I would love to hear you take on whether the gathering that is an hour and a half away from where the preacher is streaming his message is part of the same local church or another church?
I am not baptist. But my understanding is that the Baptist made the message talks about an autonomous local church and those clearly aren't. Unless you consider the six campuses over many counties or States as one local church.
That’s a great question and one that a lot of people are wrestling with today in light of modern technology and multi-site churchesThe idea of a local church traditionally means a group of believers who gather physically in one location for worship discipleship fellowship and serviceHebrews 10:25 reminds us Do not forsake the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another This verse implies a close knit gathered community not just shared content So when a group gathers an hour and a half away and receives a message by livestream but has its own leadership rhythms and relationships some would argue it functions more like another local church than an extension of the first The Baptist tradition like you mentioned emphasizes local church autonomyThat is each church is self-governed under Christ’s headship without being ruled by a larger bodyEven the 1689 Baptist Confession states To each of these churches thus gathered according to His mind declared in His Word He hath given all that power and authority which is in any way needful for their carrying on that order in worship and discipline which He hath instituted for them to observeThis reflects a high view of each church being fully a church in its own right meaning multiple campuses across different counties being managed by a central team doesn’t really align with that visionIt starts to resemble a more Episcopal or hierarchical model where decisions flow down from central leadership Now to be clear multi-site models can still be used by God and can serve the kingdom powerfullyBut theologically and biblically speaking it’s worth asking whether they are functioning as one church in multiple locations or multiple churches under one brandPaul often wrote to specific churches the church in Corinth the church in Ephesus the church in PhilippiHe didn’t just address the network of churches under one preacherHe recognized each congregation as distinct yet united in Christ 1 Corinthians 12:12 says For just as the body is one and has many members and all the members of the body though many are one body so it is with ChristThat’s true of the universal Church we’re one in Christ even as we gather in different places But the local church seems to be marked by proximity mutual care accountability and gathered presence So in short if a campus is distant enough to require its own leaders pastoral care and community life then biblically and practically it may be more faithful to recognize it as a separate local church even if it shares teaching with others Ultimately the key is not just shared sermons but shared life in Christ as a gathered body under biblical leadership
But to your final point. If all those things are local can we consider it a separate local church if it is being governed, the message is being dictated, if the finances are being managed by a bishop (that's what we call.the pastor who controls the ministers in several churches) in another location? Hasn't that abandoned the local church model? Again this is an Episcopalian form of government. It certainly isn't baptist.
You make a very valid point and one that strikes at the heart of how the New Testament describes the structure and function of the local church in Scripture each local church was autonomous meaning it was self-governing under the leadership of elders or overseers raised up from within the local body Titus 1:5 says Paul left Titus in Crete to appoint elders in every town” not to place one bishop over many towns but to establish local leadership in each gathering Acts 14:23 also shows that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church” with prayer and fasting again pointing to self-governing local churches not a centralized hierarchy The Baptist model historically follows this biblical pattern valuing the independence of each local church under Christ who is the true Head of the Church Ephesians 1:22-23 says And He put all things under His feet and gave Him as head over all things to the church which is His body the fullness of Him who fills all in all” if a gathering is being controlled in its teaching governance and finances by a bishop or central figure in another city it ceases to function as a true local church in the New Testament sense and more closely resembles an Episcopal or hierarchical system So yes if a group is not free to discern the Spirit's leading raise up its own shepherds steward its own finances and engage in mutual accountability under Christ then we should question whether it’s functioning as a biblical local church true spiritual community as designed by Jesus flows from the local body not from distant control Galatians 5:1 reminds us It is for freedom that Christ has set us free and that includes the freedom of the local church to follow Christ directly without human overlords
1. Multisites make it hard to practice the Lord's Supper and discipline.
2. Multisites if there is a screen showing a sermon elsewhere seems strange and foreign to the expectations of the Bible
3. Multisites may be the same organization if there are pastors together overseeing it, but I suspect you'd need a more Presbyterian model to make this work.
