Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
I want someone to establish the whole idea of "ground" by reference only to things actually found in the Bible.
I find it quite interesting that the word "church" (well, actually the Greek or another local term) that meant "meeting." And we almost all agree that there is an alternate use of the term that means something besides just the meeting or assembly, but also the universal collection of all those who would constitute the members of the separate assemblies.
So we have a word that we claim for purposes of the Bible to have somewhat ambiguous meaning. It could refer only to an assembly. Or it could refer to everyone that is qualified to be in any of the assemblies. And maybe, depending on use, to also refer to all who qualify within less than all assemblies but more than a single assembly. (I do note that Paul referred to the recipients of another letter to be the "assemblies" in Galatia. No cities mentioned. Not sure there is ever a clear delineation of cities in that region.)
The point is that we have overlapping use of singular and plural to refer to the Christians in various places (as well as all Christians). I believe there is a general reference to the fact that the church grew. Not referring to any city or region (and I could be wrong and it was strictly in Jerusalem prior to the spread). There is ambiguity as to the coverage of the word when viewed from the standpoint of a defined boundary. The only truly meaningful thing about the word is that it is with reference to the gathering of the believers in Christ. Or alternately to the general condition of being among those who are believers in Christ. In effect, the NT refers to many believers either as believers, or as the church. And it also refers to distinct assemblies as the church.
It refers to some groups meeting in a house in or around a major city as the church in that house (Rome? maybe Laodicea?) and not by reference to any city. So finding some references to churches by reference to the city does not carry the weight of a clear prescription. Even the ambiguous one in Revelation.
And this whole thing of ground. Define it. Not by examples. Not by metaphors. No "it's like . . . ." Let the scripture define it without presumptive overlay. Without declaring that something with multiple meanings can only be understood with the one that gets to your position.
By the way. If I make reference to the church in Dallas, I would be referring to all those who claim to believe in Christ within the city. And within the county, and probably within the general area. At least the metropolitan area (the entire DFW area). I am not living in Dallas. But a letter by someone like Paul to the church Dallas would be understood to be to the called-out ones in the vicinity.
If we would not place such a harsh restriction on the nature of the church, why do we think that such an indirect thing as the introduction to a few letters is meant to do exactly that despite not even abiding by it in all cases?
|
Ground is another name for foundation. The foundation of the church is the same foundation as a Christian's - it is Christ. What or who else could it be?
The ground or foundation of the church is none other than the crucified Christ (closest reference I can find is Matt 16:18).
If we take it to mean simply the region or boundary of a city, this is the wrong understanding. When Christ looks down upon a city and sees all His believers in that city, that is His one local church.
The "ground of locality" is to leave the denominations and have only Christ as the ground in whatever locality you reside. This means I will only take the name of Christ as my identify, and none other. If we fellowship in a denomination we realize we do not belong to it, Christ is still our ground. The ground of a denomination is whatever organization or institution that denomination represents. The Roman Catholic church for example, in London, has the Papacy as its ground, not Christ. The RC church in New York, also has the Papacy as its ground, not Christ. The principle of "no other name" other than Christ applies here.
This is the meaning prescribed by Nee (Normal Christian Church Life):
Let us note well that the ground of our receiving anyone into the church is that the Lord has already received that one
If in a given place anyone believes on the Lord, as a matter of course he is a constituent of the church in that place; there is no further step necessary in order to make him a constituent. No subsequent joining is required of him. Provided he belongs to the Lord, he already belongs to the church in that locality; and since he already belongs to the church, his belonging cannot be made subject to any condition.
So we can see that a believer is automatically on the "ground of locality" after becoming a believer. This is the basis upon which we receive any believer in the Lord. If a person has Christ, they are automatically in the local church.
Nee writes further:
If, before recognizing a believer as a member of the church, we insist that he join us, or that he resign his connection elsewhere, then “our church” is decidedly not one of the churches of God.
Since a believer in Christ is already a member of the local church, he cannot join another and cannot leave it.