[Cal]

This debate seems to me a lot like the one about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Now, I realize the intended result of the debate is to produce a principle that is more useful that the angels-on-a-pin answer. But its hopes of producing any answer are just as empty.

It is the exceedingly practical nature of the boundary-of-the-church question that makes it so problematic. In order for its "answer" to produce anything more than an I'm-right-everyone-else-is-wrong attitude, you have to convince most people to go along with it. And that is not going to happen--partly because admittedly some people are not interested in the idea, but also because many others will in good faith just not agree with your "solution."

You might as well try to define for everyone how church leaders should dress or what kind of music is appropriate or which Bible version to use. I'm sure there are numerous arguments concerning all those questions. The problem is none of them are airtight enough to reasonably expect anything close to everyone agreeing with them. And neither is any boundary of the church argument. If one was, the Church would have adopted it long ago.

So all you are left with is the attitude that you are right and everyone else is wrong, that no one is meeting properly but you; and that you are going to take your marbles, go home and eat worms. (Note: see the LCM).

It doesn't lead anywhere. It doesn't get anyone anywhere. In the meantime, you are supposed to meet somewhere and receive all believers as Christ did. So sooner or later you are going to have to stop banging the drum of your opinion and get on with that.


Further, assuming we could come up with an agreed-upon boundary of the church and over time we have all the churches established as they should be, what happens if the leadership of one or more of those churches goes bad? What do members under that leadership do? Do we wait for the apostle to come around and straighten everything out? What if he has gone bad? Then what? What does the Church do to reform when all the boundaries are already taken up with "valid" churches?

The LCM's answer is: Nothing. We just drift along and pretend there is no problem. That's the fate of the Church if you establish the tantalizing but elusive "boundary" of the church. As they say, be careful what you wish for...


It's clear to me God made the Church fluid enough to defy all our attempts to define its "boundaries" in a one-size-fits-all fashion. This is necessary to give the Church room to change and reform. Pinheads (sorry, couldn't resist the pun) can sit around debating such things until the the next millennium and it won't make any difference. You are not going to get anything approaching a practical consensus. You are just going to get more contention, more friction, more time wasted, and maybe some self-satisfaction about being "right."

Join a church. Worship and serve the Lord there and in your personal life. Get on with it.