Dear Brother, In this communication I propose to set out as clearly as I can the evidence of Scripture on the question whether the saints in a city were called to meet in the same room, in order thereby to maintain that unity, which in name is universally allowed in our midst, as it is in deed and truth asserted or assumed in the written word. There is a phrase of not uncommon occurrence in the New Testament, which has been supposed to imply the fact, and hence the duty, of the saints' assembling in one and the same company. Is this then the only scriptural way to express unity in a city?
Let us examine err; Td aim; in the Acts and the Epistles that we may gather whether the usage there necessitates the meeting in a single place for common action. On the face of the words no such restriction of meaning is taught; for their primitive or literal import is “for the same thing.” Sameness of place is not expressed, but rather of object; though it is entirely allowed that the same purpose might be carried out in the same place, or at the same time, and this be implied contextually in the application of the phrase. Hence “together” is a legitimately derived signification, and indeed the most habitual sense in which it occurs in the New Testament. The nature of the ease alone determines whether there was also the same time or place. Thus it is probable that it was in the same place when the Pharisees assembled “together” (e7r; 7;1 la,Td) to question the Lord (Matt. 22:3434But when the Pharisees had heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together. (Matthew 22:34)), as it could hardly be otherwise with two women grinding “together.” But this we shall see might or might not be. The words in themselves do not settle it, but the circumstances or the context. The phrase itself therefore in no way shuts us up to one “place” in the physical sense. A moral force prevails generally, if not always, save in bare outward facts.
The first instance is Acts 1:1515And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) (Acts 1:15), where the parenthesis informs us that there was a crowd of names “together” about a hundred and twenty. Now there is nothing here to hinder our supposing the 120 gathered into the same apartment; for that Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren was said just before, and immediately after we have his address. The natural inference is that they were all there to hear. But the true meaning of the words is a muster of names “together,” and not their being “gathered,” as the Revised Version puts it. In the second occurrence, Acts 2:11And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. (Acts 2:1), I see no reason to doubt that the disciples were assembled in the same place together. But here besides we find 4a0i;, (the critical correction of 4,a0Ovitaii4e, “with one accord,") which is used properly of place, “at the same place,” though it too acquires the meaning of “together,” even where the notion of place is lost. The brethren were thus waiting for the promise of the Father, as the Lord had enjoined; and all the facts point to their being gathered in one place at this time, when they were baptized of the Spirit in the wondrous grace of God.
But the phrase occurs again in verse 44: “And all that believed were together and had all things common.” Now we know the sudden and immense spread of the truth even on that day alone. Are we to conceive they, were all gathered into one room The Spirit of God is describing their habitual life in unity, not here their assembling merely, as it would appear. It is in verse 42 that we find the general fact and formal principle, as verse 46 states the particulars, which lent a bright and blessed character even to their every-day life.
In the close of verse 47 we have another and more conclusive disproof of a mere gathering under one roof, to which some would limit the phrase. It is well known that the true text of the last clause is: “And the Lord kept adding daily together those to be saved.” For want of understanding this, 7ij eicreXlabi,"to the church,” crept in as an explanation; and en-; Tf «In-(i got relegated to the beginning of chapter iii. But, however taken, it is clear that the words do not mean “in the same place.” The Lord was adding His own “together,” quite apart from their being collected into “one place.” That they would assemble together as much as possible and enjoy the fellowship of saints is beyond controversy;
