by Timothy Decker | Aug 30, 2025 | New Testament, Systematic Theology
*Editor’s Note: The following is the first in a blog series authored by Dr. Timothy Decker. As more installments release, they will eventually be linked together.
A Worthy Inclusion? The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7–8
Part 1: Introduction
Of all the textual variants debated throughout church history, perhaps no passage is as ferociously fought over as the Johannine Comma (Comma Johanneum) and the “heavenly witnesses” of 1 John 5:7. Notice the difference:
NKJV: “7 For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree as one.”
LSB: “7 For there are three that bear witness: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”
This well-known textual variant consists primarily over whether the “heavenly witnesses” clause should be included or excluded in our Bibles. It is absent in almost all Greek manuscripts and editions of the Greek New Testament, ancient versions, as well as most modern translations, such as the LSB above. Even the Majority Text of Hodges and Farstad, as well as the Byzantine Textform of Robinson and Pierpont, exclude the Comma. Yet it has been enshrined in the KJV and its underlying Greek text, the Textus Receptus (TR). Additionally, the papists’ Clementine edition of the Latin Vulgate includes it, canonizing it for the Roman Catholic Church. On the other hand, the Greek-speaking Eastern Orthodox Church has generally rejected its inclusion. Protestants and evangelicals are divided.
The name Comma Johanneum or the “Johannine Comma” sounds strange for such a long variant. However, “comma” refers not to the punctuation mark “,” but rather to the Greek word κόμμα (komma) meaning a “short clause in a sentence” (see LSJ s.v. II.3.). In this case, the “heavenly witnesses” clause of v. 7 as well as the “earthly witnesses” expression in v. 8 make up the Comma. I, however, think all of 1 John 5:7–8 should be the focus.
Not all textual variants are created equal, nor are they all treated with the same level of ardor as the Comma. Much of the zeal for its inclusion is due to the Trinitarian prooftext it supposedly offers (though not all agree). It is believed that anyone seeking to remove such a core doctrinal passage must be attacking the doctrine itself.[1] This was the accusation leveled against Erasmus by Spanish Inquisitors when he did not include it in his first two editions of his printed Greek New Testament![2] Others would simply point out that they do not like their Bible “being tampered with. Leave well enough alone!”
For those of the Reformed tradition whose confessions cite 1 John 5:7 as a trinitarian prooftext, such as the Westminster and 2nd London Confessions, this may seem even more alarming. 2LBC 2.3 begins by saying, “In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit,” and citing 1 John 5:7; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14. Therefore, to reject the Comma would appear to conflict either with one’s confessional commitment or, in the least, constitute a departure from the Protestant and Reformed tradition that has accepted it. So the argument goes anyways.
This leads to the obvious question: why have so many come to doubt the originality of the Comma? At one time, the 17th-century reformed theologian Francis Turretin said of the three heavenly witnesses of 1 John 5:7, “All the Greek copies have it.”[3] Whether Turretin was aware or not, or if he was just speaking in hyperbole, this was a careless and overgeneralized statement that was patently false, even in his own time period.[4] Whether he was referring to printed editions of the GNT and not ancient, hand-written manuscripts, it would still be grossly inaccurate. The reality is, of the 500+ ancient Greek manuscripts containing 1 John still extant, only 10 include the Comma. Of those 10, half of them are marginal notes added. What is more, the earliest of the 10 is from the 14th century. The rest date either around or after the first instance of its inclusion in a printed Greek New Testament (Erasmus’s third edition of 1522).
Suffice it to say, if we hold to the providential preservation of God’s Word (WCF/2LCF 1.8), then there is good reason to doubt the reliability of 1 John 5:7. It is clear that the manuscript evidence for its inclusion is dubious.
Upcoming Articles
In order to engage with all the angles that the Comma presents, we’ll first begin this study by considering the Greek Manuscripts that include the Comma in some form or another. It is here that the evidence is strongest against its inclusion. However, there is a historical argument made for its inclusion, so we’ll examine that. Afterwards, we’ll consider and respond to the internal arguments made for its inclusion. This is by far the strongest evidence for the Comma. We will also consider various interpretations and disputes over the comma. Bringing those categories together, we’ll take a minor rabbit trail in the Textus Receptus tradition on the Comma, which will bring to light some instability in that tradition.
Concluding word
When discussing a cherished passage of Scripture, especially over whether the passage is original or not, passions can get the better of us. Often times, more heat is inserted into the conversation rather than light. I want to conclude by stating that my brothers who believe the Comma to be original to 1 John are exactly that—brothers. A disagreement, even over a text like 1 John 5:7–8, is no cause to disfellowship or castigate, no more than differences of eschatology. What Sam Waldron recently wrote of this matter among Christians disagreeing over matters of eschatology while still affirming the core doctrines of orthodoxy also applies to this subject. He graciously stated,
We must be careful to avoid words and attitudes with those within the bounds of Christian orthodoxy that practically deny the special Christian love we owe to all believers. On the contrary, all that we say must be characterized by the moderation, kindness, respect, and love which we owe to other believers. This does not mean that we cannot say boldly what we think the Bible teaches. It does, however, mean that such boldness must be marked by the gentleness and respect that we owe to all men (1 Peter 3:15) and especially to believers (John 13:34–35).[5]
May God be pleased to grant us the light of illumination on this subject rather than give way to the heat of our sinful passions.
