Linda. I am not sure the terminology is all that important. What matters is the heart of the matter - Jesus sends us into all the world to make disciples. Where people are called to follow Christ in community, there we find a church starting. I think church planting refers more to the practice of launching churches that we ourselves do not intend leading. If I declare that I am starting a church (which I have done several times in my own home), then people typically understand that I will be leading or facilitating the new church. However, the Lord has also used my to plant hundreds of new churches that I have never led (some I have not even met!). The church started because of my intentional efforts, but was started by other people whom I mentored and trained. Generally, when I refer to church planting, I am talking about this outsider catalytic role.
Blessings
David B.

Hi Andy. The primary goal of this post was to illustrate the power of the Discovery/ inductive process inside a small disciple-making group. In this context, I would focus on passages that lead easily to an obedience response. A Bible study on books such as Leviticus would be better for other contexts where people are exploring the historical and deeper meaning of those scriptures.

Hi Bob. In the introductory paragraph, I set the context for this post as addressing the problems associated with introducing the deductive approach into our Discovery Groups. The article is not meant for contexts outside these small groups. It would be easy to misinterpret the statements if you try to apply them to any other context. Please do not misunderstand the intent.

Romans 16 is a fascinating passage. At first glance, like the geneology passages, it seems like meaningless data. But there is much hidden in the passage.

I find Paul's use of the singular "church" and the plural "churches" very interesting. Firstly, he does not use the plural to refer to church in a city. He does not talk about the churches (plural), but the church (singular) in Cenchreae. See vs 1.

He uses the plural twice. Once referring to all the Gentile churches (multiple cities and provinces) and then to all the churches of Christ (presumably worldwide). See vv 4; 16.

When he refers to units of the church that are smaller than the city, he does not seem to talk of them as independent, autonomous churches as much as he refers them by the places where they meet. Thus we do not find "a church," but rather "the church that meets at . . ."

In the passage he actually speaks against divisions of the church. Here again, he talks about "the church" emphasizing the one body of believers, rather than separate units across the city. He does not talk about dividing "a church" but about dividing "the church." vv17-19.

What does confuse the issue slightly, is when Paul talks about the "whole (Strong's: complete) church" hosted by Gaius. Here he seems to infer that a group meeting in Gaius' home is a complete unit on its own.

Yet, there is strong support for the fact that Paul talked more about city church than about many churches in a city. He seems to have viewed church (singular) as a city-wide body that met in various locations (homes). This is what I see in this passage, but let's keep talking . . .