Since writing this letter I have lit on the following note on the verse in the pious and learned Dr. John Lightfoot's Works (Pitman's edition, viii. 61): “This Greek word ez; TO akt; is of frequent and of various use in the Septuagint. It sometimes betokens the meeting of persons in the same company; so of beasts; sometimes their concurring in the same action, though not in the same company or place; sometimes their concurring in the same condition; and sometimes their knitting together, though in several companies;—as Joab's and Abner's men, though they sat at a distance, and the pool of Gibeon between them, yet they said auvaurriv e7r; TO ttimi. And in this sense is the word to be understood in this story: for it is past all imagination or conceiving, that all those thousands of believers, that were now in Jerusalem, should keep all of one company and knot, and not part asunder; for what house would hold them? But they kept in several companies or congregations, according as their languages, nations, or other references, did knit them together. And this joining together, because it was apart from those that believed not, and because it was in the same profession, and practice of the duties of religion; therefore it is said to be Cr; TV de m:, though it were in several companies or congregations.” I have omitted the author's references, as they of course, appear included in the much fuller list from the Septuagint, which is given elsewhere in this letter. but these were practical results of what the Lord was then doing in His grace. For there is one body and one Spirit. It is certain that the most solemn witness and sweet pledge of their fellowship as one, the breaking of bread, was not observed in one vast place capable of thousands participating, but war' orKov, “at home,” in contrast with the temple. They took the Lord's supper in the houses of one and another of the saints. See again chap. v. 42, where a similar contrast re-appears, though here teaching and preaching are the point rather than the Lord's Supper. They as yet had no public building suited to such a purpose, but just used their private houses throughout the city. Solomon's porch might be excellent as long as it was available for speaking and testifying to the mass of Jews who frequented it as a sort of religious lounge and promenade; but it is as unfounded as ridiculous to suppose that all the saints could or would have met there for meetings of the assembly. It is certain therefore that the context refutes the idea that “together” here has anything to do with their assembling in one “place.” For if this had been sought, it must have been preeminently in the breaking of bread, and here we learn expressly that it was not so.
The fact is that the phrase is used adverbially in classical or ordinary Greek writers, just as we have seen in the New Testament, for “together.” Thus Thucidides, though not using it often, does thereby express (i. 79, vi. 106) concurrence in sentiment or, in falsehood without reference to place. For other purposes he with marked precision employs C/• Tf, ep T. karit TV T01, a 1,70ii, le. 1. X. Su Polybius (ii. 326) uses it for “together,” Dion3-s. Hal. (Aut. Rom. 3), Cl. Ptol. (Geogr. i. 12), and Plutarch frequently, not to speak of other heathen authors.
But it is evidently to the Septuagint, Philo, and Josephus, we must look for more direct and sure illustration of New Testament phraseology; and there the formula occurs freely, and habitually for “together,” &c. Occasionally, of course the place or time, may be the same; but, as in the New Testament, the usage is wider and often admits of difference in these respects where there is community of act or design. Compare Ex. 26:9; 36:139And thou shalt couple five curtains by themselves, and six curtains by themselves, and shalt double the sixth curtain in the forefront of the tabernacle. (Exodus 26:9)
13And he made fifty taches of gold, and coupled the curtains one unto another with the taches: so it became one tabernacle. (Exodus 36:13), neut. xxii. 10, xxv. 5, 11, Josh. 9:2; 11:52That they gathered themselves together, to fight with Joshua and with Israel, with one accord. (Joshua 9:2)
5And when all these kings were met together, they came and pitched together at the waters of Merom, to fight against Israel. (Joshua 11:5), Judg. 6:33And so it was, when Israel had sown, that the Midianites came up, and the Amalekites, and the children of the east, even they came up against them; (Judges 6:3).3, xix. 6, 2 Sam. 2:13; 10:15; 12:3; 21:913And Joab the son of Zeruiah, and the servants of David, went out, and met together by the pool of Gibeon: and they sat down, the one on the one side of the pool, and the other on the other side of the pool. (2 Samuel 2:13)
15And when the Syrians saw that they were smitten before Israel, they gathered themselves together. (2 Samuel 10:15)
3But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. (2 Samuel 12:3)
9And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the Lord: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning of barley harvest. (2 Samuel 21:9), Ezra 4:33But Zerubbabel, and Jeshua, and the rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel, said unto them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as king Cyrus the king of Persia hath commanded us. (Ezra 4:3), Neh. 4:8; 6:2, 78And conspired all of them together to come and to fight against Jerusalem, and to hinder it. (Nehemiah 4:8)
2That Sanballat and Geshem sent unto me, saying, Come, let us meet together in some one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But they thought to do me mischief. (Nehemiah 6:2)
