God's Order For Christians Meeting Together For Worship and Ministry: The Biblical Answer to Traditional Church Order
Stanley Bruce Anstey
Table of Contents
Preface
The object of this book is to exalt the Lord Jesus Christ. We believe that will be done by allowing the Word of God (the Bible) to have supremacy in our hearts and our lives over all our pre-conceived ideas about ecclesiology (Church doctrine and practice). We believe that this approach to divine subjects will redound to the glory and honour of our Lord Jesus Christ.
It is my desire is to faithfully, and we trust lovingly, point out the unscripturalness of the traditionally accepted order of church government and practice that is has been in the Christian profession for centuries. At the same time, our aim is to present principles of God’s order in the Scriptures for the function of a Christian assembly. We realize at the very outset of this study that what we will take up might "step on the toes" of some who are emotionally attached to the denomination and its traditional order for worship and ministry. However, it has not our intention to malign any of the denominations in Christendom, or the Christians associated with them. We have not sought to criticize the various church denominations in the Christian profession just for the sake of criticism, but to point out the error of the whole system. Our great desire is to make known God's Scriptural order for Christians gathering together for worship and ministry, so that all who are exercised may know that simple pattern. We trust that through all the many things we touch on, that there can be seen a genuine love and concern for the whole family of God.
I make no claim to the originality of the truth herein compiled. These are things that faithful Bible teachers have taught me and many written by brethren for over 180 years. In this publication we have merely sought to give a fresh presentation of these truths. The Bible references used in this book are from the King James Version. Where the wording is different, the references have been taken from the New Translation of J. N. Darby.
I now commend the reader to the Lord and the various points of truth herein compiled. Our prayer is that each Christian that reads this material will be honest, spiritual, and mature, and they will to acknowledge these things to be the truth. May God give us the grace to do His will.
Bruce Anstey
August, 2018
Is Denominationalism God's Order or Man's?
All Christians have, more or less, looked into the Word of God (the Bible) to find the way of salvation, but it seems that very few, after being saved, have searched the Word to find out how the Lord would have them to assemble together for worship and ministry. Though all believe that there is only one way to be saved, many consider that each is left to himself to choose how he should worship. Today, in Christianity, it seems that Christians are doing what the children of Israel did in the days of the judges, “Every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 17:6; 21:25; Deut. 12:8; Prov. 21:2). As a result, there is a wide variety of opinion as to Christian worship, and much of it is conflicting. Most Christians have gone on for years worshipping, each in his own way or style, peculiar to his personal preference and denominational affiliation. Literally, for generations Christians have accepted what tradition has given the Church without question. In fact, most think that it is God’s ideal.
The Bible—the Ultimate Authority
The question that we need to ask is, "Does God care which way His people worship Him, or how they meet together for ministry? Does He have an opinion on this subject?" The answer we believe is, "Yes." Since there is only one place to which we can turn for authoritative answers on this and other subjects—the Word of God (the Bible)—it’s time that we got back to the basics in Christianity and had a fresh look at the Scriptures to see what God has to say about the subject of Church order. Since it is “the church of God” (Acts 20:28), surely He must have something to say about how Christians ought to worship. We believe that the pattern for Christian worship and ministry, and Church government is in the Bible, but it seems that most Christians have missed it.
A Challenge Concerning the Scripturalness of Denominational Christianity
Since we are to be “ready always to give an answer to every man that asks” us about our beliefs on a variety of Biblical subjects (1 Peter 3:15), we ought to be able to give an answer from the Word of God as to why we worship the way we do. Can we then, give our authority from the Scriptures for the way in which we meet together as Christians for worship and ministry? Or are we merely following the traditions of men?
To stimulate our thoughts along these lines we ask the following questions as a challenge to all believers for their Biblical authority as to why they worship in the way they do. The following questions are not meant to criticize the present order of worship and ministry in the Church today, but to stir up our thoughts as to what God’s order really is.
1) What authority is there from God’s Word for setting up so-called denominational or non-denominational "divisions" within the Christian testimony, when the Lord and the apostles taught that Christians should walk in oneness and unity in all things? (John 10:16; 11:51-52; 17:11, 21; Eph. 4:2-4; Phil. 2:2) In fact, Scripture decries the making of sects and divisions among believers! (Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 1:10; 3:3; 11:18-19)
2) What authority do Christians have from God for calling their so-called “church” groups names, such as: Presbyterian, Baptist, Pentecostal, Alliance, Christian Reformed, Anglican, etc., when we have no direction in the Bible to meet together in any other name than the name of the Lord Jesus Christ? (Matt. 18:20; 1 Cor. 5:4)
3) What authority do Christians have for naming their so-called church groups after prominent gifted servants of the Lord, such as: Lutheran (Martin Luther), Mennonite (Menno Simons), Wesleyan-Methodist (John Wesley), etc., when Scripture decries the forming of a fellowship of Christians around a leader in the Church? (1 Cor. 1:12-13; 3:3-9)
4) What authority from God do men have for establishing these churches on the lines of national distinctions, such as, “The Church of England,” “The Chinese Mennonite Brethren,” “Greek Orthodox Church,” “Filipino Baptist,” “German Church of God,” etc., when Scripture tells us that there are no national or social distinctions in the Church of God? (Col. 3:11)
5) What authority do Christians have for fashioning their places of worship after the pattern of the tabernacle and temple of the Judaic order in the Old Testament? Many of these church buildings have ornate furnishings of gold and other fine materials. Many have a "altar," though it doesn't resemble the Old Testament altar. Others have special parts of the building roped off as being more sacred than other parts. What authority do Christians have for borrowing things like this from Judaism, when the Bible indicates that Christianity is not an extension of Judaic order, but rather an entirely new character of approach to God? (Heb. 10:19-20; 13:13; John 4:23-24)
6) Is there any foundation from the Word of God for having steeples and crosses, etc., erected on these so-called "church buildings"?
7) Is there any foundation from the Word of God for calling these buildings “a church?” The Biblical definition for the "Church" is a company of believers who have been called out of both the Jews and the Gentiles by the gospel, and are united into one body by the indwelling Spirit of God, to Christ their Head in heaven. Hence, the Church is a company of redeemed people—not a literal building made with men's hands (Acts 11:22; 15:14; 20:28; Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 5:25).
8) What authority from Scripture is there for setting up a man in the Church (a Minister or a Pastor, so-called) to “conduct” the worship? Scripture teaches that the Spirit of God has been sent into the world for the purpose of guiding Christian worship (Phil. 3:3; John 4:24; 16:13-15). The Bible indicates that the Lord, by the Holy Spirit, is to preside in the assembly of the saints and direct the proceedings as He chooses (1 Cor. 12:11).
9) What Scriptural authority is there for having pre-arranged worship services in these churches? Often a program will be handed out describing the order in which the worship will be carried out on that particular day.
10) What authority is there from Scripture for calling the services that go on in these churches “worship,” when they usually consist of listening to music and having a man give a sermon?
11) What authority is there from New Testament for the use of musical instruments in Christian worship? The Bible defines Christian worship as being that which the Spirit of God produces in the hearts and mouths of believers—in thanksgiving, praise, etc. It is not something mechanical (John 4:24; Acts 17:24-25).
12) What Scriptural authority is there for rehearsing pre-written prayers from prayer books in church services? The Bible says that we should not have vain repetitions in our prayers, but that our prayers should be our own words expressed from the heart. (Matt. 6:6-8; Jam. 5:16; Psa. 62:8; 1 Tim. 4:5 – "freely addressing Him").
13) What authority is there for rehearsing the Psalms in those so-called “Christian” worship services, when the Psalms do not express the sentiments of believers who know Christ's finished work on the cross? The Psalms do not express the worship of those on Christian ground, who know the privilege of access into the presence of God as purged worshippers (Heb. 9:14; 10:19-22)
14) Why do most churches have the Lord’s supper once a month or every three months, when the habit of the Church in Scripture, once it was established under Paul's ministry, was to break bread each Lord’s day? (Acts 20:7)
15) What authority is there from New Testament Scripture for having a choir of trained singers to aid the worship?
16) What authority from Scripture is there for the use of robes and special garments in the services of Christian worship? The choirs inn these churches are usually dressed in robes, and the Ministers are often similarly attired—depending on which denomination they may be affiliated with.
17) What authority do these churches have for allowing women to publicly preach and teach when the Bible says that the role of the sister is in not taking a public place in the Church, either in administration, teaching, or preaching? Scripture says that they should be silent in the assembly (1 Cor. 14:34-38; 1 Tim. 2:11-12).
18) What authority is there for women praying and prophesying (ministering the Word in preaching and teaching) in these churches with their heads uncovered, when the Word of God says that the women should be? (1 Cor. 11:1-16)
19) What Scriptural authority is there for allowing only certain individuals (the Pastor or Minister) to do the official ministering from the Word of God? Why is there not liberty in these churches for all who are able to minister to do so, as led by the Spirit? The Bible teaches that when Christians come together in assembly that all (brothers) are to have liberty to minister as the Lord would lead them by the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:6, 11; 14:24, 26, 31).
20) What Scriptural authority is there for the idea that a person must be ordained to be in the ministry? There is not one pastor, teacher, evangelist, prophet, or priest in the Bible that was ordained to preach or teach! Scripture teaches that the very possession of a spiritual gift is a person's warrant to use it! (1 Peter 4:10-11)
21) What Scriptural authority is there for the idea that there are men on earth today who have power to ordain others? Where did those men get this power?
22) Is there any authority from Scripture for making a man a Pastor of a local church? Scripture never speaks of the gift of a pastor as a local office, but rather, is a gift to the Church universally? (Eph. 4:11) Moreover, what authority is there for naming these men who preach and teach “Pastors” (i.e. “Pastor Jones”), when in Scripture the gift of pastoring (shepherding) was never given as a title to someone?
23) What authority from Scripture is there for these so-called Ministers calling themselves, “Reverend,” when the Bible says that “Reverend” is the Lord's Name? (Psa. 111:9) Some clergymen take the name “Father,” even though Scripture says that we should call no man “Father!” Others take the title “Doctor” (meaning 'teacher' or 'instructor' in the Latin) which Scripture also says shouldn't be done (Matt. 23:8-10).
24) Is it a Scriptural practice for the Church to be choosing its “Pastor” or “Minister?” The usual procedure is that the would-be “Pastor” will be invited to a certain church group where he will be given an opportunity to prove himself by giving some sermons. If his preaching is acceptable, then the church (usually through a board of deacons) will elect him to be their “Pastor.” Is this procedure according to the Word of God?
25) What Scriptural authority is there for church denominations choosing their elders? There is not one assembly of Christians in the Bible that chose its elders.
26) What authority from Scripture do churches have for making holy days and observing Christian festivals, such as, Good Friday, Easter, All Saints Day, Lent, Christmas, etc.? Scripture says that Christianity is not to do with special days and seasons (Gal. 4:10; Col. 2:16).
27) What Scriptural authority do those ministering in the pulpits of these churches have for teaching erroneous doctrines such as, Covenant Theology, A-millennialism, Conditional Security, Purgatory, Absolution, Law-keeping, etc.?
28) Is there any authority from Scripture for “testimonial” meetings, where a man will get up and tell the audience how he got saved, often dwelling on his past life of sins?
29) What authority from the New Testament is there for taking tithes (giving 10% of our income) from the audience, when tithing is clearly a Mosaic law for Israel? (Lev. 27:32, 34; Num. 18:21-24)
30) What Scriptural authority is there for the fund-raising efforts and the asking for donations from mixed audiences of saved and lost persons in these churches? The Bible indicates that the servants of the Lord took “nothing” from the unsaved people of this world among whom they preached the gospel (3 John 7).
31) Are seminaries and Bible schools God’s way of preparing a servant for a ministry? Is the giving and receiving of diplomas and degrees (i.e. Doctor of Divinity D.D.) supported by Scripture? The Bible says we are not to give flattering titles to one another (Job 32:21-22; Matt. 23:7-12).
32) Is there any foundation from the Word of God for these churches sending Ministers and Pastors to a particular place to carry on a service for the Lord? We have often heard comments like, “Pastor so and so was sent out by such and such organization.” Scripture shows that Christ, the Head of the Church and Lord of the harvest, sends His servants under the direction of the Spirit into the work He has for them, and that the Church is to merely recognize it by giving the servant the right hand of fellowship (Matt. 9:38; Acts 13:1-4 – J. N. Darby Trans., Gal. 2:7-9).
33) Where in Scripture do we get the concept of the Church being a teaching organization? We often hear people say, “Our church teaches that...” In the Bible, we do not read of the Church being in a position of authority whereby it formulates doctrines as a legislative body, but simply being a company of believers taught by teachers raised up by the Lord (Acts 11:26; Rom. 12:7; Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 1 Thess. 5:27).
34) Is there any authority from New Testament Scripture for the Church "christening" babies, and having "dedication" services of Christian children?
"We Can Do Anything in Worship If Scripture Is Silent on It!"
Some Christians respond to these questions by reasoning that if the Word of God does not specifically address or prohibit something, then it is a non-issue with God. They believe that the Bible does not directly address the subject of how Christians should meet together for worship and ministry, and therefore, it is something that should be left to personal taste and discretion. Consequently, they see nothing wrong with implementing things into Christianity that are not in the Bible.
This view conveniently excuses the present order of things in the Church today. However, this assumption is quite incorrect because the Bible does address the subject of how Christians are to meet together for worship and ministry. God’s ideal is clearly found in the Scriptures. To think that the worship of God in Christianity is simply a matter of personal preference is ignorance. W. Kelly said, “She of Samaria [John 4] thought, like many an one since, that the worship of God was only a question of human opinion. Strange that even God’s children should doubt that God’s worship must be of God’s will! That He Himself should be denied a voice—the voice—in His own worship is indeed the climax of man’s incredulity. But so it has been, and so it is, that men see not the presumptuous self-will that does not allow God to decide what is His will for the worship of His children.”
Mr. Kelly also said, “Man’s will is bad enough anywhere, but it is specially so where it intrudes into God’s worship. Be assured that those who complain of lack of light on such a subject in Scripture have a far more serious question to settle. For this is as much a matter of revelation, and so of faith on our part, as the salvation of a man’s soul; the same faith which can trust God in one thing can trust Him in everything; while on the other hand, the incredulity which doubts God on one point is ready to doubt in all. I deny, as a matter of fixed principle, that the Word of God is obscure [on the subject of worship]: the allowance of such a thought arises from nothing but secret infidelity, and infidelity from an unjudged will.”
Furthermore, it is not a rationally sound principle to reason from what is not in the Bible to learn God’s mind on a subject (2 Tim. 1:7). In essence, what is being said is, “We can do whatever we want in worship and ministry as long as it’s not prohibited in the Bible!” This is not rational. It reminds us of what one well-meaning, but confused, brother once said: “There is more between the lines of Scripture than on the lines!” Surely this cannot be the right way to seek God’s will on this subject. If we applied that principle to other subjects that pertain to Christian doctrine and practice, there could be no end to what we could make them out to mean. The truth would be lost in no time. In fact, to a large extent, this is what has happened in regard to this very subject of how Christians should meet together for worship and ministry. The reason God gave us His Word is so that we might know His will (1 Cor. 2:12-13). The honourable thing for us is to “search out” the truth in His Word and seek by His grace to practice it (Prov. 25:2; Acts 17:11-12). The habit of the Apostle Paul was to “reason out of the Scriptures” (Acts 17:2); he didn’t reason into the Scriptures. This shows that we really do not have any right to take our thoughts to the Word of God and try to make it say something that we want it to say.
Perhaps the pattern for Christian worship and ministry is so simple that people have overlooked it and imagine that it is not addressed. Allowing for human ideas and preferences to have a place in the worship of God has resulted in the traditional order of Church government that exists in denominational Christianity. It not only has no foundation in the Word of God, but it plainly contradicts the statements in His Word. Mr. T. B. Baines said, “Either God has laid down an order for the assembly, or He has left it to man’s will to do so. If He has laid down an order, it is clearly obligatory upon all, and every departure from that order is an act of disobedience.” If we were honestly seeking God’s will, the only logical way to get help on this subject would be to go back to the Word of God and start from "scratch," so to speak, saying, “We will do nothing, but what is mentioned in the Bible in our worship and ministry?” This is what we will attempt to do as we pursue this subject in this book.
