• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • Christian Forums is looking to bring on new moderators to the CF Staff Team! If you have been an active member of CF for at least three months with 200 posts during that time, you're eligible to apply! This is a great way to give back to CF and keep the forums running smoothly! If you're interested, you can submit your application here!

Should Churches have Requirements for Membership...

Blackmarch

Legend
Oct 23, 2004
12,221
325
43
Utah, USA
✟40,116.00
Faith
Marital Status
Single
Zaac said:
other than a confession of faith in Jesus Christ and a baptism?

Recently at our church, we were told that all new "prospective " members would be REQUIRED to go through a series of classes before they could become members of the church.

Is this Biblical and would you do it?
As in it really helps knowing the gospel a little before joining.. so yes in that sense, and that if there are things which the members are expected to do, then also yes for that.
 
Upvote 0

kdet

God lives in us
Jul 12, 2003
7,541
256
62
TX
Visit site
✟24,307.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Zaac said:
other than a confession of faith in Jesus Christ and a baptism?

Recently at our church, we were told that all new "prospective " members would be REQUIRED to go through a series of classes before they could become members of the church.

Is this Biblical and would you do it?

Our church was recently told the same thing. Is it Bibical? I dion't know. But I do believe it's a good idea. If I had known and was clear on some of our doctrine, I would not have joined the church I am a member of now.
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Blackmarch said:
As in it really helps knowing the gospel a little before joining.. so yes in that sense, and that if there are things which the members are expected to do, then also yes for that.

But is it a requirement of Jesus that people know the Gospel before becoming members of the Body of Christ? If not why would it need to be a requirement to become a member of a church?

And as for the things which the members are expected to do, why can't that be done after membership? Why should someone be delayed membership into the church if God has accepted them into HIS Church?
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
kdet said:
Our church was recently told the same thing. Is it Bibical?

Now I asked the Senior Pastor the same thing and was also told that he didn't know. Now I would really like to know why we would be making a major change if the Senior pastor does not know of a Biblical reason for doing so? (Tapping foot...)

I dion't know. But I do believe it's a good idea. If I had known and was clear on some of our doctrine, I would not have joined the church I am a member of now.

Why is it a good idea to do something that may not be Biblical? If someone, as in your case, finds out some things that he doesn't like about the church after he joins, then he has the option to leave. But to tell someone that you can't be a full member unless you go through a certain amount of classes when their doesn't appear to be a Biblical basis for it...
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
NothingButTheBlood said:
Requirements for membership don't bother me too bad. Most churches have them for good reason. As long as there are no requirements for attendence your ok.

Should the church's requirement for membership be different from the requirement into God's Church?
 
Upvote 0

NothingButTheBlood

Well-Known Member
Feb 27, 2005
3,454
130
✟4,508.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
I don't believe Christ talks about church membership or attendence for that matter. But Paul states lot so criteria for bishops,deacons, etc. Attending a church and wanting to be a member are two different things. Members make major decisions for a church like missionaries to support, finances, activies like vacation bible school, etc. You want people you know love the Lord in those postions. I think making sure someone is ok with the church and what it's doing is important.
 
Upvote 0

NothingButTheBlood

Well-Known Member
Feb 27, 2005
3,454
130
✟4,508.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Zaac said:
Should the church's requirement for membership be different from the requirement into God's Church?

By making a requirement for membership you are not restricting someone's attenance, participation, or salvation. Once saved you are a member of God's church. But the local building you go to may have other requirements for reason's stated above.
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
NothingButTheBlood said:
I don't believe Christ talks about church membership or attendence for that matter. But Paul states lot so criteria for bishops,deacons, etc.

None of those restrict membership.

Attending a church and wanting to be a member are two different things. Members make major decisions for a church like missionaries to support, finances, activies like vacation bible school, etc. You want people you know love the Lord in those postions. I think making sure someone is ok with the church and what it's doing is important.

If they have accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, why should their ability to make other decisions be a limiting factor in church membership?

If the purpose of the Church is to get together for fellowship and worship of God, why should what they think after the fact be a limiting issue to membership?
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
NothingButTheBlood said:
By making a requirement for membership you are not restricting someone's attenance, participation, or salvation. Once saved you are a member of God's church. But the local building you go to may have other requirements for reason's stated above.

And I ask the question again, why? We like to rag on the Catholic CHurch for its manmade rules. Why should the church, the local building, have more requirements for membership into its body than Jesus Christ has for His?
 
Upvote 0

Abiel

Missionary
Jul 24, 2004
17,022
827
57
East Anglia
✟45,797.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I suppose it depends what is meant by 'membership'.
When I was an Anglican, I wanted to confirm my baptismal vows. That took classes. When I became a soldier of the Salvation Army, that took classes. I could have chosen not to confirm my baptismal vows, or not to become a soldier, many salvation army attending folk arent soldiers. Are they any the less 'members'?
 