[1] John Owen hypothesized that 1 John 5:7 was “ notoriously corrupted by the old heretics.” Owens, Works, Banner of Truth edition. 16:367.
[2] Grantley McDonald, “Raising the ghost of Arius: Erasmus, the Johannine comma and religious difference in early modern Europe,” PhD dissertation, Leiden University, 2011: 125.
[3] Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology (Philippsburg: P & R Publishing, 1997), 1:114.
[4] Having access to Theodore Beza’s annotations alone would have demonstrated the falsity of this claim. Additionally, the Stephanus GNT of 1550, the first to include a textual apparatus of sorts, listed in the margin at 1 John 5:7 seven manuscripts or printed editions the excluded the comma. Stephanus listed them as δ, ε, ζ, θ, ι, ια, ιγ. According to J. K. Elliott, these are manuscripts GA 5, 6, 8, 38, 2298, 398; manuscript ια being lost and no longer extant. See J. K. Elliott, “Manuscripts Cited by Stephanus,” New Testament Studies 55, no. 3 (July 2009): 391. Also, Stephanus cited a difference with the Complutensian Polyglot. Turretin would write over 100 years after Stephanus’s 1550 edition. For more on Francis Turretin and textual criticism, see Micharl Marlowe, “Textual Criticism in the Writings of Francis Turretin,” Bible Research; accessed here: https://www.bible-researcher.com/turretin-text.html.
[5] Sam Waldron, The Doctrine of Last Things (Greenbrier, AR: Free Grace Press, 2025), 31.
Dr. Timothy Decker is one of the pastors of Trinity Reformed Baptist Church of Roanoke, VA, having joined them in 2018. He holds a B.A. and M.A. biblical studies from Carolina University (formerly Piedmont International University), a Th.M. in New Testament from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. in biblical studies from Capital Seminary and Graduate School. In his dissertation research, he examined the style of biblical Hebrew poetry in the New Testament. He has presented various papers at academic society meetings and authored numerous articles in several different scholarly journals. He is a member of ETS and IBR. When he is not reading or researching, he enjoys spending time with his wife and four children.
Courses taught at CBTSeminary: Elementary Greek I, Elementary Greek II
by Ben Habegger | Aug 26, 2025 | Eschatology, Old Testament
*Editor’s Note: This blog is the fourth of six installments in a series by Ben Habegger titled “An Amillennial Interpretation of Zechariah 14.” Read the other parts of this series here:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Zechariah 14:12–15: The Lord Does Battle Against the Nations
Next in this last chapter of Zechariah comes a description of the Lord’s final dominion over the nations. The nations will either willingly submit to the Lord or else be subject to punishment. We will break down this larger section (verses 12–19) and address it in two separate posts. For now, let’s look at verses 12–15.
12 Now this will be the plague with which the Lord will strike all the peoples who have gone to war against Jerusalem; their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongue will rot in their mouth. 13 It will come about in that day that a great panic from the Lord will fall on them; and they will seize one another’s hand, and the hand of one will be lifted against the hand of another. 14 Judah also will fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the surrounding nations will be gathered, gold and silver and garments in great abundance. 15 So also like this plague will be the plague on the horse, the mule, the camel, the donkey and all the cattle that will be in those camps.
These verses return to the earlier scene when the Lord comes down to fight Jerusalem’s foes. He will destroy their bodies and the bodies of their beasts so rapidly that they are consumed while still standing.[1] Although swift, the destruction is also gruesome. The plague consumes portions of the armies while the remaining combatants are so terrified that they turn their weapons on each other in the confusion; this hearkens back to various Old Testament battles in which God fought for his people by turning their attackers against each other. The rotting disease and the victory of little Judah over her mighty enemies may also allude to the covenant curses which God promised disobedient Israel (Lev. 26:16–17, 25, 39; Deut. 28:21–22, 25, 27–28, 59–61); in this context, however, those same curses turn to consume Israel’s enemies.[2]
Given the military imagery of this and other apocalyptic texts, many people expect a very literal gathering of the world’s militaries in the Middle East just before the Second Advent. Such an interpretation would tend to overlook the deeper significance of the relevant prophecies.
As has been stated earlier in this blog series, Jerusalem here stands for the church at the end of this age of tribulation. It is the church on earth, surrounded by her enemies. Therefore the armies sent against her need not be the sorts of forces deployed in earthly warfare, though physical force will doubtless be involved. Far less need they be gathered in one geographical location. Everywhere the church is, there the nations will assault her. John saw these nations as they “came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city.” (Rev. 20:9) The camp of the saints, God’s people preserved in the wilderness of this world (Rev. 12:6, 14), are identified as the beloved city. In order to oppose her, the Satanically-deceived nations will tread “the breadth of the earth” (nkjv, csb). Furthermore, this warfare should be compared to that of the beast against the two witnesses in Revelation 11:7, that of the beast against the saints in Revelation 13:7, and that of the beast and his ten kings against the Lamb and his people in Revelation 17:14.
The picture here in Zechariah 14 is that of total disintegration and terror among the attacking nations. They and their wartime resources are struck by the sword of Christ’s mouth (Rev. 19:15, 21), and the confusion is such that they begin to destroy one another. Verse 14 adds, “Judah also will fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the surrounding nations will be gathered, gold and silver and garments in great abundance.” In that last hour, we know that the church militant will face her last battle (see the near context in Zech. 12–13); but whereas they were momentarily overrun in verse 2, now the glorified church—the church triumphant—joins her Lord in this battle as his victorious heavenly army (Rev. 19:8, 14). And as was promised them, they will share in the spoils. They will plunder the Egyptians. They will inherit the earth.
