Church Membership... is it Biblical?

hi,i offer a testimony of a church i have been with, on and off for 37 yrs.after many years of pastoring southern baptist churces, roy receieved the baptism in yhe Holy Spirit and left under pressure a large sb church. he was led of the Lord many months later to buy a home with some acreage. after moving in he held a service with his family of 5,a man knocked on the door and asked if this was where the new church was going to be. as a sb pastor he was always caught up in numbers,God told him to get out of the book of numbers and into the book of acts. for many years we had no members,no deacons,no paid staff,no paid musicians etc. he would say "you can't join this church: the only Thing you can join is Jesus" i have seen thousands saved and filled with the holy spirit and millions given to missionaries.many missionaries sent out from here, many miracles of every kind. all votes of the church were unanamous...all in favor say amen...this church is not perfect(allows me to attend}by any means but it is sweet and bears much fruit even with close to 20,000 attendees noone has heard of us.jimp

Do you think that modern day "church membership" is Biblical?

Well, scripturally, I believe the genuine born-again experience automatically ushers a person as a royal priest into the Church of the Living God, and this is all done through the Spirit. The corporeal aspect of this, of course, is the actual [i]physical fellowship of believers[/i], which we attend in the flesh, and what most of us here get out of bed to do on Sunday mornings.

These two "churches", however, do not always complement each other. What I mean to say is you can one without the other. There are multitudes not born into God's spiritual church in Christ, yet these same are loyal, exemplary church members corporeally. Normally, these are the ones who would make the corporeal church a law unto itself, and would even make it a "sin" to miss a Sunday. This is usually because an overriding true membership in the spiritual is lacking. I've had actually brethren accuse me of "backsliding" because I missed a Sunday, and I'm sure others here can attest to the same. When this happens, it is normally a sign of coporeal exaltation over the spiritual. These same people will not normally question your quiet time, they will not ask if you've been neglecting personal fellowship in the spiritual with the Lord; they will only see an absence from the corporeal body and automatically deduce the obvious: a backslidden condition.

I think church attendance corporeally is scriptural and something we should all practice. And why wouldn't we? This horrid world is a terrible place, and we being strangers in a strange land ought to seek every opportunity to congregate and edify each other. But I don't think we should make this weekly congregating a law unto itself, and like tithing the obligatory 10% in fear of robbing God, I don't think we should make such a thing compulsory - and we certainly shouldn't lay guilt trips on those who abberate from what we would inaugurate as laws through grace. I say let us hear from God and obey the Holy Spirit according to the will of the Father as revealed in Scripture.

Brother Paul

My question has to do with church "membership". You know, sign the card, agree to the church by-laws and doctrine... enjoy the perks of membership such as being allowed to teach, or voting on church business... etc.

Should the church be a democracy?

I can not find anywhere in scriptures where the church, the Local Body or any other Body that should be a democracy... I believe the scriptures prove that the church should be a Theocracy with God by the Holy Spirit as the head..and those in positions of leadership as under shepherds, servants to all not just those in their "congregations". (The book of Acts, 2 Peter 5:2-4, I Corinthians 1:12,13& 3:1-8))

My personal experience has been that the divisiveness found inside churches is not based solely on scriptures, rather on the democratic perspective that the group rules under the direction of the corporation. In other words, if our corporation is in competition with your corporation I can ignore your needs and you can ignore mine. (Yet, they only ignore up to the point that someone crosses their doctrinal comprehension and many are ready to BLAST the other out of the water)..but the rule of our corporation is that God is rather a silent partner and His "by-laws" are subject to the interpertation of the law school I went to.

I don't believe that it is sinful to be a "member" of a church, and it can be quite helpful to some.. but what a sad commentary on the spiritual state of being within the churchworld when being a "member" is more influential than being a son or daughter of God led by the Holy Spirit.

As far as voting for church business... why not? If your running it as a business you might as well let the "members" have a say in whether your parking lot is paved.....

I would like to say, that there are some very precious people in congregations around the country, that I have met, and I do not hold ANY THING against their choice to partake in modern churchianity. It can be a stumbling block to some, yet on the other hand, it seems almost everything these days can become a stumbling block.

"I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy....with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love. endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit....There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling: One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." Eph 4:1-6

Do you think that modern day "church membership" is Biblical?

that begs the question: is the reason why we have non-biblical "church membership" because we fail to understand what the church (ekklasia) really is?

maybe that is for another thread, but it ties in to this one as well. i'll let you decide krispy.

have a good day.
phil

This article shows the "new testament pattern for the church" its quite challenging and provoking

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=22023&forum=34&2] challenging reading [/url]

About church membership: If there were no membership, you would have wolves come in and destroy a brotherhood and once they have accomplished it, will run off. Actually, methinks this question is rooted in an independent spirit that does not want to submit to others which is anathema to brotherhood. (EDIT: The moderators prefer a scripture to substantiate a position: here is one: consider 1 Corinthians 5.)