1. Multisites make it hard to practice the Lord’s Supper and discipline
You're right to highlight this. The early church gathered *physically* and *locally to break bread and practice meaningful accountability. Paul said,
When you come together it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat… Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not 1 Corinthians 11:20,22 Paul rebuked the Corinthian church for mishandling the Lord’s Supper, emphasizing it must be practiced with unity and discernment something very difficult to preserve across disconnected campuses. Church discipline, too, assumes proximity Tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile Matthew 18:17 How can that happen well if the “church” is fragmented across screens?
2. Multisites with a screen sermon feels foreign to the Bible’s model The image of believers gathering to watch a sermon on a screen from someone not physically present isn’t something we see in Scripture. Paul wrote letters but he also prioritized presence I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you. Romans 1:11 Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to come to you and talk face to face 2 John 1:12 There’s power in embodied presence. The church isn’t just about content it’s about community, shared life, and Spirit-filled interaction not just consumption.
3. Multisites as one organization with shared pastors might require a Presbyterian model
Exactly when multiple locations are overseen by a central authority, that begins to resemble a connectional church model, like Presbyterian polity, rather than an autonomous local church structure, which is typical of Baptist ecclesiology. In the New Testament, we see churches as self-governing but interconnected like in Acts 14:23 And when they had appointed elders for them in every church with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord Each local church had its own elders not just one pastor over many churches. The model was plural leadership in one local body not one leader across many bodies.
So yes, these are more than just structural concerns they touch the core of what it means to be the church biblically. There’s room for innovation, but we must be careful that it doesn’t compromise the relational and Spirit-led nature of Christ’s church And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another Hebrews 10:24-25 Being *together* matters and not just in spirit, but in flesh and blood.
“It is in membership of a local church in one place that the fellowship of the one holy catholic Church becomes significant. Indeed, such gathered companies of believers are the local manifestation of the one Church of God on earth and in heaven.”
“The basis of our membership in the church is a conscious and deliberate acceptance of Christ as Saviour and Lord by each individual.”
“Membership of our local churches is normally consequent on Believers' Baptism”
“To worship and serve in such a local Christian community is, for Baptists, of the essence of Churchmanship.”
The Baptist Doctrine of the Church.” 1948. Baptist Quarterly 12 (12): 440–48. doi:10.1080/0005576X.1948.11750738.
Absolutely, and thank you for sharing such a thoughtful reflection. Your articulation is actually quite clear and grounded in both Scripture and Baptist tradition. The tension and harmony between the universal Church and the local church have always been essential to Christian understanding, especially for Baptists.I really appreciate what you have written here it’s honest, thoughtful and rooted in both Scripture and tradition You may feel your definition isn’t the most "articulate," but honestly, it reflects a deep understanding of the Church as both universal and local.The way you describe the local church as the visible manifestation of the one Church of God is right in line with Scripture.In fact, when Paul wrote letters to local congregations, he often addressed them as the Church of God" in that location just like you pointed out with Acts 20:28.That same phrase is used in 1 Corinthians 1:2 To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints 1 Corinthians 1:2This shows how each local church is truly connected to the one body of Christ, sanctified and called by Him.I also resonate with your reference to the church being both militant and triumphant present in time and eternity.That lines up beautifully with Hebrews 12:22-23 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem... to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven There is one Church Christ's Body and it exists across time and space.Local churches, as you rightly said, don't exhaust that reality, but they certainly express it.Ephesians 4:4-6 captures this unity so well There is one body and one Spirit...one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all You are in good company with early Baptists and faithful theologians who saw this same truth And at the end of the day, the Church belongs to Christ And He put all things under His feet and gave Him as head over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all Ephesians 1:22–23Thank you again for sharing.You’re not inarticulate you are wrestling with the mystery and beauty of what it means to belong to Christ and His people, both locally and universally That’s sacred work.
I'd like to see this from other angles. The local church is much more significant I think, than these doctrines hash out.
The pandemic exposed a real weakness in many devout and faithful Christian's understanding of the local church.
For instance, live streamed church services do not and cannot promote true worship as God has laid down in his word.
There is a fountain of God's grace pouring from that pulpit from which we are called to drink and be nourished.
There is communion with him, a bond in blood thorugh His sacrifice.
