POLEMIC SERIES: WHAT IS A "LOCAL" CHURCH?....

What is a local church?  When does an assembly of believers stop being a local assembly?

If we examine the term local church in Google Books, we find the following:

click to enlarge (link)

The term began to be used in the 1820 and as can be seen, continues in jagged upward pattern until the year 2000 which is the highest use of the term in Google's scanned books.

The concept of the term is simple - a local assembly of believers in a geographical area.  Even though the term local church cannot be found in the New Testament, the concept surely is there.  There is no denying of this fact as can be seen from the reading of the book of Acts and the Epistles.  But what choice did they have?  Could there have been ANY gathering of believers in New Testament times without a physical presence in the same location?  Of course not.  This very fact means that we cannot use the practices of believers at those times in regards to how they met as authoritative, since they had no choice in the matter.  They walked or rode horses to meeting, does this mean we must do the same?  Of course not.  Why?  Because the Christians of those times did not have a choice, so their use of these forms of transportation was not a choice it was a necessity.  Did they have a choice of using telecommunications to meet together as a body?  No!  So their practice of being physically present is not authoritative to us since it was the ONLY choice available to them. 

As some churches belonging to the order of Old School Baptists have gotten smaller and some have died out, members have been forced to travel longer distances to meet together, sometimes traveling hundreds of miles.  The common criticism against this practice is that these members live too far from each other have an edifying effect one upon the other.  This is seen by some, as a violation or abuse of the term "local".  The criticism continues on to say that they are violating the very principle of the term "local". The members, meeting together for a few hours once a week at most, cannot keep in close contact with each other, to pray for each other, to lift each other up in difficult times, etc.  Those who think along those lines also speak of the inability of these far-flung members to have "fellowship" with each other.

The bulwark proof-text they use for this definition of a local church is the passage in Hebrews 10:24-25:

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, 25 not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.

Thus in the meeting in person, in the actual face to face contact, in the close geographical proximity, it is thought that believers in a local assembly can stir up each other to love and good works.  All of this makes sense.  This is one of the most important reasons for believers meeting together as an ordered assembly, unless sickness or other factors prevent it.  YET, THIS IS NOT WHAT THE PASSAGE IS TALKING ABOUT AT ALL!

Let us look at the CONTEXT of this passage in more detail and ask ourselves some questions.  A brief look at Hebrews 10 will reveal that after explaining Christ's sacrifice, the writer draws a conclusion which begins in vs 19 of the chapter.  We quote Hebrews 10:19-39, with a running commentary on the passage:

Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, Believers are advised to "hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering", i.e., do not apostatize!  Hold on to your confession of Christ as Lord.  This passage has nothing to do with "church attendance", but with staying in the faith despite persecution.  It is in this context that we are told to not abandon "the meeting together".  The KJV and most other translations agree the translation of the ESV.  For those who like the Geneva Bible, this verse (25) is made worse than the other versions in translation, "Not forsaking the fellowship that we haue among our selues, as the maner of some is: but let vs exhort one another, and that so much the more, because ye see that the day draweth neere."  The Greek word for fellowship (κοινωνίᾳ koinonia) is not even there.  The English phrase that is there "meeting together" is a translation of a Greek word (ἐπισυναγωγὴν, episuvagogen) means "gathering".  In no other passage in the New Testament is it used in a context discussing a local assembly (ἐκκλησίᾳ, ekklesia = a church).  Thus a better translation of this word with the attending reflexive pronoun which follows episuvagogen is "the gathering of yourselves" or "your gathering".  This does not have reference to a church gathering but to process going on in this age of Jesus gathering his people together.  In II Thessalonians 2:1-2, where the same word "gathering is used, we read, "Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers and sisters, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by the teaching allegedly from us—whether by a prophecy or by word of mouth or by letter—asserting that the day of the Lord has already come."  Here, the same word gathered is used to indicate that the Lord Jesus is gathering all his sheep to Himself.  He will lose none of the children the Father gave Him.

as is the habit of some...The word habit here is translated in other passages as "custom", or "tradition".  When Jesus was buried John 19:40 uses the word.  It reads: "So they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths with the spices, as is the burial custom of the Jews."  Here the word should mean the burial laws of the Jews.  It was not a mere "habit".  So it is in Hebrews 10:25.  It was those who went back to the traditions of the Jews that forsook "the gathering of yourselves".  So a better reading of that par of the passage is "as is the legal traditions of some" that being the Jews who harassed Paul and the other disciples.  So these believers were being encouraged not to imitate the legal positions of the Pharisees who rejected Christ and Christianity.

...but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.  This but is a contrast to the forsaking of the gathering of yourselves phrase.  What are believers to be doing in contrast to forsaking?  Encouraging one another especially since the day draws near.  Believers are to strip up one another to good works and NOT leave the faith in discouragement.  But what if they do leave the faith?

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.  Here we see what it means to forsake the gathering of yourselves - it is a deliberate sin after receiving the knowledge of the truth; it is trampling under foot the Son of God; it is profaning the blood of the covenant by which that believer was sanctified and it is outraging the Spirit of grace.