7And thou hast also appointed prophets to preach of thee at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and now shall it be reported to the king according to these words. Come now therefore, and let us take counsel together. (Nehemiah 6:7), Pas. ii. 2, iv. 9, xviii. (Heb. xix. and so in the following) 10, xxxiii. 3, xxxvi. 40, xl. 7, xlvii. 4, xlviii. 2, 9, liv. 15, lxi. 9, Lxx. 11, lxiii. 7, 9, lxxxii. 15, ci. 23, cxxi. 2, cxxxii. 1, Eccl. 11:66In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good. (Ecclesiastes 11:6), lsa. lxvi. 17, Jer. 3:18; 6:12; 46:1218In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers. (Jeremiah 3:18)
12And their houses shall be turned unto others, with their fields and wives together: for I will stretch out my hand upon the inhabitants of the land, saith the Lord. (Jeremiah 6:12)
12The nations have heard of thy shame, and thy cry hath filled the land: for the mighty man hath stumbled against the mighty, and they are fallen both together. (Jeremiah 46:12), 1. 4, Hos. 1:1111Then shall the children of Judah and the children of Israel be gathered together, and appoint themselves one head, and they shall come up out of the land: for great shall be the day of Jezreel. (Hosea 1:11), Amos 1:15; 3:315And their king shall go into captivity, he and his princes together, saith the Lord. (Amos 1:15)
3Can two walk together, except they be agreed? (Amos 3:3), Mark 2:1212And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion. (Mark 2:12). Comment on these occurences of the Septuagint is needless: though they will naturally be of chief interest to the student of the Greek Bible, it is hoped that the English reader may find the search not without profit, as it fully confirms the fact that the phrase admits of sameness of purpose for several companies in as many places.
Here we might leave the question with its decisive answer from God's word; but it may help doubtful minds if we pursue it further. Acts 4:2626The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. (Acts 4:26) is the next example: “The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together, EV; TO avid, against the Lord and against his Christ.” Of this we have the revealed application in the next verses: “for of a truth in this city against Thy holy Servant Jesus whom Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together to do whatsoever Thy hand and Thy counsel foreordained to come to pass.” Now it is very certain that this gathering e7r; TO airrd of Herod and of Pilate, of the Gentiles and of Israel, does not convey, or bear, the inference that they were all assembled “in one place.” Scripture declares that they were gathered “together,” 47T; TO” airT; yet scripture expressly demonstrates, as every reader of the Gospels knows, that they met in quite different places. The chief priests and scribes led Christ to their own council,—indeed to Annas first and then to Caiaphas; the whole multitude of them led Him to Pilate and the Prcetorium; then Pilate remitted Him to Herod; and finally Pilate chastised Him in his own place before the cross. The argument therefore founded on this phrase is a proved fallacy, and the deduction from it falls to the ground, as not only without reality but opposed to the sure teaching of scripture.
Hence there is no solid reason for drawing more from 1 Cor. 11:2020When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. (1 Corinthians 11:20) than the Revisers say: “When therefore ye assemble yourselves together,” &c. This would be true if the saints in Corinth met in more buildings than one, though it is assuredly addressed to all the assembly in the city, and not to a part in one place.
Another passage which has been impressed for the service of the assumption that all met in a single place is 1 Cor. 14:23-2523If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? 24But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: 25And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth. (1 Corinthians 14:23‑25). But it seems surprising that any one should fail to see that the apostle is not describing facts as they were or ought to be, but only supposes a case where “the whole assembly” should meet “together” (eri TO avid), and here by implication it would be in one place. If all were to speak with tongues, it would expose them to the charge of madness; if all were to prophesy, it would force, even on the unbeliever or simple man that came in, the conviction of God's being indeed in or among them. But as we know expressly from 1 Cor. 12:29, 3029Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? 30Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? (1 Corinthians 12:29‑30), that “all” are not prophets, and do not speak with tongues, so this passage rightly understood would rather point to the conclusion that “the whole church” did not as a fact gather into a single place. Here only is it put, and this simply as an hypothesis, to correct the unspirituality of the Corinthian saints in preferring the more showy sign-gifts to that really higher exercise of divine power which sets the soul morally in the presence of God under His grace and truth.
