man.

There are some who say that you must be able to prove full lineage, but I have never met any man who can do so - it becomes an intellectual argument only, and therefore nigh on useless..... words to no profit, one might say.

The point of the 'argument' is what's an individual seeking a church to do? Not pointless--it's a direct question about a practical matter. The profit of answering that question might be that it helps those seeking churches with what they should be looking for and what they should be doing.

The question of what a potential church ought to do when being founded is a separate but related question--in fact it's what your other thread is for, isn't it Dave?

[DaveW]

2 minutes ago, Alimantado said:

The point of the 'argument' is what's an individual seeking a church to do? Not pointless--it's a direct question about a practical matter. The profit of answering that question might be that it helps those seeking churches with what they should be looking for and what they should be doing.

The question of what a potential church ought to do when being founded is a separate but related question--in fact it's what your other thread is for, isn't it Dave?

No no - not a pointless question - a pointless argument.

And my answer to the question is that the more important thing, rather than the history of the church is where that church is right now.

A church could have a great history (as far as can be established), but may very possibly be right out in left field doctrinally.

Another church could have a "Shady past" (if you will), but might now be solid in doctrine.

The choice is obvious.

[Alimantado]

15 hours ago, swathdiver said:

A church can start out wrong and become a New Testament Church.  As a practical matter, the candidate should look at the history and the qualifications of the sending church, but what really matters is if that church today is of the kind that Christ started during his earthly ministry.

Consider this.  A NT church plants another in a nearby town.  However, the pastor they chose has only one child.  After several years the pastor has multiple children.  So when the new church was planted it did not have a qualified pastor but in time he became qualified and the church is now scriptural.

A well established NT Church that fell away with regards to music makes repentance and once again honors the Lord with scriptural music.  

I believe an historical example might be Charles Chiniquy and his flock.  He was a Catholic Priest that saw the error of his ways and brought his entire congregation out of Popery and into what I believe then became a NT Church.

Ok, so in other words the Bible gives us the model of how churches ought to be planted by other legitimate NT churches, but if it ends up because of history or necessity that a church hasn't quite followed that model then it doesn't necessarily make it illegitimate and therefore the seeker should concern themselves with what said church is doing now. Is that fair?

Or should concern themselves 'first and foremost' might be more accurate a summary...

(just added)