Doctrine

In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s America witnessed a phenomenon known as the Jesus Movement. It became so popular and widespread that Time Magazine devoted an entire issue to this movement. At the time it seemed to be a spiritual renewal especially among young people. These young people, who became known as Jesus People or Jesus Freaks, did many positive things for the Kingdom of God. In fact, the Jesus Movement was compared to a second Reformation. But, while the battle cry of the Reformation was Sola Scriptura (the Scriptures only), the battle cry of the Jesus Movement was “Christ -yes. The Church-no.”

That statement expressed, among other things, a rejection of the religious hypocrisy of the institutional church and a mistrust of institutions in general. The Watergate Scandal certainly fostered a mistrust of the institution of government but also a mistrust of all institutions. This included the church. For those reasons one can easily understand the mind set of “Christ - yes. The Church - no.”

But as sincere as the proponents of that mind set were, a question in the thinking of the writer begs to be asked. Is that a sound theological concept? Is it Biblical? Can one be committed to Christ and not be committed to His church? Now that question in Platonic fashion leads to another question. Can a Christian be committed to a church without being a member of that church? More specifically, is membership in a local assembly of believers really that important? So the question that will be addressed in this brief study is this: Is there a Biblical basis for Church Membership?

Before that question can be answered, some terms must be defined. First, what is the meaning of the word “church”? The word “church” probably comes from the Anglo-Saxon word “Kyrke” or ‘kirk’. The Greek Fathers used the term, He ecclesia kuriakn, ‘The Lord’s assembly’. In time, the word ecclesia (assembly) was dropped and only the adjective was used. Therefore we have kuriakn or church.

The word translated ‘church’ comes from the word ecclesia. The word is used 117 times in the New Testament. Of these 117 usages, four refer to Israel and three refer to a political assembly (Acts 7:38; 19:32,39,41). One refers to the general assembly of believers in glory (Heb. 2:12). But 113 usages refer to a particular assembly of baptized believers on earth. In a rare sense, the word is used of the body of Christ that is composed of all believers (Eph. 1:22,23). There is also a rare and abstract usage of ecclesia in the generic or institutional sense. An example of the generic sense would be Matthew 16:18. Here Jesus refers to the institution of the local church. Those who refute this must answer the question as to what particular church does the Lord refer, two chapters later (Matt. 18:17). In that passage it would be difficult to restrict it to any particular church, but the application must certainly be to some particular church.

“But”, some may ask, “What is the point of understanding what the church is, and how does that relate to church membership?” The answer is that church membership has to do with membership in a local assembly of baptized believers. One who is regenerate is certainly a member of Christ’s body (I Cor. 12:12,13). But that same person is not necessarily a member of “the house of God, which is the church of the living God” (I Tim. 3:15,16). Therefore one must understand the difference between being a member of Christ’s body (to which all believers belong) and being a member of an assembly of Christ’s body on earth. Without this understanding, church membership can have little value or meaning to a person.

Another term that must be defined is “membership”. What is meant by it? What does it mean to be in the “membership” of a local church? Webster defines membership as “the state or status of being a member”. He defines “member” as “a part (as an arm, leg, leaf, or branch) of an animal or plant; one of the individuals composing a group; a constituent part of a whole”. It would certainly appear from this definition that a member of any body implies being part of a whole. It also implies that the part has no identity apart from the body. Paul develops that very concept in I Corinthians 12. He says, “if they (the various members of the body) were all one member, where were the body?” (12:13).

But those who claim that the New Testament churches had no membership would argue: “Where is it written that one must have one’s name on a membership roll in order to be a member of the local body of Christ?” The implication of that question is that membership means having one’s name on a roll. Indeed, church membership does involve having one’s name on a roll. However, if that is all that church membership is (i.e. having one’s name on a roll), then the argument of the “no membership” advocates is logical. But membership goes far beyond that. Membership in a local body of baptized believers implies (more than anything) a commitment to Christ and His body! When those 3000 people were saved and baptized on the day of Pentecost, “they continued stedfastly” (i.e. continually devoted themselves) to the apostle’s teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread and prayers. They were totally committed to the local body of Christ. For those who still say there was no membership in the churches of the New Testament, let them explain the following:

1. The exact number of one hundred and twenty on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:15); also the number of three thousand and five thousand (Acts 2:41; 4:4).
2. Who would be eligible to vote on disciplining members? (I Cor. 5:13).
3. To what were new converts added by baptism?
4. Would not elections of officers presume a roll? (Acts 6:2-5).

1. The local church always acted in absolute self-judgment of its own membership - I Cor. 5:13.
2. The local church always acted in absolute self-election of its own officers - Acts 6:1-6.
3. The local church always acted in absolute self-protection of it own ordinances - I Cor. 11:23.
4. The local church always acted in absolute self-settlement of its own internal affairs -I Cor. 6:1-5.
5. The local church always acted in absolute self-determination of its relation with other local churches - Acts 15:1-30.
6. The local church always acted in absolute self-government as the only government for local churches - Matt. 18:15-17.
7. The local church always acted in absolute self-possession of its own property - Acts 15:1-30 e.g.”

1. Accountability: Sometimes, the reason why a person doesn’t want to join a local church is because he or she doesn’t want to be accountable. Yet, the New Testament is replete with statements that show Christians are to be accountable to one another. The principle of accountability is a Biblical basis for church membership.
2. Unity: Nowhere in the New Testament do you find “free lance” Christians. People were saved, baptized and then became devoted to a body of believers. There was an interdependence of caring and love. One major source of problems in the early churches was the cultivation of an independent spirit by individuals and groups within the assembly.
3. Stability: To those who say of church membership, “thanks, but no thanks”, we ask: “Where is the stability?” When trials and heartaches come, where is the stability? The answer is painfully simple. It isn’t there because there’s no family around. There can be no stability in a family unless those family members are committed to each other.
4. Consistency: After more than twenty-five years of ministry in a local church, the writer has observed that Christians who are not committed to the local body of believers have no consistency in their spiritual walk. Without exception this has been the case. These same people have the mind set that the church is there to serve them and not vice versa. They want to know what the church can offer them. Perhaps we can paraphrase President John F. Kennedy’s words: “Ask not what the church can do for you. Rather, ask what you can do for God in and through the church!”