[1] Boda, Zechariah, 772.
[2] The description of rotting flesh also seems similar to that of leprosy (cf. Num. 12:12). It is interesting that King Uzziah is referenced earlier in the text, since God struck him with leprosy when he attempted sacrilege.
Ben Habegger first served in full-time pastoral ministry near Detroit, Michigan from 2013-2017 and has now been vocational pastor at Hope Reformed Baptist Church of Aloha, Oregon (formerly Glencullen Baptist Church of Portland, Oregon) since January of 2020. He has a Master of Divinity degree from Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary and a Master of Arts in Reformed Baptist Studies from Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary. Ben and his wife Theresa have four children.
by CBTS Student | Aug 20, 2025 | Practical Theology
Chaplains: Professionally Compassionate
As I step out into the world of clinical chaplaincy, I find myself without an anchor. With 20 years of pastoring experience, I have a fairly solid foundation for serving in the church, but what orients my faith and practice as a professional spiritual care provider? What are the parameters of my contributions to a care team? Any good and lasting endeavor requires a foundation—a purpose. “For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?” (Luke 14:28). To be an effective Reformed Baptist clinical chaplain, I need to build a similar tower upon the bedrock of God’s Word.
I reject the notion espoused by some who say, “Professional chaplains must be able to move aside their own belief system(s)/theology and support the system of the person to whom they are providing chaplaincy care.”[1] Chaplaincy is not at odds with compassion. It is not something that must be moved aside but embraced. Christian theology not only allows for, but demands compassionate care for all mankind, in spite of the spiritual state of the sufferer.
I set out to build a theological foundation for the Christian chaplain through a careful study of the Parable of the Good Samaritan and other relevant biblical passages. The Parable of the Good Samaritan is the locus classicus of chaplaincy, and the word upon which the entire parable turns should be the starting point of any meditation concerning clinical spiritual care. That word is compassion.
Jesus Christ came into the world and was moved with compassion. After John the Baptist was beheaded, Jesus sought solitude in the wilderness, but the multitudes followed him out of their cities, apparently bringing their sick friends and family with them. Jesus did not separate himself from them, but “was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick” (Mat 14:14). In those days, Jesus was serving as the sole physician, nurse, and chaplain. He couldn’t escape the crowds of sufferers. And what motivated his physical and spiritual wellness program? “He was moved with compassion toward them.” The Greek word behind the English phrase “moved with compassion” is in the passive voice which implies this affection is happening to Jesus, not by Jesus. The Light of the World came into contact with the pain and suffering of this world, and compassion overcame him. This compassion is the moving cause of his healing ministry, here and in passages like Matt. 14:14, 15:32, 20:34; and Mark. 1:41, 8:2.
The quintessential passage that describes Christ’s compassion is the Parable of the Good Samaritan in Luke 10. In the parable, a certain man fell among bandits on the road to Jericho, was robbed, wounded, and left half dead (Luke 10:30). A Jewish priest and a Levite dispassionately ignored the sufferer, and the crisis appeared bleak. But the parable turns on the word compassion. A third traveler comes upon the sufferer: “a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him” (Luk 10:33). Once again, this verb is in the passive voice meaning the Samaritan was moved with compassion. This movement of compassion resulted in the Samaritan bandaging the sufferer’s wounds, setting him on his own pack animal, and taking him to an inn in Jericho where he paid for the man’s care. Jesus presents this parable as the reasonable service of all who share in humanity, saying, “Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise” (Luke 10:36-37).
Jesus is moved with compassion when he encounters the pain and suffering of mankind. This movement of affections occurs in his human nature, not his divine. The divine nature cannot be moved by anything outside of himself, for He is immutable (James 1:17). God the Father cannot be moved to compassion. Therefore, Christ was moved to compassion in his human nature—the nature which he took upon himself at his incarnation, which he shares with all of us.
Therefore, it is this shared humanity that moves Christ to compassion upon the plight of human sufferers. “For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15). For every high priest “can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity” (Heb. 5:2). Ultimately, this compassion allows Christ to bear the infirmity of mankind’s sin on the cross. Secondarily, it allows Christ to be moved with compassion for the earthly plight of his fellows.
Since all Christians share Christ’s human nature, we are to be likewise moved. “But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?” (1 John 3:17). Since Christ’s human nature was moved with compassion for the needy, it is assumed that we will be moved with compassion as well.
This movement of compassion, just as it was with Christ, will occur when we come into contact with suffering. Paul tells us that in allowing ourselves to be transformed by the renewing of our mind, we will rejoice with them that rejoice and weep with them that weep (Rom. 12:2, 15). This implies that the more we are transformed, the more empathy we will experience toward sufferers. Although the Holy Spirit can move anyone to compassion, he mostly reserves this good fruit for those who now walk as children of light (Eph. 5:8,9). Compassion is a movement of the Spirit of Christ working in us “to will and to do his good pleasure” (Php. 2:13).