The Need for Unlearning Certain Things
Before we attempt to present God’s order from God's Word for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry, there are unfortunately, many false ideas that need to be cleared away first. Just as a builder digs deep to remove a lot of rubbish and untrustworthy material before he lays a single stone (Luke 6:48), we feel it is necessary to clear away certain mistaken ideas that have come to be accepted in the Christian world that simply have no Scriptural support.
Over time many things in the Christian testimony have been taken by the masses as being God’s way. It seems that very few have even thought to check whether those things are in accord with the Word of God—the Christian’s charter and guide. People have simply accepted it all at face value. One of the problems with this is that when we have lived so long with these things they tend to be ensconced in our minds as being truth, when really they are just tradition. Such pre-conceived ideas cloud our thoughts and hinder us from seeing the truth. Therefore, for many of us, learning the truth of God’s order for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry, will mean that we may have to unlearn some things that we have (wrongly) imbibed over the years. And that is not always easy.
The Ruin of the Christian Testimony
Turning to the Word of God, we see that almost every New Testament writer has foretold that ruin and departure from the Word of God would come into the Christian testimony. Hence, there should be no real surprise to us when we see such departure from God's order in the making of denominational and non-denominational churches.
The “Second” Epistles
The “second” epistles in the New Testament concern themselves particularly with this subject. Each epistle views some aspect of the Christian faith being given up, and thereupon marks out the path for the faithful in respect to it.
• The 2nd epistle to the Ephesians describes the letting go of first love (Rev. 2:1-7).
• The 2nd epistle to the Thessalonians treats the letting go of the blessed hope—the Lord's coming (the Rapture).
• The 2nd epistle of John considers the seriousness of letting go of the doctrine of Christ.
• The 2nd epistle of Peter gives the letting go of practical godliness.
• The 2nd epistle to the Corinthians, among other things, treats the letting go of apostolic authority as found in Scripture.
• The 2nd epistle to Timothy tells us of the letting go of order in the house of God. (This is particularly connected with the subject we are considering.)
The Testimony of Paul
The Apostle Paul warned that there would be a great departure from the Word of God in the Christian profession. He said, “I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:29-30). In his epistles to Timothy, he spoke of those who would make “shipwreck concerning the faith” (1 Tim. 1:19-20), of those would “depart from the faith”—the body of Christian truth (1 Tim. 4:1-3), of those who would “wander from the faith” (1 Tim. 6:10), of those who would “err concerning the faith” (1 Tim. 6:20-21), of those who would be “overthrowing the faith” of others through their erroneous teachings (2 Tim. 2:18), and of those who would become “reprobate concerning the faith” (2 Tim. 3:8). He said there was a time coming when the Christian profession generally would “no longer endure sound doctrine, but turn their ears away from the truth to fables” which have no foundation in the Word of God (2 Tim. 4:2-4). He said that the morals in the Christian testimony would also degenerate to the level of things in the heathen world (2 Tim. 3:1-5; compare Romans 1:28-32). He spoke of impostors rising up professing to know of the truth, who would imitate the miraculous powers of God in an attempt to resist the truth, and they would lead away many (2 Tim. 3:7-8). He also said that things would not get better, but that “evil men and seducers” in the Christian testimony (for that is the context of 2 Timothy 3) would “wax worse and worse” (2 Tim. 3:13). A cursory look at the Christian testimony today tells us that all this has had its sad fulfillment.
The Testimony of Matthew
The Apostle Matthew indicates the same departure in the parables of the kingdom of the heavens. In these parables, the Lord Jesus said that an enemy (Satan) would come and sow “tares among the wheat.” This indicates that there would be an introduction of false and lifeless professors into the kingdom of the heavens. The result would be a mixture of believers (the wheat) and false professors (the tares), which would not be sorted out until the end of the age (Matt. 13:24-30, 38-41).
Matthew records that the Lord Jesus taught the multitudes that a vast system of things would grow out of the original simplicity of Christianity and that at the end it would have no resemblance to what there was at the beginning. He used the figure of a “mustard seed” being planted in the earth and growing out of proportion, until it became a huge tree where the birds of the air would lodge. A large tree in Scripture speaks of dominion and power (Ezek. 31:3-7; Dan. 4:10-11, 2-22, 34). Thus, the Christian profession would develop into a great worldly institution having an aspect of grandeur and pretension to it. It has become a great system of religion, politics, and business. It is a place where men strive for honours, greatness, and power. The “birds of the air” speak of evil spirits (Rev. 18:2) that would get a hold of the minds of men and influence them to teach erroneous doctrines (1 Tim. 4:1).
If we have ever had the opportunity to witness the noise that emanates from a tree full of birds we would understand how apt a picture this is of the confusion that exists in the Christian testimony. The birds are all chirping at the same time, all seemingly having something to say, but their voices are all conflicting. This is just what we hear when we look and listen to the thousand voices of the various so-called churches in Christendom (Matt. 13:31-32).
The Lord went on to speak about the woman who hid “leaven” in “three measures of meal” (Matt. 13:33). This speaks of another aspect of the ruin that has come into the Christian profession. If the birds in the huge tree illustrate the great outward profession that would develop, the leaven in the meal speaks of the great inward corruption that would also permeate Christendom. Leaven in Scripture is a type of evil (Matt. 16:6; Mark 8:15; 1 Cor. 5:6-8; Gal. 5:7-10). The “meal” is a type of Christ, who is “the Bread of life.” He is the spiritual food for the children of God (John 6:33-35, 51-58). Hence the Lord indicated that the professing Church (the woman) would corrupt the food of the children of God by introducing evil doctrine, mixing it with the truth of His Person. This is exactly what has happened. Many evil and erroneous teachings have been associated with the Person of Christ in the vast profession of Christendom.
Thus these three parables in Matthew's gospel indicate that there would be the introduction of evil persons (Matt. 13:24-30), evil spirits (Matt. 13:31-32; 1 Tim. 4:1), and evil doctrines (Matt. 13:33).
Some of the other similitudes of the kingdom in Matthew's gospel also indicate that this same failure would come in. For instance, Matthew 25:1-13 says that the tens virgins “all slumbered and slept.” They were sleeping when they should have been watching.
The Testimony of Peter
The Apostle Peter also spoke of the evil teachings that would rise in the Christian testimony. He said that false teachers would rise up among the saints of God and bring in “damnable heresies” that "many" would follow—to the point where they would call the way of the truth evil (2 Peter 2:1-3; 3:16). Heresy is not teaching evil doctrine (the conventional meaning), but sect making. A “heresy” or a “sect,” by definition, is making a party or a division within the Church that severs itself practically from others and forms its fellowship around a particular view. It’s true that evil doctrine is often connected with sect-making, and this is probably why many Christians think of heresy as teaching things that are heterodox and blasphemous, but heresy in itself is the formation of an outward division in the Church. The subtlest of all heresies is one that develops around some part of the truth to the exclusion of other truths. There may be many true believers that are connected with such heresies. But a “damnable heresy” of which Peter speaks, is a sect that gathers its cause around soul-damning doctrines.
When we look out at the vast profession of Christianity we see all the numerous divisions and sects in the church. We are told that there are well over thousand denominations and non-denominational fellowships today! Thankfully we can say that most of these church groups are not “damnable” heresies, but nonetheless, they are outward divisions in the Church and are sectarian. And let us remember that Scripture says we are to reject heresy because it is a work of the flesh (Titus 3:10-11; 1 Cor. 11:19; Gal. 5:20).
The Testimony of John
While the Apostle Paul warns of those who would “draw back” from the revelation of Christian truth (Heb. 10:38-39), the Apostle John warns of those who would “go forward” and not abide in it (2 John 9). John spoke of this departure as resulting from the work of antichristian teachers. He said, “They went out from us, but they were not of us” (1 John 2:19). The “us” here, and in many other places in John's epistle, is referring to the apostles. Going out from the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship was really the giving up of it. While John was primarily referring to the giving up of doctrine concerning the Person of Christ, we can see that the Christian testimony has not stopped there. Much of that which passes for Church order essentially has no basis from the teachings of the apostles. What we see reminds us of the Lord's word to the Pharisees when He said that they were “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” He also said, “Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition” (Mark 7:7, 9).
The Testimony of Jude
Jude also tells us that certain men would creep in among the Christians unawares and “turn the grace of God into lasciviousness” (Jude 4). He describes the character of those that would corrupt the Christian testimony as; having “gone in the way of Cain,” having “ran after the error of Balaam,” and having “perished in the gainsaying of Core [Korah]” (Jude 11). These three things aptly depict the kind of ecclesiastical error that is prevalent in Christendom today.
Firstly, there is the “way of Cain” which describes the effort to present to God our works as a means of acceptance with God. Cain was a religious man in that he offered a sacrifice, but he presented the work of his own hands to God for acceptance, and consequently, it was rejected (Gen. 4:1-5). His offering had no blood in it, which would figuratively point to the ultimate sacrifice and blood-shedding of the Lord Jesus Christ, without which no one can be blessed of God. A bloodless gospel (which is really no gospel) is being preached today from the pulpits of many churches through which people have been led to believe that they can present their good works to God for acceptance and salvation, even though the Bible clearly indicates that salvation is “not by works of righteousness” (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-8).
Secondly, there is “the error of Balaam” which speaks of the willingness to teach things which God has not authorized for money and high honors. Balaam presented himself to Balak and the Moabites as a prophet, and was willing to prophesy for them to the hurt of God's people (Num. 22-24.) Many preachers in Christendom (though perhaps not intending to hurt any of the Lord's people) are likewise teaching hurtful doctrines that are not founded on Scripture and are also striving for high honors in the Church.
Thirdly, there is the “gainsaying of Korah” which is the organizing of a party of men to challenge God's order of priesthood. Korah and his men wanted a position above the people of God, which had not been given to them by God. In the Christian profession there has been a similar organizing of a special class of men to preside over the flock of God, known as the clergy. They freely speak of the flock of God as being “their” flock. This sort of organization may well have come in with good intentions, and there also may be many that presently occupy that place who have equally good motives, but still, it is a system of things that has no foundation in the Word of God. In essence, it challenges the true priesthood of the believer.
The Testimony of the Lord
Finally, the Lord Himself gives His own condemnation of a group of persons whom He said would rise up in the Church—called “the Nicolaitanes” (Rev. 2:6, 15). These people brought impurity into the Christian testimony; and from the meaning of their name, many Bible teachers have concluded that this party was the beginning of clericalism. “Nico” means “to rule;” and “laitan”—which is the same word as laity—means “the people.” The Nicolaitanes apparently sought by some means to rule over the people, and this marks the beginning of the clergy/laity system. The Lord said that the “deeds” and the “doctrines” of the Nicolaitanes were something that He hated, and He still hates it (Rev. 2:6, 15).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thus, we have abundant evidence from Scripture—from almost every the New Testament writer—that there would be a great departure from the simplicity in the Christian faith. They forewarned that in their absence there would be a system of things that would develop in the Church which would have no foundation for its existence in the Word of God. Some of todays’ churches have more of this ecclesiastical error than others. But whether it is St. Peters in Rome or the smallest evangelical chapel, most, if not all, have the basic principles of clericalism woven into the fabric of its worship and ministry. The believer instructed in the mind of God cannot but admit that what passes for the Church of God before men barely resembles the Church of God that we read of in the Word of God. We might ask, “What has happened?” In a word, we (the Church) have failed. It is not for us to point our finger and one group or another, because we have all contributed to the breakdown and failure in some way. We need to own our part in the ruin before God, as Daniel did in connection with the ruin in Israel (Dan. 9).
The “One Body” Versus the Many Sects and Divisions
Perhaps the saddest of all these evidences of departure, is that of the many sects and divisions in the Church's testimony before the world. The plain teaching of Scripture is that God hates divisions, because schism and heresy (party-making) are a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:20). How great a contrast to the Lord’s will are these numerous sects and divisions in the Christian testimony! While He was still on earth, He prayed that believers would all be one. He prayed, “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word; that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me” (John 17:11, 21). He was willing to die to “gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad” (John 11:51-52). The Lord also said that after He died, He would seek to gather His sheep together into “one flock” that they might have “one Shepherd”—Himself (John 10:15-16). In spite of the Lord's desires for His people to express a cohesive practical visual unity on the earth, we are all divided up into different sects—each having its owns beliefs and practices peculiar to that sect. Surely this cannot meet the Lord's approval.
At the first appearance of division in the early Church, the Apostle Paul was led of the Spirit to write, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you ...every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I am of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor. 1:10-13; 12:25) Here in the plainest of language, Paul on behalf of God, beseeches all believers for the glory of the Name of the Lord Jesus, that there be no divisions! Yet when we look around the Christian profession today we see that what Scripture denounces, has happened in the Church! How many thousands of Christians are meeting separate from one another in their particular sect, and essentially are saying, “I am of Rome” (Roman Catholic), “I am of Luther” (Lutheran), “I am of Wesley” (Methodist), “I am of Menno Simons” (Mennonite), etc. If it grieved the Spirit to hear Christians say, “I am of Paul” and “I am of Apollos,” etc., does it now please the Spirit to hear them say, “I am of Luther,” “I am of Wesley,” etc.? If it was denounced as carnality in those early days of the Church, could it now be called spirituality? (1 Cor. 3:1-5) The many denominations have set aside God's order for worship and ministry, and for church government, and have set up an order of their own, complete with all their creeds and church by-laws. And, in doing so, they have created sad division in the church.
We ask, “Will there be sectarian divisions in heaven?” All Christians agree unanimously that all such lines of denominational divisions in the Church will all be gone up there. Everyone in heaven will be gathered around the Lord Jesus Christ in perfect unity without any sectarian affiliation. How is it then, that Christians want to meet together for worship on earth in sectarian divisions, when there is no such thing in heaven? The Lord Jesus taught the disciples to pray, “Thy will be done in earth, as it is done in heaven!” (Matt. 6:10). It is clear then that the Lord wants the same unity that exists among believers in heaven to exist among believers on earth now.
The Apostle Paul said that the first responsibility that we have as Christians walking “worthy of the calling wherewith we have been called,” is in the “endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the uniting bond of peace.” He went on to explain why, saying, “for there is one body” (Eph. 4:1-4). This means that, as Christians, we should be seeking to express the truth that we are “one body” in a practical sense. The world should be able to see a visible unity in the Church on earth. Unfortunately they see the Christian testimony shattered in pieces. It is not possible, of course, for the whole Church to meet together under one roof in one place, but nevertheless, it should express a unity among believers in the way in which it functions in its practical relations between the various local assemblies seeking to uphold that unity wherever they may be on earth.
We hear Christians speaking of the different denominations as, “their body,” and “our body,” as if there were many bodies! They speak of their particular church fellowship as a “body” in itself, as distinguished from other church groups, whom they also view as bodies. From what we see and hear among Christians, the truth of the one body has been lost from sight.
An illustration used by the late Charles Stanley aptly describes the confusion that exists in the Christian testimony. Suppose Her Majesty the Queen sends out a commander-in chief to one of her colonies, and for a time the army puts itself entirely under his command. It would properly be called, “The army of Her Majesty.” But if that army were to set aside the commander-in-chief, and appoint another of its own choosing, or if the army divided into separate parts and each division had its own appointed commander, even though each soldier was still a British soldier—could that divided army be correctly called “The army of Her Majesty?” Having set aside the authority of Her Majesty’s appointed commander-in-chief, every division that they formed in their rebellion would be considered by the British crown to be mutiny. Would it not be disloyalty to join the ranks of any such mutinous division?
