Can a Church decide who they allow into their congregations?

[Michael 777]

Absolutely
If your church is in the initial stages of change (music or the first 40-day program), your church could be saved by talking with other church members, and with activist intervention by 10-20 percent of the membership. If nothing is done at this early stage, then by the time the program advances to step four, there is little that can be done except look for another church. Your church has been stolen and become a Purpose Driven entity in association with Saddleback Church of Orange County or Willow Creek of Chicago.You must educate yourself, and others, so that you can mobilize the membership to effectively resist. “For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind” 2 Timothy 1:7 .The Purpose Driven Church books and most of the programs are published by Rupert Murdoch, who owns 175 newspapers worldwide, and a large percentage of the television and communications industry. He also owns several magazines, some of which have been classified as pornographic.Billions of dollars pour into the Purpose Driven Church movement. Dr. Warren has stated he intends to send one billion Christians into the world to bring in the “Kingdom of Heaven”. The entire movement appears cultish.

Purpose Driven "Secret Church Take Over Strategy" Revealed.

When a secret take over of a church and the switch to a Purpose Driven Church is planned, the church

thejosephplan.org

A bit off topic but maybe worth a separate discussion in the forum?

 

[Michael 777]

I wouldn't equate preaching the Gospel with a catechism as you have. That could be a mere matter of opinion.

How does/would a church confirm that the latter statement is true? iow, what mechanism is implemented to ensure that the potential member does indeed already know and have accepted the Gospel and not a false gospel?
If someone were to present themselves for membership claiming to know Christ and accept the Gospel, but came from a radically different spirtual confession; would you still recieve them into full fellowship? Would you allow them to teach/preach? Why or why not and on what basis?

This is the essense of an adult catechism.

There is only one Gospel message, anything added to it comes from man and may or may not be helpful. It makes sense to us that if a Christian with radially different spiritual confession came into a church then that church could deny them membership in order to keep the peace. But, what if the Holy Spirit actually sent that person to shake up the church because the church had become a lukewarm full of man invented practises? Just a though stirrer. Jesus came to shake up the Jewish practises and belief of the pharisees and sadducees. All manmade religions at the time. I often wonder if Jesus came back today would we as Christians actually recognise him as many of us are so tied up in practising church tradition that we miss the real truth.

There is only one spiritual confession a Christian has to make and that is to believe in faith and confess with their mouths that Jesus Christ is Lord, was crucified and was raised from the dead to pay the penalty of our sins. Anything added to this is a requirement of man. So if a Christian confesses this - does the church have reason to deny them membership?

 

[Michael 777]

Matthew 21:12-17 NIV​

KJV
Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. “It is written,” he said to them, “ ‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it ‘a den of robbers.

The Bible doesn't explicitly command church membership

It's not a requirement as far as salvation goes, but we are to be in community with one another. We are to be in fellowship with other believers and mostly this takes place through a church system. All are invited .... but the church should not be outside of it's intended purpose ... it is to be a house of prayer nor disruption of same. Becoming an "official member" is a man made construct mostly for administrative purposes within a church system.

I tend to agree - there is no scriptural mandate for church membership. There is however mandate for church discipline once people are in the church.

 

[Michael 777]

Absolutely they can! And they should as well!

To properly frame the question, we we say "allowing them into the congregation," we are not talking about casual attendance where you "duck in, duck out, and maybe shake a few hands and engage in some idle chit-chat." We are talking about actually becoming a part of the congregation, being a full member and having all rights and responsibilities. Members serve in ministry, sit on committees, attend business meetings, teach Sunday School, and may be eligible to hold the office of either elder or deacon. You do not get to just walk in off the street and expect them to give you the "keys to the Church!"

Each congregation and/or denomination has its own criteria for membership. The following are prerequisites for membership into my (Baptist) church:

1. Have a clear and credible testimony of salvation.
2. Baptism - by immersion, upon profession of faith (letter of transfer in lieu of baptism if transferring from another congregation).
3. Be in agreement with the church's statement of faith, constitutional bylaws, and membership covenant as applicable.
4. Not living in any manner of sin that would be grounds for church discipline

Our church has baptism and discipleship classes for new converts and membership candidates.

