It means someone that the church sees as belonging there, part of the church family, part of the congregation.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

It means someone that the church sees as belonging there, part of the church family, part of the congregation.

---

You said three different things. Two are the same, the first is very different.

The only way to be part of the Church family is to be baptized. The baptized are part of the assembly (congregation) which is what ecclesia, Church means.

Belonging, or being welcome, is membership in a very different sense. This whole discussion has been people using both senses back and forth and it's confusing.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

I'm asking for the con that outweighs the pro of having more members who can get saved.

---

I don't think you got to be a member of anything/place to get saved...

Ok so they get baptized. Then a few years later they get a divorce. Do they get pushed out?

So you may be saved.... but you aren't "one of us".

What's the underlying of your example? Are you asking if Christians have the right to discipline members of the a Church?

1 Cor 5 answers this clearly - yes, of course. As do the words of Christ in Matthew 18:17. Or 2 Thessalonians 3:6.

If you're asking how, when, or why that can happen, that's a case by case basis. In practice there is a huge amount of grace and patience granted to laymen in the Church. Less so for clergy... that tends to be a one strike and you're out policy (ie, "laicized" no longer a priest). This kind of discipline is done by the church collectively, personified by the bishop.

I would like to point out that for all of our doctrinal differences there seems to be pretty strong unity in the response to this question. I think that says a lot about how much we have in common before we sift out into denominations and individual congregations. I feel like this supports the point that it is not simple disagreement that would put someone outside the church but something of primary or secondary importance. Cheers brothers!

AGC said:

---

I would like to point out that for all of our doctrinal differences there seems to be pretty strong unity in the response to this question. I think that says a lot about how much we have in common before we sift out into denominations and individual congregations. I feel like this supports the point that it is not simple disagreement that would put someone outside the church but something of primary or secondary importance. Cheers brothers!

---

Agree and Happy New Year!

"The only one good is God," said Jesus. There is a difference between human good v divine good. Human good is actually evil. The only real good is God good. Human good came into existence when Adam ate from the Tree of the knowledge of GOOD and evil in Gen 3. When a person believes into Christ he receives into himself the goodness of God. To the extent that person yields to the Holy Spirit's influence within him, he is God good.

I don't think it makes sense to say human good is evil. Human nature is not evil. Christ was made fully human, and so His human good is truly good.

There is simply good and evil. Where men do the divine will, it is good. When men oppose God, it is evil. The scriptures say woe to those who call evil good and good evil. This is the guard - not that we may have some kind of human good thst is really evil, but that we would see evil and call it good. Good is good, bad is bad, and the standard is God.

Happy New Year's to all!! God Bless!