House church or excuse?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Esaias, in my opinion your commentary about Matt 18 did great until you got to the verse in question. Jesus is merely saying that if two or three do something IN HIS NAME, it's like Him personally being there. he is represented as being there in those two or three. It's not saying He is present Himself, since that is redundant. He is everywhere anyway, and He indwells us all anyway as well. But the reason that which is bound or loosed in earth is also so in heaven is because those in earth who do this in his name are AS GOOD AS HIMSELF being there and having done it. Its is not saying two or three can gather and He will bless us with His presence. For that matter, we can be alone and He is with us!

It is speaking in terms of proxy, He is in our midst by proxy if we do this in His way and in His name.

Paul said the same thing!

1 Corinthians 5:3-5 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, (4) In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, (5) To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

The power of Jesus is His authority, and that is what it means to do things in His name. It's putting us in the place of Jesus by proxy. We're doing this in His authority, and not our own.

When a policeman commands somebody to do something in the name of the Law, the law is not physically there except in the person of that officer. That is what Jesus mean by two or three gathering in His name and Him being present. By proxy.

I wasn'tsaying Christ is only present if two or three are gathered together. I was speaking of the role and authority of the ekklesia, which is Christ's authority, which is in force in ecclesial matters when the church comes together for Kingdom business. One believer cannot exercise the authority given to the Body. That would be popery. So the believerS must gather as his Body to transact any official business, and the minimum number is two or three.

I believe the context shows Jesus was speaking directly to the concept of the minyan and the required quorum under Jewish tradition to "bind and loose". The ekklesia is not subject to the halacha of the rabbis. Ten are not necessary. Two or three is sufficient.

And this necessarily determines the minimum number for an ekklesia to exist.

Otherwise, what is the number? One? Twenty?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Esaias, in my opinion your commentary about Matt 18 did great until you got to the verse in question. Jesus is merely saying that if two or three do something IN HIS NAME, it's like Him personally being there. he is represented as being there in those two or three.

Not so. I notice that you didn't quote the text. Let's look at the text:

Matthew 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

Jesus didn't say, "it is like I am there in the midst of them". Jesus said, "there I am in the midst of them".

Sorry, I feel the Scriptures refute your notion of representative presence. Jesus is truly there to participate in the actions performed.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I've always understood that it means that since Jesus was born of a woman, the curse of childbearing which began in the garden ended at Calvary.

well, does it no longer cause pain to bear children?

To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children;

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

well, does it no longer cause pain to bear children?

To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children;

It's spiritual.

Isaiah 66:5-8 Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed. (6) A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies. (7) Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. (8) Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

In other words, Zion no sooner got the point where there should have been in travail than she already gave birth.

The curse-free birth is salvation the day of the cross.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

It's spiritual.

Isaiah 66:5-8 Hear the word of the LORD, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you, that cast you out for my name's sake, said, Let the LORD be glorified: but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed. (6) A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies. (7) Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. (8) Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

In other words, Zion no sooner got the point where there should have been in travail than she already gave birth.

The curse-free birth is salvation the day of the cross.

i will agree that there is a reflection in this, but it sure strikes me as overstretching "women may be saved in childbirth" to the breaking point. And again, that is not the only example, anyway.

[votivesoul]

Since the principle in Matthew 18 is church discipline, the two or three gathered together makes me think of the "out of the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established", which, as a principle, is always used in both the OT and NT as the standard for rendering accurate judgment as it pertains to punishment (even execution in the OT).

So when two or three witnesses all agree that the person guilty of sin needs punishment, the Lord is present with them and bears witness to their testimony, and so, binds in heaven what the church does on earth.

I will read the passage again, since right now, I'm just posting off the top of my head.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I wasn'tsaying Christ is only present if two or three are gathered together. I was speaking of the role and authority of the ekklesia, which is Christ's authority, which is in force in ecclesial matters when the church comes together for Kingdom business. One believer cannot exercise the authority given to the Body. That would be popery. So the believerS must gather as his Body to transact any official business, and the minimum number is two or three.

I believe the context shows Jesus was speaking directly to the concept of the minyan and the required quorum under Jewish tradition to "bind and loose". The ekklesia is not subject to the halacha of the rabbis. Ten are not necessary. Two or three is sufficient.

And this necessarily determines the minimum number for an ekklesia to exist.

Otherwise, what is the number? One? Twenty?

Okay. Thanks. Thought you meant Jesus is not there in proxy.

[good samaritan]

What if two are three gathered in the name, but their intents where not what Jesus would have?

If I am sent as an ambassador to another country in the name of my king, I have the king's support to carry out his mission (his will). If I get off course (out of his will) than I would not be in the name of my king. I think this illustrates the authority given to the church when we are doing the will of God particularly in these verses regarding church discipline.

If you have been born again you are the church, and no number makes you the church. In order for their to be an assembling that would mean for the church to gather. It doesn't matter the building structure as long as it is in the will of God what you are doing. God is not the author of confusion.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

What if two are three gathered in the name, but their intents where not what Jesus would have?

If I am sent as an ambassador to another country in the name of my king, I have the king's support to carry out his mission (his will). If I get off course (out of his will) than I would not be in the name of my king. I think this illustrates the authority given to the church when we are doing the will of God particularly in these verses regarding church discipline.

If you have been born again you are the church, and no number makes you the church. In order for their to be an assembling that would mean for the church to gather. It doesn't matter the building structure as long as it is in the will of God what you are doing. God is not the author of confusion.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Note the "For" in Matthew 18:20. It is gar in Greek and is a preposition indicating causation, and can be and sometimes is translated "because". So, reading Matthew 18:20 as "Because where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them" makes one realize that Matthew 18:20 is a conclusion on all the material that came before, and the material that came before is about church discipline, not a worship based communual meeting.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/18-20.htm

http://biblehub.com/greek/1063.htm

So it's pretty clear Matthew 18:20 doesn't have anything to do with the saints getting together to praise the Lord and edify each other. Consider the following parable, which is all about forgiveness and reconciliation, and what happens when a brother doesn't forgive a brother. It's a reinforcement of the principle regarding church discipline.

There isn't any one Scripture that says how many it takes to qualify a meeting of the church. It could be two or three, it could be something else. But the Bible is silent on the matter, and Matthew 18:20 doesn't offer any additional insights, since it's not what the verse, or even passage, or even entire chapter, is about.

Bingo!! And bravo.