Upvote 0

mepalmer3

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2005
930
35
50
✟23,778.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Zaac said:
other than a confession of faith in Jesus Christ and a baptism?

Recently at our church, we were told that all new "prospective " members would be REQUIRED to go through a series of classes before they could become members of the church.

Is this Biblical and would you do it?

We have a similar sort of thing at my church. Folks go through a new member class that does 2 primary things (to my knowledge).

1. It goes over the basic beliefs of that particular church body. There are a lot of people new to christianity, a lot of people from various faiths that join our church. As for biblical basis, this is somewhat common sense I think in that it's easier for a body to work as a body if we all understand where we are going, what tune we're going to dance to.

2. The folks learn more about what ministries are going on at the church, where various buildings and such are, and so on... There's probably about 800 or so people at my church, so it's not huge, but definitely pretty big for someone just coming in. For a biblical basis.. again, if you're a small part of the body and being part of a body means interacting with the rest of the parts, then you need to know about the rest of the body.

I don't think the bible defines a strict set of rules on how a church is supposed to act with respect to a large number of issues because there isn't just one way that can work. In the same way a government doesn't define a specific government type (aside from possibly a theocracy). But this doesn't mean that there should be governments, or that there shouldn't be plans or rules in individual churches for running itself. I think it means that churches should setup rules that are Godly, and that are consistent with other sorts of biblical rules.

From a practical sense, it would be bad if you got 500 new people, immediately they all became voting members of a church, and then they voted to go a way that was decidedly not christian.

My brother in law just had to go through our new member classes. And he came straight from another lutheran church just one city over where his dad has been the head pastor for most of his life. But again, the new classes aren't meant just to teach people about Christ, they're also meant to introduce the person to the staff, and to all that is going on at that church. Overall there are a few bit of grumblings, but people get involved quite a bit more because they're not intimidated by the size. They're just a lot more informed.

But as far as holding off membership... it's not like people don't get to come to church until their class finishes. The folks still come to church, almost all can still participate in communion, come to meetings and listen and give input. The only thing I think they can't do is vote is some of the meetings. And I really don't see any reason to give voting priviledges to someone who's come to a church and been there less than X number of weeks.

On a similar note... my wife and I had to go through marriage counseling before we were allowed to get married. It's just the standard thing our church does now. We really loved it though.
 
Upvote 0

mepalmer3

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2005
930
35
50
✟23,778.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Zaac said:
And I ask the question again, why? We like to rag on the Catholic CHurch for its manmade rules. Why should the church, the local building, have more requirements for membership into its body than Jesus Christ has for His?

I think I understand and appreciate your point. However, and this is splitting hairs a bit perhaps... but I think the church may only ask for a tithe, whereas God asks for all of your money. I think the price Jesus asks for is much higher than the local buildings we call churches will ask. But I'm not talking about salvation here, I'm just talking about what Jesus explicitly called us out to do, how to live, etc...
 
Upvote 0

JimfromOhio

Life of Trials :)
Feb 7, 2004
27,738
3,738
Central Ohio
✟67,748.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I had this answer from a similar thread last year.

In Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus set up an accountability system. When a professing believer starts living like an unbeliever, those in the church who know about it are to confront him about his sin. First, one is to go to this person, and then, if he will not listen, the one is to bring one or two others along for a second conversation. The goal is to restore him back to full fellowship with the Lord and his fellow believers. If he persistently and unrepentantly refuses to return to the Lord, the final step is to report the matter to the church. Then everyone in the church has the chance to win the person back. And if he continues in his sin, the church is to withdraw fellowship from him as the final means of showing him his need to repent. If you aren't part of the church, they have no authority over you and cannot do what Jesus said to do. Unless you join the church, your independence places you outside the way Jesus wants things to happen.

Incidentally, when Jesus says in verse 17 to bring this matter "to the church," how do you know who should be notified (and who should not be) unless there is a formally recognized membership? Related to this idea of spiritual authority, recall Hebrews 13:17, the passage we examined which tells us to obey the leaders of the church and submit to them because they keep watch over our souls. The leaders of the church are to "watch over" you by providing spiritual protection for you and caring about your growth in Christ. You place yourself outside that spiritual watchcare unless you join a local church. The meaning of the word "join" in Acts. 5:13 makes sense only in the context of membership. In Acts 5:13 we read of the reaction of the non-Christians in Jerusalem after a couple within the church, Ananias and Sapphira, had died on the spot when it was revealed that they had lied to the church. It says, "Yet none of the rest dared join them, but the people esteemed them highly." The unbelievers had great respect for the Christians, but after this incident none of them who claimed to be converted but were outward-only believers wanted to join the church. In the Greek language in which Paul wrote this letter, the word he used that's translated here as "join" literally means "to glue or cement together, to unite, to join firmly." It doesn't refer to an informal, merely assumed sort of relationship, but one where you choose to "glue" or "join" yourself firmly to the others. Again, that kind of language only makes sense in the context of membership. That same "glue word" is used in the New Testament to describe being joined together in a sexual relationship (1 Corinthians 6:16) and being joined to the Lord in one spirit in salvation (1 Corinthians 6:17). And it's the very same word Paul uses in 1 Corinthians 5:11 when he says "not to keep company with" any so-called brother who continues in immorality, but rather to "put away from yourselves the evil person." Clearly this kind of language doesn't refer to a casual, superficial, or informal relationship. So when it says in Acts 5:13 that no insincere believer "dared join them," the "glue word" used there speaks of such a cohesive, bonding relationship that it must be referring to a recognized church membership. The meaning of "the whole church" in 1 Corinthians 14:23 makes sense only in the context of membership

