It’s always amazed me to find such little evidence in the Scriptures that support what we believe. The text of our heading is such an example where a majority find a local church that Paul joined. Once again, there is little doubt that saints lived in the city; as many as five thousand plus were added unto the Lord. The issue is whether Paul wanted to join other saints in the teaching, fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayers or join a local church organization? Some are suggesting that there is no difference, yet recognize that there was no “slush fund” for ongoing expenses related to “church owned” property, but only collections for the poor among them which they individually collected and laid at the apostle’s feet for distribution. This action, according to advocates of local church organizations, is “collective action.”
What does this mean? Did they gather somewhere and conjointly gather it, that is, at the same time and place as when a plate is passed around an auditorium? Is that what makes it “collective.” Or, does the fact that each laid their gift at the feet of the apostles for distribution make it collective action. We’ve coined the term to make distinctions between individual action and “collective” action, but I have yet to see any justification for the distinction. First, the gifts were not given to the local church for distribution or into a local church treasury. The collection was for the specific need of the poor and like every gift of this kind, once completed, was not ongoing for some future possibility of its reoccurrence.
Second, by using the word “church” is the proof texts used in Matthew 18 and 1 Timothy 5, only shows that what was designed to be an individual obligation to be met and fulfilled by the same individual can, in certain situations require the aid of other individual saints. “Taking it to the “called-out” in Matthew 18 only suggests that other saints become involved in the effort to convict the brother of sin. Nothing suggests a body of decision-makers or board members handing out ultimatums and sending letters of withdrawal from the church as a collective decision. Instead, it is intended to show that when the brothers privy to the sin have failed to bring them to repentance, the entire class of “called-out” ones become aware and work toward their repentance. It portrays the ideal hope and action of a particular brother or sister to restore another in sin, in which no one else is privy to it. 1 Timothy 5 is the same application. Ideally, each individual has the responsibility of caring for his or her own so that other saints (“called-out” ones) are not burdened with it. “Church” does not describe the action of a local church organization. It describes the collective work of other individuals working toward fulfilling a need. The aid, whether it be money, work, or the sharing of their harvest or homes is individuals acting responsibly. It does not describe the action of a local church board of decision-makers authorizing the release funds to be used in meeting those needs.
So, once again, Paul tried to join himself to brethren who met in the temple and from house to house as the early example of Acts shows to fellowship with brothers and sisters. The saints were not sure of the claim that he was one of them as he had earlier gone into their homes, dragging off men and women to jail. There’s nothing here that forces the conclusion that he was seeking to be a member of the local church organization. They were just leary of this man coming into their homes, thus being able to identify where saints lived in the city. They were not deciding on whether he should be allowed membership in a local church? Called-out ones lived there and thus, the ekklesia was in Jerusalem but that an organization/agency existed apart from the people through which individuals work is an unproven theory. The saints in Jerusalem were deciding on whether they should trust Paul with their whereabouts in Jerusalem. Once that trust was granted, he was seen going out and coming in among them as a practice of life.
Tradition seeks to hold a person captive to the will of the people who create entities and make laws where God did not. Once again, we must understand that the action is always individual action, even though many individuals are participating in the same work.