Many churches put a huge emphasis on membership, and as you pointed out, they end up with more unsaved members than saved members many times.

Do you not think the reason this happens is when a church is more concerned with numbers then the quality of spiritual life n a person? Too many people are more interested in joining a social club for the personal benefits then they are in joining a group that works to build each other up and act "as iron sharps iron". When this sharpening occurs they run off to another social club (called 'church') where they will be celebrated for any reason - you fill in the blanks.

And then there is the question of voting. Should churches vote on issues facing the church?

What kind of issues are you referring to? If it has to do with issues pertaining to "thus saith the LORD" these should never be put to a vote. You either obey God and his Word or you don't. Simple. It is not up for modification.

Should the church be a democracy?

I will vote with the other poster who says it should be a theocracy. Hebrews 13: 17 is still in my Bible, like it or not...

In our brotherhood, members vote for trustees, SS superintendent, church hostess, librarian, ushers, etc. We do not vote on which scriptures are applicable for today, which can be ignored or which ones are no longer relevant. This method is Biblical as far as I can discern from the scripture. And it works with us frail humans.

ginnyrose

I'm not sure what you are talking about here What difference can "membership" make to the risk of "wolves"? And how can lack of it possibly show an independent spirit, or lack of submission one to another?

Good question...

In 1Corinthians 12 the scriptures refers to the church as a body, using the human body as an analogy as to how it works, interdependent on each other for its functions, survival. The function of the church is to build each other up, to edify each other, to assist each other, just like human body does. No part of our body is of any use to the other if it is disconnected. That is why churches will have guidelines, or by-laws - whatever you want to call it- to spell out briefly what the gospel is all about and gives the leaders - as well as anyone else who is a member there - a framework from which to minister, to serve.

Now how does this prevent wolves from coming in? It is no guarantee it still cannot or will not happen, but you are opening the door for it by not requiring [i]something[/i] from the members. Membership means commitment to each other, to assist in their welfare, be it spiritual, physical, or material. Without this commitment, the brotherhood will not (or should not) allow such a person to occupy positions of leadership. Let me tell you a story. This happened just recently.

A gifted couple started attending a church. This church had membership rolls but seemed to have ignored its role in how they did church. Anyhow, this man was very gifted and before too long the man was teaching Sunday School and such like. In the meantime, he was backstabbing the leadership, and people started leaving and this couple did, too. And then the church disbanded. Extreme? you could say the church's leadership was weak and that is true. In any case, they could not withstand the onslaught this wolf brought with him. Members can become 'wolves' as well. And if this happens the church will exercise its authority to silence him/her by excommunication.

Pain to the body means something is hurting and needs immediate attention. When you are disconnected from the body, that pain cannot be shared and felt.

Benefits of church membership? It is all about brotherhood. And how often does this expression appear in the NT? The saints are referred to brothers, sisters. In my part of the globe brothers and sisters are connected by blood. We are committed to each other. In the church we are connected by the Blood of Jesus who is our head and so we work to support, assist each other. Like a family or a team.

Make sense?

ginnyrose

[u][b]Acts 2:46-47[/b][/u]

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved.

I don't know about signing a card to say that I am a part of something. It kind of reminds me of the good old "pinky swear" that we used to do. [i]Or this:[/i]

[u][b]Matthew 5:33-35 [/b][/u]

"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.' But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God's throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.

So would taking part in a man made ritual of claiming membership in the church be considered the same as Mat 5:33-34? I don't know. My oath is to the Lord, and not to a man made custom.

Miccah,

Matthew 5: 37 says:"But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil." This verse , just a few verses below the reference you shared, informs us that we will be saying 'yes' or 'no' to people. It is swearing that Jesus is prohibiting in verses 34-36. I have never heard that becoming a member of a church is akin to oath making. If it is, you better high-tail (run) out of there: it is not a God - fearing church. A God - fearing church will not require one to violate any of Jesus directives to become a member. Is this saying it too strong? Yes, I have heard of churches who think they are the only organized church going to heaven, but I do not find that in my Bibles, be it NASB, or the KJV. The churches I am acquainted with do not require a card to be signed. And if a church does require it, does it say you will be faithful to this particular church until death? That should raise a red flag if it does because that is a promise one may not be able to fulfil because one does not know the future that well.

What say? Make sense?

ginnyrose

I think it is perfectly fine and well to become a member, as long as you are comfortable with the churches beliefs and doctrin. I do not find any exact doctrin to support it, other that in the early churches found in Acts. Paul wrote to these churches by name. Thereby I would say membership was certainly implied. I have been a member of a local church for many years and I have been very happy there.
:-)

Krispy,

I believe so in a sense and in a sense not. At my first Church there was no such thing. It was actually frowned upon. However in our day of mega Church people walk in and out without even being noticed. Sometimes in a large congregation things need to be more formal and organized. I think it is wrong to be false about it like has been pointed out. However I see good that can come out of it. Like for instance I dont think it is biblical to have unsaved people tithing to your ministry, yet it seems most Churches will just take from whatever anonymous person gives. Also many Churches at their meetings will allow unsaved to come to their meetings for years in hopes that they will get converted so membership can be a good statement to them and also to the community so they dont believe that they are actually part of the Church if they are in error. I would like it done just to acknowledge those who have been walking with God righteously with God. Though my whole argument lies upon the Churches being large so it should probably jsut be broken into smaller groups and be more personal and none of that would have to be worried about.