Now, applying this to the Church, we can easily see that such a thing has happened in the making of denominational and non-denominational churches. For a time, the early Church abode under the authority of the Holy Spirit who was sent down from heaven to govern the Church, just as the British army, for a time, owned the authority of Her Majesty’s commander-in-chief. When departure from God’s Word came into the Church, there came with it divisions and human arrangements were implemented to guide those divisions. Many, if not all, of these human arrangements that were brought into the Church, came in with good intention—but without authority from the Word of God. As the sects within the Christian profession multiplied, human authorities (with their special creeds and by-laws) were set up within the various denominations to manage the affairs thereof. Today the whole thing has grown into a vast system having many separate fellowships of Christians, and very little of it has any authority from the Word of God.
Is it any wonder why unbelievers in this world look at the Church and shake their heads? If they are questioned as to why they don't believe the gospel, they often point at the confused and divided state of Christendom with all its conflicting voices as their excuse for rejecting Christ. How sad a testimony we have rendered to this world! Surely, we should bow our heads and confess to the Lord that we have sinned, as Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah acknowledged that they had a part in the failure of Israel’s testimony (Dan. 9:1-19; Ezra 9:1-15; Neh. 9:4-38).
Conventional Terminology Versus Scriptural Terminology
Much of the confusion that exists in the Christian testimony has come from the terminology that theologians have attached to the simple truths of the Bible. F. B. Hole once said that modern theology has taken many of the terms of Scripture and has emptied them of their Scriptural meaning, and then, has attached to those terms, meanings of human invention for the support of its system of theology. When we compare these ideas with the Word of God, we see that they are not the truth.
The “Church”
One of the more obvious examples of how conventional terminology has attached a new meaning to a Scriptural term is, “the church.” Most Christians use this term to refer to a building to which Christians go, when they meet together for worship. When they gather together in the building, they say, “We are going to church.” However, the Bible never uses the word in this way. The Bible speaks of the church [ecklesia - Greek] as a company of redeemed persons who have been “called out” of both Jews and Gentiles through their belief in the gospel. These persons compose Christ’s body and will one day reign with Him over the world as His bride. The Bible clearly shows that the church is not a material building, for it says that Christ loved it and gave Himself in death for it (Eph. 5:25-26). Clearly this could not be said of a mere building made with men’s hands. The Word of God also tells us that the church was often found in a person’s home (Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; Phile. 2). It says that the church had ears so that it could receive instruction (Acts 11:22, 26); the powers of discernment to know the mind of the Lord (Acts 15:22); and that it could pray (Acts 12:5), be greeted (Rom. 16:5), and be persecuted (Acts 8:1; 1 Cor. 15:9). It is quite obvious from these references that the church is a company of people saved by the grace of God, and is not a mere building of stones and timber.
A sister in the West Indies who had learned something of the truth of the church, was asked by the “Minister” of a local denomination, why she wasn’t “going to church” any more. She replied, “The only church that I read of in the Bible, is the one that fell on Paul's neck and kissed him. If that thing fell on me (pointing down the road to the building), it would kill me!”
Christians will also erroneously use this term to describe a sect in the church. They speak of being a member of a church; when in reality, they are speaking of being a member of a denominational [or non-denominational] sect in the church. The truth is, Scripture knows no other membership than that in the body of Christ. Every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ is a member of that body. (1 Cor. 12:12, 27)
We also hear Christians speaking of people “joining a church,” which in reality, they mean joining a sect in the church. A. H. Rule once said, “The church is not a voluntary association that men can join or leave at will, as is the case in the sects.” The Bible does not teach that we are to “join” a church. There is only one church in the Bible: to this the Lord (not us) joins persons when they believe on Him for salvation (Acts 2:47; 5:14; 11:24; 1 Cor. 6:17). A brother, who had an understanding of this truth, was asked which church he belonged to. He replied, “I belong to the church that nobody can join!” The person who asked was naturally quite taken back, and asked, “How do you get new members then?” He answered, “Oh, the Lord joins them by the Spirit when they get saved, but people can’t voluntarily join it” (1 Cor. 12:13). What we can, and should “join,” is the fellowship of the saints, but we cannot join the church (Acts 9:26).
Sometimes a person will ask, “Who is the head of your church?” They suppose that we will mention some “Minister’s” name. However, the Head of the church that the Bible speaks of is in heaven—it is Christ Himself! (Col. 1:18)
We have also heard people saying, “Our church teaches such and such....” There is, however, no thought in the Word of God of the church teaching. It is purely a human idea. If men should make up an organization with certain doctrines and creeds formulated as the standard for their sect, people would not be wrong in a certain sense, to say that that organization teaches. But an organization of men is not the church! The truth is, the church is not a legislative body that establishes rules, laws, and doctrines. It does not teach, but rather, is taught! And that, by gifted individuals raised up by Christ the ascended Head of the church (Acts 11:26).
A “Saint”
Another example of the confused terminology that exists in Christendom is found in the meaning of “saint.” Many Christians think of a saint as someone who is living, or has lived, an exemplary life. But the Bible uses this term to describe all believers—even those at Corinth, who were marked by division and carnality (1 Cor. 3:1-4). They were going on in association with moral evil (1 Cor. 5), and some of them held an evil doctrine that struck at the very foundation of Christianity (1 Cor. 15). There was no group of Christians in the Bible that was going on more poorly, except perhaps the Galatians. Yet with all their failure, the Word of God calls the Corinthians “saints!” (1 Cor. 1:2) From this it is clear that the Bible has a different definition for “saint” than what is commonly used by people today.
Mr. W. Kelly said that in the minds of most people, being a saint is considered to be something more than merely being a Christian; but in reality, a Christian is something more than a saint! He said, “Many would count my doctrine strange; because they consider everybody in these lands Christian, and very few on earth a saint—and perhaps none till they get to heaven. But it is to me most evident—nothing more certain—that a Christian is a saint, and a good deal more!”
A saint is a “sanctified one.” To be sanctified (positionally) is to be “set apart” by God for blessing. This happens when we are born again. Those who have been born of God have been set apart from the mass of humanity that is heading toward destruction. All believers from the beginning of time are saints. Hence, we can speak of those who lived in Old Testament times as “saints” (Deut. 33:3; 1 Sam. 2:9; 2 Chron. 6:41, etc.). But they are not Christians. Only believers from Pentecost to the Rapture are in that position before God. A “Christian” is one who has believed “the gospel of His salvation,” and thereupon has been sealed with the Spirit, and thus made part of the church (Eph. 1:13). Thus, he has been brought into a far more blessed position (being linked to Christ the Head of the church) than an Old Testament saint. A Christian is a saint, but he is more than that—he is a member of the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:12-13), and a son of God (Rom. 8:14-15; Gal. 4:5-7; Eph. 1:5). These are things that Old Testament saints are not. (There is also practical sanctification, which has to do with perfecting holiness in the life of the believer—the making of our lives practically consistent with our standing – John 17:17; 1 Thess. 4:3-4; 5:23; Heb. 12:14; 2 Cor. 7:1).
Space does not permit us to continue on this digression and enumerate all the various terms that are erroneously used by Christians today. We will examine some of them as we follow our subject.
A Right State of Soul
The Necessary Pre-requisite to Learning the Truth
We may ask, “Why do so many Christians accept the man-made clerical order of things in Christendom, without even questioning the veracity of it?” We might also ask, “Why have so many Christians missed God's order in the Bible for true Christian worship and ministry?” The answer to this lays in the fact that there is a moral requirement necessary for understanding the truth. This important pre-requisite is found in a state of soul. The following points are absolutely necessary if we are going to have a proper state of soul to apprehend the truth of Scripture:
1) Spending Time in the Lord's Presence In Communion With Him
The Word of God says, “Thy way, O God, is in the sanctuary” (Psa. 77:13). Since His way is there, we will need to be there with Him if we are going to discern what His way and will is. To be in His sanctuary, for Christians, means to live in His presence in fellowship and communion with Him. The Lord's mind as to these things will be revealed to us when we are in the secret of His presence. “In Thy light shall we see light” (Psa. 36:9). There is no substitute for communion with the Lord. This tremendous privilege of communion with Him is ours to enjoy at any time, for we have free access into His presence by prayer. “Blessed is the man that heareth Me, watching daily at My gates, waiting at the posts of My doors” (Prov. 8:34).
2) A Willingness to Do (Practice) The Will of God
The Bible says, “If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17). Most, if not all Christians, want to know God's will for their lives. But that is not what this verse says. This is speaking about the willingness to “do” God's will—not just the mere knowledge of it. Many Christians spend their whole lives not knowing what God’s will is for them. This may cover many areas, including where and how God would have them to meet together with other Christians for worship and ministry. The reason for this is that having a desire to know His will is not enough. “The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing” (Prov. 13:4). The knowledge of God’s will is revealed to those who are willing to do His will, cost whatever it may. When we are committed to doing God's will, He will make it known to us.
3) The Exercise of Soul to Apply Oneself To Learn the Truth
It says that “Ezra had prepared his heart to seek the law of the Lord, and to do it." He said, “I proclaimed a fast there, at the river of Ahava, that we might afflict ourselves before our God, to seek of Him a right way for us, and for our little ones, and for all our substance” (Ezra 7:10; 8:21). We need to have the same exercise of soul, and be diligent in seeking the truth by searching the Word of God (Acts 17:11).
In the book of Revelation, the Apostle John had to “take” and “eat” the “little book,” which contained the truth of God’s counsel concerning Christ and His inheritance, if he wanted the truth. He had asked for it, but that was not enough, the angel replied, “Take it, and eat it up” (Rev. 10:9). This shows us that the truth is not automatically given to those who merely ask for it, but rather to those who have the spiritual energy to take and eat it—which is to assimilate it. This implies diligence. “The soul of the diligent shall be made fat” (Prov. 13:4). Paul said to Timothy, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). He also spoke of the “words of the faith and good teaching” which Timothy needed to “fully follow up” in diligent study (1 Tim. 4:6). There is a sad lack of personal study of the Scriptures among Christians today generally. Some Christians rely solely on what they get in the way of spiritual food, from the so-called Pastor at their church denomination, or from what they hear over the radio. Such mediums are not likely to give their hearers the truth on this subject we are considering. Consequently, it is no wonder why many Christians do not know God’s order for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry.
4) Uprightness of Heart to Acknowledge the Truth When it is Presented
The Word of God says, “Unto the upright there ariseth light in the darkness” (Psa. 112:4). We may not like the truth when it is presented, but if we have an honest and upright heart, we will acknowledge that it is the truth. Someone said that if the truth rubs us the wrong way, it might be evidence that we are facing the wrong direction, because the truth does not hurt, unless it should.
Our only conclusion as to why so many Christians simply accept this whole order of things in the Christian profession without question is; that one, or all, of these necessary points are lacking. Paul Wilson used to say that if there is a hindrance to our understanding a passage of Scripture, it is due to one or all of the following three things:
1. We have not read the passage carefully.
2. We have got a pre-conceived idea (or teaching) on the subject that is hindering us from seeing the true meaning.
3. Our will is at work, and we don't want the truth.
We Are Not Called to Set Right The Ruin in the Christian Testimony
Many upright and concerned believers have asked, “What can I do to help restore the disorder in the Christian testimony? Perhaps I should bring these things before my ‘Pastor’ so that we can have a more Scriptural church.”
If we turn again to the Word of God we will see that the fallen condition of the Christian testimony will not be restored, but rather, judged by God and removed from the earth. In Romans 11, the Apostle Paul spoke of “the olive tree” whose branches were “broken off,” as figuratively illustrating how Israel would be set aside nationally from the place of privilege they occupied with God. This was done because they refused all testimony from God in Christ (as recorded in the Gospels) and the Holy Spirit (as recorded in the Acts). He then spoke of the branches of a “wild olive tree” being grafted into the root of the olive tree. He used this to illustrate how that God would bring the Gentiles into a place of privilege through the gospel. Those who profess to know the Lord are now in this place of privilege and association with Him. This is the place that Christendom occupies by God’s grace.
But the Apostle went on to state that if the branches of the wild olive tree (Christendom) did not keep itself in the goodness of God, that it would be cut off from the place of privilege, and the branches that were cut off previously (Israel) would be brought back into that place of favour. As we have shown, Christendom has failed on all counts of its responsibility and awaits that judgment, which will happen after the Lord calls the true believers out of it at His coming (the Rapture). Thus, we see that the end of Christendom is judgment, not restoration. A type in Scripture of this is Vashti (the Gentile queen—a type of Christendom) being set aside and Esther (the Jewess—a type of the remnant of Israel) being brought in to take her place (Est. 1-2).
Also, in the Lord’s addresses to the seven churches in Asia, which give prophetically, the successive stages of decline through which the professing Church would pass; He gives no indication whatsoever that the Christian testimony would be restored. Rather, he says that it would be spued out of His mouth in the end (Rev. 3:16). Instead, the Lord said, “I will put upon you no other burden, but that which ye have already, hold fast till I come” (Rev. 2:24-25). Neither is there a word in any of the epistles that there would be a restoration of the Christian testimony.
More than this, in Matthew 13:28-30, we have the Lord’s own word that we should desist from attempting to remedy the fallen condition in the Christian testimony. When the enemy had sown tares among the wheat, the servants of the householder asked, “Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?” They asked whether they should attempt to remedy the situation. The householder answered, “Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest.” The “harvest” is the end of the age (Matt. 13:39). It is clear then, that we are not called to set right the confusion in Christendom, but to leave it all for the Lord to sort out at the end of the age.
Now if God says the Christian testimony will not be restored, then surely it will be a futile effort on our part to attempt to remedy its present condition. Would He ask us to do something that His Word tells us cannot be done? Would He ask us to do something that He has told us in His Word not to do?
A Call to Separation
While we are not called to set right the confusion in the Christian testimony, something we are called to do is to set ourselves right in relation to it. The Apostle Paul described the departure in the Christian testimony as being so confusing that only the Lord would be able to tell who was real and who was not. He went on to say that our responsibility in the whole thing is to depart from what we know to be wrong and inconsistent with the truth of Scripture. “Let him that nameth the name of Christ [the Lord], depart from iniquity” (2 Tim. 2:19).
To illustrate this important point, Paul used the figure of “a great house” to describe the confused condition of things in Christendom. In the house there was a mixture of vessels of “gold and silver” (true believers); and of “wood and earth” (false professors). Some of these were “to honour” and some were “to dishonour.” If a Christian is going to be a “sanctified” vessel to honour, and fit for every use that the Master may call him to, he had to go through the exercise of purging himself by separating from those vessels that were mixed up in the confused state of things. He said, “If therefore one shall have purified himself from these in separating himself from them, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, serviceable to the Master” (2 Tim. 2:20-21). Hence, the Lord’s call to every Christian who finds himself identified with the confusion in the “great house” of Christendom is to separate from it. While we cannot leave the “great house” (for this would mean to abandon the Christian profession altogether), we can and should separate from the disorder in the house. See also 2 Corinthians 6:14-18; 2 Timothy 3:5; Revelation 18:4.
Why Separate?
It may be asked, “Why is separation so important?” The simple answer is, “Because we can, and will, be defiled by our associations!” Most Christians think that they can associate with whatever they want and not be affected by it. The Bible, however, teaches that we are affected by those with whom we associate. It says, “Evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33; 1 Tim. 5:22; Haggai. 2:10-14; Deut. 7:1-4; Josh. 23:11-13; 1 Kings 11:1-8, etc.). We realize that this is not a popular topic with Christians today, but God has told us these things so that we might be preserved from the subtle corruptions of the enemy of our souls (Satan). The things that God has said in His Word are for our good, not because He wants to spoil our joy. He loves and cares for us, and knows what is best. And let us remember, we are never wiser than the Word of God.
Three Kinds of Evil Prevalent in Christendom
The Bible indicates that the Christian is to separate from three kinds of evil because association with such things will affect and defile us. They are:
1) Moral Evil
An example of this is found in the problem that existed at Corinth where they had an immoral person in their midst. As a group of Christians associated with an evil person in their midst, they were in danger of being leavened by that person’s sin. The Apostle said to them, “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump” (1 Cor. 5:6-7). He told them they must disassociate themselves from it by excommunicating that person (1 Cor. 5:11-13). By allowing it to continue in their midst it would have the effect of desensitizing the morals of the others, and they too could fall into immorality.
