Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
The idea of these sects meeting independently in their own groups is wrong because verse 18 says:
1 Cor 11:18 In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it.
1 Cor 11:20 So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat,
Clearly this is speaking of divisions within the one meeting or assembly, so your idea is unbiblical.
This is speaking of factions, parties within the one church in the city, which may mean within the one assembly (see Gill commentary below) or within multiple meetings of the one church in the city. In any case, clearly this speaks of divisions when coming together, which is a situation completely different to today's denominations.
The next logical step would be for these factions, parties to stop meeting with each other, and form the situation we know today of multiple "churches" within the one city. Paul no where proposes meeting independently as a solution to the problem. . Paul no where entertains a notion of "let us agree to disagree and go our separate ways" as is the practice in denominationalism today.
These verses should be plain enough. But let's confirm with some bible commentaries that the situation of multiple denominational meetings within the city is not well supported:
Barnes —
When ye come together in the church - When you come together in a religious assembly; when you convene for public worship. The word "church" here does not mean, as it frequently does with us, a "building." No instance of such a use of the word occurs in the New Testament; but it means when they came together as a Christian assembly; when they convened for the worship of God. These divisions took place then; and from some cause which it seems then operated to produce alienations and strifes.
Gill —
For first of all, when ye come together in the church,.... The place where the church met together to perform divine service, called "one place". 1 Corinthians 11:20 and is distinguished from their own "houses", 1 Corinthians 11:22 and the first thing he took notice of as worthy of dispraise and reproof, in their religious assemblies, were their animosities and factions:
The bible nor the commentators support your idea of the early church being multiple meetings per city, a city divided into "denominations" like the situation today. Clearly this is speaking of factions/divisions within the one church assembly (or assemblies) within the city. Furthermore, the apostle nowhere proposes separate meetings as a solution to this problem. Nowhere does Paul sanction the idea that those "of Peter" should meet independently from those "of Paul".
|
But you are starting with a presumption of what constitutes the whole church (assembly). You presume that for Corinth, or any other city, that there can be only one such assembly.
But even your commentators do not say that there cannot be multiple assemblies. They only say that when the members of a single assembly meet together that there was this problem. It is the extra-biblical teachings of the LRC that you are presuming on top of the commentators to declare that this means all the Christians in a city must be part of that one assembly. Paul was writing to deal with a problem of acrimony, not of ecclesiology. Those who meet together should not have such acrimony. Paul did not ever say that no one should have a preference of teacher. His complaint was that they were fighting about it. The current environment of assemblies, whether independent or grouped, is not general with the kind of acrimony that Paul was speaking to in Corinth. I know you can point to certain exceptions. Like the Westboro Baptist Church. And there are issues of teaching that are discussed openly. Especially related to the teachings of a prosperity gospel. But even those generally are not like what Paul was pointing to in Corinth.
If it doesn't fit . . . .