The same principle applies to 1 Cor. 5, save indeed that it is a weaker case. If the Corinthian assembly met in several houses, they none the less assembled themselves together, and none more than another put out from among themselves the wicked person. The church in Jerusalem had unity as much as the church in Corinth; yet it is certain that they met in many houses to break bread. So therefore it may have been in Corinth without the least prejudice to their unity. The unity of the Spirit is a reality for principle and practice, and not a mere hope for heaven as independency makes it; but it is quite superior to the accidents of time and place. Is it seriously supposed that for putting away they temporarily abandoned the various places of meeting, and that all met in one building for such a purpose as this, whenever a case of church action occurred? Scripture gives no indication of such a thing, for discipline but shows breaking bread at home distributed over a city. We have already seen in Col. 4 the clear proof, on the one hand, of more than one meeting in Laodicea, and on the other of the unity of all the saints therein as the assembly of Laodiceans. Local responsibility is of the utmost practical value; but it must not be exercised so as to swamp the governing truth of unity in a city or town. And excision is unquestionably laid down in 1 Cor. 5 as incumbent on the “assembly in Corinth,” not merely on the church in somebody's house, which of course was (or might be) but part. The local brethren would naturally occupy themselves with the details, and this neither jealously nor suspected, if grace wrought; but on the assembly in the city, it is as certain from scripture as anything can be, falls the duty of approving themselves to be clear in the matter, The isolation of the assembly in such a one's house from the assembly elsewhere in the town never occurs to the apostle's mind; and we must bear in mind that the Lord had “much people” in Corinth (Acts 18:1010For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. (Acts 18:10)). It is the fruit of old habits or traditional error, strengthened by the growing self-will of the day, and claiming “the voice of God” from passing circumstances, as clericalism does for its party-work.
Mere notification after the act of excision, for example, in no way meets the word of God, but is quite consistent with the congregational system. Scripture requires that the assembly in the city should put away, and not the local meeting independently of the rest. To notify it to other saints not concerned in that solemn duty is a subordinate point, and not what scripture demands; but scripture is imperative that the assembly in the city, and not the local meeting only, should clear the Lord's name. Of course, “the churches” of the province or country would in some way or another learn the fact and act on the decision, and so everywhere, unless unity were given up in every respect. But unity would be given up in a city, if the saints gathered therein to Christ's name (whether meeting in one room or in ten) did not take part as a whole in putting away the wicked person. The independent action of the meeting in somebody's house, where the offender might be, is not the injunction of the Holy Spirit, but his exclusion by all the gathered saints, as in Corinth. Plurality of meeting-places in a town does not change the divine principle, but makes the unity more impressive.
But here I must pause, and remain, ever yours affectionately in Christ,
To R. A. S.
P.S. As some readers of Letter 2 in the last “Bible Treasury” think I had overlooked the fact of disciples in Damascus (Acts 9:19, 2519And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. (Acts 9:19)
25Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket. (Acts 9:25)), let them be assured that it is not so: the letter shows the contrary. But “disciples” do not necessarily mean “assembly” any more now than then. Even supposing however that the disciples in Damascus or elsewhere were gathered and walked;. X_v _KK 11Clieb this would only modify some words quite independently of the argument, but not shake the great substantial fact pressed, that the phrase is altogether peculiar as expressive of another thought. It in no way weakens the difference between the assembly in a town and the assemblies of a country, which a false view of unity will always be found to confound or destroy. That marked and weighty difference is not more indelible in Scripture than bound up with the essential nature of God's assembly on earth; and every saint is responsible at least not to oppose and thwart the Lord's authority concerned in it, even if he be not intelligent enough to comprehend and appreciate it duly. I am quite content to leave the expression in Acts 9:1313Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: (Acts 9:13) as meaning no more than the assembly throughout these lands, i.e., the church thus limited; but the difference abides intact, even if the church were actually said, which it is not, to have then existed elsewhere.