But recall the former days when, after you were enlightened, you endured a hard struggle with sufferings, sometimes being publicly exposed to reproach and affliction, and sometimes being partners with those so treated. For you had compassion on those in prison, and you joyfully accepted the plundering of your property, since you knew that you yourselves had a better possession and an abiding one. Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive what is promised. To further emphasize the point, the writer of Hebrews recalled the previous lives of these believers who he is encouraging to stay in the race.  They visited those in prison and joyfully accepted the plundering of their property for a better heavenly reward.  They have need of endurance (i.e., not leaving the faith).

For,
“Yet a little while,
    and the coming one will come and will not delay;
but my righteous one shall live by faith,
    and if he shrinks back,
my soul has no pleasure in him.”
Again, forsaking "the gathering of yourselves" is the same as shrinking back.
But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.  Again the writer emphasizes the exhortation to NOT shrink back but have faith.

WHAT IS FELLOWSHIP?
The word is used often, but few Christians stop to consider what it means.  Most assume it means spending time together in person, talking over coffee, asking for prayer requests, worshiping together, etc.  But biblical fellowship is much more than that!  There are two related Greek words for fellowship used in the New Testament,  koinonia (κοινωνία) and metocos (μέτοχoς).  The first can be translated as a bond or connection and the second can mean "share", "companion", or partner". 

Our thesis is that biblical fellowship is not socializing between believers.  The essence of the word is a partnership, a common bond!  It is not something you do.  It is something you possess.  You have fellowship, you do not do fellowship.  The word used for fellowship in the new testament is a noun, or an adjectives, but never a verb.   Many believe that they decide to have fellowship when they attend meeting and then presumable they stop having fellowship when they leave the meeting.  This is not the biblical definition of fellowship.

Christian fellowship is a participation in a relationship first with Jesus and His Spirit and then through to fellow believers who share this bond or connection.  It is a spiritual connection that one ALWAYS has with the Lord and His Spirit.  Thus, we ALWAYS have this connection with any believer.  It is never severed. It is likewise a spiritual bond and connection.

Of course, a bond or connection can be secular.  So we are not surprised that the Greek word metochos is used in business partnerships, such as the one between Peter and his fellow fishermen in Luke 5:6-7: "And when they had done this, they enclosed a large number of fish, and their nets were breaking. They signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them."  The partnership described here is a fellowship of a sort.  This business fellowship existed even when they were not together.  The bond did not begin when they were physically together or end when they departed from each other.  Indeed, this kind bond or partnership or fellowship could exist between people who had never physically met if it was created through written correspondence or legal contract.

But this bond was also a sharing of a sort, because, they shared the profits and benefits from the bond.  Thus, in Acts 2:42, when the scripture reads, "And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.", the reader will notice that it says to THE fellowship and not to fellowship.  In English and in the Greek this points to a relationship not an action.  It was that BOND between them based on the bond they had with Christ that they devoted themselves to.  Believers were called to this fellowship (relationship, bond) we did not initiate it or "do" it, "God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord." (I Corinthians 1:9)

In I Corinthians 10:16 the King James Version reads, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?"  This is a much better translation of the Greek text than the English Standard Version which reads, "The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?"  Although communion implies some sort of participation, the translation falsely gives the impression that koinonia here is in some verb form.  It is not.  It is a noun and if we translate it as bond or relationship we can better see that the drinking and eating here described is a celebration of the BOND or RELATIONSHIP we have with the blood and body of Christ.  How does one participate in the blood of anybody or the flesh or anybody if it is not through a bond or connection?  The phrase if not understood this way leads to a vagueness which allows Roman Catholics to bring in some mysterious transformation (transubstantiation, consubstantiation).

In II Corinthians 8:4 Paul is collecting money for the believers in Jerusalem.  The text reads, "Praying us with much intreaty that we would receive the gift, and take upon us the fellowship of the ministering to the saints."  The reader will notice that the phrase "take upon us" is in italics.  That indicates that those words were inserted by the translators in order to clarify the meaning of the text.  Again note the word fellowship is a noun.  A better translation would be "...that we would receive the gift and the fellowship (or connection) to the serving of the saints (holy ones)."  In this case, the connection consists of having a connection to the serving of the believers in Jerusalem by contributing funds for their relief.

In a similar passage, Paul speaks about sending money to the poor in Jerusalem in Romans 15:26, "For it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem."  Again, we see no need to translate koinonia as  "contribution."  It could more logically be translated as, "making a certain connection (or bond) with the poor saints which are at Jerusalem."

We could go and on with more examples of koinonia and what it means but space and time prevents us.  We took some of the more challenging passages to our definition of the word fellowship.

THE DEFINITION OF "LOCAL" AND THE PRESENT POTENTIAL OF TECHNOLOGY
The critical question of course is what is the definition of local?  Is it next door, a block away, a mile away, 10 miles away?  