If the question was about "allowing people to come through our doors on an Sunday morning," all are welcome unless they have demonstrated some sort of ulterior motive and are being combative or disruptive. Radical groups like "Act Up" and "Queer Nation" used to come into meeting houses intent upon disrupting their meetings with same-sex couples fondling/French-kissing each other, and so forth. Such is highly illegal (as it should be) and not so much of this happens anymore.

Here in the United States, we are not dealing with a "persecuted church" (yet) and all services are public. In places like China, North Korea, and Iran, I would expect that Church meetings are not open to the public and only the faithful know where and when a service will be taking place.

What you have written is probably what most churches do in terms of membership. Each denomination has its similar "entry" requirements for church membership and is generally accepted as church praxis. There maybe some debate over the issues of baptism and the living in sin part, although I dont know of any Christians who have perfected the "not living in sin" part - scripture does give instruction on the serious sins like sexual immorality etc but only once we are perfected at the resurrection of the dead will we be free of sin. Anyway this is not about discussing sin, what I am trying to debate is that although most churches have membership requirements is there a scriptural basis for membership? Or have we become slaves to church tradition and is the church today what Jesus intended - a place for the Ekklesia to gather together? We often see the the church as an organisation and run them as such but the biblical term was more concerned about the believers gathering together in worship, prayer and discipleship. If we see it this way surely we should accept Christians from all denominations to simply gather together and worship God? The only requirement for joining is professing faith in Jesus?

 

[Michael 777]

A group which makes no decision about who can join is not a church. It doesn't even have an identity at all.

Not sure what you mean by this?

 

[Michael 777]

Unless a particular Church practices excommunication, no one should be barred from attending it.
Becoming a member of that Church however is different. Obviously there should be agreement with its theology and profession of faith.
Barring someone from membership on flimsy excuses such as "none of the elders know you" does not reflect well on a Church whose purpose is to bring people into the Kingdom of Christ.

I have experienced a very similar thing. After serving in churches for many years, from cleaning toilets to preaching, we moved countries and wanted to join a church but were literally shunned because we came from a different country and we didnt have christian references from their country. Apparently they need references - which means they operate like a business and not a church. Fortunately we are mature enough Christians to know that this is not normal Christianity and we moved on to a real church. Churches who select members based off their own whims and pride, I doubt are real churches at all. I can't imagine the damage a church like this would do to newly converted Christians if they were treated in the same way. Pride in churches is a terrible thing and something they should repent of.

 

[CoreyD]

I post this here to hear what people have to say on this topic. Can a Church, a Christian one - not a cult, decide who can join their church? The emphasis is on the word join. There are numerous scriptures to deal with church discipline once a person has already joined a church but what about joining a church?

When a new person comes to church, we do not know them at all and they do not know us. If they profess to be a Christian can a church stop them from joining? Please let's not discuss hypotheticals - the assumption is that the person is a professing Christian, they do not claim to be perfect, none of us are.

Many church's have so called membership or partnership sessions where they get to know the person first and if both parties agree to the church's particular take on theology or doctrine then they accept the person into the church. This is very common practise across denominations but is it scriptural? The Bible states that it is the Holy Spirit who adds to his church, not man. How then can churches decide who they allow into church? The church belongs to Jesus Christ, not man. What if they do have differing views on theology, who are we as the church to say they cannot join?

Eager to hear what people have to say.

I don't know what "joining a church" means to others here, but I do know what it meant to join "the Church" back in the first century.
Acts 2:41, 42
41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 42 And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.

To join the Church in the first century, persons had to embrace the word preached by Jesus' followers, then get baptized, then continue, in the teachings, and fellowship.
That was the only way to join the Church.

If it is any different today, in any profession of faith, it is obviously a deviation from the teachings of Jesus and his apostles.
Jesus said that persons had to embrace his word; get baptized; keep following him. John 8:31, 32, 43, 47; Matthew 28:18-20; John 4:1, 2

 

[CoreyD]

Definitely we should be preaching the Gospel message however my question is not on the act of teaching people the gospel, rather it is addressing the question, can a church reject people who already know and have accepted the Gospel?

The Bible, which we have accepted as the word of God, contains the gospel, as you would agree.
So why are there so many different "gospels" in all these various denominations?
How does a person of a different denomination, know the gospel already, if he wants to join a different denomination, with a different "gospel"?
I don't see how that works. Can you see it working?
If so, can you explain how, please.

