Membership of the SDA Church....

[Woody]

Praise God

[Twilight]

Some have argued for a denomination that does not operate membership.

Does anyone actually have a real life example of that?

And not just an example where "membership" is renamed to something else, to avoid the word "membership"... :-)

[Bravus]

I'd be interested in responses to my post here: http://clubadventist.com/forum/ubbthread...html#Post401199

It tries to go beyond theorizing to look at specific ways in which an exclusive approach to membership impedes the mission of the church.

[Twilight]

Sadly, it ends up being more subjective than that. An example is probably the best way to illustrate:

This whole discussion started from the premise that people who are not recent creationists ought not to be members of the SDA church. The implication varied as to whether they should be booted out or just leave of their own accord, but the message was very clear that they shouldn't be members.

There are many such people in the church (there is a wide range of views on origins within the church). So if the membership policy was as some folk here deem is should be (which, incidentally, it arguably is not according to the Church Manual but which Ted WIlson seems to be pushing hard toward) the denomination would have many fewer members, particularly in the developed world.

Now here's where the subjective part comes in. To me, that would be a tragedy, and would impede the gospel. Saved, committed Christian believers who are sincerely seeking God's face and have the Holy Spirit acting in their lives would be pushed out of the church. Some might find homes in other Christian churches, others might be hurt enough to lose their faith entirely, or to become solo worshippers rather join any congregation.

To others, though, they're just infidels and no loss: they ought to just buckle under and believe what the church tells them to believe. (Never mind that that contradicts the whole anti-authoritarian and anti-tradition roots of the Advent movement.)

So if you're asking me, then yes, I think church membership - at least as some seek to apply it - is an impediment to the gospel. The origins issue is only one of a number of issues, that within living memory has included beards on men, for example, that is used to exclude people from the club. And when the club claims to represent Jesus, the implication that people have been rejected by Jesus on cultural matters is a very likely misconception to be fostered...

Fellowship is open to all.

Membership is for those that agree with the standards the church presents.

The minute you try to replace membership with fellowship, the church loses all of its standards and just becomes a "social club".

[Woody]

Quote:

The minute you try to replace membership with fellowship, the church loses all of its standards and just becomes a "social club".

I realize that you will accuse any church or organization that doesn't have "membership" ... a social club. But, I think those who attend this church http://www.applegatefellowship.org/ without members would object to that. It is the largest church in Southern Oregon.

Having been to this church to visit ... I do know just a little about it.

Note: I had a hard time deciding if I should respond to Gerry request for a name of an organization or church that does not have members. But I decided to. However ... I know this is just a set up to criticize this church. This makes me sad. But I guess it just goes with the territory.

[Twilight]

Quote:

The minute you try to replace membership with fellowship, the church loses all of its standards and just becomes a "social club".

I realize that you will accuse any church or organization that doesn't have "membership" ... a social club. But, I think those who attend this church http://www.applegatefellowship.org/ without members would object to that. It is the largest church in Southern Oregon.

Having been to this church to visit ... I do know just a little about it.

Did they ask you up front to preach?

Or do you need to pass some type of qualifying examination before they let you do that?

[Woody]

When I was there ... Jon Courson usually did the speaking. He is very popular. Even when he mistakenly predicted that Jesus would come in 1999. After that ... he still had a growing attendance.

[Twilight]

Quote:

The minute you try to replace membership with fellowship, the church loses all of its standards and just becomes a "social club".

I realize that you will accuse any church or organization that doesn't have "membership" ... a social club. But, I think those who attend this church http://www.applegatefellowship.org/ without members would object to that. It is the largest church in Southern Oregon.

Having been to this church to visit ... I do know just a little about it.

Note: I had a hard time deciding if I should respond to Gerry request for a name of an organization or church that does not have members. But I decided to. However ... I know this is just a set up to criticize this church. This makes me sad. But I guess it just goes with the territory.

No membership huh?

Is this the example you would like to use?

http://procinwarn.com/courson.htm

"The Rev. Jon Courson, the evangelical pastor who built the Applegate Christian Fellowship into the biggest church in Southern Oregon, will leave his post to become a pastor with the 25,000-member

His son was chosen to replace him "without any question" by the 150-man assembly of deacons and elders, said Bob Thornley, 46, one of Applegate’s pastors...

Hmmm...

150 deacons and elders.

But no membership, are you sure about that Redwood?

Or do they just walk in off of the street and get the job?

[Twilight]

Quote:

The minute you try to replace membership with fellowship, the church loses all of its standards and just becomes a "social club".

I realize that you will accuse any church or organization that doesn't have "membership" ... a social club. But, I think those who attend this church http://www.applegatefellowship.org/ without members would object to that. It is the largest church in Southern Oregon.

Having been to this church to visit ... I do know just a little about it.

Note: I had a hard time deciding if I should respond to Gerry request for a name of an organization or church that does not have members. But I decided to. However ... I know this is just a set up to criticize this church. This makes me sad. But I guess it just goes with the territory.

http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2006/0224/local/stories/02local.htm

First Pastor Courson returns to Applegate

By DAMIAN MANN

Mail Tribune

The founder of the Applegate Christian Fellowship has returned after a three-year absence during which membership declined as affiliate churches formed in Grants Pass and Medford.

http://archive.mailtribune.com/archive/2006/0224/local/stories/02local.htm

As to declining membership, Mangin said Jon Courson told the congregation recently that it wasn’t a numbers game.

Mangin said he is more concerned about the message he receives at the church than the number of members.