The earthly founder of the church at Corinth, the Apostle Paul, wrote to this new body of Christians about their many difficulties, including how to bring order to their public worship. He began 1 Corinthians 14:23 with, "Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place, . . ." Who did he have in mind when he referred to "the whole church"? The only realistic answer is "the church members." That's why one commentator, working with the original language of this text, translates it "If then the whole church assembles together and all its members" and notes "(the last two words are not in the Greek but are naturally to be understood)."1 Imagine the leaders of the Corinthian Christians walking into the gathering of the church for worship one Sunday. Would they have known by looking, or would they have had some way of deciding, whether "the whole church" was there? Surely they would have known who was supposed to be present in a churchwide meeting and who was missing. But how else could they have known when "the whole church" was "together in one place" without knowing who was a member and who wasn't? This implies a verifiable membership.
The instructions for pastoral oversight and spiritual leadership make sense only in the context of membership "This is a faithful saying:," said Paul to Timothy, "If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work" (1 Timothy 3:1). In other places the New Testament also refers to a bishop, or "overseer" as the NIV and NASB render it, as a pastor or elder (Acts 20:17, 28; Philippians 1:1; Titus 1:5-7). But what or whom does he oversee? How can he provide spiritual oversight if he doesn't know exactly those for whom he is responsible? A distinguishable, mutually-understood membership is required for him to fulfill his charge. Down in verse 5 it says of an overseer, "for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?" The local church is compared to a family. Is anyone a casual member of a family? No, membership in a family is a very definite thing.

"Take heed to yourselves," Paul instructed the elders of the church of Ephesus, "and to all the flock" (Acts 20:28). How could they fulfill their responsibility as undershepherds to "all" the flock unless they knew who was part of "the flock" and who was not? These leaders of a growing church in a large city needed some means of identification of those for whom they were to "take heed." A simple membership list is the logical solution. In Hebrews 13:17 is a word addressed to those under such overseers: "Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you." For whom will the leaders of a church give an account-everyone who comes in and out of their church services? No, it has to be a limited group of people-the members of the church-for whom they will be answerable. Otherwise, how can church leaders be responsible for someone until they know he or she is committed to their care? The Bible's instructions for pastoral oversight and spiritual leadership can best be obeyed when there is a well-defined church membership. The metaphors used to describe local churches (flock, temple, body, household) make sense only in the context of membership.The New Testament uses several metaphors to describe churches. Some of these metaphors describe the church of Christ collectively throughout the world. While all of them could potentially apply to the local church also, at least four of these metaphors-flock, temple, body, and household-are definitely used to refer to individual churches (in Acts 20:28; Ephesians 2:21; 1 Corinthians 12:27, and 1 Timothy 3:15). And each metaphor is best understood in a setting of specific church membership. A flock of sheep isn't a random collection of ewes, rams, and lambs. Shepherds know their flocks. They know which sheep are theirs to care for and which are not. Sheep belong to specific flocks. This is also the way it should be for God's spiritual sheep. A temple building, just like a church building, shouldn't have any loose bricks or blocks. If it does, something's wrong. Each one of them has a definite place. "There is no place," said an English preacher long ago, "for any loose stone in God's edifice."2 The same analogy is true for a human body. Your body isn't a casual collection of loosely related parts. You don't keep your fingers in your pocket until you need them. They are joined. They are members of the body. The local body of Christ should be like this also-those joined to Christ, who are members of His body-should express that relationship through a visible membership. And in a household, a family, you're either a member or you're not. So if you are part of the family of God, show it by joining a local expression of God's family.
 
Upvote 0

JimfromOhio

Life of Trials :)
Feb 7, 2004
27,738
3,738
Central Ohio
✟67,748.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
I need to add a summary and references.

In my opinion, non-members avoid being members so that won't "commit" to do what God wanted them to do. Being a member means being involved and being "part" of a growing church (small home-church or large church facility).