KrispyKrittr wrote:

They met in homes and it seems that all these little house churches were networked together creating a "church" as a whole in one city.

Krispy

One church in one city. This is what we have been praying for for the last 3 years. That all the body will come together under the banner of Jesus Christ with no denomonations.

Just as Paul wrote to one church consisting of one city.

Interesting subject.

I've been involved in churches for about twelve years and not one of them had "membership", until recently. I've begun fellowshipping at a church in the town I moved to and they have membership.

Their rule is that only members may join in communion, but other than that nothing else is "restricted". If you are already a member of another church which teaches similarly (i.e. not Mormon, Roman Catholic, Unitarian) , you may also join in communion.

Their requirements for membership are that you conform to a basic orthodox statement of beliefs and are aware of the bible's teaching about discipleship and biblical church discipline.

I'm in the membership class right now. It is ten weeks long, the pastor is meeting with about eight of us personally and teaching us one hour lessons on the basic foundational doctrines of the faith. This lets the elders know where we are at and gives us a good idea of where the church is at.

I think it's wise, albeit not mandatory for all churches. The scriptures instruct shepherds to "know the flock" and it makes sense to get to know the sheep/goats before they enter the fold and begin espousing whatever winds of doctrine.

Very interesting subject indeed. The church I attend is currently considering this topic very seriously. We moved away from a formal membership that meant nothing perhaps 20 years ago. But now...

Now we have a grave concern that many in our midst who regularly come to services (where the true Gospel is strongly proclaimed) may not be converted. They hear many exhortations to examine themselves, and we regularly speak of the Matthew 7 passage, and yet it seems that many are comfortable coming on Sunday morning, and have a sense that they are a part of the church. When, in fact, this may not be the case. Mark Dever makes this statement: "Church membership signifies a church's corporate endorsement of a person's salvation." And we are concerned that we may be giving some a false sense of assurance by not having some distinction between who is a part of the church and who is not.

I am not certain of this, but it seems that in the New Testament, there wasn't much need for a pen and paper type of membership. Why? Two reasons: 1. The church was persecuted, so those who were attending meetings were often risking their lives, or at least being ostracized by family to attend. For the most part, they were true believers. 2. The power of God was present in such a way in the early chapters of Acts that Acts 5:13 says: "But none of the rest dared to associate with them: however, the people held them in high esteem." There was a very marked difference between the church and those who were not the church.

I am not sure that membership is the answer. But in a day when easy believism is so prevalent, it seems somehow we must get back to a place where there is a clear line between the church and the world. I thought that strongly preaching the Gospel would naturally accomplish this, but it doesn't. Because unconverted men find it easy (and genuine believers sometimes find it possible) to listen to a message, and think of others, and ignore the piercing Word of God, and thus continue to live in sin. Anyway, these are just some thoughts and struggles. Is membershi the answer? I don't think it is the whole answer, but perhaps a step in the right direction? More than anything, we need God's power in our lives. I am open to comments and or insight.

Has anyone read Dever's book 9 Marks of a Healthy Church? I'm going to read it, as it seems he may have some insight. Thanks, and may God bless you all.

Edit: Mispost.

beloved, the church i wrote about earlier has home groups all over the city;over 1000 of them where you get close attention and fellowship. we have no collections and only mission appeals. jimp

Is membership the answer? I don't think it is the whole answer, but perhaps a step in the right direction?

Seems to me you understand the solution quite well what happens where there are no formal membership rolls.

When you have the problem you described: " Now we have a grave concern that many in our midst who regularly come to services (where the true Gospel is strongly proclaimed) may not be converted" it is a real temptation to go to extremes.

This problem demonstrates again the wisdom our forefathers had in the way they did church. Moderns think they were old - fashioned, legalistic and since we are so much more spiritual we can eliminate those things that irritate and be super-spiritual because after all "we have the Holy Spirit directing us!" implying the people of yesteryear were outside of the Holy Spirit's leading. So we go on our own way and find our selves in a mess. And we scream for revival but are not willing to stop and consider what things contributed to the decline of the church and the things we may practice that keeps us on that slippery slope.

Yes, there is no one solution to fix the problem, but a combination starting with repentance, then submission to God and his word (which results in obedience) and then to each other and the church leaders...so we need formal membership to accomplish these goals because it means we are committed to the welfare of each other similar to what vows do to a couple (except those are for life).