And just like with Christ, we are especially moved to compassion when we come into contact with the suffering of our fellow human beings. This is part of what the author of Hebrews calls letting brotherly love continue: “Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body” (Heb 13:3). You don’t have to suffer incarceration to be bound with the incarcerated in compassion. You don’t have to suffer the exact same adversity as your brother to experience brotherly love. The prerequisite to compassion is not shared experiences, but fellowship with Christ in his sufferings on behalf of mankind (2 Cor. 1:3-5).
All those who commune with Christ by faith are little by little, more and more, conformed to the image of Christ (Rom. 8:29), having their compassion sanctified. The movement of compassion toward mankind is by the Spirit working in Christ’s people by faith, empowering each of us to act upon that compassion according to our shared humanity. However, as with all of God’s gifts, there are some who are called to something more.
Some, like Nehemiah, Jesus, the Apostles, Stephen, and Philip, were moved with an extraordinary compassion which led them to leave their vocations to concentrate on spiritual care. This kind of compassion flourished in the first decades after Christ. Clement wrote that many in the early church gave themselves into prison in order to ransom their imprisoned brother, and many willingly sold themselves into slavery and used the money to ransom their brother out of slavery.[2] All Christians are capable of great acts of mercy. However, the Spirit does move some to extraordinary, full-time compassion.
It is reasonable, therefore, that those who are moved by the Lord’s compassion in an extraordinary way might, like the apostles and deacons of the early church, make compassion their vocation. In Acts 6 for example, Stephen and Philip, among others, were chosen and set apart for vocational mercy toward the widows of the church. Just as some are called to minister the word, some are called to compassion in the field of chaplaincy.
Those who are called to vocational compassion need instruction and experience in the finer details of compassionate spiritual care. Education and training are indispensable for effective preaching ministries, and so they are for effective mercy ministries. For three years, the Apostles followed the greatest mercy minister the world has ever seen, studying and experiencing the Lord’s compassion on multitudes of people. Soon after his death, resurrection, and ascension, we find Christ’s disciples fine tuning their own massive ministries. Peter, for example, became so proficient at healing, that sufferers sought a cure from his mere shadow (Acts 5:15). Compassionate elders in the church were so highly practiced in compassionate care that James said with confidence, “the prayer of faith shall save the sick” (James 5:13,14).
Peter’s healing ministry differed slightly from that of Stephen and Philip, whose main subjects were those within the community of faith. Although Peter was a respected leader of the early church, his healing ministry reached the world at large. In this way, it could be said that Peter functioned like a modern chaplain as well as one of the pillars of the church. Clinical chaplains seem to follow in Peter’s healing footsteps, and ultimately in Christ’s, in that they are moved to compassion for all suffering people, regardless of faith, and seek to grow in compassion and hone their skills. Clinical chaplains may come out of the church with its shared Christianity, but their ministry extends to the whole world because of their shared humanity. Their connection with the sufferer is not fellowship in redemption, but fellowship in creation.
About the Author
Ken Klein is a retired Pastor of 20 years in the Southern California area. Ken is a MABC student at CBTS and enrolled in the ACPE program at Loma Linda University Health in Loma Linda, CA. He and his wife, Marjorie, have been blessed with six children and five grandchildren.
[1] Martha R. Jacobs, “Creating a Personal Theology to Do Spiritual / Pastoral Care,” in Professional Spiritual & Pastoral Care: A Practical Clergy and Chaplain’s Handbook, ed. Stephen B. Roberts (Woodstock, VT: Skylight Paths Publishing, 2012), 10–11.
[2] Pope Clement I et al., The Apostolic Fathers, ed. Kirsopp Lake, vol. 1, The Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge MA; London: Harvard University Press, 1912–1913), 103.
This blog post is authored by a student of Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary.
by Tom Hicks | Aug 19, 2025 | Ecclesiology
Many Christians today question whether it’s necessary or even biblical to join local churches. Some think joining a church will rob them of personal freedom and independence. Others believe they may attend several different churches without ever committing to just one. Some even believe they don’t need to be part of any particular local church, but that they may stay at home, pray privately, and watch sermons on the internet for their personal edification. I once met someone who said that his “church” was his personal circle of Christian friends.
But all of these attitudes are a novelty in church history, and they reflect the radically individualistic and autonomous spirit of our age. Such beliefs are contrary to the clear teaching of Scripture, orthodox theology, and the historical witness of the church.
Some Historical and Confessional Witnesses to Church Membership
The great prince of the Puritans, John Owen (1616-1683), wrote, “It is the duty of everyone who professes faith in Jesus Christ, and takes due care of his own eternal salvation, voluntarily and by his own choice to join himself to some particular congregation of Christ’s institution.”
The early English Particular Baptist, Benjamin Keach, in his magnificent work, The Glory of a True Church, wrote:
A Church of Christ, according to the Gospel-Institution, is a Congregation of Godly Christians, who as a Stated-Assembly (being first baptized upon the Profession of Faith) do by mutual agreement and consent give themselves up to the Lord, and one to another, according to the Will of God; and do ordinarily meet together in one Place, for the Public Service and Worship of God; among whom the Word of God and Sacraments are duly administered, according to Christ’s Institution.