There is the mystery of how God uses that local body to effect his holy prerogatives.
There is just so much more I think we could say.
I agree. I think it might be helpful to distinguish:
(1) What something is
(2) What something does
(3) What marks a thing
I was specifying #1. You here are speaking about #2 and #3, I think? And I suppose it's all connected.
I would love to hear you take on whether the gathering that is an hour and a half away from where the preacher is streaming his message is part of the same local church or another church?
I am not baptist. But my understanding is that the Baptist made the message talks about an autonomous local church and those clearly aren't. Unless you consider the six campuses over many counties or States as one local church.
But that all looks more Episcopal to me.
That’s a great question and one that a lot of people are wrestling with today in light of modern technology and multi-site churchesThe idea of a local church traditionally means a group of believers who gather physically in one location for worship discipleship fellowship and serviceHebrews 10:25 reminds us Do not forsake the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some is but exhorting one another This verse implies a close knit gathered community not just shared content So when a group gathers an hour and a half away and receives a message by livestream but has its own leadership rhythms and relationships some would argue it functions more like another local church than an extension of the first The Baptist tradition like you mentioned emphasizes local church autonomyThat is each church is self-governed under Christ’s headship without being ruled by a larger bodyEven the 1689 Baptist Confession states To each of these churches thus gathered according to His mind declared in His Word He hath given all that power and authority which is in any way needful for their carrying on that order in worship and discipline which He hath instituted for them to observeThis reflects a high view of each church being fully a church in its own right meaning multiple campuses across different counties being managed by a central team doesn’t really align with that visionIt starts to resemble a more Episcopal or hierarchical model where decisions flow down from central leadership Now to be clear multi-site models can still be used by God and can serve the kingdom powerfullyBut theologically and biblically speaking it’s worth asking whether they are functioning as one church in multiple locations or multiple churches under one brandPaul often wrote to specific churches the church in Corinth the church in Ephesus the church in PhilippiHe didn’t just address the network of churches under one preacherHe recognized each congregation as distinct yet united in Christ 1 Corinthians 12:12 says For just as the body is one and has many members and all the members of the body though many are one body so it is with ChristThat’s true of the universal Church we’re one in Christ even as we gather in different places But the local church seems to be marked by proximity mutual care accountability and gathered presence So in short if a campus is distant enough to require its own leaders pastoral care and community life then biblically and practically it may be more faithful to recognize it as a separate local church even if it shares teaching with others Ultimately the key is not just shared sermons but shared life in Christ as a gathered body under biblical leadership
But to your final point. If all those things are local can we consider it a separate local church if it is being governed, the message is being dictated, if the finances are being managed by a bishop (that's what we call.the pastor who controls the ministers in several churches) in another location? Hasn't that abandoned the local church model? Again this is an Episcopalian form of government. It certainly isn't baptist.
You make a very valid point and one that strikes at the heart of how the New Testament describes the structure and function of the local church in Scripture each local church was autonomous meaning it was self-governing under the leadership of elders or overseers raised up from within the local body Titus 1:5 says Paul left Titus in Crete to appoint elders in every town” not to place one bishop over many towns but to establish local leadership in each gathering Acts 14:23 also shows that Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church” with prayer and fasting again pointing to self-governing local churches not a centralized hierarchy The Baptist model historically follows this biblical pattern valuing the independence of each local church under Christ who is the true Head of the Church Ephesians 1:22-23 says And He put all things under His feet and gave Him as head over all things to the church which is His body the fullness of Him who fills all in all” if a gathering is being controlled in its teaching governance and finances by a bishop or central figure in another city it ceases to function as a true local church in the New Testament sense and more closely resembles an Episcopal or hierarchical system So yes if a group is not free to discern the Spirit's leading raise up its own shepherds steward its own finances and engage in mutual accountability under Christ then we should question whether it’s functioning as a biblical local church true spiritual community as designed by Jesus flows from the local body not from distant control Galatians 5:1 reminds us It is for freedom that Christ has set us free and that includes the freedom of the local church to follow Christ directly without human overlords
Just to add some notes:
1. Multisites make it hard to practice the Lord's Supper and discipline.
2. Multisites if there is a screen showing a sermon elsewhere seems strange and foreign to the expectations of the Bible
3. Multisites may be the same organization if there are pastors together overseeing it, but I suspect you'd need a more Presbyterian model to make this work.