A fundamental problem is we can become so idealistic about how humans will now function corporately after being born-again that we ignore human nature which is still very much well and alive in a body. Then we have problems and wonder "what went wrong?" Face it folks: we see this human nature interfering here on SI all the time. Just think how often we have to apologize for things written/said? And why do we need moderators to ride herd on us all? Human nature...can't get away from it all. Seems to me Paul calls it carnality...and we all have it abiding within in different doses which becomes apparent depending on what is said. So if you are really spiritual we will learn from these exposures and crucify that thing.

My observations and understanding of human nature and history....

Blessings,
ginnyrose

You know, I think if this question was posed to an 19th century evangelist like DL Moody or Sam Jones the answer might be something like this.

'All sorts of people refuse to be connected with the church of God. Some of them presume to make it a doctrinal stance, others simply have no desire to fellowship with the Body of Christ. We have no problem being a part to political affiliations, no problem signing our name on the registry at a social club. However when it comes to putting our names on a list of saints so often we recoil.'

iansmith wrote:
You know, I think if this question was posed to an 18th century evangelist like DL Moody or Sam Jones the answer might be something like this.

'All sorts of people refuse to be connected with the church of God. Some of them presume to make it a doctrinal stance, others simply have no desire to fellowship with the Body of Christ. [b]We[/b] have no problem being a part to political affiliations, no problem signing our name on the registry at a social club, but when it comes to putting their name on a list of saints people recoil.'

Hello Ian, did you compose that? Who are 'we'? Because of course not all of us have 'no problem being a part to political affiliations'.

Intens4Him wrote:

jimp, oh my gosh!!!!!

Hello Lisa, since my english is not native and I am not familiar with this word, could you explain what it means 'gosh'? Thanks.

So again, where is church membership biblical?

Tears,

Haha, I composed that, but I tried to do it in the style of a 19th century evangelist. Evanglists tend to speak in generalities, when an evangelist says 'We' it means that the most common denominator of the audience.

iansmith wrote:
I composed that, but I tried to do it in the style of a 19th century evangelist. Evanglists tend to speak in generalities, when an evangelist says 'We' it means that the most common denominator of the audience.

Ok, thanks. I just saw your book list for reading, and that's says all :)

Miccah wrote:
So again, where is church membership biblical?

i guess my question is why do we need a church membership?

if we really love one another, pray for one another and get to know one another, then why do we need church membership?

i seriously cannot think of one good biblical reason except that is the way our church does it. that is about it. (and i have belonged to a "church" for 15+ years, so it's not like i am anti everything).

phil

So again, where is church membership biblical?

Try reading this from 1 Corinthians 1:
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

My question to you is: how can this happen unless there is a corporate agreement? commitment to the Word and each other?

Now read the rest of 1 Corinthians, Acts and the other Pauline epistles with this question in mind. And ask the LORD to reveal to you what He thinks.

Please allow me to share what we have seen locally by persons who are of the same mind as you:

They do not want to submit to others.

They are very independent.

They interpret the Word through their feelings: "I think", "I believe", "I feel", et al.

Obedience is based on their feelings.

They cannot be depended upon to help others in the brotherhood in time of need.

But when THEY have physical needs they ask for our help!

Embrace questionable doctrines and take offense when challenged.

There you have it: these people have not proven themselves to be reliable in doctrine and life. I would never look up to them as spiritual mentors because of these problems.

ginnyrose

David wasn't allowed to count his army

It seems apparent that this census was in addition to other census taken because you can read in 1 Chronicles 7 about the numbers of the tribes, the numbers of their valiant men.

If you study carefully the OT law and the history if the Jewish people you will find where God may say you can do this or that and then in the life of the nation He may come along and say "Don't" do something which was allowable in the law given by God to Moses. Case in point: the Israelite armies were allowed to take of the spoil after battle. However, one time God said: Don't". Remember that time? It was when Saul was told to kill everything taken in battle when they fought the Amalekites as recorded in 1 Samuel 15. (Read it for your self.) And because Saul disobeyed, God took the kingship away from him. Oh, he tried to act real pious about his disobedience by offering up in sacrifice the cattle he took...(Sounds like a few moderns, does it not?) But God was not impressed: 1 Samuel 15:22-23: 22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. 23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

Yeah, some things never really change, do they?

Blessings,
ginnyrose

ginnyrose wrote:

Try reading this from 1 Corinthians 1:
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

My question to you is: how can this happen unless there is a corporate agreement? commitment to the Word and each other?

Now read the rest of 1 Corinthians, Acts and the other Pauline epistles with this question in mind. And ask the LORD to reveal to you what He thinks.

Commitment to the Word and signing a sheet of paper stating that you are set apart from other believers is totally different.

[u][b]1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (NKJV)[/b][/u]

Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? [b]I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name.[/b] Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.

Look at what was bolded. Can you make a distinction between a membership body doing things seperately from the rest of the Church body as being something that can be considered "baptizing in my own name"? Paul said [i]"Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? ”[/i]... Wouldn't someone claiming to be a part of a certain singular church be doing what Paul is teaching against?

