[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We call ourselves the church in London because we are the church in London.

I don't really understand your point that we cannot call ourselves the church in London just because everyone else is the church in London as well. Then we end up with a situation where no one calls themselves the "church in London", and then the church does not exist practically.

This is the height of exclusivity (and shallowness). You ask "we cannot call ourselves the church in London just because everyone else is the church in London as well." More us vs. them. The issue is with calling your group "the church in London." Because your group is something smaller than the church in London. At best, you can say that you are a part of the church in London (yes, just like "everyone else").

"the church is all around you" indicates that you hold to an idea of a church which does not actually exist practically.

On a Sunday, how does one know where to attend a church which is "all around me"?

If such is the case, how can we apply the instructions of the bible to "tell it to the church" . Matt 18:17. There has to be some authority structure, which we know at the time was a plurality of elders appointed by the apostles.

It does not mean we can just tell our Christian friend or neighbor about our problem and we are satisfying Matt 18:17. There must be an entity in our city called "the church" which exists in practicality.

I think denominations such as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican all recognized the need of a practical church administration in the city representing all believers in a city.

This issue of "practicality" is a made up distinction that is never defined in the New Testament. "Tell it to the church" means just that: tell it to the church. Not "tell it to the group that refers to itself as "the church."

Why can't 10 meetings all be meeting practically as the church in London?

So, in a city like Toronto, where at least four different groups refer to themselves as "the church in Toronto," which one is "the genuine church life"? What is the real basis? Or are they all "the practicality of the church" because they use the right words?

Nice try but it's not saying that a church is only 2 or 3 people.

That is not what I said at all ("nice try"). You said that "the genuine church life" is defined by "the life of Christ and Christ Himself in the midst." According to this verse, I showed you that this in itself cannot be the basis because "2 or 3"--not a local church--is also defined by Christ in the midst.

It depends, who started the local church in the city?

Who has to start it?