The most influential confession of faith among English Baptists and early American Baptists, the Second London Confession of Faith 26.6, says:
The members of these [local] churches are saints by calling, visibly manifesting and evidencing (in and by their profession and walking) their obedience unto that call of Christ;[12] and do willingly consent to walk together, according to the appointment of Christ; giving up themselves to the Lord, and one to another, by the will of God, in professed subjection to the ordinances of the Gospel.[13]
12. Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:2
13. Acts 2:41,42, 5:13,14; 2 Cor. 9:13
The Second London Confession is not alone. Other Reformed confessions speak of church membership, including the Second Helvetic Confession (XXI, XXX), the Savoy Declaration (Institution of Churches), and others. Having looked at parts of the church’s historical and confessional witness to church membership, we now need to consider what it means to join a local church.
What Does it Mean to Join a Local Church?
To join a local church, a credibly professing believer must enter into a covenant with a local church as a whole. Church membership is a bilateral covenant in which individuals make promises to the church as a whole, and the church as a whole makes promises to individual members. A covenant is a formalized agreement, or commitment, by which two or more parties make promises to one another. The basic promises between individuals and churches in a church covenant include:
1. Individual Promises. Each individual church member promises the whole church to trust and obey the Lord Jesus Christ together, to love other church members, to attend faithfully and participate in the life of the church, to receive the means of grace, and to be in submission to the pastors and to the church as a whole for the sake of growing in the knowledge of Christ for His glory.
2. Church Promises. The church as a whole and her pastors promise to trust and obey Christ, to love individual members in their midst, to foster a community of truth and love, to maintain biblical orthodoxy and godly character, to administer the Word and sacraments, and to watch over the souls of individual church members for their growth in the knowledge of Christ for His glory.
A church covenant is bilateral (a two-way commitment), and it is breakable, which means one party may break the covenant, such that individual members may be disciplined for heresy or gross unrepentant sin, or individuals may call the whole church to account for heresy or gross unrepentant sin.
Some question whether a church has authority to make such a covenant. But the Bible provides examples of human beings making covenants with one another to keep the Word of God (Neh 9:38; 10:28-32ff). Church covenants are valid because churches are formed, not on the basis of any historical succession of churches or apostolic succession, but only on the basis of the Word of God. The Word of God forms a church when a group of Christians agree together (covenant together) to believe and obey the Bible and to be a church together.
Why is Joining a Church Necessary?
Consider seven important reasons that joining a church is necessary: (1) for the church’s existence, (2) for the church’s purity, (3) for pastoral ministry, (4) for church discipline, (5) for congregational government, (6) for growth in love, and (7) because church membership is implied by the New Testament.
1. Joining a church is necessary for the existence of a local church.
A local church (ekklesia) is a “gathering” or “assembly” of credibly professing believers. That which distinguishes one local church from another is the mutual agreement of credibly professing believers to be a church together. Thus, for a particular local church to exist at all, it must be an assembly of credibly professing believers, who have agreed to be members of one particular local church, rather than another.
The New Testament teaches that local churches were well-defined local assemblies. It uses language such as “the whole congregation” (Acts 6:5), “the church in Jerusalem” (Acts 8:1), “the disciples in Jerusalem” (Acts 9:26), “in every church” (Acts 14:23), “the whole church” (Acts 15:17). A church is a known and specified group of professing believers in a local assembly (1 Cor 5:4; 14:23; and Heb 10:25).
1 Corinthians 14:23 says, “If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your minds?” This passage identifies a well-defined local assembly as “the whole church.”
But it also recognizes two other categories of people, who may be present in the assembly but are not part of the church: outsiders and unbelievers. The term “unbelievers” clearly refers to people visiting the church who do not believe in Christ. The term “outsiders” likely refers to believers who are not members of the church of Corinth. This implies that to be a Christian or member of one local church does not make a person a member of all local churches. If a Christian is a member of one church, he’s still an “outsider” to all other local churches.
Therefore, for a local church to exist at all, it must be composed of credibly professing believers who have agreed, or covenanted, either implicitly or explicitly, to be a part of that local church. An explicit membership covenant makes the people of a particular local church clear to all.
2. Joining a local church is necessary for the church’s purity.
True churches are composed of people who credibly profess to be “saints” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; Phil 1:1, etc). A “saint” is a Christian, someone whom God has declared holy (sanctified) and given a holy (sanctified) or regenerate heart. When Paul wrote to the church of Corinth, he noted that the people of the church were rich in “all speech and all knowledge” of Christ (1 Cor 1:5). He knew they were rich in all speech and knowledge because “the testimony about Christ was confirmed among you [meaning the church as a whole]” (1 Cor 1:6). That is, those who wanted to join the Corinthian church were first required to give a credible “testimony” of conversion to Christ. Then their testimony had to be confirmed, or certified as valid, by the whole church, proving that they were rich in all speech and knowledge of Christ.
Confirming the credible testimonies of membership candidates is a necessary precondition of joining a church because it guards the church’s purity of membership for the sake of her worship, mutual edification, as well as her witness to the world. Any candidate who lacks a credible professions of faith must be excluded from church membership, so that the church will be a pure church. Therefore, church membership is necessary to guard the purity of the church, that is, to ensure that the church is only composed of credibly professing believers.
3. Joining a local church is necessary to have a pastor.
Pastors are shepherds of particular local churches, and they have responsibilities to the churches they pastor. Consider Hebrews 13:17, “Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.” This passage gives instructions both to pastors and to the churches they lead.