Please allow me to share what we have seen locally by persons who are of the same mind as you:

They do not want to submit to others.

They are very independent.

They interpret the Word through their feelings: "I think", "I believe", "I feel", et al.

Obedience is based on their feelings.

They cannot be depended upon to help others in the brotherhood in time of need.

But when THEY have physical needs they ask for our help!

[b]Embrace questionable doctrines and take offense when challenged.[/b]

Do I come off that way sister? If I do then I am sorry. That is not who I am in the Lord and do repent when my flesh arises.

As for what I bolded, all I did was ask where church membership is scriptually, and your post is what I received?

There you have it: these people have not proven themselves to be reliable in doctrine and life. I would never look up to them as spiritual mentors because of these problems.

ginnyrose

Well, I guess that you labeled me in this group. I am sorry that I have offended you by asking that scripture be taken into account on this subject. I guess I am having a hard time understanding how NOT being a card carrying memeber of a man made symbolic church religiousity qualifies me as being doctrinally unsound?

No worries ginnyrose, this is not a reason to stop breaking bread over. I am not fully against church membership, in fact, I am considered to be a part of the Church in my city I live by all who attend the Church in my city (Of who not one are card carrying members of this church). But I am against people making church membership mandatory in order to be considered a believer in that church. There is a difference.

Blessings sister.

Just a little thought here.

Membership is just a form of control.

What do I mean, well if you don't live up to the rules that allowed you to get a membership in the frist place you can then have your membership taken from you.
-------------------------------------------------

Example

If you join and become a member you might have to make a statement like this.

I want to be come a member of this church because God has spoken to my heart and this is the church he wants me to come to.

Then when you go to the Pastor or Elders and say I am leaving, there are things you are doing that I don't agree with know. They (Pastor or Elders) could then say something like this. You told us in your membership form God had spoken to join this church. Surely God has not changed his mind.

Know if you do listen to Gods voice and leave, they could then go to the pulpit and say this.
Five years ago these people told us they joined because God had spoken to them to join. These people are back sliding or rebelling against God are not to be trusted do not talk to them.

I am sure we could come up with many more examples. But in my eyes it's a form of control.

It can and does get misused...................

Something to also keep in mind is to do an [u]attitude and motive[/u] check on ourselves. I don't see anything about church membership in the Bible but that doesn't necessarily mean that God is against it. The Bible instructs us to take proper care of our bodies. We can do that at a gym, but becoming a member of a gym is not scriptural either. But you join it because you enjoy the benefits given to the members. There's not necessarily anything wrong with it if you are in agreement with the church doctrine and rules. If you aren't, don't join, but there's no need to make a fuss about it.

Quite frankly, I find that most people are choosing their own churches and that's where problems come in. They try to find a church that meets [i]their[/i] requirements and [i]their[/i] needs. That's not what church is for and not how to choose one. It's not something we choose for our comfort. A Christian should be incredibly prayerful about what church they attend. It should be God's decision, not our own.

No church is perfect anyway. No one has it all right. I believe in being planted and not church hopping, but I'm going to remain open to God's leading. (The key word there is [i]God's[/i] leading, not my own.) He may have me in a church where I don't agree with some things they believe, but He's placed me there for a reason. This is the case where I'm at now.

I don't want membership in this church, but I'm where God has placed me - matter settled. I sought God on this decision. I'll stay put until He moves me. And He may just move me to become a member! (I can't discount that possibility!)

But, if I refuse to become a member of that church just because I'm having a fit about it not being laid out in scripture and [i]I[/i] don't believe in it and , bless God, I'm not going to join just because they want me to -- then my attitude is haughty, rebellious and proud. Member or not, we attend there and are still under their authority which we are to respect and honor. We may not be members but we are still subject to their rules, guidelines, charter, or whatever they want to call it.

Motives and attitude mean [i]so[/i] much!

Miccah wrote:

But I am against people making church membership mandatory in order to be considered a believer in that church.

Somehow we are not on the same page...

Let me try again.

In the above quote are you saying this particular church says that if you are not a member of their church you are not a Believer? I do not subscribe to this philosophy at all. If I would believe this I would have declared to one and all on this forum the name of the church I belong to and insisted everyone join it in order to be saved! As it is I do not think I have ever posted my church affiliation on this forum.

Miccah, the locals who eschew church membership are strange. Really! Want me to describe some of their beliefs? The one fellow - when he got short on funds would 'do the churches', meaning he would go preach to earn money; if he really needed help he would come to our churches with a sob story and then people would open their pocketbooks to him... He was rude to females, was not an honest man - cheated my DH out of some money. Another man declared the Holy Spirit would cease to exist in eternity, or something like that. Also he was very paranoid as Y2K approached and purchased a lot of firearms to protect himself from enemies. Now all of these people were/are very religious, claim they belong to God, believe in Jesus. Like I said, they are weird.

