Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
Interesting formula. It sounds inclusive. It seems benign...
|
It is a historical fact that a church in the New Testament was not smaller than a city. For this I bring your attention to
The Word of Truth: A Summary of Christian Doctrine Based on Biblical Revelation By Dale Moody
p. 435
The New Testament also speaks of the church as the one body of Christ composed of all true believers in all places, but it never speaks of a plurality of churches in one city (Col 1:18,24; Ephesians 1:22; 2:14-21;3:6-10;4:4,12; 5:23-33). It comes as a jolt, but it must be said again that the modern concept of a plurality of churches in one city is never found in the New Testament.
I bring your attention to post #51 by "testallthings" here:
"It is a clear historical fact that there was only one church in one city."
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ad.php?p=50465
My study on counting the number of times the word church is used versus churches in relation to city, house or region, seems valid to me.
A plurality of churches in one city is never found in the New Testament.
If we take a pure factual black and white new testament or biblical approach to this, we must agree. It's there in plain black and white.
The question under discussion then is whether or not it is acceptable to God, to contradict this model, or rather, whether to adopt it. Lee/Nee say no, others say yes.
The principle of one lampstand per city as per Revelation, seems to me to indicate no. Otherwise Jesus would have talked about many lampstands per city.
We cannot truly be a "100% bible following" and "new testament" Christian unless we adopt the one city per church model.