First, pastors are to keep watch over souls and they will give an account for their ministries (Heb 13:17). But how does a pastor know whether or not he will give an account for a particular Christian’s soul, unless that Christian agrees that a particular pastor is his pastor? The pastor of one church is not responsible to shepherd souls in another church. Every pastor is not responsible to shepherd all Christians everywhere. Pastors can only give an account for the spiritual well-being of his church, if he knows who belongs to his church. A pastor can only shepherd a flock if he knows who is a member of the flock and who is not a member.
Second, the Bible requires Christians to obey their pastors and submit to them (Heb 13:17). But how can a Christian possibly obey this passage unless he knows who his pastor is? How does a believer know which pastors to obey? Christians are certainly not required to obey and submit to all pastors everywhere. A believer will only be able to obey this biblical command, if he has joined a particular church and agreed for a particular pastor (or pastors) to be his pastor(s).
4. Joining a local church is necessary for church discipline.
Church discipline is not possible, unless the church knows exactly who is part of the church and who is not part of the church. Does a church have the right and responsibility to discipline any Christian who happens to come on Sundays? How long would a person have to come to a church before he is eligible for discipline? The only way to know that a person is part of a particular church, and therefore subject to discipline, is if the person agrees by way of covenant to be a member of that church. Church discipline is only possible, therefore, if the church knows who is part of the church.
In Matthew 18:15-17, our Lord Jesus outlines the process of church discipline for private sins.
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.
Unless the church is a well-defined assembly, it is not possible to obey Christ’s teaching to “tell it to the church.”
1 Corinthians 5:11-13 provides the procedure of church discipline for public sins.
But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
Churches are only to discipline those inside the church and not those outside the church. But there is no way to identify who is “inside” the church and who is “outside” the church, unless Christians agree to be “inside” one particular local church, rather than another.
A church is only authorized to discipline Christians who are “inside” that particular church, not all churches. The fact that the final stage of discipline requires a church to “purge [remove or expel] the evil person from among you [plural, the church]” implies that a person was once a member of a church, and as a result of the process of discipline, is now no longer a member. Church discipline of individual Christians is only possible, therefore, if a church knows who is inside the church and subject to the church’s discipline.
5. Joining a church is necessary for congregational church government.
Congregational church government means that the church as a whole decides the most important matters in the church, such as the church’s confession of faith, constitution and bylaws, membership, elders and deacons, cases of church discipline, churchly associations, and the church’s budget.
The Bible gives us a theology of congregational church government in various passages. For example, Matthew 18:15-20 teaches that the church as a whole has ultimate authority to excommunicate members. Acts 6:1-7 teaches that the whole church chose the first deacons from among themselves to care for the Hellenistic widows. In Acts 13:2-3, the church chose Barnabas and Saul to be missionaries to the Gentiles. In Acts 15, at least two whole churches, Jerusalem and Antioch, worked together by sending messengers to an associational meeting to collaborate on an important doctrinal difficulty that had arisen among them. In 1 Corinthians 5:4-5 Paul instructs the whole church of Corinth to excommunicate a sinful man. In 2 Corinthians 2:6, we see that the majority of the church voted to excommunicate that sinful man, but that it should also vote to welcome him back after his repentance.
Congregational church government is not possible, however, unless the church knows who is part of the congregation and who is not. How can a congregation govern the church, if no one knows exactly who is part of the congregation?
Only credibly professing believers, who have voluntarily covenanted with a church, and who have been accepted into membership, have the right and responsibility to vote on matters of church government. It would greatly damage the church if random visitors, unbelievers, or marginally committed long term church attenders had an important role to play in the government of the church. Thus, congregational church government implies a well-defined church membership.
6. Joining a local church is necessary for growth in love.
When a believer joins a church, he binds himself to the rich and the poor in that church, to the old and the young, to people with families and without families, to the sick and the healthy, to introverts and extroverts, to people of higher education and lower education, to those with white collar jobs and blue collar jobs, and to believers of varying levels of sanctification. Joining a church means covenanting to love a diverse group of people because of mutual communion with Christ.
Historically, Christians who sought holiness in isolation from the church became puffed up in pride and self-righteousness. The Bible teaches that the only way to learn to love like Christ is to be covenantally bound to a local church in love. When a believer covenants with one local church, he renounces membership in all other local churches and prioritizes the people of his church. It means he does not choose preferred social groups or people to whom he is most naturally fitted over the Christians in his church.
The only way a believer can be more and more conformed to Christ’s image is by learning to forgive church members who sin against him. He grows in Christ by learning patience toward those who try his patience, by rejoicing with those who rejoice, and by weeping with those who weep. He becomes more like Christ, and thus, grows in the knowledge of God, in subjective union with Him, and in participation in the divine nature, when he keeps the nursery, wipes the tables, attends funerals, celebrates at weddings, goes to the hospital to pray for a brother before surgery, and takes a meal to a sister who just lost a loved one.
He does these things, not because he necessarily naturally likes all of these people, but because he is covenantally committed to loving them from the heart by virtue of church membership, and in that way, he actually learns how to love others from the heart like Jesus. Believers can only learn to obey the New Testament’s teaching about Christian love by joining a particular local church and being committed to its people.
Consider some of the “one another passages” of Scripture, which teach this doctrine of committed love for a particular local church. Each of these texts is directed to a local church, not to individual Christians. Their application is to the local churches to which they were written. Romans 12:10 says, “Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor.” 1 Corinthians 12:25 asks, “that there may be no division in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.” Galatians 6:2 says, “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” Ephesians 4:32 says, “Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you.” Colossians 3:16 says, “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God.” 1 Thessalonians 5:11 says, “Therefore encourage one another and build one another up, just as you are doing.” Hebrews 10:24 says, “And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works. James 4:11 says, “Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks evil against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge.” 1 Peter 5:5 says, “Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.’”