Let me try again: read 1 Corinthians 12 and the rest of the Pauline epistles as well as Acts (2:47). You see the church operating as a body, all attached to each other, committed to helping, edifying each other. How can this be done when you isolate yourself from the body of believers? To demand membership means you are in agreement with their beliefs, doctrines. Now if you cannot find a church whose doctrinal positions you cannot support, find one you can. And if that is not possible, start one by meeting with others for prayer and Bible study. That is how many churches started anyways.

If you start a home church, how would you like it if you get a group going and some would declare they enjoy coming but they refuse to make any commitment to help out? or attend? Suppose you agree to meet on a certain day and they may or may not come? and you have no one? They want the benefits but none of the responsibility? How is this being Biblical?

Are we communicating now?

Blessings,
ginnyrose

There is a sermon by Brother Mose on this topic.
http://www.charityministries.org/msg_detail.a5w?vlast_index=3966

ginnyrose wrote:

If you start a home church, how would you like it if you get a group going and some would declare they enjoy coming but they refuse to make any commitment to help out? or attend? Suppose you agree to meet on a certain day and they may or may not come? and you have no one? They want the benefits but none of the responsibility? How is this being Biblical?

Bottom line is that church membership is man made.

As you know I am part of a house church that meets in my home. People are free to come and go as they are lead. No one is required to pledge loyalty to me, anyone or anything except the Lord. We are about making diciples of the Lord and not diciples of any certain church structure.

If church membership works for you and helps keep the crazies out, run with it. I pray nothing but the Lord's will and guidance.

We can do that at a gym, but becoming a member of a gym is not scriptural either. But you join it because you enjoy the benefits given to the members. There's not necessarily anything wrong with it if you are in agreement with the church doctrine and rules. If you aren't, don't join, but there's no need to make a fuss about it.

the only way to join the true church (ekklesia) is by new birth into the kingdom of God by His Holy Spirit.

now if we are talking about joining an institution, then by all means take roll and have members, but if we are talking about something spiritual in nature, then how can you have a membership class?? only God knows that membership.

i hope it makes sense.
phil

Try reading this from 1 Corinthians 1:
10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

My question to you is: how can this happen unless there is a corporate agreement? commitment to the Word and each other?

i guess i still don't understand why one needs to be a member of a church to do this.

Please allow me to share what we have seen locally by persons who are of the same mind as you:

They do not want to submit to others.

They are very independent.

i ask you these questions because we need to differenciate between someone who feels like they don't need anyone and someone who loves to meet and talk with believers about what God has done in their life and what He has done in others lives' as well.

They interpret the Word through their feelings: "I think", "I believe", "I feel", et al.

Embrace questionable doctrines and take offense when challenged.

There you have it: these people have not proven themselves to be reliable in doctrine and life. I would never look up to them as spiritual mentors because of these problems.

would it be fair to say that all members of churches are hypocrites who don't really love God, they just go and do there sunday routine, praising God with their lips while their hearts are far from Him?? no, by no means. while there may actually be some that fall under that catagory, how could we paint all members of a local church as such people? that's unfair and wrong to do.

with love sis,
phil

by LoveHim on 2008/2/7 7:31:02

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We can do that at a gym, but becoming a member of a gym is not scriptural either. But you join it because you enjoy the benefits given to the members. There's not necessarily anything wrong with it if you are in agreement with the church doctrine and rules. If you aren't, don't join, but there's no need to make a fuss about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the concern i have with this type of thinking brother is that the true church (ekklesia) is spiritual in nature and not physical. there are physical, local expressions of this true church (ekklesia) (one church per city), but this is merely the expression of the church and not the church itself. do you understand what i'm saying??

the only way to join the true church (ekklesia) is by new birth into the kingdom of God by His Holy Spirit.

now if we are talking about joining an institution, then by all means take roll and have members, but if we are talking about something spiritual in nature, then how can you have a membership class?? only God knows that membership.

i hope it makes sense.
phil

I do understand where you're coming from, Phil, and I appreciate your concern. Perhaps it wasn't the best example I could have given, but it's not wholly without merit. Personally, I believe it's a mistake to separate life into physical, or secular, and spiritual. We are spiritual beings and everything we do is spiritual in nature. (I learned this from Leonard Ravenhill and Keith Daniel. It has made a huge difference in my life, personally.)

Even so, with the example aside, my post was about the [u]attitudes and motives[/u] of those who are either accepting membership or refusing it.

Again, I don't see any scriptural backing to becoming a member of a church, either. The Word of Faith movement, which I came out of, uses membership to keep an eye on who's tithing and who's not, among other things relating to elitism. [i]However[/i], I don't think taking membership in a church is a sin. There is no scriptural backing to say that it is. Therefore, this is just one of those issues that isn't overly important. Those who get all worked-up and flustered over the audacity of membership would benefit from a self-examination and an attitude check. All Christians are instructed to do this.