 

[David Lamb]

I tend to agree - there is no scriptural mandate for church membership. There is however mandate for church discipline once people are in the church.

So when Paul wrote to local church (The church at Ephesus, the church at Corinth, etc) are you saying he was just addressing some undetermined group, just the people who happened to be gathered at the time? The responsibilities of members one for another cannot be fulfilled without church membership.

 

[CoreyD]

There is only one Gospel message, anything added to it comes from man and may or may not be helpful. It makes sense to us that if a Christian with radially different spiritual confession came into a church then that church could deny them membership in order to keep the peace. But, what if the Holy Spirit actually sent that person to shake up the church because the church had become a lukewarm full of man invented practises? Just a though stirrer. Jesus came to shake up the Jewish practises and belief of the pharisees and sadducees. All manmade religions at the time. I often wonder if Jesus came back today would we as Christians actually recognise him as many of us are so tied up in practising church tradition that we miss the real truth.

There is only one spiritual confession a Christian has to make and that is to believe in faith and confess with their mouths that Jesus Christ is Lord, was crucified and was raised from the dead to pay the penalty of our sins. Anything added to this is a requirement of man. So if a Christian confesses this - does the church have reason to deny them membership?

The Bible says the holy spirit sends Jesus ministers out into the world, to preach the gospel to every nation. Acts 1:8

Those who belong to a "church that needs shaking up", will be among those who hear the message being preached abroad, and they have only one option recommended by the holy spirit.
2 Corinthians 6:17

Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

The other option is to remain, which the Bible says is not a good choice.
Revelation 18:4

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: "Come out of her, my people, so that you may not have fellowship in her sins, and so that you may not receive of her plagues.

Remember that the religious Pharisees, and Sadducees, were of a religious system that was about to be destroyed, for their unfaithfulness.
This is the case with Babylon the Great. It is a system or religion that has become so unclean that God has rejected it, and it is destined to destruction. Revelation 17:1-18:24

 

[CoreyD]

I tend to agree - there is no scriptural mandate for church membership.

The scriptural mandate is found in the words of Jesus Christ, and the disciple Luke.
Please see this post.

There is however mandate for church discipline once people are in the church.

1 Corinthians 5 is a good scripture, yes.

 

[Michael 777]

So when Paul wrote to local church (The church at Ephesus, the church at Corinth, etc) are you saying he was just addressing some undetermined group, just the people who happened to be gathered at the time? The responsibilities of members one for another cannot be fulfilled without church membership.

No - when Paul was addressing the church the inference was clearly towards Christian believers who gathered (Ekk

The Bible, which we have accepted as the word of God, contains the gospel, as you would agree.
So why are there so many different "gospels" in all these various denominations?
How does a person of a different denomination, know the gospel already, if he wants to join a different denomination, with a different "gospel"?
I don't see how that works. Can you see it working?
If so, can you explain how, please.

There is only one Gospel message but differing views on doctrinal interpretations. I think most Christian churches agree that Jesus is the Messiah, is God incarnate, died on the cross and was raised from the dead for our sins - that is the Gospel message. Where most denominations differ is actually on church praxis. There are some churches which differ significantly in the gospel message - but these are by definition cults and not churches.

Think on this - when Jesus returns and the believers are raised with him - there will be no denominations - only Christ.

 

[Michael 777]

The scriptural mandate is found in the words of Jesus Christ, and the disciple Luke.
Please see this post.


1 Corinthians 5 is a good scripture, yes.

Those verses in Acts identify what a Christian essentially is they do not refer to church membership. Maybe I was not clear when I refer to membership, I am referring to the modern day interpretation of membership. If I identify with a Christian as Acts 2 41-42, and I decide to join a church, any church, do they have scriptural grounds to either deny me or admit me as a member? If they deny me due to denominational bias then is that scripturally correct?

 

[Michael 777]

So when Paul wrote to local church (The church at Ephesus, the church at Corinth, etc) are you saying he was just addressing some undetermined group, just the people who happened to be gathered at the time? The responsibilities of members one for another cannot be fulfilled without church membership.

