Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus, ¶ To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons: |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus (the Messiah, the Anointed), To all the saints (God's people) in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, including the overseers and deacons: |
Bible Question:
Dear Saints, Define the local church (the Biblical ideal), explaining why we have the denominational (divisive) system in it's place. Frankly, I am disappointed that not one person tried to explain the plight the church is in today! The odds are that most of you are part of a denomination. So... tell me why? The other day I posted: A local church is a 'mutually committed expression of the body of Christ in a specific locality.' A family of believers that have bound themselves together before God, dedicated to showing forth Jesus to their neighborhood. In the early church, these were usually gathering in a saint's house. "how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house," Acts 20:20 NASB "also greet the church that is in their house. Greet Epaenetus, my beloved, who is the first convert to Christ from Asia." Romans 16:5 NASB "The churches of Asia greet you. Aquila and Prisca greet you heartily in the Lord, with the church that is in their house." 1 Corinthians 16:19 NASB "and to Apphia our sister, and to Archippus our fellow soldier, and to the church in your house:" Philemon 1:2 NASB Another aspect is that there should be fellowship, as in the sharing of lives, with our homes open to eachother. This implies a commitment to one another beyond *membership.* "And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer." Acts 2:42 NASB Finally, I can find no reference in the Bible to connecting one local church to another in any form of organization. The thought of 'strength in numbers' is never spoken, nor is the binding of any local body to another for denominational (divisional) identity ever portrayed. The absence of any encouragement to 'make a name for yourselves,' and the many warnings not to become like the Pharisees, Saducees, scribes, or any other 'named' grouping, leads me to believe that God never intended for their to be anything more than the local church. I would welcome anyone that can Biblically defend 'denominationalism' without claiming superior doctrine or 'strength in numbers.' (both points are moot in Jesus) Blessings to all, and blessings to the local church. In Christ Jesus, charis |
Bible Answer: Charis I don’t think anyone can supply a Biblical answer since denominations are more or less man made. However I will try to explain the reasons I see for denominations. First leadership we see an example in Acts 12:17 with the implication of James being the leader of the church in Jerusalem. It has been surmised that in the first through third century each church had a pastor or a pastor would be shared by two or three smaller churches. However in each city there was a man charged with the oversight of the churches of that city. Denominations may well be the natural extension of this city grouping of churches. Leadership implies government and even church leadership must have some form of government. We all know there are many and widely varying forms of government. There is one person in charge making the decisions, the whole church collectively voting on decisions, and the elected/appointed body of representatives charged with making decisions. There are many variations of one or all three of these that effectively or not so effectively govern organizations and churches. People naturally gravitate to the form of government that best suit their needs. I have seen abuses in all forms so there is no conclusive argument for any one form. However I do believe a man pastoring a church should submit himself to someone, if for no other reason than accountability. Denominations fill that need. Charis you said not to use the size factor but I think that one point is too big to ignore. First a denomination can supply printed materials, books and other resources one church or organization could never hope to. Then there is missionary support, a grouping of denominational churches can collectively support many missionaries where one church may not be able to totally support any. We must include hospitals, colleges and institutions, many colleges started as seminaries and bible schools to train up pastors and missionaries. There have been many abuses but many denominational bible colleges remain faithful to that purpose. The ones that have turned secular they still served to educate the population examples Harvard and Yale. Hospitals are mostly started by a denomination. Without the denominational support many would probably would have failed to have been built or stay open. Senior adult care facilities are springing up all over the place many are denominational supported and from my experience preferable to government or private institutions. Theological beliefs help to group people. As we have all seen in this forum there is more than one way to believe and still be a Christian. I think grouping together in like mindedness is essential for the life of a church and any hierarchical oversight. Denominations therefore became the next logical step. I don’t think denominations were the intended result of people gathering together in like mindedness, however that is what evolved. We all know power corrupts and total power totally corrupts. Case in point the Catholic church before the reformation. I think having multiple and various denominations limit the power of each. I don’t see badness in denominations, however I see disaster in what they have become. By competing with a win at any cost attitude denominations have pitted Christian against Christian. We never fairly teach what another denomination believes we only convince our members that another denomination’s belief is wrong and therefore we have a obligation to help save others from that error. We mock and belittle people of other denominations and soon animosity and hatred prevails. In many cases in our zeal to rid ourselves of denominationalism, we avoid all use of catechisms, hymns, and creeds. However these were proven and repeatable forms of instruction which are lost to many churches today. The results are churches filled with people that have no real idea of what it is they believe and if they have some concept, have no way to articulate or to put it into words. Without this basic capability they soon feel disenfranchised and begin to drift back into the world. Denominations are not in themselves bad it is what man has turned them into that is bad. However isn’t that true of anything man gets involved in? |