It is only possible to fulfill these commands to “one another” if we are part of a local church where we know who the “one another” are.
7. Joining a local church is implied in the New Testament.
The New Testament knows nothing of independent Christians who are not members of local churches. Consider that many of the letters in the New Testament are addressed to particular local churches. For example, Paul wrote Ephesians to the whole church at Ephesus. He knew the people at Ephesus, and he wrote with that particular local church in mind. The same could be said of Romans, Philippians, and others. The Bible assumes Christians will commit themselves to a particular local church, rather than another, that they will be under its ministry and authority.
Scripture teaches that new converts were baptized and added to a specific local church (Acts 2:41, 47; 5:14; 16:5). They were then “added to the number” of members in these local churches, showing that there was a definite and known number of members in local churches (Acts 2:41, 47; 16:5).
The New Testament also implies church membership when the member of one church is commended to another church when he or she moved or traveled (Rom 16:1; Col 4:10; cf. 2 Cor 3:1-2). Passages like this are the basis of the “letter system” in Baptist churches, where a church gives a letter of commendation for one of its members, who is seeking membership in a different church.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the very existence of a local church requires individual members to join. Many of the doctrines of a local church assume a clear and well-defined membership. These doctrines include regenerate church membership, pastoral ministry, church discipline, congregational church government, and committed love for others in the church.
For these reasons, faithful teachers and confessions of faith throughout church history have consistently taught that individual Christians should join themselves in covenant to a particular local church. This doctrine of church membership runs contrary to the autonomous spirit of our age, but it is nothing less than biblical Christianity.
by Ben Habegger | Aug 19, 2025 | Eschatology, Old Testament
*Editor’s Note: This blog is the third of six installments in a series by Ben Habegger titled “An Amillennial Interpretation of Zechariah 14.” Read the other parts of this series here:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Zechariah 14:6–11: The Lord’s Reign from Jerusalem
Once the Lord arrives to rescue Jerusalem, the Lord remains to forever reign from Jerusalem; and as the apostle John would later note, “there will be no night there” (Rev. 21:25).
6 In that day there will be no light; the luminaries will dwindle. 7 For it will be a unique day which is known to the Lord, neither day nor night, but it will come about that at evening time there will be light. 8 And in that day living waters will flow out of Jerusalem, half of them toward the eastern sea and the other half toward the western sea; it will be in summer as well as in winter. 9 And the Lord will be king over all the earth; in that day the Lord will be the only one, and His name the only one. 10 All the land will be changed into a plain from Geba to Rimmon south of Jerusalem; but Jerusalem will rise and remain on its site from Benjamin’s Gate as far as the place of the First Gate to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the king’s wine presses. 11 People will live in it, and there will no longer be a curse, for Jerusalem will dwell in security.
Several items here require attention, including the light without luminaries, the living waters, the universal worship of Yahweh, the exaltation of Jerusalem above the surrounding land, Jerusalem’s secure population, and the absence of a curse.
The text and translation of verse 6 are difficult, but when taken along with verse 7, the larger point seems clear.[1] The “luminaries” are probably the heavenly bodies. The failing of these heavenly bodies has both literal and figurative significance throughout the prophets, especially in connection with “the great and awesome day of the Lord” (Joel 2:31; cf. also Isa. 13:9–13; Joel 3:15; Matt. 24:29; Mark 13:24–25; Luke 21:25; Rev. 6:12–13). Bryan Gregory also observes, “The disruption to the normal cycles of day and night is significant. In God’s promise to Noah, he had promised that the normal rhythms of seasons and days would not cease for as long as the earth endures (Gen. 8:22).”[2] Thus Zechariah indicates that, although he speaks in terms of the old city of Jerusalem and land of Judah, this holy city and promised land will be part of the new creation. The earth as his readers know it will have passed away.[3]
MacKay helps to illumine the significance of the “living waters”:
Jerusalem was always poorly provided with water, but the renewed city is the source of a divinely provided supply. Zechariah here resumes the picture presented by Joel and Ezekiel of the Temple as a source of water (Joel 3:18; Ezek. 47:1–12). This is not just typical of physical change, but of the spiritual blessings that water represents. It is ‘living’ water flowing freshly from a spring or fountain, and symbolic of true spiritual life given in salvation (Jer. 2:13; John 4:10; 7:38). This looks back to the river of Paradise, when ‘a river watering the garden flowed from Eden’ (Gen. 2:10), and it looks forward to Paradise restored…. Truly ‘there is a river whose streams make glad the city of God, the holy place where the Most High dwells’ (Ps. 46:4).
Unlike Ezekiel’s river which flowed only to the east (Ezek. 47:1, an embarrassment for those who take both prophecies to refer to the same literal future event), the water splits half to the eastern sea, that is the Dead Sea, and half to the western sea, that is, the Mediterranean. In this way it is available for all the land. And it is available all the time, in summer and in winter. Many streams in Palestine were only winter torrents which dried up in the heat of summer, when the need for water was at its greatest. Not so this source of supply. It is available all the year round. There is no disruption of the bliss of the new creation ‘for the old order of things has passed away’ (Rev. 21:4).[4]
Verse 9 expresses the consummated, universal submission and worship given to the one true God in the age to come. “And the Lord will be king over all the earth; in that day the Lord will be the only one, and His name the only one.” Night forever gone. The river of living water. All the earth serving and worshipping the Lord. If these things do not point us to John’s vision of the eternal state in Revelation 21 and 22, I doubt much will.