Even so, with the example aside, my post was about the attitudes and motives of those who are either accepting membership or refusing it.

I don't think taking membership in a church is a sin. There is no scriptural backing to say that it is. Therefore, this is just one of those issues that isn't overly important. Those who get all worked-up and flustered over the audacity of membership would benefit from a self-examination and an attitude check. All Christians are instructed to do this.

but like i've said before, i still don't understand why one has to be a member of a local fellowship to love one another, pray with one another and reach the lost. none of these things mentioned are the result of having to be a member, but are merely the result of walking with Jesus and loving others. (and this coming from a guy who has only been at one main church for 15+ years)
:-)

phil

by LoveHim on 2008/2/7 18:40:57

Quote:
Even so, with the example aside, my post was about the attitudes and motives of those who are either accepting membership or refusing it.
i totally agree with you keith. it is really a matter of the heart.
Quote:
I don't think taking membership in a church is a sin. There is no scriptural backing to say that it is. Therefore, this is just one of those issues that isn't overly important. Those who get all worked-up and flustered over the audacity of membership would benefit from a self-examination and an attitude check. All Christians are instructed to do this.
you're right, it really isn't something to get all worked up about. it is good to have an idea where you stand and rest assured in that. to me it really doesn't matter, i just have seen how it has been used as a means of watching whether one has been at church lately or how much you've been "giving" to the church lately ya know?? so from that i'm kinda leary (sp?).

but like i've said before, i still don't understand why one has to be a member of a local fellowship to love one another, pray with one another and reach the lost. none of these things mentioned are the result of having to be a member, but are merely the result of walking with Jesus and loving others. (and this coming from a guy who has only been at one main church for 15+ years)

You're a dear brother, Phil.

The good news is that no one [i]has[/i] to take membership in a church. You know, I think people do it more blindly and without a lot of thought or prayer. If someone wants to, I'll bless them and rejoice with them. If someone doesn't want to, I'll support them, too, hoping they've at least prayed about it and performed a self-examination.

Personally, I would only take membership if it was through the prompting of the Lord.

The good news is that no one has to take membership in a church. You know, I think people do it more blindly and without a lot of thought or prayer. If someone wants to, I'll bless them and rejoice with them. If someone doesn't want to, I'll support them, too, hoping they've at least prayed about it and performed a self-examination.

Personally, I would only take membership if it was through the prompting of the Lord.

thank you keith,
phil

I was just visiting John MacArthur's website, listening to his audio Q&A. There was a question there called [i]Is church membership important? If so, why?[\\i]

Brother MacArthur says it is. He explains how, in Acts, scriptures say that the churches grew by so many people and so many people. He said they knew that because they kept records. He also mentioned that it says when these members moved from one town to the next, they carried letters of recommendation with them. These would have been given out by someone whose been shepherding these people.

He also says that there's no such thing as "free floating" Christians in the Bible. So, according to Brother MacArthur, (and in his words), church membership is mandatory.

He also gives the example of submitting to those who are over you in authority, in the Lord.

Personally, it's enough to make me seek God in prayer on this. If I'm wrong, I'd rather know it and correct it than stubbornly hold to an incorrect theology.

He also mentioned that it says when these members moved from one town to the next, they carried letters of recommendation with them.

Interesting thought though,yet, there was only ONE church in each town. As in scripture Paul writes to the church in Ephesus, the church in Corinth, etc. etc.; (though there may have been several homes that they met in, they were really only a part of one church)..... that seems to be an issue in this day, which "church" is the church we should be a member of?

He also says that there's no such thing as "free floating" Christians in the Bible. So, according to Brother MacArthur, (and in his words), church membership is mandatory.

just my $0.02
phil

LoveHim wrote:

He also says that there's no such thing as "free floating" Christians in the Bible. So, according to Brother MacArthur, (and in his words), church membership is mandatory.

there's also no such thing in the bible as believers meeting in a building and calling it church, so why do we do it?? also, how does he know if some believers went from one house to another house for prayer and fellowship and instructions from the word? that statement seems to be made more by guessing or hoping instead of simply reading the word and seeing what it says.

just my $0.02
phil

My intention was only to offer some information I came across. Being that Brother MacArthur tends to be well-thought of on these forums, I thought the information might prove useful to some. People can do what they like with it.

In all fairness, brother, there are plenty of arguments and decisions on both sides by way of "guessing or hoping." There [i]are[/i] people who argue against church membership for the wrong motive of not wanting the accountability or out of rebellion.

Is it really fair to say that the opposing side of your belief should "simply reading the word and seeing what it says." If the matter were that "simple," this wouldn't be the debate that it has been for years.

There are aspects of [i]both[/i] sides of this arguement that sound reasonable to me. As a result, I will put the matter into prayer to receive peace about it. A scripture that always comes to mind in matters of debate is:

[i]"There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death."[/i] Proverbs 14:12

This is what encourages me to pray about all things.