Moreover, by carrying on in association with the sin (by carelessly leaving it unjudged) they as a company would be guilty of that very sin, even though they had not personally committed it! Compare the sin of Achan. When he sinned the Lord said, “Israel hath sinned” (Josh. 7:1, 11). Even though only one man and his family had done the wrong, the Lord charged all Israel with the guilt because they were associated with him.
2) Doctrinal Evil
An example of this is the case of the “elect lady” in the 2nd epistle of John. She was warned that if someone came to her who was not abiding in the doctrine of Christ, that she was not to receive that person into her house, nor was she even to greet him, for in doing so, she became partaker of his evil. The Apostle John said, “If any one come to you and bring not this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, and greet him not; for he who greets him partakes in his wicked works” (2 John 9-11). Notice: if she greeted or received such a person, she would be partaker of that person's evil doctrine, even though she herself did not hold his evil teaching! Her responsibility then, was to keep herself clear of such erroneous teachings and this was to be done through separation.
The Galatians are another example. There had come among them teachers that attempted to Judaize them, teaching that they had to keep the law. Paul said to them, “Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of Him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” (Gal. 5:7-9). We see here, that the erroneous teaching of the Judaizing teachers among them had the same leavening effect on the company as a whole. They were being leavened by those Judaizing doctrines with which they were in association.
Also, some of the Corinthians had picked up bad teaching as to the doctrine of the resurrection. Paul traced it back to their association with certain teachers among them that were askew on doctrine. He warned them that if they continued to associate with such ones, they would all become affected, saying, “Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33).
Paul also told Timothy that if he should come across someone teaching things that were not according to sound doctrine, that he was to “withdraw” himself from him, for if He did not, he would become a partaker of that person’s evil (1 Tim. 6:3-5).
3) Ecclesiastical Evil
The same principle is true in religious evil and disorder (i.e. clericalism—the clergy/laity system in the Church). When we associate with a particular fellowship of Christians which has a clerical system of things, which is not according to the Word of God—whether we hold what they practice or not—we are still identified with it! This principle is clearly laid down by Paul in 1 Corinthians 10:14-22. He shows there that whether in Christianity, Judaism, or Paganism, the principle of identification exists. In each case, partaking in a religious order of things is the expression of one's fellowship with all that exists there.
In regard to Christianity, he said, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not fellowship with the blood of Christ? The loaf which we break, is it not fellowship with the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16—W. Kelly Trans.) It is clear from this that our act of breaking bread (partaking of the Lord’s supper) is the expression of our fellowship with those with whom we break bread.
In regard to Israel, he showed that the same principle existed, saying, “See Israel according to the flesh: are not they that eat the sacrifices in fellowship with the altar?” (1 Cor. 10:18—W. Kelly Trans.) One who partook of the sacrifices on the altar on which they were offered was identified with all that the altar stood for.
And the Apostle also showed that the same principle holds true with the idolatry in paganism, saying, “The things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with demons” (1 Cor. 10:20). In this case those who partook of the “cup of demons” were in fellowship with demons.
The fact of association exists in Judaism, paganism, or in Christendom. Within the Christian profession, our act of partaking with a particular church group is our identification with all that goes on there. If they teach evil doctrine, we are in fellowship with it. If they are engaged with an unscriptural practice of worship, we are also in fellowship with it. And God would not have His people in fellowship with evil doctrine or practice (2 Cor. 6:14-18). This is why Paul said that when religious confusion develops in the house of God, we must “purge” ourselves from those things by separating from them (2 Tim. 2:20-21).
A Remnant of Jews Departed From Babylon
The Old Testament furnishes us with an illustration of this exercise of separating from religious confusion. Following the history of the children of Israel through the books of the Kings and Chronicles, we see that after they had been set up in their promised land with their God-given service of worship, they slowly departed from it. They brought in things that God never told them to do (e.g. 1 Kings 11:7-8; 2 Kings 16:10-18). Through their disobedience and failure to rely on the Lord, they lost the land to their enemies bit by bit; until at last, the Babylonians came in and carried them away from it altogether. They were taken into the vast system of Babylon (meaning “confusion”), which typifies religious confusion. Many of the vessels from the temple were taken and incorporated into the paganism of Babylon. As the children of Israel stood in that land of religious confusion in Babylon, there was barely a trace left of their own God-given worship. Their vessels of worship were there (Dan. 1:2; 5:2, 5), but they were all mixed up with that huge system that was not of God. What a sad picture of failure.
What we are to see in this sad picture is a correlation to the history of the church. Not long after God established the church in the simplicity of Christian worship and service, there was also a departure from His Word. It wasn’t long before the great ruin and failure that we have been speaking about came upon the Christian testimony. Consequently, the church was also carried into religious confusion. The departure today is so great that true Biblical Christianity is barely recognizable amid all the extraneous accessories that have been attached to the name of Christ. What a sad testimony of the ruin of that which has been the depository of the highest truth ever made known to man!
After the children of Israel spent seventy years in Babylon, there was an exercise among some of them to return to Jerusalem after hearing the decree of Cyrus, the king of Persia. Their concern at that time was to worship Jehovah in the way and place that God had originally appointed. So, Jeshua and Zerubbabel (and later, Ezra and Nehemiah), with a few thousand Jews, departed from Babylon (Ezra 1-2). To return to Jerusalem meant to leave (or separate from) Babylon. To leave Babylon meant to leave many of their brethren who were not concerned about leaving the confusion that was in that land. The correlation is obvious. To leave the denominations will mean the same thing for us, and it will mean separation from true believers who are quite happy in those places.
Seven Common Objections for Not Separating From the Denominational Systems
Before we answer these often-used objections, we want to make it clear that we have no intention of trying to convince somebody against their will. Scripture says, “To subvert a man in his cause, the Lord approveth not” (Lam. 3:36). If a person is happy to remain in his or her church group, we take no issue with them. It is Christians who are genuinely concerned about where and how God would have them to meet for worship and ministry that we address our remarks. Furthermore, we do not want to answer these things with a contentious spirit; it is surely not our intention to criticize other Christians. In answering these excuses we trust the reader will understand that we do not think that we are better than other Christians who go on with the human arrangement of things in the house of God. Our object is to show the falsity of the arguments people use in wanting to remain in a position that God’s Word clearly tells Christians to separate from. “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear” (Matt. 11:15).
1) "We Shouldn't Judge Other Christians!"
Sometimes people will say, “I wouldn't want to separate from my church, even if I see a few things that are not right, because if I did, I would be judging them, and the Bible says we are not to judge one another.”
We realize that, to some people, the things that we have been discussing sound like a pharisaical spirit of judging other Christians. We trust, with good conscience before God, that we are not judging other people’s motives, for God alone is the Judge of motives (Matt. 7:1; 1 Sam. 2:3; 1 Cor. 4:4-5), but we are told in Scripture to judge a person’s doctrines (1 Cor. 10:15; 14:29), actions (1 Cor. 5:12-13), and fruits (Matt. 7:15-20).
With the Lord’s help we are going to show from Scripture that the present order everywhere in Christendom for worship and ministry is not according to the Word of God, and that it (the Word of God) judges that order of things to be in error. As Christians, we are called to pass judgment on what God’s Word passes judgment on. This principle is given clearly in Revelation 18:20; “God has judged your judgment upon her.” After true believers are taken out of it at the Rapture, the whole man-made order of things in Christendom will culminate in the false church in the book of Revelation (under the figure of “Mystery Babylon the Great”). God will execute His judgment on it—using the Beast to do so, and it will be gone forever (Rev. 17:16). When it happens all heaven will rejoice in a celebration, and the saints of God will be told, “God has judged your judgment upon her” (Rev. 18:20). This shows that prior to that time, right-minded believers had already passed their judgment on it. In that coming day, God will cause their judgment to be publicly vindicated by the execution of His judgment on it. This clearly shows that Christians are to judge what is unscriptural in Christendom and separate from it.
The Old Testament has another type that illustrates this point. Jeroboam brought into Israel a new system of worship that was purely of his own devising. He had no word from God to do it. Nevertheless, he made two new centers for worship in Israel at Bethel and in Dan. He also set up a new priesthood at these places that was “like unto” God’s order at Jerusalem. He did this to give the people the feeling that his new order of things was of God, for it had the semblance of God’s order in Jerusalem. But, he caused Israel to sin by encouraging them to worship there (1 Kings 12:28-33). It hardly needs to be mentioned that the thing displeased the Lord.
Not long after, the Lord sent a prophet to Bethel to cry against the altar that Jeroboam had built there. The prophet, “Cried against the altar in the word of the Lord, and said, O altar, altar, thus saith the Lord....and he gave a sign the same day, saying, this is the sign which the Lord hath spoken; behold, the altar shall be rent and the ashes that are upon it shall be poured out” (1 Kings 13:1-3). Note carefully: the prophet cried against the altar, not against the people who worshipped there! The altar, with its calf, being the focal point of the worship at Bethel, represented the whole system of things that Jeroboam established. This illustrates our point. We do not cry against (or judge) our brethren mixed up with the confusion in the house of God, but against the system, because it is not of God.
The prophet's message greatly bothered Jeroboam and he lashed out against the prophet, but in doing so, his hand became withered. Notwithstanding, the prophet prayed for the restoration of Jeroboam’s hand. This proves that he had no intention of attacking Jeroboam or the people, but only wanted their good and blessing. Similarly, when the subject of separation from the confusion in the house of God is mentioned, many Christians who want to go on with that system of things get personally offended, as Jeroboam did. Nevertheless, it is not our intention to attack any person, but to speak the truth of God in love (Eph. 4:15). We should never give offence personally, but when the truth comes to someone who does not want it, they will sometimes be offended by it (Matt. 15:12; Gal. 4:16). If that be the case, we must leave them with the Lord.
2) "It's Not Showing Love to Separate!"
Some Christians think that to separate from other believers, who “have different views,” is just too extreme and is not showing love.
The Bible, however, says that the greatest way we can show love to the children of God is through our personal obedience to God. “By this we know we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments” (1 John 5:2-3). We ask: “What is more important, obedience to God which is a demonstration of our love to Him, or remaining in an unscriptural position, because we want to show love to the people there?” To disobey Scripture is not love. It is one thing to be in a so-called church organization, being ignorant of God’s Scriptural order, and quite another to remain there when we know better (James 4:17). We should not put the people of God before the Lord—He must come first. The Lord Jesus said, “If ye love me, keep my commandments, ...he that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me” (John 14:15, 21).
3) "Our Church is Growing!"
Others respond to these things by saying, “But our church is growing. This proves that God is blessing it. And if God is blessing it, it couldn't be wrong! Why should I separate from something that God is obviously blessing?”
The problem here is in definition. When people speak of growth they are usually referring to the increase of numbers (people). The Bible however, speaks of growth as being spiritual development and maturity in the believer (1 Peter 2:2; 3:18; Eph. 4:15-16; Col. 1:10; 2:19; 1 Thess. 3:12; 4:10; 2 Thess. 1:3; Acts 9:22).
Growth in numbers is no sign of the Lord’s approval or blessing. It is an assumption to equate the increase of people with God’s blessing. If it were so, then the Roman Catholic Church would be the denomination that God approves of, for they boast of having the largest numbers of all the churches! Jehovah’s Witnesses boast of phenomenal growth in numbers. Does this mean that God is blessing them?
The Word of God says that the only kind of persons that are going to increase in number in the church in the last days, are “evil men and seducers” and the “many” who will follow them (2 Tim. 3:13; 2 Peter 2:2). By boasting of large numbers, we could be unintentionally identifying ourselves with the error that Scripture warns would rise in the church in the last days. This is not always the case, but it should cure us from wanting to boast in numbers. It is clear from Scripture that faithful and godly believers will diminish as the days get darker (2 Tim. 1:15; Psa. 12:1).
In a system of things that is largely supported by donations and offerings from the congregation, numbers are important to church organizations. But God is not occupied with numbers as men are. This is seen in the few occasions where numbers are mentioned in the book of the Acts. It simply says, “The number of the men were about five thousand” (Acts 2:41; 4:4). And “all the men were about twelve” (Acts 19:7). The kind of growth that God is looking for in His redeemed people is growth in spiritual maturity. If we were to visit an assembly of Christians that had a certain number people, and then returned a year later to see that they had truly increased in their apprehension of the Lord and their love for one another, we could rightly say that that assembly was growing, even though they had the same number of persons (2 Thess. 1:3).
In this context, we ask, “How much growth is there among those in the various denominations?” Since the acknowledgement of the truth of God is the test of a person’s spiritual maturity (1 Cor. 10:15; Phil. 1:9-10; Heb. 5:14), would Christians in denominational churches receive the truth of the church in its order and function, as found in Scripture, if it was put before them?
4) "God is Using the Denominations!"
Some Christians say, “But I still don’t think that it is wrong to worship with a group of believers in their denomination just because the order of things there is not in the Bible. After all, God is using these denominational churches! People are getting saved and Christians are being blessed there. If God will use them, they couldn’t be so bad that I must separate from them!”
Although it may look like God is using the denominational (and non-denominational) churches, we would hasten to say that it is not the man-made denominations that He is using; it is His Word that He is using. The Bible says, “The Word of God is not bound” (2 Tim. 2:9). God can and does use His Word for blessing wherever it is ministered. When a so-called Pastor or Minister preaches the Word and ministers its truth to his audience, the Spirit of God will take it and apply it to the hearts and consciences of those there. People get saved in these places: there is no question this happens. However, because God is saving persons in these churches does not mean that He is approving of that man-made order of things which is contrary to His Word. He never approves of something that contradicts His Word. A person could take the Word of God into an ungodly place like a bar or tavern and the Spirit could use it for someone’s salvation. But does that mean that God is using taverns? It does not justify their existence. This is an extreme example, of course, but it illustrates our point that God can use His Word anywhere, even in an ungodly place.
While God is using His Word wherever He pleases (Isa. 55:11), Christians are not to walk anywhere they please. We are to walk according to the path God has marked out for us in His Word. We are to love all the people of God, but our feet are to remain in the path of obedience to God’s Word that calls us to separate from the disorder man has brought into God’s house (2 Tim. 2:20-21). Just because there is observable blessing in some system or denomination does not mean that we are absolved from our responsibility to walk in the truth of the Word of God. We cannot not (rightly) forsake the path of obedience and be in fellowship with something that we know is unscriptural.
5) "I Can Do a Lot of Good Staying Where I Am in My Denomination!"
Others may say, “I know that there are some things that are not exactly right in my church, but why should I leave a lot of what I think is good for a few of things that are not consistent with Scripture? Besides, I feel that I can do a lot of good in helping people there. If I leave, I won’t be able to help them.”
This is a common excuse, and usually the one the Pastors and Ministers who lead the congregations give for continuing with the unscriptural order in their churches. Many feel that by remaining in fellowship with those in their unscriptural churches, they will have a broader sphere in which to serve the Lord. As the old saying goes, “You got to go where the fish are.”
If we were to go back to the figure the Apostle Paul used of the vessels in the “great house,” we would see that it is not a question of whether the vessels unto honour mixed up with the vessels unto dishonour could be used by the Master. The point is that they cannot be used for everything the Master may need done. A dirty dish in your home is useful for some jobs. For instance, if you had to change the oil in your car, a dish that is not clean would do fine. But a clean dish could be used for any purpose. This principle is the same in regard to service in God’s house.
Some may feel that we are speaking derogatorily of Christians who are associated with the churches, by inferring that they are not clean. We do not speak derogatorily of Christians; we are simply stating what Scripture says. It is Scripture that says that a person is not a “sanctified” vessel until he has purged himself from the mixture in the house of God by separating from it (2 Tim. 2:21).
Some might say, “What service would the Lord want done that He couldn’t call on one in a denomination to do anyway?” To illustrate our point, suppose there are some Christians that are under exercise of soul as to the truth of how God would have us to meet together for worship and ministry. Could the Lord call on someone in the denominational systems to delineate the Scriptural pattern for worship and ministry? And even if someone associated with the churches did know the truth on this subject, he probably wouldn’t want to speak of it because it would only condemn him. And even if he did attempt to explain it, he would be condemning himself for not doing what he was telling the other person to do. His words would seem to be as though he was mocking the truth, and thus would have no power to deliver a person from such a position.