No, I am not saying Paul was addressing and undermined group. Paul was addressing the Ekklesia - the body of people who identified as Christians and gathered in His name. There were no denominations, as we know it today, when Paul wrote his letters, the letters were addressed to the Christians gathered together in Jesus name in each particular town which Paul had previous ministry experience in. Paul knew the people in those ministries.

What I am trying to discuss is, is there a scriptural basis for church membership? I think we all agree that membership makes it easier to bring order and structure to a church but has it resulted in the denominational split we see today?

For example, has a baptist church got the scriptural right to reject membership to a methodist Christian? Let me bring an example out of my own life. I grew up in an Anglican Church and then I decided to join a Pentecostal church. Both churches believed in the full Gospel message but had differing views over some doctrinal issues. The Pentecostal church accepted me and my family into "membership" with no issues and my old Anglican Church welcomed me back anytime we wanted to visit. We then moved and joined a Charismatic church, again there were no issues and we were received into membership. This is the way I would expect it to be and in my view is scriptural because Jesus does not consider one denomination to be superior to another. However, I know there are some denominations, and I won't mention them here for the sake of keeping the peace, who would not just accept Christians from other denominations to become members of their church.

 

[Truth7t7]

It ought to anyway. These days with so many people "shacking up" and not even bothering to get married, this is often a sticky issue for new converts just beginning to get their lives sorted out. There have been more than a few cases where such have become saved, baptized, and arrangements are then made for one of them to find temporary accommodations until they could become lawfully wed and it is always a joy seeing God working with them and they often become the most faithful of members! If they are unwilling to deal with their situation, they are clearly not serious about their desire to "walk in newness of life" and should therefore be denied both baptism and membership until they make this matter right.

Don't forget the many that are unlawfully married in Adultery, on a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, wife while their 1st wife is living (Adultery)?

Calvary Chapels and Baptist turn a blind eye to this active sin, with many Adulterers holding prominent positions in leadership?

John Hagee ex-pastor of cornerstone church in Texas divorced his wife and 2 children after 15 yrs marriage and at 35 years old Hagee instantly married a 23yr old college girl (Diana Castro) in the (Trinity Baptist) church he pastored in 1975, he's still married to Diana while his first wife Martha lives biblical (Adultery)?

Is there a way to stop the sin of Adultery "Yes", repent and divorce the unlawful wife, remain single or reconcile with the 1st wife

 

[CoreyD]

No - when Paul was addressing the church the inference was clearly towards Christian believers who gathered (Ekk

There is only one Gospel message but differing views on doctrinal interpretations. I think most Christian churches agree that Jesus is the Messiah, is God incarnate, died on the cross and was raised from the dead for our sins - that is the Gospel message. Where most denominations differ is actually on church praxis. There are some churches which differ significantly in the gospel message - but these are by definition cults and not churches.

Think on this - when Jesus returns and the believers are raised with him - there will be no denominations - only Christ.

Does everyone agree that is the gospel message, and does the Bible say that is the gospel message?

 

[Truth7t7]

Unless a particular Church practices excommunication, no one should be barred from attending it.
Becoming a member of that Church however is different. Obviously there should be agreement with its theology and profession of faith.
Barring someone from membership on flimsy excuses such as "none of the elders know you" does not reflect well on a Church whose purpose is to bring people into the Kingdom of Christ.

Who are you responding to, try responding to a post it would be greatly appreciated and less confusing

 

[Armchair Apologist]

What you have written is probably what most churches do in terms of membership. Each denomination has its similar "entry" requirements for church membership and is generally accepted as church praxis. There maybe some debate over the issues of baptism and the living in sin part, although I dont know of any Christians who have perfected the "not living in sin" part - scripture does give instruction on the serious sins like sexual immorality etc but only once we are perfected at the resurrection of the dead will we be free of sin. Anyway this is not about discussing sin, what I am trying to debate is that although most churches have membership requirements is there a scriptural basis for membership? Or have we become slaves to church tradition and is the church today what Jesus intended - a place for the Ekklesia to gather together? We often see the the church as an organisation and run them as such but the biblical term was more concerned about the believers gathering together in worship, prayer and discipleship. If we see it this way surely we should accept Christians from all denominations to simply gather together and worship God? The only requirement for joining is professing faith in Jesus?