KrispyKrittr wrote:
Yep... I agree, Phil.

I have tremendous respect for McArthur, but when I hear "John McArthur says...", my immediate reaction is "So what?".

Too much hero worship in the church.

Krispy

You state an unfair, and untrue, assumption, brother. I don't know Brother MacArthur from a hole in the ground. There is no worship going on here.

As I said in my previous post, I posted brother MacArthur's comments simply because he appears to be well-thought of by many on this board and someone might appreciate knowing his thoughts.

If his thoughts agreed with yours, would you have still said, "So what?" By your reasoning, when others read your post, should their immediate reaction be the same? "So what?"

This is the aspect of debating that I don't like. They inevitably come down to one person adamantly holding to their side without giving proper consideration to the other viewpoint. A debate is not meant to be a battle and the best arguer wins.

In all fairness, brother, there are plenty of arguments and decisions on both sides by way of "guessing or hoping." There are people who argue against church membership for the wrong motive of not wanting the accountability or out of rebellion.

for me brother, i will say that this was an issue that i've studied to see what the NT shows us and i can honestly say that being a member of a "church" building is not shown in scripture. but being a member of the true ekklasia and fellowshipping with other believers is VERY BIBLICAL.

it's not a life or death issue, so with that i can honestly careless if one person wants to be a member of a "church" or not, i just care if one is a member of the true church..

like i said before "Why does one need to be a member of a "church" to love, pray, help and reach out to one another?" you don't.

but if someone wants to, hey whatever floats your boat. pray and have assurance from the Lord and walk in that assurance.

ps. i don't think that krispy thought you were hero worshipping macarthur, he was merely stating that because a well known and well thought of pastor says something, it is not fact. if that's not so, i'll let him tell you.

anyways, i appreciate you looking at both sides of the issue and taking it to the Lord. i really appreciate the prayerful posts that i feel when i read your posts. you are a dear brother. :-)

your brother,
phil

LoveHim wrote:
brother, i appreciate what you posted. it is never wrong or anything to post what macarthur or others say, but in doing so, we should also hold that opinion to the word right?? i hope that it didn't come across that i was mad at what you said (cuz i wasn't), i just wanted to show that the statement made by him was more of an opinion, not fact.

I will be honest and say that, yes, I thought sensed some frustration in your post. I appreciate you taking the time to correct my false assumption. I apologize for assuming the worst.

You're right, brother, that this really is a secondary issue and not even worthy of a debate, when a friendly conversation would suffice.

I wish I was wise. There are so many things to pray and seek God about. Especially when it can seem that there are scriptures that support both sides of an issue. I know this can't be the case because scripture is not double-minded, but it's for this reason that I really try to remain prayerfully objective and not jump prematurely to one side or the other. It's a thin place between obedience and my legalism/perfectionistic past. Prayer is so vital.

I have a lot of patience. I believe I can safely say that. I can wait three hours for you to tie your shoes, only for you to realize that you haven't put them on yet. But, when it comes to wanting to grow in the Lord and be more transformed into His image, I seem to be as restless as a hog at butcher time. But, that's why God invented time - so everything doesn't happen all at once.

Keith wrote:

He explains how, in Acts, scriptures say that the churches grew by so many people and so many people. He said they knew that because they kept records.

Seems to me you all got off-tract on this question by disputing McArthur and never did get around to addressing the issue that McArthur addressed: did the NT church keep records of members and is there Biblical proof for this?

What say?

ginnyrose

He explains how, in Acts, scriptures say that the churches grew by so many people and so many people. He said they knew that because they kept records.

Seems to me you all got off-tract on this question by disputing McArthur and never did get around to addressing the issue that McArthur addressed: did the NT church keep records of members and is there Biblical proof for this?

What say?

ginnyrose

all i am saying is that to understand that the true ekklesia is spiritual in nature and our local bodies are merely the physical expression of the church. so i am born again in spirit and i automatically become a member into His church. that is all i see from scripture.

but hey, if one wants to become a member to the local "church", then by all means go ahead. just please do not look down on some of us who do not see the scriptural support for it..that's all i am saying my friend.;-)

phil

It seem to me that 'membership' as defined by most local churches is totally unsupported by scripture. I attend a local Church with my family because I believe God has called us there. They have 'Membership classes' where we wee presented with a 'Membership pack', standing order for tithing and a form to sign. I have not joined because I cant see a scriptural basis for this membership doctrine. Also I can't help wonder what I'd be getting into.

I completely believe the word of God, but as I can find no scropture to support 'Membership' I just can't 'sign up'. I've been a Christian for over 20 years and I know that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ. The local Church can't offer me any better status than that.

However, I'm also a firm believer in helping, giving, taking part, functioning as part of the body. As a 'non-member' I am blocked from helping in the Church. So the local Church is using 'membership' to block me from functioning within the body.

That I guess is the fruit of 'membership'.

It's a great shame and the subject of much prayer at the moment.