The Church at Ephesus in the First Century. And Today?

Note: The following is part of an email that I recently wrote to a brother from Y Community Church (mentioned below) in an email conversation we were having discussing the nature of the local church.  In it I make reference to the teaching of Watchman Nee on the local church in chapter 4 of his book The Normal Christian Church Life.  You can find a free online version here.  I've modified the names of the actual churches mentioned since the conversation isn't mainly about those specific churches but rather it's about the larger way we traditionally have come to think about the local church in our generation.

The city of Ephesus in the first century had ~300,000 people.  The number of believers that composed this church initially when they repented of their magic arts and brought their books to be burned was big enough to bring the worth of that aggregation of books to the equivalent of ~$5.5 million today on the lower end and ~$1.5 billion on the upper end (Acts 19:18-20).  Through Paul's preaching there were so many people turning to the Lord that there was an impact on buying patterns of the marketplace in Ephesus leading to riots (Acts 19:23-27).  And yet with that many people following Jesus in Ephesus there appears to be a single church in Ephesus with one group of elders over the church in the entire city (Acts 20:17).  By the last book of the Bible long after Paul's left the scene, there is still just a single church in Ephesus (Revelation 2:1) even after the years that have passed since the first converts through Paul's ministry there.

Here's how I've attempted to visualize this:

We can probably assume that though there was just one church in Ephesus, they had multiple meetings.  But however many meetings they had, each meeting was part of the one church in Ephesus with one set of elders that were overseers of the entire church in Ephesus.

Now, here's how I've attempted to visualize what Ephesus would like like in the 21st century:

Forget for a moment that I've added denominations to this picture (e.g. baptist, lutheran, presbyterian).  I don't think that's the root of the problem.  Imagine for a moment that one circle in Ephesus is X Community church (where I was a member for a decade) and another circle is Y Community Church (who I've been gathering with for the last year or so).  The big difference between the first image and the second image is that there's an additional line drawn (i.e. an additional set of circles).  Within this line not only are people in some sense bounded but elders are also bounded.  Elders and saints belong to the church in Ephesus, yes.  But they also in a substantive way belong to something else within that church in Ephesus.

Y Community Church has been talking about splitting up into two separate gatherings.  But they would both be Y Community Church gatherings.  They wouldn't just be two meetings that belong to the church in Ephesus (first image above).  They would be two meetings that belong to Y Community church within the church in Ephesus.

Now I'm going to draw one more visualization for you:

Here are a couple of questions I have (based on the three diagrams above):

1. In the first diagram, you enter the church at the first level (church of God) by conversion/baptism.  You likewise enter the church at the second level (church in Ephesus) in the same way, but belonging to this circle is based on where God has providentially chosen to place you (Acts 17:26).  In the second diagram, a person enters the church at the first and second level in the same way as the first diagram: by conversion/baptism.  But how does a person come to belong to the church at the third level (1st baptist, 2nd presbyterian, X Community Church, Y Community Church, etc.)?  Isn't it merely by personal preference?  I think Nee's point is that with locality (however you define it), even though we're much more mobile today than in the first century, God chooses which church/people you belong to (the way God chooses which biological families we belong to).  But the moment our belonging becomes on the basis of our choice, we will be sectarian.
2. Is belonging to a circle at the third level in diagram 2 really substantively different from belonging to a circle at the third level in diagram 3, which 1) is entered into by personal preference and 2) Paul clearly rebukes as divisive and carnal? (1 Corinthians 1:10-13, 3:1-4)

I think Nee's main point is that we should not embrace anything that's sectarian.  And to the extent that being a member of something would create sectarianism within the body of Christ, we should not be a member of that something.  But what Nee thinks isn't the main point =).  What I've sketched out above is where I currently stand based on my prayerful study of the Scriptures (though brothers like Nee have been hugely influential in the formation of my own thoughts as I reflect on Scripture).

I look forward to more discussion.  I know there's much more to be said. =)