Comment/Question:
The entire problem with the whole argument is that by stating that the “Spirit Himself gathers,” there are suddenly two groups of Christians (which in itself contradicts the Word of God—we're either IN CHRIST or we're not. Do a search for the exact expression “in Christ”—you’ll be amazed). There are those who are gathered, then there are those who aren't gathered. So, what is so special about those who are gathered? Those who believe in this “teaching” of Scripture will say that there is nothing special...but they just say that because they know it’s the right thing to say, even though they don’t believe it. The elitist attitude that has sprung up in many gatherings gives proof of this. An elitist attitude is not of the Spirit of Christ and such teachings lead to a wrong spirit. How can anyone make the argument that such is of God? My mom was (and is) always saying, “We don't go because of the (hypocritical) people; we go because the Lord is there.” Well, last I checked, God is always with me. “Your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who IS IN YOU...” (1 Cor. 6:19). So if I were to meet another believer, and we were to share in all that we have enjoyed in our relationship with Christ, you can bet that Jesus is going to be right there with us (two temples of His), smiling away and thoroughly enjoying our joy in Him. Furthermore, if the Spirit were to actually gather believers, you can guarantee that where the Spirit is truly present, those who have been “gathered” are going to imitate the Spirit—which is the Spirit of Christ. By the way, Bible-believing churches (Baptist, Calvary Chapel, etc.) draw no distinction between believers; it is only the cults (Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses) that do so.
Answer:
The reasoning here is that if the Spirit of God has led some Christians to gather in the Lord’s name in separation from all other organized Christian groups, then the Spirit has divided the flock of God. Since this is something that He would never do, it proves that there is no such thing as the Spirit gathering believers to the Lord’s name, as brethren have taught.
Separation in the House of God
What our commenter/questioner objects to is the truth of separation in the house of God (the Christian profession). He evidently believes that such a thing does not exist in Scripture, but he has overlooked some important passages in the Word of God.
Most Christians don’t have a difficulty seeing separation when it comes to what is outside the house of God—i.e. in regard to people who are not saved. But if separation is mentioned in regard to those within the house of God, they strenuously object to it. Their reason for insisting on this is because the New Testament presents the Christian community as one happy family that walks together in unity. In their minds we shouldn’t walk in separation from any true believer, because, in doing so, we are dividing the flock of God and furthering the sad state of the Church’s testimony.
The problem with this is that we have not taken into account where we are in the Church’s history. We are not in Pentecostal times, or even in times of great revival; we are in “the last days” of the Church’s history on earth (2 Tim. 3:1). The Apostle Paul said, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron’’ (1 Tim. 4:1). He also said, “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.” “The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Tim. 3:1; 4:3-4). When such a condition of irremediable ruin has come upon the Christian testimony, separation in the house of God is called for. Paul also said, “Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity. But in a great house there are not only gold and silver vessels, but also wooden and earthen; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If therefore one shall have purified himself from these, in separating himself from them, he shall be a vessel to honour, sanctified, serviceable to the Master, prepared for every good work” (2 Tim. 2:19-21).
God most certainly desires that all His people would walk together practically as one happy family. But, He has also told us that when the Christian testimony would corrupt itself, and ruin would come in, that we are to apply the truth in the New Testament in the modifications given to us in what we might call “the relief epistles”—i.e. the “second” epistles in our Bibles. These epistles order the Christian’s path in times of such departure. There are two things that are prominent in each of them:
The evidence of departure from true Christianity in doctrine or in practice. Various aspects of breakdown in Christian responsibility are considered in each epistle.
The importance of the believer separating himself from the corruption and error—not just in his personal life, but also in matters of collective fellowship.
Our commenter/questioner evidently has been reading his or her Bible without reference to these “second” epistles. So, while it is true that God desires all the members of the body of Christ to be together in practical fellowship (Eph. 4:1-16), and since irreparable ruin is everywhere in the Christian testimony, the “relief” epistles indicate that we are to take a position of separation from the error and confusion (2 Cor. 6:14-17; 2 Thess. 3:6-15; 2 Tim. 2:19-21; 2 Peter 3:17; 2 John 8-11). If we didn’t have these “second” epistles in our Bibles, we would have no authority to separate; we would be forced to go on with the mass in the Christian profession in its confusion.
