The PuritanBoard - View Single Post

Scott Bushey · #11 (**permalink**) 09-30-2005, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by biblelighthouse

Quote:

Originally posted by fredtgreco
Joseph,

How can you possibly practice "very strong church discipline" if there is no means of jurisdiction? In other words, what mechanism holds the Church accountable if they discipline one who is not under their authority? How does the Church even know whom is under their authority? Am I? Are you? How are you different from me? From the person who wandered in the church last week?

How is the one under authority held accountable? How is it possible to avoid the "church said" / "he said" scenario?

Further, if belonging to a church is a covenant act, where are the witnesses? The "documentation"?

Who says we have "no means of jurisdiction"? If someone attends MBC, then they are automatically under MBC's authority. Suppose you moved to McKinney and attended MBC for a couple months. Then suppose you decide to divorce your wife without biblical cause. The MBC elders would council you to repent. If you did not do so, then the MBC elders would formally bring up the issue to the entire church body. Then, if you still did not repent, then you would be flormally disfellowshipped, including a written statement from the MBC elders.

So, there are *plenty* of witnesses, and there is ample documentation, as well.

Quote:

Originally posted by fredtgreco
Isn't the roll in heaven, and also the book of life indicative of how God views the matter? Why would a church not want to have a formal sign of commitment? Sounds a lot like the argument used by those who live together but don't need to be married, because "it's just a piece of paper." It is most certainly NOT just a piece of paper - it is a formal witness that testifies to the commitment when one party seeks to pretend that there never was a commitment.

Fred, I believe your comments are well-intended, so I am not angry with you, but I confess that I find your suggestion *extremely* offensive. When you compare MBC to a bunch of fornicators just "living together", you are slandering *your* brothers and sisters in the body of Christ, who believe in the doctrines of grace just like you, and who believe in church discipline very seriously. You will not find many churches that take Matthew 18 as seriously as MBC, whether you want to believe that or not.

We believe that membership is important in the same way that *you* suggested from Scripture: "the roll in heaven, and also the book of life". If someone confesses Christ, then we assume they are entered in the roll in heaven, and that their names are written in the book of life. Thus, on *that* basis, they are welcome at MBC, and are under the jurisdiction of MBC as long as they attend.

Notice that "the roll in heaven, and also the book of life" is NOT some manmade membership roll on a piece of paper in a local pastor's office . . . I don't see anything like that anywhere in Scripture. As you have pointed out, there is a roll in heaven, and MBC figures that roll is good enough. If you confess Christ, we figure you are on *that* roll, so we don't see any good reason to put you on some manmade MBC roll.

Joseph,
The scriptures clearly distinguish between the local church and the universal body of Christ. There is a difference. One needs to establish this distinction first when trying to understand the doctrine.