The cross-pollinization of ideas on religious bodies versus cells is enjoyable. Lynn, as usual, shares many wonderful ideas (and not to neglect Sterling's heavy dose of common sense).
   Still, the question is left begging:
   THE QUESTION, if I may paraphrase: Are neighborhood meetings preferable, in God's eyes, to a more formal and extensive "church?"
   As a true lover of liberty, Sterling prefers the local autonomy of small gatherings in control of their own destiny (as they are led by the Spirit).
   The responses so far have neglected these points:
   1. Man's physical makeup is in the image of God, implying that if you desire the perfect way to govern any organization such as a group of believers, it would be by utilizing the principles found in our mortal frame. By implication, it is the same "perfect" organization as God's own body. The importance of this one point ought to be convincing enough that local cellular groups cannot achieve nearly the influence as they would in a larger context, i.e., the whole man. "Man of whol-e-ness is my name." To keep the system PERFECT you've got to take the whole thing together as God designed it. >From there, the human organization fits perfectly into a larger scheme of things, and so forth. The pattern for all things has already been worked out by a Great Intelligence and it eventually requires an AT-ONE-MENT of the whole race. You can't do that and simply operate in local groups. We need a larger context for local groups to fit into.
   2. Lynn's reference to Eph. 4:11 supports my point that God does the organizing. The early Christians were a small group because they couldn't find many recruits until the Gospel was watered-down and less demanding. The bigger the church the worse it got. But that wasn't the fault of being organized in a big way, necessarily. God had already provided HIS WAY to organize a big church. That brings me to the second point that is neglected--God commanded ancient Israel to organize a national church with lots of hierarcy, it appears. He also organized the government with tiers of delegation by tens, fifties and hundreds. So you had here an ideal system of local groups entwined harmoniously within larger units. Fabulous concept.

   3. The third neglect of the question is simply that God rules from the top down as far as directives go. There is a feedback loop, of course, where information is traded so that directives are adapted to serve the sheep the mostest, fastest, bestest. We remember that Christ is the Good Shepherd. He rules the sheep from the top. The sheep aren't told when to eat or fertilize the ground, for certain functions are delegated with almost complete autonomy. However, when the wolves come, without a shepherd the sheep are helpless.
   So all neighborhood church groups are still directed to pray for governance from the Top. Since Jesus told Pilot that Pilot had no power except Christ's Father had given it to him, Pilot tried to free Jesus, knowing (by some means) that this was true. Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus were called God's servants. So if we have government, we ought, as Paul says in Romans, honor that institution for the good it does in keeping the sheep safe, etc. It is the best the people can handle in their darkness and lack of integrity.
   The same with the churches of today. There is something for everybody, and then some. Who knows but what the large churches of today are used by the Father to do many mighty works amongst wicked people--who can handle no greater blessing than the filthy hierarchies they have now.
   --David   

"Would to God that all the Lord's people were prophets"

www.greaterthings.com/OpenForum/Davids_Outcasts/