More to say ... just quick notes.
1. Multisites make it hard to practice the Lord’s Supper and discipline
You're right to highlight this. The early church gathered *physically* and *locally to break bread and practice meaningful accountability. Paul said,
When you come together it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat… Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not 1 Corinthians 11:20,22 Paul rebuked the Corinthian church for mishandling the Lord’s Supper, emphasizing it must be practiced with unity and discernment something very difficult to preserve across disconnected campuses. Church discipline, too, assumes proximity Tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile Matthew 18:17 How can that happen well if the “church” is fragmented across screens?
2. Multisites with a screen sermon feels foreign to the Bible’s model The image of believers gathering to watch a sermon on a screen from someone not physically present isn’t something we see in Scripture. Paul wrote letters but he also prioritized presence I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you. Romans 1:11 Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to come to you and talk face to face 2 John 1:12 There’s power in embodied presence. The church isn’t just about content it’s about community, shared life, and Spirit-filled interaction not just consumption.
3. Multisites as one organization with shared pastors might require a Presbyterian model
Exactly when multiple locations are overseen by a central authority, that begins to resemble a connectional church model, like Presbyterian polity, rather than an autonomous local church structure, which is typical of Baptist ecclesiology. In the New Testament, we see churches as self-governing but interconnected like in Acts 14:23 And when they had appointed elders for them in every church with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord Each local church had its own elders not just one pastor over many churches. The model was plural leadership in one local body not one leader across many bodies.
So yes, these are more than just structural concerns they touch the core of what it means to be the church biblically. There’s room for innovation, but we must be careful that it doesn’t compromise the relational and Spirit-led nature of Christ’s church And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another Hebrews 10:24-25 Being *together* matters and not just in spirit, but in flesh and blood.
Further:
“It is in membership of a local church in one place that the fellowship of the one holy catholic Church becomes significant. Indeed, such gathered companies of believers are the local manifestation of the one Church of God on earth and in heaven.”
“The basis of our membership in the church is a conscious and deliberate acceptance of Christ as Saviour and Lord by each individual.”
“Membership of our local churches is normally consequent on Believers' Baptism”
“To worship and serve in such a local Christian community is, for Baptists, of the essence of Churchmanship.”
The Baptist Doctrine of the Church.” 1948. Baptist Quarterly 12 (12): 440–48. doi:10.1080/0005576X.1948.11750738.
Absolutely, and thank you for sharing such a thoughtful reflection. Your articulation is actually quite clear and grounded in both Scripture and Baptist tradition. The tension and harmony between the universal Church and the local church have always been essential to Christian understanding, especially for Baptists.I really appreciate what you have written here it’s honest, thoughtful and rooted in both Scripture and tradition You may feel your definition isn’t the most "articulate," but honestly, it reflects a deep understanding of the Church as both universal and local.The way you describe the local church as the visible manifestation of the one Church of God is right in line with Scripture.In fact, when Paul wrote letters to local congregations, he often addressed them as the Church of God" in that location just like you pointed out with Acts 20:28.That same phrase is used in 1 Corinthians 1:2 To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints 1 Corinthians 1:2This shows how each local church is truly connected to the one body of Christ, sanctified and called by Him.I also resonate with your reference to the church being both militant and triumphant present in time and eternity.That lines up beautifully with Hebrews 12:22-23 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem... to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven There is one Church Christ's Body and it exists across time and space.Local churches, as you rightly said, don't exhaust that reality, but they certainly express it.Ephesians 4:4-6 captures this unity so well There is one body and one Spirit...one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all You are in good company with early Baptists and faithful theologians who saw this same truth And at the end of the day, the Church belongs to Christ And He put all things under His feet and gave Him as head over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all Ephesians 1:22–23Thank you again for sharing.You’re not inarticulate you are wrestling with the mystery and beauty of what it means to belong to Christ and His people, both locally and universally That’s sacred work.