There is no question that a person can do some good in the churches. Eldad and Medad are an Old Testament type of this very thing (Num. 11:26). They remained in the camp of Israel when the Lord had called them out of it to Himself (Num. 11:16; 24-26). They were being useful there, but was it the highest calling for them when the Lord distinctly said, “Gather unto Me seventy men of the elders of the people?” Another example is Naomi in the land of Moab. She was a help to Ruth, in that Ruth turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God (Ruth 1:16-17). But that does not justify Naomi's existence for being there. She should not have been there in the first place. The Lord could have brought Ruth to the knowledge of the one true God without Naomi being in a position of compromise.
Scripture says, “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam. 15:22). This means that to obey is our first duty, and we leave the rest to the Lord. The Lord regards obedience as being more important than doing some service for Him. The greatest help we can be to those mixed up in the confusion in the great house is to disengage ourselves from it and then try to help others (2 Tim. 2:24-26). Brother W. Potter said that our first responsibility is to take care of principles, and God will take care of the persons. J.G. Bellett said that if we see someone stuck in a ditch, we are not to get into the ditch to help them get out of it. We could end up getting stuck in it ourselves. Instead, we get on solid ground and try to help them get out. It is the same in divine things.
6) "We Shouldn't Forsake the Assembling Of Ourselves Together!"
Others have said, “The Word of God exhorts us to not forsake the assembling of ourselves together. If I separate from my church I would not be obeying this verse of Scripture.”
Yes, the Bible does tell us not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together—this is true (Heb. 10:25), but we need not belong to an unscriptural denomination (or a non-denominational fellowship) to obey that Scripture. The Lord Jesus said, “Where two or three are gathered together in my Name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20).
7) "Separating From Other Christians Breaks the Unity of the Spirit!"
For many honest and earnest believers it seems inconceivable that a Christian would separate from other Christians. Especially when one of the main concepts of the Christian community is that we are all one large family where unity and happy fellowship are to exist. In their minds, to separate would be to break that unity (Eph. 4:3).
It is important to understand that no right-minded, true-hearted Christian wants to separate from other Christians, for it is normal and right to love all the household of faith (John 13:34-35; Rom. 12:9-10; Eph. 1:15; Heb. 13:13). However, love to the Lord Jesus and a desire to please Him leads true-hearted Christians to separate from what is a dishonour to Him (2 Tim. 2:19-20; John 14:15). Even though it pains us to separate from fellow brethren, we must separate from what dishonours Christ. What is due to Him must have precedence.
The problem with this idea of maintaining unity at all costs comes from seeing only one side of the truth on the subject. If we see only the side of things that speak of Christian unity without the side, which speaks of separation from evil, the faithful would be left to hopelessly go on without any recourse. They would be left in a predicament of seeing God’s order in His Word, but would be unable to practice it, because unity calls them to stay with other Christians in their unscriptural position. They would have to remain in fellowship with that which they know is contrary to the Word of God. And for them it would be a path of disobedience, for “him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17). Consequently, for every exercised Christian, it would be a constant vexation of soul. We can thankfully say that it is a false principle of unity at the cost of holiness and obedience—and that is never God’s way.
The truth is that God’s principle of unity can only be rightly practiced in separation from evil. J. N. Darby said, “God Himself must be the spring and center of unity, and that He alone can be in power or title. Any center of unity outside of God must be so far a denial of His Godhead and glory. Since evil exists—yea, is our natural condition—there cannot be union of which the holy God is the center and power, but by separation from it. Separation is the first element of unity and union.”
Therefore, in this day when ruin and confusion pervade the public testimony of the church, those things that pertain to unity can only be practiced in a remnant testimony. This is a Scriptural principle, and a provision God has made for us to be able to practice all the truth. This can be seen by following the downward course in the history of the Christian testimony, as depicted in the Lord’s addresses to the seven churches in Revelation 2-3. There is a point reached where the Lord no longer owns the mass of the Christian profession, and thereafter takes up with a remnant testimony. He distinguishes a remnant, saying, “But to you, I say, the rest [remnant] ...”—and it is with them that the Lord focuses His dealings thereafter (Rev. 2:24-29). The reason for this is that the state of the church has come to a point of “no remedy.” From that point forward, a marked change takes place in the Lord’s ways with the church. This is indicated by the call to “hear what the Spirit saith to the churches” following the promise to the overcomer, instead of preceding it, as the pattern had been up to that point. In the Lord’s words to the first three churches, the reward to the overcomer was set before the whole church because the Lord was still dealing with it at large. But thereafter it is given up. The call to “hear what the Spirit saith to the churches,” is only given instead to a remnant, because only they will hear and overcome. Walter Scott said that the reason for this change is that the public mass of the Christian profession is treated as being incapable of hearing, repenting, and practicing the truth. W. Kelly said, “The Lord thenceforth puts the promise [to the overcomer] first, and this is because it is vain to expect the church as a whole to receive it ...a remnant only overcome, and the promise is for them; as for the others, it is all over.”
Therefore, since this is the case, we cannot expect in our day to practice God’s principle of unity with the public profession at large, but in a remnant testimony.
In reality, anyone who joins a particular denomination in preference over others really has no basis for his criticism of those who wish to separate from denominations; for he has done the same thing! He has confined himself to one denomination, but by doing so, he has cut himself off from the others; for a person cannot be a Baptist and a Presbyterian at the same time. Hence, by joining that one of his choice, he has by that act, made himself to be not with any other, and thus is not keeping the unity of the Spirit. So, the one who argues this point needs first to practice the unity that he calls for himself.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Separation is Not Isolation
Let us remember that when the Word of God speaks of separation, it is not referring to isolation. Not one of the New Testament writers, when dealing with the ruin and confusion that would come into the Christian testimony, tells us to go off into isolation. It is not the answer to the problem. In fact they speak quite to the contrary. The same passage of Scripture that tells us to purge ourselves from the confusion in the great house by separating from it, also tells us that we should, “Follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart” (2 Tim. 2:22). This shows that we are to seek fellowship with those who are seeking to uphold the principles of the Word of God.
More Light!
If God’s Word tells us to assemble together in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, then surely it must also tell us how we should do it. We take this as a confirmation that there is indeed a pattern in God’s Word for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry. As we continue this treatise, we hope to present this simple pattern before the reader.
An important underlying principle for guidance in the day of departure is, “Cease to do evil, learn to do well” (Isa. 1:16-17). Until we are prepared to separate from what we know is inconsistent with the truth of God’s Word in the Christian profession, we can not expect to get light for further steps in the pathway. A great principle in the ways of God is that when we seek to walk in the light that God has given us, he will give us more light. “In Thy light we shall see light” (Psa. 36:9). Abraham is an example. God called him while he was living in the land of Ur of the Chaldees, and told him to go to a place in the land of Canaan that he would later be shown (Gen. 12:1-3; Acts 7:2-3). In faith, he “went out, not knowing whither he went” (Heb. 11:8). When he stopped along the way, at Haran, and settled there, he didn’t get any further light or communication from God for his path because God never told him to stop there (Gen. 11:31). It was not until he continued his journey into the land of Canaan, as the Lord had told him, that he received further communication from the Lord (Gen. 12:4-7). It is the same for us in the path of faith. It is something like what headlights are to a moving car at night. They only provide light for the traveler for about 200 or 300 yards at a time. As the car moves forward, the driver gets light on the road for another 200 or 300 yards, but if the car stops moving, the driver gets no further light. Let us remember, those who are willing to “do” God’s will, will be given to know the truth (John 7:17).
To Which Church Should I Go?
After a person has discovered that he has been in a Christian fellowship that has a great deal of man-made order, and separates from it, he might well ask, “Where then should I go?” When we look out at all the names and divisions in disordered Christendom, this is a perplexing question indeed. But, without hesitation we answer, “To God and the Word of His grace” (Acts 20:32). We must seek God’s mind in His Word. If all agree that the Word of God is to be the guide for the Christian, then we must look into His Word to find the Scriptural order. We ask therefore, “Which denomination does the Word of God tell me to join?” This answer is obvious: why, to none at all, for it does not speak of joining denominations! The answer is clear then. Then, I can’t belong to one of any kind or size, for in doing so I would be putting myself in a position where the Word of God has not placed me.
The Pattern of the Apostolic Church
Turning to God and the Word of His grace, we find that He has not left us without light on this subject. “Unto the upright, there ariseth light in the darkness” (Psa. 112:4; Psa. 119:105; 130). If we are truly upright about this, He will show us. His Word says, “And this is love, that ye walk after His commandments. This is the commandment, that as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it” (2 John 6). This is one great principle that will guide us in this matter. It indicates that in a day of departure and confusion, when evil teaching and practice are prevalent in the Christian testimony, (for that is the context of this 2nd epistle of John—see vss. 7-11), we must return to that which was “from the beginning”—to the first principles of Christianity. We need to go to the Word of God and see how the church in the days of the apostles met for worship and ministry, and let that be our pattern.
The Church is Not Revealed in the Old Testament
When we look into the Word of God to study the order and function of the church, we must look into the New Testament, and particularly, the epistles. It is here that the truth of the church is unfolded.
One of the greatest keys to understanding what the church is, is to see that it forms no part of the Old Testament revelation. Christ and His church is God's great mystery (Eph. 5:32). A “mystery,” in the Biblical sense, does not mean something that is mysterious and hard to understand, but a secret that God has kept hidden from before the world was made (Rom. 16:25). Now that the secret has been revealed, it is not something that is difficult to understand. The great secret of God’s eternal purpose, is that when Israel would reject their Messiah, and consequently be set aside for a time in God's governmental dealings, that the Holy Spirit through the gospel, would gather out of all nations, believing Jews and Gentiles to compose a new and heavenly company of saints who would be united to Christ as His body and bride. This is something that was hidden in the heart of God, and not revealed in the Old Testament (Eph. 3:9). Those in other ages knew nothing of it, for it did not even begin until the day of Pentecost (Matt. 16:18; Acts 2:1-3, 47; 11:15). This secret then, was not made known until New Testament times, through the special ministry of the Apostle Paul. (Eph. 3:2-5, 9; Col. 1:24-27).
The mystery is not Christ in His person, nor is it His perfect life in this world as a Man, nor is it His death and His resurrection, nor is it His coming to reign over this world in power and glory. All these things were spoken of in the Old Testament Scriptures. The marvelous secret now revealed is that Christ would have a complement (the church—His body and bride) at His side in that coming day when He will publicly reign over this world. From the day of Pentecost until the coming of Christ (the Rapture), God is calling people out of all nations by the gospel to be part of this wonderful privilege (Acts 15:14).
Now, seeing that the truth of the church forms no part of the Old Testament, we do not turn to it to learn how the church should worship and function administratively, since it is not there. This is an extremely important point. It is something that many Christians have misunderstood.
The Old Testament is a Book of Types And Figures For the Christian
We do not say that the Old Testament should not be read by Christians. It is quite the opposite. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). The New Testament makes it clear that “whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15:4). This shows that even though the Old Testament was not written to us as Christians, it was written for us. It is of utmost importance for us to see that, apart from moral issues (for they never change with God), the way Christians are to read and apply the Old Testament is in type and figure. The things that are recorded in the Old Testament Scriptures are now types and figures for us as Christians (1 Cor. 10:11; Heb. 8:5; 9:9, 23-24; 10:1; 11:19; 1 Cor. 9:9-10; Gal. 4:24; Rom. 4:23; 5:14; John 5:39; Luke 24:27, 44). We are instructed from the Old Testament by learning the underlying principles therein.
Judaism is Not a Pattern For Christian Worship
Notwithstanding, the churches in Christendom have ignored the plain teaching of Scripture that says that the tabernacle is a figure of the true sanctuary into which we now have access by the Spirit (Heb. 9:8-9, 23-24). Instead, they have used the tabernacle as a pattern for their church buildings. They have borrowed many things from the Old Testament in a literal sense for their places of worship and religious services. In doing so, the true meaning of what those things figuratively signify is lost from sight. Magnificent buildings and cathedrals after the pattern of the Old Testament temple have been set up in Christendom. Often they name these buildings “Temple” or “Tabernacle” in keeping with the Old Testament Judaism. Some denominations have gone so far as to rail off one part of their building as being more holy than the rest, and they speak of it as being “the Sanctuary,” as in the Old Testament tabernacle. All this shows that Christians have long lost sight of the fact that the house of God today is “a spiritual house” made up of redeemed persons (1 Cor. 3:9; Eph. 2:19-22; Heb. 3:6; 1 Peter 2:5), and not a material literal thing.
The following is a list of some of the things that the church has borrowed from Judaism:
• The use of literal temples and cathedrals for places of worship.
• A special caste of men who officiate on behalf of the congregation.
• The use of musical instruments to aid worship.
• The use of a choir.
• The use of incense to create a spiritual atmosphere.
• The use of religious robes on the “Ministers” and choir members.
• The use of a literal (non-sacrificial) altar.
• The practice of tithing.
• The observance of holy days and religious festivals.
• A registry of names of the congregation.
It is true that many of these Judaic things have been altered somewhat to fit into a Christian context, but they still have the trappings of Judaism. This kind of Jewish influence of principles and practices has permeated the church. Much of it has been around in Christianity for so long that it has become accepted by the masses as God’s ideal. Most think that it is good to have this Judeo-Christian mixture. Unfortunately, mixing these two distinct orders of approach to God has destroyed the distinctiveness of each, and what has resulted from the mixture is neither Jewish nor Christian.
Church Buildings—A Help or A Hindrance To the Gospel?
The general public has become so accustomed to seeing church buildings and cathedrals, that they think that it is God’s ideal. In most people’s minds they are synonymous with Christianity. But the New Testament does not even hint that it is God’s will for the church. There are at least good five reasons why these edifices connected with Christianity tend to hinder rather than help the gospel.
1) They are unscriptural.
As we have already shown, there is simply no basis for it in the New Testament.
2) They send a wrong message to the world.
People may well be led to think that Christianity is a continuation of Judaism, only with some new Christian alterations. They may falsely conclude that God dwells in “temples made with hands,” and can only be worshipped therein (Acts 17:24-25). Hence, there comes the false idea that one must go to a “church” building to pray and be near God.
3) They are not economical.
To put such emphasis on luxurious buildings while there are millions of people around the world in spiritual and material need, is simply not a good use of money. The major part of the funds the church receives in its collections should be for the support of the gospel and the dissemination of the truth, not for funding modern building programs and parachurch organizations. The heavy payments on principal and interest tend to cause church leaders to encourage more generous offerings in order to pay for the building and its upkeep. Moreover, people may be led to think that God is only interested in money. With thousands of dollars being received weekly, it seems that the church does not have so much a problem in giving, as it does in directing the funds when received. Hudson Taylor said, “The problem of the church is not insufficient funds, but unconsecrated funds!”
4) They are hypocritical.
By building huge edifices on one hand, and then on the other hand tell the world that we love them and are deeply interested in their souls, does not have a very convincing message. If the church is so interested in the needy people of this world, why doesn't it sacrifice a little of its ornate splendor? By building such things the church is demonstrating that it has more concern for its own glory and comfort than it does for people in need.
5) They are intimidating.
It is difficult to get people to attend meetings in the lavish church buildings connected with Christianity. Imposing buildings tend to deter, not attract, people who have had little or no Christian exposure. The whole thing is usually obnoxious to them. (People of the world sometimes have a better sense of what is proper to Christianity than Christians—Luke 16:8.) There is a strong reaction against formalism among the young especially. There is also a fear of being solicited for funds. Yet many of these same people are willing to attend a conversational Bible study in a home or in a less pretentious hall. They are more comfortable in an informal, unprofessional atmosphere, and therefore, more likely to receive the gospel.
These great buildings then, are really counter-productive to the gospel, and only show us that we are not wiser than the Word of God. The simple pattern that He has given us in His Word is always the best, for “His way is perfect” (Psa. 18:30).