Ephesians 2 (NIV)
18For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
19Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and aliens, but fellow citizens with God's people and members of God's household, 20built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

Read 1 Timothy 3
 
Upvote 0

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2004
8,430
426
Atlanta, GA.
✟12,748.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
mepalmer3 said:
We have a similar sort of thing at my church. Folks go through a new member class that does 2 primary things (to my knowledge).

1. It goes over the basic beliefs of that particular church body. There are a lot of people new to christianity, a lot of people from various faiths that join our church. As for biblical basis, this is somewhat common sense I think in that it's easier for a body to work as a body if we all understand where we are going, what tune we're going to dance to.

If it's common sense, and a lot of denominations and beliefs think that a lot of things are, where is the BIBLICAL basis for restricting membership based upon beliefs of a particular church body?

I mentioned this before. But we as churches continue to things in a way that we think will make life easier on us. Yes it would be easier to make these things about the church known before someone joins. And a lot of the more mature Christians will ask these questions before they join. But why do we keep coming up with ways to shuck our discipling responsibilities to MEMBERS of the church?

Now if we want to give people information about the church before they join that would allow them to make an informed decision, or suggest that if they do not know much about the church that they take the classes before making a decision to join, I'm all for it. But to tell people that you CANNOT be a member of this church unless you go through these classes, I can't find any Biblical basis for doing so.


2. The folks learn more about what ministries are going on at the church, where various buildings and such are, and so on... There's probably about 800 or so people at my church, so it's not huge, but definitely pretty big for someone just coming in. For a biblical basis.. again, if you're a small part of the body and being part of a body means interacting with the rest of the parts, then you need to know about the rest of the body.

Isn't finding out about the Body part of the discipling process? Why should not knowing about the Body be a factor in who can be a member when Christ says to come as you are?

If people get up the nerve to COME and Jesus Christ has accepted them, who are we to say, yeah Jesus has accepted you, but before this church accepts you as a member, you've got to go through a series of classes?

I don't think the bible defines a strict set of rules on how a church is supposed to act with respect to a large number of issues because there isn't just one way that can work.

Treading on some dangerous ground. Jesus Christ gives us a display of what the Church is supposed to look like in Acts for good reason. And nowhere therin was there a restriction of membership to those who had accepted Himas Lord and Savior. There was a plan in place for dealing with those within the Body who were not repentant of sin, but there was no blocking of membership into the church.

The principles are there. But yet again, because we aren't discipling people after they get into the church, we are opting to just block their membership if they don't do what we think they should do before coming into the church. And this goes against every principle set forth in God's Word for people to just come.

By doing this, we're going to potentially run off people who thought they could just come as they are.

In the same way a government doesn't define a specific government type (aside from possibly a theocracy). But this doesn't mean that there should be governments, or that there shouldn't be plans or rules in individual churches for running itself. I think it means that churches should setup rules that are Godly, and that are consistent with other sorts of biblical rules.

Again, part of the normal discipling process. Rules for running the church should not be a membership factor.

From a practical sense, it would be bad if you got 500 new people, immediately they all became voting members of a church, and then they voted to go a way that was decidedly not christian.

You mean like requiring something of membership into a church that is not Biblical?

My brother in law just had to go through our new member classes. And he came straight from another lutheran church just one city over where his dad has been the head pastor for most of his life. But again, the new classes aren't meant just to teach people about Christ, they're also meant to introduce the person to the staff, and to all that is going on at that church. Overall there are a few bit of grumblings, but people get involved quite a bit more because they're not intimidated by the size. They're just a lot more informed.

And I say again, those are the things that most mature Christians are going to do anyhow. But that doesn't mean that we should make it a requirement for membership of the people who aren't mature.

If you want to acclimate people to the Church, do that. But it is not Biblical to deny them membership because they do not meet the pastor and staff.

But as far as holding off membership... it's not like people don't get to come to church until their class finishes.

It's not like people have to stop going to church either because there is an openly gay pastor in the pulpit.

The folks still come to church, almost all can still participate in communion, come to meetings and listen and give input. The only thing I think they can't do is vote is some of the meetings. And I really don't see any reason to give voting priviledges to someone who's come to a church and been there less than X number of weeks.

Why is doing what we want more important than not doing something God has not said to do?

On a similar note... my wife and I had to go through marriage counseling before we were allowed to get married. It's just the standard thing our church does now. We really loved it though.

But would the church have married you if you were not members?
 
Upvote 0

JimfromOhio

Life of Trials :)
Feb 7, 2004
27,738
3,738
Central Ohio
✟67,748.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
One should join the church and then go to church classes, not the other way around? Answer: NO

Before joining a church, would-be members must learned the Church's doctrines, beliefs, and by-laws before becoming members. "Would-be members" must agree with the church's doctrine or don't join the church. There must be "unity" and "family" within the Church where all can agree.
 
Upvote 0