Continuing our discussion of verses 6–11, we pick up with the prophecy of the holy city being raised above the now leveled land surrounding it. The exaltation of Jerusalem in verse 10 reflects a common prophetic theme. Perhaps the clearest parallel appears in Isaiah 2:2–3:
2 Now it will come about that in the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord will be established as the chief of the mountains, and will be raised above the hills; and all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; that He may teach us concerning His ways and that we may walk in His paths.” For the law will go forth from Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
The words of this same prophecy are also found in Micah 4:1–2, where they follow and contrast the Babylonian desolation of an impure Jerusalem (Micah 3:11–12). God removed his presence from the temple because of Jerusalem’s iniquity; but one day, God’s presence will eternally dwell in a purified Jerusalem, and the city will nevermore be put to shame. Zion will tower over all the earth, and all nations will be under its dominion. The kingdom of the heavenly Zion will become a great mountain and fill the whole earth (Dan. 2:35).
The geographical markers here mentioned by Zechariah had symbolic meaning which we might easily miss. Bryan Gregory explains:
Before the exile, Geba and Rimmon denoted the northern and southern boundaries of Judah during the days of Josiah’s reform. In other words, the land will be restored to her preexilic, pre-disaster state, and being ‘leveled out,’ will provide a geological setting for the crown jewel of the new creation, the city of Jerusalem…. The city itself will then be defined by distinct boundaries, stretching from the Gate of Benjamin (on the city’s northern side) to the place of the First Gate (the location of which is now lost but possibly denotes an old gate on the east side of the city), down to the Corner Gate (on the western side), and from the Tower of Hananel (probably near the northwest corner) down to the king’s winepresses in the south. The boundaries are not only a way of tracing the city’s limits but are more importantly an allusion to Jeremiah 31 where the Lord had promised that the city would be rebuilt from the Tower of Hananel to the Corner Gate (Jer. 31:38). Part of the promise to Jeremiah was that the whole city would once again become holy, never again to be uprooted or demolished (Jer. 31:39–40; cf. Zech. 14:20–21). In other words, the boundaries paint a picture of Jerusalem as a city entirely safe from the threat of violence.[5]
In terms the contemporary inhabitants of Jerusalem understood, Zechariah echoed Jeremiah, promising that the holy city would remain intact from one end (or wall) to the other, and that it would be exalted above the whole land.
Verse 11 pointedly states that “people will live in it.” “In the period after the return from the Exile,” says MacKay, “there seems to have been an ongoing problem with population in Jerusalem. Many of those who returned preferred to live in the countryside and had to be forced to come to the capital (Neh. 7:4; 11:1–2). But there will be no problem about getting people to live in the capital when the king has returned to it.”[6] The absence of a curse, as MacKay goes on to explain,
refers to the ‘ban’ which the Lord imposed on the cities of Canaan because of their great wickedness (Josh. 6:17–18; see also Mal. 4:6). The fate of God’s people for their rebellion had been understood in similar terms (Isa. 43:28). But when the Lord returns to the city, ‘no longer will there be any curse’ (Rev. 22:3). His people will have been purified and will be ready to enter into his presence.[7]
Given the factors we’ve discussed in the last post as well as this one, Zechariah’s prophecy fits better within the context of the new Jerusalem which “will dwell in security” in the new creation than it fits with a millennial Jerusalem which continues to experience day and night and the (lightened) effects of the Adamic curse and is eventually surrounded by a Satanic coalition of nations bent on her destruction (Rev. 20:9).
[1] Boda, Zechariah, 760–61, fn.b., 762.
[2] Bryan R. Gregory, Longing for God in an Age of Discouragement: the Gospel According to Zechariah, The Gospel According to the Old Testament, ed. Iain M. Duguid (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2010), 207.
[3] Boda also suggests an allusion in the Hebrew text to Genesis 1:3–5, implying a recreation. “This suggests that 14:7 refers to a day of recreation, with 14:6 returning the earth to a state prior to the creative activity in Genesis 1, and 14:7 initiating the process of creation in Genesis 1. This recreation day, just as the original creation day, is known only to Yahweh, in whose hands are the times and seasons (see Ecclesiastes 3). However, the fact that the light appears now in the evening suggests a clear shift in the cosmos, so that there is perpetual light and no night. This is a feature of texts envisioning a future idyllic age (cf. Isa. 60:19, 20; Rev. 21:25; 22:5).” See Boda, Zechariah, 762–63.
[4] MacKay, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, 308–309.
[5] Gregory, Longing for God, 208–209.
[6] MacKay, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, 311.
[7] Ibid.
Ben Habegger first served in full-time pastoral ministry near Detroit, Michigan from 2013-2017 and has now been vocational pastor at Hope Reformed Baptist Church of Aloha, Oregon (formerly Glencullen Baptist Church of Portland, Oregon) since January of 2020. He has a Master of Divinity degree from Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary and a Master of Arts in Reformed Baptist Studies from Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary. Ben and his wife Theresa have four children.