Christianity is Characteristically Heavenly
If we are going to understand what true Christianity is, we must see that Judaism and Christianity are really two distinct and contrasting orders of worship—both set up of God. Judaism is an earthly way of approaching God in worship, given by Him for an earthly people with earthly hopes and an earthly inheritance. Christianity, on the other hand, is a heavenly order of worship, given by Him for His heavenly people who have heavenly hopes and a heavenly inheritance (Heb. 3:1; Col. 1:5; Phil. 3:20; 1 Peter 1:4).
Consequently, in true Christianity there is not the keeping of holy days or special religious festivals, for those things belong to earthly religion. When the Galatians turned aside after the weak and beggarly elements of earthly religion, the apostle Paul rebuked them saying, “How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years” (Gal. 4:9-10). Israel observed special religious holy days because they had an earthly religion. This was right and proper for them, but the church, which belongs to heaven, has no such thing. Notwithstanding, the denominations have largely lost sight of the heavenly calling of the church and have invented special religious days such as; Good Friday, All Saints Day, Lent, etc. These things are found nowhere in the Bible. Colossians 2:16-17 tells us, “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come.” There is only one day that should have any significance for a Christian, and that is “the Lord’s day”—the first day of the week (Rev. 1:10).
True Christianity is “Without the Camp”
The New Testament indicates that the early church, which was predominantly made up of Jewish converts, left that Judaic order of things (after some prompting) for true Christianity. The burden of the epistle to the Hebrews is to show that Christian worship is actually a contrast to Judaic worship, not an extension of it.
After many points are made to this end in the epistle, the conclusion of the whole matter is to exhort the church to leave that Judaic order of things altogether because the Lord Jesus Christ is presently outside of it all! It says, “Let us go forth therefore unto Him without the camp, bearing His reproach” (Heb. 13:13). The “camp” is a term that stands for Judaism and all of its related principles and practices. A Jew would have no difficulty understanding what this term meant, since it was used in the Old Testament in connection with Israel. The early church went “without the camp.” Under Paul’s teaching they were brought to see that Christianity was not an addition or an alteration of Judaism as many Christians today think, but an entirely “new” way of approaching God in worship (Heb. 10:20). It was something that was difficult for converted Jews to do at first, and God bore with them in patience. It was actually the cause for the writing of the Hebrew/Christian epistles. These epistles (Hebrews, James, 1 Peter) are particularly devoted to taking the converted Jew out of Judaism and establishing Him in Christianity. They are also very applicable for the church today, which has immersed itself in a quasi-Judaic order of things, and desperately needs extrication there from.
Since the so-called churches in Christendom have taken many Judaic things and have woven them into their system of worship, so that it has become an integral part of their services, Hebrews 13:13, in principle, is a very needed exhortation today. We are to leave “the camp” wherever we see it, whether it is in the Jewish synagogues or in the man-made denominational churches of Christendom. This verse also furnishes us with another reason why we are to separate from the denominational and non-denominational churches. It exhorts us to go unto Christ who is now outside of that earthly order of things, because Judaism is an order of worship, though originally set up of God, that has been set aside.
Christian Worship Is “In Spirit and Truth”
This change in the way of approach to God in worship was first announced by the Lord Jesus to the Samaritan woman at Sychar’s well. He indicated to her that there was going to be a cessation of that earthly order of worship. He said, “Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father” (John 4:21). That “mountain” (Gerizim) was the place where the Samaritans worshipped, and “Jerusalem” was the place where Israel worshipped Jehovah. But now all that was going to give way to an entirely new way of worship and approach to God. (We are told elsewhere that after the church is called home to heaven at the Lord’s coming—the Rapture, that Judaism will once more be resumed on earth by Israel and the converted Gentiles, because it is the proper way for earthly people to worship God. See Ezekiel 40-48. This shows that Judaism is not bad, it has just been set aside for a time while God is calling out a heavenly company—the church.)
The Lord also told the Samaritan woman that another change would occur. While Israel worshipped Jehovah, Christians would now worship “the Father.” This was a new thing and is distinctly a Christian revelation, for to approach God as the Father was not known in the Old Testament.
Furthermore, He showed her that there was also going to be a change in the character of worship. The Lord said, “The hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him” (John 4:23-24). Worshipping in “spirit and in truth” is a spiritual worship according to the Christian revelation of the truth. This was something that did not characterize Israel’s worship, because the Lord clearly indicated that it was something that was about to begin; it was not in practice then. Israel’s worship of Jehovah was through ritual and ceremony. They had a religion that was designed, if at all possible, to induce man in the flesh to worship God. This was because man at that time was still under testing (from Adam to the cross of Christ is 40 centuries—the number signifying testing). Hence, practically every outward means in the name of religion was employed to reach this end. But Christians do not need a religion of ritual and ceremony to worship God—as did Israel—because we now have access by the Spirit into the very presence of God (Eph. 2:18; 3:12; Heb. 10:19-22). In Christianity, the worship is aided by the indwelling Holy Spirit, not by the efforts of men's hands (Phil. 3:3; Acts 17:24-25). This is a blessing that Israel did not have. Christian worship is a “new and living way” (Heb. 10:20). It is “new” because it is not a rehash of Judaism, and it is “living” because one must have a new life (born again) to approach God in this heavenly way.
Spiritual Sacrifices or a 'Music Ministry'
Consequently, Christian sacrifices are not an outward literal thing as in Judaism, but are “spiritual sacrifices” (1 Peter 2:5; Heb. 13:15; John 4:23; Phil. 3:3). Since the Christian worships “in spirit and in truth,” he could sit motionless in a chair, and there could be produced in his spirit, true praise and worship to God by the indwelling Holy Spirit. This is true heavenly worship. The Christian does not need an orchestra or a choir to draw out the worship of his heart, as did Israel in Judaism. To worship with the aid of musical instruments is really worshipping on Jewish ground. Mixing Christian knowledge and revelation with the Jewish order of worship (which is essentially what most so-called churches in Christendom are doing) is not true Christianity. In heaven there will be no need for those outward mechanical props in the worship of God. And Christians have no need for them now, for they are to worship God now in that heavenly way.
Two Instruments in Christian Worship
This is why we do not read of any instances in the book of the Acts or in the epistles, where Christians worshipped the Lord using musical instruments. There is not one mention in the New Testament epistles where Christian worship was aided by musical instruments. The only two instruments Christians use to worship God are their “hearts” (Col. 3:16; Eph. 5:19) and their “lips” (Hebrews 13:15). In Christianity we only read of “singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19; Col 3:16). We are told to “offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to His name” (Hebrews 13:15). Regardless of this, the distinction between Christian worship and Judaism has been ignored in the denominations. Musical bands (sometimes large orchestras) have become an integral part of today’s Christian “worship services.” It is called a “music ministry,” but the purpose seems to be more for entertainment of the audiences than for ministry.
Not only does the Word of God give no direction for Christians to worship in this way, church history tells us that music had virtually no part in Christianity for the first 1400 years! (There has been the complete absence of music in the church in the first 700 years, followed by much stormy opposition to it during the next 700 years.) It is only in the last few centuries that music has become accepted and used in worship and gospel activity. We ask, “If a so-called ‘music ministry’ is as important to assembly life as the church today emphasizes, why didn’t the Apostle Paul exhort the assemblies to which he wrote, to make sure to have a “music ministry” in their meetings?” And, “Why is there no mention of it in the New Testament?” We believe that musical instruments in worship—and many other man-made things that have been introduced—are evidence of the departure that Scripture tells us would come into the church. As things in the Christian testimony have departed farther and farther from God’s order, music has slowly gained a place (and not without opposition), until it has been accepted as normal for Christian worship. It may well have come in through good intentions, but still it has no place in Christian worship.
We do not say that a Christian should not play music, but that it has no place in Christian worship. J. N. Darby said, “If I could put a poor sick father to sleep with music, I would play the most beautiful I could find; but it only spoils any worship as bringing in the pleasure of sense into what ought to be the power of the Spirit of God.”
New Wine in New Bottles
Notwithstanding, many Christians reject this, and insist that Israel’s way of approach to God in worship is indeed the pattern for Christian worship. We ask, “If Israel’s way of worship in the Old Testament is the pattern for Christian worship, then why does Scripture say that Christian worship is a ‘new’ way of worship?” (Heb. 10:20)
The Lord knew that there would be an attempt to attach the old order of things to the new order in Christianity, and He warned that by doing so, it would be like putting a new patch on an old garment, and new wine in old bottles (Luke 5:36-39). The result would be that both would be spoiled. This is just what has happened in the Christian profession. He went on to say that “new wine” must be put into “new bottles.” This means that the new things connected with Christian worship need to be found in a new Christian setting suited to that worship. The Lord also said that when one who is accustomed to the old wine of Judaic things is presented with the new wine of Christianity, he will at first say that the old is better (Luke 5:39). Being affectionately attached to that outward order of worship that appeals so greatly to the senses, a person does not easily let go of it. As we have said, the epistle to the Hebrews carefully deals with this problem. It takes up one feature of Judaism after another, and compares it with what we now have in Christianity, and concludes in almost every chapter, that we have something “better” (Heb. 1:4; 6:9; 7:7, 19, 22; 8:6; 9:23; 10:34; 11:4, 16, 35, 40; 12:24).
Christians Are to Meet Together For Worship and Ministry in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ and Wait on the Leading of the Spirit
Looking into the New Testament as our guide for the function of a Christian assembly, we see that God’s great purpose is to exalt His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. We learn that God thinks so much of His Son that He has set the highest value on His name. The Bible says that He has “given Him a Name which is above every name: that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth [infernal beings]” (Phil. 2:9-10; Eph. 1:20). The Lord Jesus told His disciples that when the church would be formed after His death (at Pentecost) that His NAME was to be their gathering point. He said, “For where two or three are gathered together unto my name there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). The early church did this. They met in that exalted name of the Lord Jesus when they gathered together for worship, ministry, and administrative responsibilities (1 Cor. 5:4). They took no other name than His. This is still God’s pattern for the church today!
What must angels think, knowing and delighting in the exalted name of Jesus Christ, when they see Christians coming together for worship on earth bearing all sorts of denominational and non-denominational names? While God sets the highest value on the Name of Jesus, men say that it doesn’t matter what name you bare! We ask, “Will the Lord's people bear those names in heaven? Will there be Presbyterian, Baptist, Christian Reformed, Methodist, Pentecostal, Alliance, etc. up there?” No, when we get there, all other names will be gone.
The name of Christ is supreme in heaven. And it should be on earth too! The Lord Jesus taught His disciples that God wants His will to be done on earth as it is done in heaven. They were to pray to that end. “Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matt. 6:10). Yet in spite of this, Christians on earth still want to meet together under all kinds of sectarian names, even though they admit there will be no such thing in heaven! If we honestly prayed, “Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven,” we would have to give up every name and sect on earth as it is done in heaven. Surely, the Lord Jesus is worthy that we should meet together in no other name but His alone.
What a difference there is today from the days of the apostles. In their day, the Lord Jesus Christ was the exalted Name to which they gathered: to exalt another name, though it be a Paul, or a Cephas, was denounced by the Spirit of God as carnality and schismatic (1 Cor. 1:12; 3:3-5). What a sad departure from God’s order to see so many Christians today bearing all kinds of different denominational names.
If we, in faith, simply acknowledged our weakness, and took our place of expressed dependence on God, and were gathered together unto the name of the Lord Jesus alone, under the leading of the Spirit, we would find that Christ would be in the midst as He promised. Even if there were but two or three who sought to act on this Word, they would experience the joy of His presence with them. They might receive reproach from other Christians for meeting in such a simple way, for the Word of God says that if we go outside “the camp” we will surely bear “His reproach” (Heb. 13:13). But they would also have the happy confidence that they were meeting according to the Word of God. This is because there is a joy in doing God's will that is known only to those who do it.
The Biblical Practice of Christians Meeting Together For Worship and Ministry
Besides being gathered together unto the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we also learn from the New Testament that the early church came together for at least four main reasons. It says, “They continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:42). These are the same reasons why the church today should gather together. We might call them "the four anchors" of assembly life.
Firstly, the early church assembled for the learning of “the apostles' doctrine.” We need meetings specifically for the learning of the truth of Scripture too. However, a lot of Christians do not regard doctrine as being important. It seems with many, that as long as we all get along together and love the Lord, that it doesn’t really matter what a person holds as to doctrine. The Bible teaching in the denominations generally reflects this attitude. The focus of most sermons is usually geared to some practical point in Christian living. As a consequence, people do not get grounded in the truth. Many dear Christians spend their lives being “tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine” that comes their way (Eph. 4:14). We need to have meetings, as the early church had, that are led by the Spirit, where two or three might address the saints in a word of exhortation, or in a presentation of the truth. Paul said, “Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge. If anything be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted [encouraged]. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor. 14:29-32). A Bible reading too, where the Scriptures are read, and brethren have opportunity to expound on a passage for the edification of the assembly, is also a viable means of communicating the truth to the saints. It was the practice of the brethren in the early church to come together for the reading of the Scriptures. Paul exhorted Timothy, “Give attendance to reading (Literally – “the readings”), to exhortation, to doctrine” (1 Tim. 4:13). The kind of reading Paul was referring to is not personal Bible study, but the public reading out of the Scriptures to others. The fact that “exhortation” and “teaching” are connected with the reading out of the Scriptures, naturally suggests that there was opportunity for those, like Timothy, who were able, to make comments on the passages read for the edification of the others. These are the basic elements of a reading meeting. It is God’s way for Christians to get established in the truth.
The early church also met together for Christian “fellowship.” Many Christians see fellowship as nothing more than getting together with other Christians for recreation and sports. There is certainly nothing wrong with recreation, but Christian fellowship is fellowship over Christian things. These are divine things that we have in common with all other members in the body of Christ. In the early church, this no doubt, took place when they were together for the learning of the apostles’ doctrine, for it is closely connected with it in that verse. However, we should not confine our fellowship with other believers to when we are assembled together for the learning of the truth only; we need to have one another in our homes too.
Furthermore, the early church also met together for the “breaking of bread.” After the church was established, each first day of the week (the Lord’s Day) they came together to break bread (Acts 20:7). This is a privilege that we have too, as the Lord requested, “This do in remembrance of Me” (Luke 22:19). Notwithstanding, this again is something that is apparently not that important to Christians today, for most church groups have the Lord’s supper once a month, or every three months. The manner too, in which it is done, is often barely recognizable from that in Scripture. Even when it is done, it is usually something that is squeezed in for a few minutes during the middle of the church “services.” Often it is done with a mixed company of believers and unbelievers, even though when the Lord instituted the supper, He indicated that only true believers were to break bread in remembrance of Him (John 13:30; Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:23-26). He wants those whom He has redeemed to take time to think on Him—to contemplate the great cost of their redemption. We would not be dogmatic about this, but it seems that when the Lord instituted the supper, that there was an hour set-aside for that purpose (Luke 22:14).
And lastly, they met together on regular occasions for “prayers” (Acts 4:23-31; 12:12-17). The original language says, “the prayers,” indicating that they had specific times when they came together for that purpose. Hence the early church had prayer meetings when they would collectively express their dependence upon the Lord for their needs. This is again something that is sadly lacking in the church today. Many Christian groups have only Sunday services. A mid-week prayer meeting is all but gone in many places. And those that do have prayer meetings, generally have poor attendance. This only proves that Christians today do not consider prayer meetings important. Nevertheless, the Lord would have His people gather regularly for prayers.
These are the main kinds of meetings that the early church assembled together for, and they are what we need today in the church. They are essential to the spiritual health of an assembly, and are the reason God has recorded it for us in His Word. The “apostles doctrine” forms our “fellowship,” the “breaking of bread” expresses it, and the “prayers” maintain it. These four things have been called the four anchors of assembly life. (There is another kind of assembly meeting that Scripture indicates—a meeting for discipline; but it is of a different character – 1 Cor. 5:4-5.)
As we look over these four basic things, we ask again, “Do we need all or any of the extra accessories that are in Christendom today to do these simple things?” No, the early church did not need them, and neither do we! Why not then, just return to the pure and simple Christianity that is found in the Bible, and find what a blessing it can be?