[Woody]

Mark. Just because a reporter mistakenly calls it membership instead of attendance .... does not mean that they have official "membership". I would invite you to contact them and ask them before going off half cocked.

They don't have membership

But they do have 5,000 people attending on a particular weekend.

[Twilight]

Really, then how did they get those 150 deacons and elders?

Are you suggesting they didn't have some type of filter in place?

[Twilight]

Maybe they recruited from the local white witch coven?

All you have to do is say "Jesus" and you can become an elder perhaps...?

:-)

[Woody]

Quote:

150 deacons and elders.

But no membership, are you sure about that Redwood?

Or do they just walk in off of the street and get the job?

Yes. Churches that do not have official membership DO have deacons and elders. In this church ... if you attend ... you are a "member" if you insist on the use of that term. You are simply chosen from the group of those who attend and support the church.

So, YES. I am very sure of this ... to answer your question.

I hope this helps.

[Woody]

Really, then how did they get those 150 deacons and elders?

Are you suggesting they didn't have some type of filter in place?

The "filter" is just as it is in ANY church. Do these brothers or sisters have the gift of ministry that would allow them to function in that particular leadership capacity. The fact that they are not "members" of any sect ... does not affect what the Holy Spirit is doing in their lives.

I should stress that 150 out of 5,000 is quite a small number. Are you suggesting that the 150 are the only ones with the status of "member"?

[Twilight]

Quote:

150 deacons and elders.

But no membership, are you sure about that Redwood?

Or do they just walk in off of the street and get the job?

Yes. Churches that do not have official membership DO have deacons and elders. In this church ... if you attend ... you are a "member" if you insist on the use of that term. You are simply chosen from the group of those who attend and support the church.

I hope this helps.

So how do they "vet" these people?

What are the conditions they have put in place that enable them to pick the elders and deacons?

What fundamental truths do they expect their deacons and elders to uphold?

What are the "standards" that enable people to be selected?

You see, many want to attract people by avoiding the "word" membership, whilst they still "operate" membership.

It is all part of the "Willow Church" philosophy of making no demands on the "congregation", easy church, easy christianity...

But they all operate "membership" schemes, they just call it something else.

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: Twilight

Really, then how did they get those 150 deacons and elders?

Are you suggesting they didn't have some type of filter in place?

The "filter" is just as it is in ANY church. Do these brothers or sisters have the gift of ministry that would allow them to function in that particular capacity. The fact that they are not "members" of any sect ... does not affect what the Holy Spirit is doing in their lives.

All the churches I know use membership as a filter.

So if you are saying they do the same, then of course I agree.

But you are claiming they don't have any defined "membership", then argue they use exactly the same principle as other churches, which is....

....membership.

[Woody]

If membership is the only defining determenit ... then I would never want to attend a church with that kind of leadership.

[Woody]

Quote:

So how do they "vet" these people?

By their fruits you shall know them.

[Twilight]

If membership is the only defining determenit ... then I would never want to attend a church with that kind of leadership.

But you are arguing they have no membership.

That the only qualification is some "spiritual" inclination.

Is there a standard they uphold to determine that?

Does someone have to be baptised to be a deacon or elder?

Does someone have to tithe to be a deacon or elder?

Does someone have to agree to some mission statement to be a deacon or elder?

Or do they just walk in and say "I am spirit filled", to which they are placed in a chair and ordained a deacon?

[Twilight]

Quote:

So how do they "vet" these people?

By their fruits you shall know them.

Oh, so they do test them then?

[Woody]

Mark. You can establish any standard you want for your leadership. But membership does not necessarily need to be one. Attendance ... yes. Membership ... no

[Woody]

Quote:

Oh, so they do test them then?

My goodness. I should hope so. I wouldn't attend a church that didn't. But if you want to extend it to those who just attend ... no.

[Twilight]

Quote:

Oh, so they do test them then?

My goodness. I should hope so. I wouldn't attend a church that didn't. But if you want to extend it to those who just attend ... no.

That is no different to the Adventist Church.

Members serve.

Visitors fellowship.

So this system you point to as your example, severely lacks the criteria you are claiming it validates.

[Woody]

Quote:

That is no different to the Adventist Church.

Members serve.

Visitors fellowship.

They don't have membership.

Our churches have membership. The members might serve and they might not. But they all have to pass the test of purity and if at any time they become UNpure ... they are history.

With no members ... you don't have to go through all those trials to disfellowship. A good benefit. I've attended those trials. They are no fun.

This church with NO members ... clearly is an example of what I am talking about. And it works just fine. If you doubt it ... please contact Janice in the church office. And you can ask HER what kind of 'test' she had to go through to work there.

[Twilight]

Quote:

That is no different to the Adventist Church.

Members serve.

Visitors fellowship.

They don't have membership.

Our churches have membership. The members might serve and they might not. But they all have to pass the test of purity and if at any time they become UNpure ... they are history.

With no members ... you don't have to go through all those trials to disfellowship. A good benefit. I've attended those trials. They are no fun.

This church with NO members ... clearly is an example of what I am talking about. And it works just fine. If you doubt it ... please contact Janice in the church office. And you can ask HER what kind of 'test' she had to go through to work there.

They do have membership.

Because they have elders and deacons.

And other church officers no doubt.

Just because some only "fellowship" there, does not mean there are no members.

My church is made of up about 60% Adventists and 40% non-members who fellowship.

This is no different to what you are describing above.

Except these churches are trying so desperately to be "non-demoninational", they have to deny the word "membership", to maintain a guise of "non-membership".

Unless someone can walk in off of the street and be selected for Elder, without any biblical tests or examination, your argument holds no water...