Thanks for the interaction. You keep me on my toes too. And of course I don’t have a totally thought through, one-size-fits-all ecclesiology.

Blessings from the cross,

Bob

Good questions. I cannot off the top of my head come up with specific Scriptural examples. This means I will need to do more study to make my points stick. Thanks for the provocation!

I wish for more unity as well, but not at the cost of secondary distinctives. Practically speaking this is a challenge. Maybe two types of fellowship? I see this happening in Together for the Gospel and other venues. I just don’t know how it works on a local basis–especially coming from my personal experience of fundamentalism and secondary separation.

I do distinguish. I also like the idea of covenanting together.

But, where do you see the local church described as a covenanting together group? Where is a church covenant in Scripture? Scripturally, I see it assumed that believers in a general locale are part of the same local expression of Christ’s body. I never see anyone outside of a local body. I do see people changing geographical locations, and one church writing another church about the individual (think Apollos in Acts 17?). I see people moving around to other churches (think Aquila and Priscilla). But I don’t see churches centering on peculiar secondary doctrines.

This of course does not mean the existence of multiple evangelical churches is a bad thing. It may help us be church better in today’s world. But we often lose our focus on unity and what we share with those who aren’t in our church but are members of Christ’s universal body. We forget we are responsible to edify and help them as well.

Do you make any distinction between the universal/invisible and local/visible church?

I treat all orthodox, fruit-bearing, professing believers as members of The Body of Christ, but I see a distinction between that acknowledgment and acknowledging them as members of my local covenant community. To be a covenant community there needs to be be an “official” covenant that we agree to.

You make many good points. Perhaps formal membership in our day and age is very helpful. But again it is not necessary as long as we actually are not dating the church but married to it.

To use your analogy, if we have been formally married do we really need a “marriage license”? The license makes it official in the eyes of the state but the ceremony before God and people makes it official in God’s eyes. We are members of the body of Christ, a formal vote to install us as members is only an official external step.

We should treat people like they really are members in the Body, since it is the Spirit who sets us as members not some ecclesiastical body.

I know you seek to be biblical in all things and that you in no way believe in less commitment. I know you are trying to avoid adding extra-biblical requirements to being a part of the visible/local church. I applaud all of those things.

I also give you a standing ovation for the point of this post! I wholeheartedly agree!

But some more thoughts on membership in general:

Although your motivation isn’t an avoiding of commitment, service, accountability, responsibility, or following a leader; the majority of those who are against formal membership have that mindset.

Do you believe the church is a “covenant community”? Do you believe in church covenants? Do you see any similarities between local church membership and marriage (in a covenantal sense)? In the past I have likened the decision NOT to join a church to the decision to NOT get married, but still live together. Josh Harris wrote a book about “Dating the Church”. I’m not sure the analogy works, so I am open to critique, but your view that discontinuing formal membership might improve commitment, is like saying that discontinuing formal marriage would improve faithfulness/commitment to one partner.

I am not trying to beat a dead horse. I just believe that commitment is vital to the local church and therefore the membership question is one of utmost importance. Thanks for the interaction!