The Practical Consequences of Letting Go of the “Four Anchors”
If we let go of any one or all of these “anchors,” there is going to be serious practical consequences felt in our lives. An illustration of this is in Acts 27:40-41. When the sailors cut themselves loose from the “four anchors,” they soon fell upon the rocks and were shipwrecked. Like those sailors, some Christians think they can cut themselves loose from these four important things and there will be no consequences. But sooner or later they drift into spiritual danger and make “shipwreck” (1 Tim. 1:19). Without meetings specifically arranged for these purposes, we are going to drift in some area of our Christian lives. A good question to ask ourselves is, “How many of these anchors do I have in my life?”
Without “the apostles’ doctrine” we will not get “established in the present truth” (2 Peter 1:12). Consequently, we will be “tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the slight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (Eph. 4:14). Some Christians think that doctrine should be left to the “Pastor” of their church, but Scripture says that the truth has been delivered through the apostles to the saints—all of them, not just a special qualified group among the saints (Jude 3). It was not delivered to the apostles, but through the apostles to the saints. The apostles were not the terminals of the truth: they were merely the channels through which it would come to us. Christian doctrine, therefore, is for every Christian to know, and enjoy, and walk in. J. N. Darby said, “No Christian knows his true place without it.” Let us, therefore, pay attention to doctrine, for there is a practical salvation connected with it (1 Tim. 4:15-16). We cannot live properly without it.
Without “fellowship” with other Christians in divine things, we will not get corrected and adjusted in our thoughts on doctrine, and in any personal faults and quirks we may have. Being with other Christians will do this for us. Furthermore, if we do not walk in practical fellowship with our brethren, misunderstandings will come in, and this often leads to strife and contention (Phil. 2:2-3).
Without the “breaking of bread” our hearts may grow cold. The Lord’s supper is an occasion when we remember the Lord in His death; when we recall His love for us that caused Him to suffer in our place on the cross. Meditation on such love draws out our hearts after Him in true worship (2 Cor. 5:14, Song of Solomon 1:2-4).
Without “prayer” our lives will become independent of Him Who is our Head. We will begin to choose our own way through life, not holding the Head (Col. 2:19). Without dependence on the Lord, we will surely make steps that will take us out of the Christian path.
Three or Four Outward, Tangible Things In Christianity
If we practice simple Christianity as found in the Bible, we will find that there are really very few tangible things in the whole new order of Christian worship:
• The ordinance of baptism.
• The ordinance of the Lord’s supper.
• The Bible.
• The head covering.
There could perhaps be another, if we added the collection to this (1 Cor. 16:1-2). But since this usually happens at the time of the Lord’s supper, we see it as included there.
The reason Christianity has so few outward things is that it is a faith system. Scripture says, “We walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Cor. 5:7). Having a new life (new birth) and the indwelling Spirit of God, we need nothing more to practice Christianity. Christians could meet together for worship and ministry in a house, a kitchen, or in a barn, etc; and if it was done according to the Word of God and the Spirit of God, they would have the Lord in their midst. The Lord’s supper was first instituted in a guest room in a house in Jerusalem (Luke 22:7-20). His presence in their midst was all they needed.
Now, we ask, “Where is all the embellishment of Christendom’s professional religion in this simple pattern for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry? Where is the need for building huge cathedrals and complex denominational organization? Where is the need for the orchestras, the entertainment, and the money that too often marks the churches in Christendom?” Why it’s gone in a moment! If it is true that Christianity has only these few tangible things, then it is all swept away in a single stroke. But where is Christ in this simple way of meeting together? He is in the midst where He promised to be! (Matt. 18:20). And if we have Christ, we have all that we need.
Who Should Lead the Congregation?
It may be asked, “If we are to come together for meetings such as those suggested in the previous chapter, who would lead these meetings?”
We would like to answer this by saying that if we really believed that the Lord Jesus was in the midst as He has promised, we would want to let Him guide and direct by the Spirit. When Christ ascended to heaven, He sent the Holy Spirit into the world to dwell in the church for that very purpose (John 7:39; Acts 2:1-33). The main works of the Spirit in Christianity are: to exalt Christ, to unite the members of Christ's body on earth to the Head in heaven by His indwelling presence, and to guide the church in all things, whether it is in worship (Phil. 3:3), prayer (Eph. 6:18; Jude 20; Acts 4:31), ministry (John 14:26; 16:13-15; 1 Cor. 12:11), or evangelism (Acts 8:29; 13:1-4; 16:6-7). From the moment the Spirit of God was sent into the world at Pentecost, we look in vain in the New Testament for any church president except that of the sovereign guidance of the Holy Spirit! It is He Who is to lead the meetings of the church.
All church groups will say that they own the Spirit's presence, but the proof of whether we really believe in the Spirit’s power and presence, will be seen in our allowing Him to direct things in the meetings of the church. What Scripture demands of us is that there would be faith in the Spirit’s power, proved by leaving Him His due right to employ whom He pleases to speak in the meetings. For all who desire to meet according to God's Scriptural order, faith will be required. But this should be no surprise to us as Christians, since every step of our pathway should be in faith. “The life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself for me” (Gal. 2:20). And again, “The just shall live by faith” (Gal. 3:11).
If it was by the Spirit’s power that God made the world and all in it (Job 26:13; 33:4; Gen. 1:2), surely then, He should be able to lead a few Christians who are gathered together for worship and ministry. With Someone as great and as competent as this divine Person present in the midst of the saints gathered together, it is not necessary for us to appoint a man to do His work, regardless of how gifted that person may be. C. H. Mackintosh said, “If Christ is in our midst (Matt. 18:20), why on earth should we even think to set up a human president? Why not give Him His rightful place and allow the Spirit of God to lead and guide in worship and ministry? There is no need for human authority.”
Notwithstanding, the denominations have set up a man (a “Pastor” or “Minister”) to conduct the worship. In the Bible, however, we do not find that God ever set up a pastor or minister to conduct the worship of the church. To put it in the language of W. T. P. Wolston, “There is a notion in Christendom that a pastor is a man set over a congregation. The idea is in people's heads, but not in Scripture!” If it is not God's order, then it is clear that it must be a human invention. To have a man set up in the assembly to “administer” the Lord’s supper is truly a monstrous mistake, for there is no such thing even hinted at in the Word of God, as a man, even an apostle, being set apart for such a thing. Scripture simply says, “The disciples came together to break bread” (Acts 20:7).
Nevertheless, this human arrangement is so wide spread in Christendom that it can be seen from St. Peter's in Rome to the smallest evangelical chapel. Instead of believers assembling together for worship and ministry in the Lord’s name alone, waiting on the leading of the Spirit for guidance, one can scarcely find a prayer meeting without someone (a prayer-leader) appointed to conduct it. What is all this, but man usurping the place of the Holy Spirit! It is the sad fruit of unbelief in His personal presence in the midst of the saints. To set up a man, however gifted he may be, to lead and conduct assembly meetings, is a practical denial of the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. It is really unbelief or ignorance in the competency of the Holy Spirit to direct the meetings. How sad that such human interference has set aside the simplicity of divine order. May the Lord deliver His people from such a system of things that is so contrary to His mind.
The Priesthood of All Believers
The root meaning of the word “priest,” is “one who offers.” (Heb. 5:1; 8:3; 1 Peter 2:5). A priest is one who has the privilege of going into the presence of God on behalf of the people. In Christianity, a priest exercises his priesthood in offering the sacrifices of praise to God, and in presenting petitions to God in prayer (Heb. 13:15; 1 John 5:14-15). Albeit, one of the causes of the weakness and confusion that prevails in the professing church, is that the priesthood in many cases, has been arrogated as the right of a privileged class of persons, some of whom are not even saved!
The truth of the matter is that all Christians are priests. That is what Scripture teaches. The book of Revelation states that they are made “priests unto God” through faith in Christ’s finished work on the cross (Rev. 1:6; 5:10). The epistle of Peter confirms this, saying, “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable unto God by Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5, 9). Furthermore, the epistle to the Hebrews exhorts Christians as a whole, to approach God within the veil, in the holiest of all (Heb. 10:19-22; 13:15-16). The fact that it says that the Lord is “an High Priest,” implies that there is a company of priests under Him. He would not preside as a “High Priest” if there were no priests under Him. Similarly, a person would not be called a leader of some company or group if there were not those whom he led. The exhortation in Hebrews 10:19-22 is to encourage Christians to draw near to God and exercise their priestly privileges.
In each of the passages of Scripture in the New Testament where priesthood is treated, there is no mention, not even a hint, that only some of the saints are priests. Nor is there any other place in the New Testament where such a notion is propounded. When the New Testament speaks of priesthood, it refers in the same breath, to all believers being constituted as such. Furthermore, not only do these verses tell us that all Christians are priests, we learn from them that we are priests with privileges that surpass those of Old Testament times. A priest in Christianity is entitled to “draw near” into the very presence of God, in the holiest of all. That is a place where no son of Aaron could come. Even when Aaron, the high priest in Israel, came once a year within the veil, he did not come boldly as we can now. On the day of Atonement he entered in with the fear of death, but we can enter with the “full assurance of faith.” Moreover, the Aaronic priests had largely an unintelligent service. They did not know why they were to do the things they were commanded. But we have an “intelligent service” (Rom. 12:1). We can carry out our priestly functions with an understanding of all that we do in His presence.
Now since Scripture teaches that all Christians are priests, and that we all have the equal privilege to exercise our priesthood in the presence of God, it is clear then that there is no need for a clergyman to perform these privileges on behalf of the rest. In meetings for worship and prayer (where Christians exercise their priesthood), we need only to wait on the Spirit of God to lead out the prayers and praises of the saints. If we allow Him to lead in the assembly, in the place that is His, He will lead a brother here and another there, to audibly express worship and praise as the mouth-piece of the assembly. (We realize of course, that we do not only exercise our priesthood at times when we are together in an assembly. At any time a Christian can enter into the immediate presence of God in prayer and worship and function as a priest. But the context of this treatise is to do with Christians meeting together in an assembly for worship and ministry.)
When we understand the nearness of relationship that all Christians have as being part of the body and bride of Christ, we can see how totally incompatible it is with the idea of a ministerial caste being nearer to God than the rest (Eph. 2:13; 5:25-32). To assert such a class for us as Christians is to deny that we are able as priests, to offer up spiritual sacrifices to God. It really obliterates the privileges of Christianity and in a sense, restores Judaism, or at least, brings us back to that level.
While few denominations will go so far as to have a clergyman with the title of “Priest” (intimating that the rest in that denomination are not), most of the evangelic type of churches call their clergymen a “Pastor” or a “Minister.” It makes little difference, for this position in the church is not according to the truth of Scripture. It is purely a man-made office.
The Difference Between Priesthood and Gift
It is important to understand the difference between priesthood and gift. They are two distinct spheres in the house of God. A priest goes to God on behalf of the people: a person exercising his gift in ministry goes to the people on behalf of God.
Gifts
Gifts are what the Lord, as the ascended Head of the church, gives to the various members of His body, so that they may be able to fill the place in the body where God has set them. The Bible teaches that every member of the body of Christ has been given a gift (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7; 1 Peter 4:10; Rom. 12:6-8). However, not all the members of Christ’s body have a gift for ministering the Word. Some may have a gift that is distinctly recognizable; such as an evangelist, shepherd (pastor), or teacher (Eph. 4:4-16; Rom. 12:4-8; 1 Cor. 12:4-31). With others, it may be something less distinct such as “showing mercy” (Rom 12:8). Whether it be evangelism or “helps” (1 Cor. 12:28), one sure thing is that we all have something to do in the body of Christ. The purpose of gifts are “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: in order that we may be no longer babes, tossed and carried about by every wind of doctrine, which is in the sleight of men, in unprincipled cunning with a view to systematized error; but to holding the truth in love” (Eph. 4:12-15). This shows us that the gifts are for the spiritual benefit of the church.
The Difference Between Ability and Gift
In Matthew 25:14-30, the Lord makes a distinction between “ability” and “gift.” He told the story of a man traveling to a far country, and before leaving he gave to his servants talents (a sum of money), which they were to trade with until he returned. Some were given more, and some were given less. This is an obvious allusion to the Lord giving gifts to His people, who are to exercise them for Him in His absence. One day He will return again, and take account of what we have done with what He has given us in the way of gift. In that day, rewards will be given to those who have fulfilled their ministry faithfully (Matt. 25:19-23).
It is noteworthy that the man “gave” talents (a gift) “to every man according to his particular ability” (Matt. 25:15). Here the Lord distinguishes between these two things. Notice, those servants had their various abilities before the man called them unto himself to give them the talents.
Ability is something that is given to a person when he is born into this world. In providence, God singles out and fashions the vessel of His purposes long before he or she is even saved. In His school He gives and forms a person’s intellectual powers and abilities, even in his unconverted days. Gift, on the other hand, is something that is given to the person from the Lord by the Spirit, when he is saved. While ability is a natural thing; gift is a spiritual thing. Gift is given to a person in order that he might fulfill his ministry in the body of Christ. The wisdom of the Lord is seen here, in that He gives gifts according to our ability. For instance, He does not give the gift of an evangelist to a person who is reticent and lacks communicative skills. Someone who naturally likes to be with people and is talkative would likely be given such a gift. Likewise, the gift of teaching requires a certain measure of natural ability in the area of intellectual powers.
We mention this because there is a great deal of confusion on this point in the Christian profession today. We often hear Christians speaking of famous converted musicians or athletes; that their natural abilities are “their gift.” However, gift in Scripture is a spiritual manifestation in the body of Christ. It has to do with spiritual things (1 Cor. 12:1; 14:1). Nor do we see in the Scriptures that God would have the church having meetings where such persons can display their natural abilities. Often these famous persons are used for not much more than entertainment in so-called, “testimonial meetings.” But are believers being established in the truth through these sort of meetings? The gifts are not for our entertainment, but for the building up of the saints in the “most holy faith” (Jude 20).
J. N. Darby said, “It is wholly a false principle that natural gifts are a reason for using them. I may have amazing strength or speed in running; I knock a man down with one, and win a prize cup with the other. Music may be a more refined thing, but the principle is the same. This point I believe to be now of all importance. Christians have lost their moral influence by bringing in nature and the world as harmless. All things are lawful to me. But as I said, you cannot mix flesh and Spirit.”
What is Ministry?
In the minds of most people, “the ministry” is what Pastors and Ministers are in, as they carry out their work leading a certain church group. The Bible, however, teaches that ministry is simply the exercise of a person’s gift (1 Peter 4:10-11; 1 Tim. 4:6; Eph. 4:11-12). Since all Christians have a gift, all Christians should be in “the ministry!” As we have said earlier, all may not have a gift for ministering the Word of God publicly, but all have a ministry to fulfill. Much ministry is service done for the Lord’s people where no public speaking is done.
The problem in the church today is that there are many like Archippus who are not fulfilling their ministry. The Apostle had to exhort him, “Take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the Lord, that thou fulfil it” (Col. 4:17). This is a needful exhortation for us today. One of the reasons many are not fulfilling their ministry is that there is a vast man-made clerical system in place in the church that is hindering them. In a normal order of things in a typical denominational church, if the Spirit of God were to give a word to one in the company who had a gift for public ministry, he would be stifled and could not exercise it. If he were to proceed to do so, it would be disruptive to the services in process.
The common idea in Christendom today is that when a person feels that he is “called to the ministry,” he must be put through a system of education by which he acquires the status of a “Minister” or “Pastor.” And even then, he still cannot exercise his gift until a congregation chooses him (usually through a board of deacons) to be their Minister. Many who have good intentions, but are ignorant of God’s order, believe that if they are going to minister the Word that they must submit to this process and be trained in a seminary. Since tradition has established it, many feel that God is truly sending them to a seminary for that purpose. It seems quite logical to them since it is the recognized, conventional way of training “Ministers.” Without faulting the individual for his sincerity, we must say, that whole order of things is not found in Scripture.