Carpentum (rich Roman road travel)

In the times of the apostles, physical distance was a very important factor.  A very excellent article Ancient Journeys:  What was Travel Like for the  Romans? explains travel in those times.  The carpentum was the "limousine" of Roman times: "...pulled by many horses, it had four wheels, a wooden arched rooftop, comfortable cushy seats, and even some form a suspension to make the ride more comfortable."  Even relatively local trips let's say from Jerusalem to Antioch would take up to seven days travel by foot (assuming about 18 miles per day).  

click to enlarge

If we take as an example the city of Corinth, we can get an idea of the size of it.  Estimates of its population in the time of Paul range from 50,000-400,000 people not including the slave population.  We do not know exactly how many members there were in the church of Corinth, but we would assume it would have been sizable due to Paul's stay in the city for 18 months.  We do know that members of the church at Corinth included Greeks (Stephanas, Achalcus, Erastus), Romans (Gaius, Fortunatua, Crispus, Titius Justus) and Jews (Aquila, Priscilla, Sosthenes).  If this is the case for Corinth, then it is unlikely that the church at Corinth would have been a "house church".  Roman Corinth was approximately 2.5 square miles.



Assuming an average walking speed of 2.95 miles per hour, it would have taken an individual about an hour to walk from one side of Corinth to another, assuming no pedestrian traffic jams.

The introduction of communication technologies of the last 10 years has made this question more vital.  Without telephones, or automobiles, news would have moved quite slow by today's standards.  Time for fellowship would have also been limited to face to face meetings (due to travel time deducted).  So the truth of the matter is that IF "fellowship" is described as spending "face time" together, then today the average communications between people over long distances using technology, provides much more social contact than did the time spent together in New Testament times.

Since we have shown above that fellowship has no relationship to distance or physical proximity, fellowship cannot mean "face time" contact.  We thus, take on the word "local".  The word is a vague term defined by culture and technology.  One hundred years ago, any distance greater than five miles could have been seen as far if horseback or walking were your two options.  Now routinely, people travel 30 miles and think that distance short, especially if roads are taken with few traffic lights.

But the truth is that in the typical "local church" the people know relatively little about each other, normally seeing each other in their best behavior for two hours a day once a week.  Physical closeness does not produce emotional closeness as anyone who has ever ridden in crowded bus or train can testify to.  How much does the average person know about their neighbors?  Through technology many people know more about people hundreds of miles away than people 50 feet away from them.

For Old School Baptists, technology can be a gift from our sovereign Lord.  There are few gospel churches.  As the membership decreases, churches die out and some are faced with a choice of either attending meetings that preach a foreign gospel or staying home.  But whatever we may define as fellowship, it is a good thing for believers to have contact with others of like precious faith.

We have the ability to communicate with one another no matter the distance instantly.  Why not use this technology to edify the people of God with the word of God?  Would Paul have used this technology if it would have been available in his time?  We believe so.  Any channel to communicate the Gospel can only be a good thing.  Are there Old School Baptists who are isolated, with little contact with the brethren?  We KNOW this is true.  What about members who are too far away or too old to travel to meeting?  Should they be deprived of hearing gospel preaching because of this when the Devil is using this technology to broadcast its anti-christian message?  Some detest Facebook or YouTube or any other internet technology as tools of the world - and they are right - they ARE tools of the world.  In apostolic times, the Romans built a road system and transportation infrastructure for the purpose of military conquest and the spreading of their pagan religion.  Yet Paul, and the other apostles used these same roads to spread the Gospel.  In older times the radio was used by Old School Baptists to preach the Gospel of a sovereign God who controls all things and who brings his people to himself?

The technology of today goes even farther than those older technologies.  Now, live broadcasts can be done through Facebook and YouTube that are interactive.  So not only can the brethren watch and hear all, but they can ask questions, or suggest a hymn to be sung,  All of this is already being used by others.  This would increase contact among the brethren, build them up in the faith and encourage them in during their trials.

We should remember brethren that if our Lord used Satan for his own glory and purpose, he can certainly use Facebook and YouTube for this very purpose!

So let us Old School Baptists create a new type of local assembly, not really new, but simply doing the same things churches have done throughout the ages, encouraging the brethren, stirring them up to good works, that they may be devoted to the fellowship, the breaking of bread, and the prayers, not limited by distance, or limited in intimacy but perhaps bringing all these things to a new intensity.

Thus, we may come to find out that a local church is not the same as a geographically close group of believers, but is the same as a gathering of emotionally and spiritually connected group of believers arranged in Gospel order.  We need to understand the true definition of an assembly, a group of people who meet regularly who have a common bond with Jesus Christ and with each other.  The "gathering" and "meeting" does not have to be physical, anymore than when a soldier overseas meets with his family through Skype or Facetime or any other like medium.  The "meeting" and "gathering" is real enough to produce tears and laughter.   It may not be a "real" meeting or gathering.  It may not be the preferred method, but necessity may make it the only alternative.  Meeting physically together is always best, but in many cases not possible.  Why not use all methods available to us?

If the Lord gives me utterance on these matters, I shall write more on this subject.  All comments positive or negative as welcome.

NOTE: THE POLEMIC SERIES OF ARTICLES DEEMS TO POINT TO OLD SCHOOL BAPTIST DISTINCTIVES - WHAT MAKES US UNIQUE FROM OTHERS CALLING THEMSELVES CHRISTIANS.