You're kind of all over the place here but lets see if we can get things focused upon perhaps one or two points...

First of all, no one is talking about entire sanctification and living completely free from sin. This is an impossibility for anyone who still has their sin-cursed Adamic nature (1 Jn 1:8, 10). The major difference between believers and unbelievers is that a believer desires to follow Christ, to be conformed to his image, and therefore tries NOT to sin. Another thing that a believer will not do is seek to justify or make excuses for their sin. Repentance must therefore be evident in the life of a believer and this is a characteristic that the Lord Jesus Christ himself used to acknowledge Zacchaeus's conversion (Lk 19:8-9). Repentance is continual, not a one-time occurrence. We never stop repenting because we never stop sinning although as we progress in our sanctification, God performs his work in us and we should be doing better now than when we first trusted Christ (Rom 8:29; Phi 1:6; 2:12-13; 2 Pet 3:17-18). These are the marks of one who has been converted as well as the characteristics spiritual maturity. We should look for such evidence in the life of one who professes Christ and even more so for those who hold the offices of a pastor or deacon.

Regarding sin, there are differences of opinion regarding issues such as the consumption of alcohol, manner of dress, grooming, listening to rock and roll music, dancing, using tobacco, watching movies, and so forth. Overindulging in these activities may indicate an underlying sin problem but total abstinence from these activities does not equate to one living a life of holiness! consider the following:

1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

Paul specifically lists these sins and prohibits believers from having anything to do with someone who participates in such sins and insists they are "brethren!" If you examine the context of 1 Cor 5, you will see this is very much in the context of Church discipline. We are not to be tolerant of such things practiced openly within the Church or among those who are called "Christian!" But notice how none of the common things like "Smoking, drinking, dancing, etc." are not even alluded to!

It is very important to make discernment between believers and unbelievers as it relates to church membership especially if it is a "Congregational Rule" setting where each adult member has a vote in the Church meaning they have a say-so in the spiritual direction, who they call as the pastor, how funds are appropriated, and the formulation and ratification of their statement of faith, constitutional bylaws, and so forth. Just as you have "Hostile Takeovers" in the corporate world, such can and does happen (far too often, unfortunately) in a Church setting where one group tries to seize control from another. The obvious matters would be like the ordination of women, affirmation of the LGBTQ lifestyle, the calling of clergy who are theologically liberal, and so forth. One may wonder how a good church could turn so bad? It starts with a lackadaisical attitude towards Church membership!

You mention that denominations should just come together? I would say that any Methodist would be welcome to come and attend my Baptist church but they are not welcome to come in and turn my Baptist church into a Methodist church! If you want to be a member of my Baptist church, you need to first decide that you are a Baptist, that you are in agreement with our statement of faith. I understand this is more of a modern issue (with all of the denominations and such) but even in the early church, there were problems with others creeping in teaching doctrines contrary to that of the apostles! Even a "Non-Denominational" church should have a well-written statement of faith in which all members should agree to and abide by.

 

[zippy2006]

Not sure what you mean by this?

Well, try to give an example of a group that makes no decisions about who can join and nevertheless retains an identity.

 

[CoreyD]

Those verses in Acts identify what a Christian essentially is they do not refer to church membership. Maybe I was not clear when I refer to membership, I am referring to the modern day interpretation of membership.

Why is a modern day interpretation of membership more important, or of any importance, rather than the one mentioned in scripture?
The Church in the Bible is not a building, but the body of Christ.

If I identify with a Christian as Acts 2 41-42, and I decide to join a church, any church, do they have scriptural grounds to either deny me or admit me as a member? If they deny me due to denominational bias then is that scripturally correct?

What churches today decide, or decide not, is to me, not important, if it does not align with scripture.
If it deviates, it is less important.

If you want to know what is "scripturally correct" for a church to do, is it not important that the church be following what is "scripturally correct", in the first place?
So, would it not be important to consider if the church followed the same exact teachings of Jesus and his followers?

Do they therefore, require that the person, or persons interested in becoming members, accept the word they teach, and then get baptized with that knowledge, and remain in association - agreeing with those teachings?
Since Jesus is the head of the Church - his body, Jesus is the one to dictate how membership of that body is qualified. Isn't that so?