Thankfully, all the truth of God, as found in the main epistles, can still be practiced today, but it will only be in a remnant testimony that is separate from the confusion and error. (This was taken up in detail in our first volume of “Questions.”) Withdrawing from “unrighteousness” (Darby’s German Elberfeld Trans.) and resorting to a remnant position where we “follow ... with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart” is an ecclesiastical separation in the house of God (2 Tim. 2:22). It is an immensely disliked aspect of separation, but something that is necessary because of the ruin. It is not an “elitist attitude,” but simple obedience to the Word of God. There could very well be an “elitist attitude” among the gathered saints (we will address this later), but acting on the truth of Scripture, in 2 Timothy 2:19-22, cannot be wrong.
Separation From Real Christians
It is simply not true that the Spirit of God wouldn’t lead a Christian to separate from another Christian. If a believer is unconcerned about the principles and practices of sin in his or her life, Scripture clearly indicates that we are to separate from that person—regardless of whether his problem is moral, doctrinal, or ecclesiastical (1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Thess. 3:14-15; 2 Tim. 2:19-21;2 John 10-11, etc.). Since the Spirit of God leads according to the principles in the Word of God, a Spirit-led Christian will be led to separate from those who are connected with evil because the Word of God clearly indicates it.
Perhaps it is conceded that separation should be practised in regard to individuals who are not going on in holiness or who are unsound doctrinally. But brethren gathered to the Lord’s name have been charged with separating from true, morally upright, and doctrinally sound Christians. It is a proof to those who make this charge that we who are thus gathered don’t love other Christians, and that our position of ecclesiastical separation is an unchristian thing.
We believe that there could be a misunderstanding here. Firstly, let us make it abundantly clear: no one among the gathered saints wants to separate from true believers, but obedience to the Lord and His Word must take precedence over fellowship with other believers in their unscriptural churches. The principle is simple: we are called to separate from the disorder in the house. If true believers are content to go on in fellowship with the error and confusion there, then we have no choice but to separate from them too. This is a painful thing to do because we love all our brethren, but it is a real test of our willingness to act on Scriptural principles. We actually prove our love for our brethren who are scattered in the various denominations by our obedience to God. 1st John 5:2 says, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments.” The best thing we can possibly do for our fellow Christians is to go on in obedience to God. To join them in what is clearly unscriptural will not help them. So, obeying Scripture and withdrawing from the ecclesiastical error and confusion in the house of God is not a proof of the lack of love for the people of God, but a proof of our genuine love for them.
Secondly, the saints gathered to the Lord’s name meet in separation from error in the house, but if godly Christians want to join us, we would gladly receive them. We do not separate from such people. The problem is, many such Christians do not care to join us in fellowship at the Lord’s table. They are quite happy to remain in their unscriptural church denominations. What then? Does this mean that we should abandon the position of being gathered to the Lord’s name to be with them in their unscriptural churches? It seems that this is what our commenter/questioner would like us to do.
Furthermore, we do not separate ourselves from godly Christians on an individual basis. It has been said that we, as gathered to the Lord’s name, want to touch as many Christians in the community as we can—without compromising principles, of course. Then, if the Lord stirs up an exercise in some as to the truth of gathering, since they know who we are and what we hold, they are going to seek our advice and help in the truth.
The Difference Between Position and Practice
Notwithstanding, our commenter/questioner accuses those who hold and practise the truth of gathering of making a “distinction between believers”—even though all they are trying to do is obey Scripture and meeting on a clean ground in the house of God! The first proof that is brought forward to negate ecclesiastical separation is that all Christians are “in Christ” without distinction, and therefore, all Christians are to walk together without distinction on earth.
In a perfect world this would be true, but to insist on it today is to disregard the fact that there is an irremediable ruin in the Christian testimony. This erroneous reasoning stems from mixing up position and practice. As far as position is concerned, all Christians are “in Christ.” Our commenter/questioner is quite right in stating this. “In Christ,” is a term used in Paul’s epistles to denote the believer’s individual acceptance before God in Christ’s very place. The term indicates that we are in Christ’s place before God. This is our position before God in heaven; it does not refer to our responsibility among men on earth. To misunderstand this is to confuse position and practice.
An example of this misapplication of position and practice is, since we are all “in Christ,” where there is “neither male nor female” (Gal. 3:28), we do not need to observe those distinctions in the Church. Hence, women can be preachers, etc. However, as mentioned, “in Christ” is our position before God in heaven; whereas, “Let your women keep silence in the churches [assemblies]” (1 Cor. 14:34), is among believers on earth. These are two different things.
The Moral State of the Saints Gathered to the Lord’s Name
As a second proof that there is no such thing as ecclesiastical separation in the house of God, our commenter/questioner states that if the doctrine of being gathered by the Spirit to the Lord’s name were really true, then those who are thus gathered would “imitate” the moral features of Christ. The reasoning given for this is that the Spirit of God is “the Spirit of Christ” (Rom. 8:9), and if He has been working with believers, He would surely leave Christ’s imprint on them morally. Since those who believe in being gathered to the Lord’s name do not display those moral graces of Christ (to his or her approval), but rather manifest an “elitist attitude,” it proves that there is no such thing as being gathered to the Lord’s name, as the brethren teach.
The mistake here is making the moral state of those gathered to the Lord’s name the criterion to judge whether the ground they are on ecclesiastically is right or wrong. It is possible to be in a right position ecclesiastically but in a wrong condition spiritually. We don’t mean to justify the low state among the gathered saints, but it does not prove that the ground on which they have been gathered is wrong.
From as far back as 1910 people have had this erroneous idea. A case in point is when the brethren from the continent of Europe sent five men to inquire at Tunbridge Wells about the sad division that had occurred there in 1909, they carefully interviewed both sides and came to the conclusion that since the Lowe party spoke more graciously to them, they must be the right ones. Upon returning to the continent, they encouraged the brethren from France, Germany, Switzerland, Holland, etc., to side with the Lowe company. Their motives and intentions were right, but their principle for judging the situation was wrong, and consequently, they were misled.
There may very well be those among the gathered saints who have a proud, “holier than thou,” "elitist" attitude (Isa. 65:5). Perhaps some boast of being in a favoured place ecclesiastically and look disparagingly on those who have not been thus gathered. This is sad, but it doesn’t change the truth that God has a gathering center. It just means that some who are associated with that testimony are in a poor state. We can be assured that the Lord will act to take the pride out of those who boast in this way, because it is not in keeping with a remnant testimony (Zeph. 3:11-12). If the gathered saints are a testimony, they are testimony to the fact that the Church has failed in its responsibility. Those who are connected with such a remnant testimony today must be marked by humility. It may be one of the reasons why there are divisions and siftings among those gathered to the Lord’s name. But it does not negate the fact that God has a gathering center on earth.
The gathered saints have been incredibly patient with those who have attacked the ground of gathering. Is not this “the patience of Christ?” (2 Thess. 3:5; Rev. 1:9) They have also manifested “the meekness and gentleness of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:1) toward such who have these erroneous ideas in trying to correct them. Our commenter/questioner accuses the gathered saints of not having the spirit of Christ, but have his or her comments been made in that spirit? They appear to be accusations that border on railing—which is an outright moral disorder (1 Cor. 5:11). The last remark this person makes is an example. He or she insinuates that the gathered saints are on the level of the cults!
The Denominational Churches Are Not the Model
As a third proof that there is no such thing as being gathered to the Lord’s name in separation from the confusion in the house of God, our commenter/questioner sets before us the model of the denominational churches, such as Baptist, Calvary Chapel, etc. If he or she had their way, it appears that they would have us copy the unscriptural practices of these denominational groups and receive all and sundry, without question. To refuse a person to the breaking of bread because there is some Scriptural hindrance does not seem to enter into this person’s consideration. To him or her, it is dividing the flock of God.
It is quite true that these groups do not practise separation in their church fellowships. They do not have reception principles, as do the brethren. Such groups are usually open to all and sundry without any questions asked as to whether a person’s life is upright, or his doctrine is sound. But is this the model for us to follow? The result of such practices is that anything that is unclean in the house of God could come in and defile an assembly. To point to those man-made denominational systems as a model for a Christian assembly shows that this person has little understanding as to what constitutes a Scriptural assembly.
Summary:
There is such a thing as ecclesiastical separation in the Word of God (2 Tim. 2:19-22), even though our commenter/questioner is opposed to it. By obeying Scripture and practicing separation in the house of God, in his or her thinking, the gathered saints have aligned themselves with cultic practices!
We need to realize that there will always be reproach connected with this kind of separation. Hebrews 13:13 says, “Let us go forth therefore unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach.” Isaiah spoke of the same thing. In recounting the sins of the nation of Israel, one of the things that he fastens on is that the godly man was assaulted for practising separation from evil. “He that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey” (Isa. 59:15). We cannot expect that things will be any better in our day. Therefore, we must be prepared to endure reproach for practising the truth of gathering.