The Bible teaches that if a person has a certain gift, the very possession of it is God's warrant to use it. It says, “As every man hath received a gift, even so minister the same one to another” (1 Peter 4:10). It does not say, “As every man hath received a gift, let him be trained and ordained by a seminary, and then so minister.”
The Scriptures say, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it in the ability which God giveth” (1 Peter 4:11). Notice again, it doesn’t say, “Let him go to school, and then let him speak.”
And again, “Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation” (Rom. 12:6-8). Again, there is not a word here about the person being trained by men before he uses his gift.
Moreover, Scripture says, “When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying” (1 Cor. 14:26). Here again, we find no hint that a person must be trained before he can exercise his gift in the assembly. It simply says that if we have a doctrine (a teaching), etc., let it be done to the edifying of the church.
Now it is true that a person’s gift needs to be developed. This takes time and use (Acts 9:20-22; Gal. 1:17; Acts 9:30; 11:25-26; 13:1-14). The more a person matures in divine things, the more serviceable he will be in ministry (Acts 18:24-28; Mark 4:20). The Biblical way for a person getting taught in divine things, is through meetings such as we discussed earlier. The Lord uses these assembly meetings, led by the sovereign guidance of the Holy Spirit, to teach us the truth. He also uses books of ministry (or tape recorded ministry), by gifted and knowledgeable persons who are able to teach us the truth. But we will look in vain in Scripture to find any thought of a person going to a seminary to be fitted for a position as a “Minister” or a “Pastor” of a church. As we have already said, it is purely a man-made thing to fit a person for a position in a man-made system. Biblical Christianity simply does not need such schools. A lot of the learning that goes on at these seminaries is to train the Pastors-to-be how to run a church after that clerical system of things that is not found in the Bible.
Ministry in the Church
Turning to the first epistle to the Corinthians (chapter 11:17 to chapter 14:40), we see how the gifts are to function when the church is gathered together in its various localities. This section of Scripture begins with the Apostle saying, “First of all, when ye come together in assembly...” Before speaking of ministry, the Apostle Paul speaks first of the privilege of the Lord’s supper, which perhaps is the preeminent meeting of the church. This meeting is not for the exercise of gift, but for the remembrance of the Lord in His death. It is a time when we can exercise our priesthood in offering worship and praise to the Father and the Son.
After setting in order various things concerning the Lord’s supper, he gives the order for ministry in the assembly in the following chapters 12 through 14.
• Chapter 12 gives the great principles of Christian ministry.
• Chapter 13 gives the spirit in which that ministry is to be exercised—love.
• Chapter 14 gives the regulation of the gifts in the assembly so that the ministry would be for the edification of all.
Christ Must be Exalted in All Ministry
Looking more closely at chapter 12, we see that the first great principle of all ministry is the exaltation of Jesus as Lord. The evidence of the Spirit's leading in ministry, is that Christ will always be exalted and never spoken of derogatorily. He says, “Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost” (1 Cor. 12:1-3). “He [the Spirit] shall glorify Me” (John 16:14).
The Local Assembly Needs the Use Of All the Gifts in its Midst
The second great principle in this chapter on Christian ministry, is that since Christ has distributed gifts by the Spirit to the various members of His body: and that these gifts are not all held by one man; we therefore, need participation in the meetings from all who have a gift for it. The Apostle says, “To one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another...” (1 Cor. 12:4-10, 29-30). It is perfectly clear from this passage that since the gifts are not held by one man, the assembly will need more than one man ministering, if they are going to get the benefit of the gifts that may be in their midst. But again, the clerical system in place in denominational Christianity hinders this.
Some might say, “Our church doesn’t have one man as the minister. We have two or three Pastors.” However, that is still missing the point in this passage. God’s mind is that the church would edify itself through every joint of supply, not just through two or three (Eph. 4:16). It is true that all may not have a gift to minister the Word publicly, but as we have mentioned already, the Scriptures indicate that all who are able should have liberty in the assembly to minister. It says, “For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted” (1 Cor. 14:24, 31).
It is also true that a man might have more than one gift, but Scripture is definite that one person does not have all the gifts. In fact, the Apostle warns of the danger of not regarding the various gifts that God has set in the body. He says, “The eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you” (1 Cor. 12:21). This shows that all the members in the body have something to contribute, even though they might seem insignificant to us. However, the clerical order of things in the churches is an arrangement where one or two persons do the ministering. It is a system that hinders (perhaps not intentionally) the other gifts from operating in the church; and is essentially saying, “I have no need of thee.”
Those who occupy this ministerial position in the churches strenuously object to this because they do encourage people in their church group to exercise their gifts—but it is only in a home Bible study setting. But the context of these chapters is the exercise of the gifts in the assembly meetings (1 Cor. 11:17, 18, 20, 33, 34; 14:23, 26). The question is, “Do they allow the liberty of the gifts in the church?” And the answer is that they do not.
The Spirit of God Should Employ Whom He Pleases to Speak
The third great principle of Christian ministry in the twelfth chapter of 1st Corinthians is that when we come together in assembly, the Spirit of God is to have His due right to employ whom He pleases to speak. As we have shown with priesthood, the Spirit is to be free in the assembly to lead whom He chooses to speak in the exercise his gift in ministry. The chapter clearly states that the gifts are to operate in the assembly by the selfsame Spirit who distributed the gift to the individual when he was saved. “All these [gifts] worketh that One and selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (1 Cor. 12:7, 11). The New Testament knows no other order for ministry than that of the sovereign guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Scriptures assume faith in us in trusting the leading of the Spirit. If we allow Him to lead in the assembly, He will take whatever gifts that are there, and use them for the edification of the saints in ministry.
The principle is simple then. The Holy Spirit is in the church, using the gifts as He chooses for the edification of all. This is God's order for Christian ministry. Now we ask, “How is the Holy Spirit expected to divide to every man severally as He chooses, if the church has set up an order of things where a man occupies this place of leading the assembly?” The presidency of the Holy Spirit is denied in practice! He may desire to call on this person or that person for ministry, but He is blocked and hindered by human order. In many of the churches, the services are pre-arranged—sometimes days in advance! Yet we do not find such a thought in Scripture. All this may be done with good intentions, but it is not God's order.
The Gifts are to be Regulated by Love And Discernment
After speaking of the motive for ministry in the thirteenth chapter of 1st Corinthians, which is “love,” the Apostle gives the simple principles that are to govern ministry in the assembly in the fourteenth chapter.
The first part of the chapter emphasizes the care that love would have in making sure not to occupy time in speaking of things that others present cannot understand. This very thing was happening in Corinth. There were those who were speaking in the gift of tongues, without an interpreter. Consequently, those in the assembly did not know what was being said. Paul shows that if a person speaks without love and care for the edification of all, he is really speaking like a trumpet that is giving an uncertain sound. The people do not know how to respond to it because they don’t know what is being said. The Corinthians were misusing the gift of tongues, but regardless of what gift it may be, the principle is the same, and is a guide for us today. Someone takes part in the meeting in a way in which the people cannot understand is clearly not speaking to “edification, and exhortation, and comfort” of all. If that is the case, then it would be well for him to not speak. Love and care for the welfare of the others will regulate this (1 Cor. 14:1-11).
This underlying principle that should govern the meetings for ministry is that what is said must be for the edification of all. Paul said that it would be better to speak a little in the assembly (“five words”) and have all understand and profit from it, than to speak a lot (“ten thousand words”) and have nobody understand it (1 Cor. 14:12-17).
He also shows that if the church met together according to God’s order for ministry, where the Spirit of God is given His rightful place in the assembly directing the ministry, that there would be a powerful testimony to those coming in to such meetings (1 Cor. 14:23-25).
He goes on to show that when the saints come together, “every one” who has something to contribute, should have liberty to minister in the assembly for the profit of the others. The problem with the Corinthians was that their meetings had become a free-for-all. They all wanted to speak and were not waiting on the Spirit’s leading (1 Cor. 14:26). To correct this, Paul told them that though all might have something, it does not mean that all should speak. They must wait on the leading of the Spirit. On different occasions, various ones may speak as the Spirit would lead (1 Corinthians 14:27-28, 30-31). Prophesying in this chapter is not predicting future things, but the telling forth of God’s mind for the occasion.
There can be, and sometimes is, a person who will be prompted by the flesh, who will rush in and take up time with profitless speaking that does not edify the saints. However, the assembly is not to be a platform for the flesh. The Apostle said, “The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets” (1 Cor. 14:32). This means that the person should know how to exercise self-control and refrain from speaking on such occasions. Regardless of this exhortation, such a one often thinks that what he is saying is profitable and edifying; and consequently, insists on speaking. When this occurs, Paul shows that the assembly has recourse. He said, “Let the prophets speak, two or three, and let the others judge” (1 Cor. 14:29). A Scriptural assembly is responsible to “judge” the ministry in its midst. And if it is not profitable, the assembly has authority to exercise godly discipline, calling for such a one to be silent in the meetings (1 Cor. 14:27-33).
These instructions are especially important for Christians who assemble together according to Scripture, because when there is liberty in the assembly meetings, that liberty may be abused. These instructions would hardly have application to the average denominational system, because in their “services” they do not have an arrangement where there is liberty for such ministry. Let us remember, such a Scriptural arrangement is not our liberty (as some mistakenly thought), but the Spirit's liberty to lead whomsoever He will. We are not to speak unless we are led by the Spirit to do so.
Then, in verses 34-40 the Apostle shows the place that sisters are to take in the public meetings. More will be said on this in a later chapter. He then concludes the chapter by giving one final governing principle; “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Cor. 14:40).
The Local Assembly Must Uphold Sound Doctrine
Finally, in the fifteenth chapter of 1st Corinthians, Paul emphasizes that sound doctrine must be upheld in the assembly. The Corinthians were astray on the doctrine of resurrection, and he corrected their misunderstandings. This is an important principle for us. We must also maintain sound doctrine in the assembly.
Hence, we have God’s order for ministry in the church. But notice, we do not find anything said about having one or two men (so-called “Pastors”) set up to do the ministering for the rest. If God intended that that was the way for ministry in the church, then He would have mentioned it in these chapters that deal with the subject: But there is not a word here of such a thing.
Furthermore, if only a few were to have the place of ministering in the church (i.e. the clergy), then these chapters on ministry would have been written specifically to them. It would be something like the Mosaic system, where the Lord gave specific directions to that special company of persons (the Aaronic priests) who were set apart from the rest of the people to perform the services in the tabernacle. But there is nothing of that here in these chapters. The directions are given to the whole church.
"Does This Mean You Don't Believe In Having a Pastor?"
Some might take from this that we don’t believe in the existence of pastors in the church, but we most definitely do, because the Bible speaks of it (Eph. 4:11). A pastor is a person who has been given the gift of shepherding the flock of God. It is one of many gifts Christ has given to the church. It is what the denominational churches have termed “Pastor” that we object to. They have made that gift into something that is not found in Scripture. They have taken a Scriptural term and have attached it to the position of a clergyman, which is not found in the Bible. And what is so confusing about it all is that a person may occupy that position and not even have the gift of a pastor! He might have the gift of an evangelist or teacher etc., and yet bear the title of “Pastor!” What a sorrowful confusion this has brought into the house of God.
Flattering Titles
The church organizations in Christendom not only have created a position that does not exist in the Word of God, they have also attached various titles to that position that also do not exist in the Word of God. Titles such as: “Minister,” “Pastor,” or “Doctor of Divinity,” etc., are prevalent in most denominations.
It is true that the words “minister” and “pastor” are mentioned in the Bible, but they are never used as a title. As we have already said, a pastor is the description of a gift, not a title of a clergyman. In fact, the Word of God says, “Let me not, I pray you, accept any man’s person, neither let me give flattering titles unto man. For I know not to give flattering titles; in so doing my Maker would soon take me away” (Job 32:21-22).
The Lord Jesus said, “Be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ: and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be called masters [instructors or teachers]: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted” (Matt. 23:8-12). Yet in the face of such a plain Scripture, some denominations have called their clergyman “Father.” As mentioned, some church organizations use the title “Doctor.” The word “doctor” comes from the Latin docere, which means to teach. Hence, a doctor is a teacher. But this is something that the Lord said we should not call one another! When a man is introduced as a “Doctor so and so” to an audience, the implication is that his words have added authority because of his degree. This, of course, is completely unfounded by Scripture. We are not saying that it is wrong to have the title “Doctor” in secular fields, but that it has no place in the things of God.
Other denominations have gone so far as to use the title, “Reverend.” Yet the Bible says that “reverend” is what the Lord’s name is! “Holy and reverend is His Name” (Psa. 111:9). Should men be taking what is ascribed to the Lord and attaching it to their names? Surely not.
When the Lycaonians attempted to give Barnabas and Paul exalted names they refused them, saying, “Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you” (Acts 14:15). The servants of the Lord today should also be refusing these flattering titles.
The Word of God teaches that pastors are just one of many gifts that Christ has given (Eph. 4:11). Why set up this one gift in the church with an official title as having preeminence over the others? There is not a line of Scripture that indicates that the church should do such a thing.
The Election of a "Pastor"
The practice of the church today in choosing a so-called “Pastor” is also something that is contrary to Scripture. We refer to the process of how a clergyman comes to preside in a local church. The usual procedure is that the would-be “Pastor” or “Minister” is invited to a so-called church where he will be given an opportunity to prove himself by giving a couple of sermons. If his preaching is acceptable to the people in the church, they will vote him to be their “Pastor.” This, again, is not God’s order.
First of all, the Word of God, which is ever to be our guide, gives no direction for such a thing. In fact, there is not one local assembly in the Bible that chose a pastor! Not one! Neither did an apostle, at any time, nominate a pastor for a local church. Scripture actually warns against the church choosing its teachers, saying, “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” (2 Tim. 4:3).
Secondly, the idea of nominating a “Pastor” is purely a worldly principle of democracy. The church is not a democracy. It is a mischievous thing to put the power of a vote into the hands of young people and new converts. They simply are not established in the truth, nor experienced enough in divine things to be able to form a spiritual judgment of such magnitude.
Moreover, it puts the man in a very awkward position. If he wants that position in the organization badly enough, he is tempted to give the people what they want to hear. Usually it is topics such as, “Love & Marriage” or “Prophecy.” Any kind of ministry to the conscience will likely be pretty far down on his list. Even after he gets the position in the church, he is constantly faced with compromising the truth for the people’s sake, because he knows that if the attendance goes down, his position and work will be reviewed. He must keep them happy. As a result, the people can, and often do, control the person and the type of ministry they want to hear. Living under this kind of obligation, he truly becomes their “Pastor.” Compare Judges 17:7-13 (“my priest”).
The Lord of the Harvest Directs the Gifts
When Christ’s Headship is referred to in Scripture, it is in relation to the corporate affairs of the church: when His Lordship is referred to, it is in connection with His sovereign guidance of individual believers. Hence we do not read of Christ being the Lord of the church. However, Scripture does say that He is the “Lord of the harvest” (Matt. 9:38). He, not the church, sends forth His individual labourers to where He would have them to serve. When Christ gives gifts, they are directly responsible to Him in their ministry. As we have already shown, the gifts flow down from Christ in heaven, and are for the spiritual profit of His body. A person with a specific gift should seek to minister to the whole church of God—when he can do so without compromising Scriptural principles. He should never confine himself to a sect that men have made in it. His gift is for the edification of the whole body.
Not only is Christ the source of these gifts, but He is also the Director of them. As the various servants are in communion with the Lord, He will direct them in their sphere of service. Since the source and guidance of the gifts is Christ in heaven, the gifts are above being controlled by any earthly religious (man-made) organization, as so often the case is in the churches in Christendom. We quite often hear people saying that “Pastor so-and-so” was sent out by a particular organization to carry on a ministry. But there is no such thing in Scripture as the church, or an organization within the church, sending a gifted person to a certain place to serve the Lord. We do not read of the gifts being under a mission board, and being directed by the board in their service for the Lord. This, too, is a man-made thing. Scripture says, “Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He will send forth labourers into His harvest” (Matt. 9:38). And again, “As they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Then, having fasted and prayed, and having laid their hands on them, they let them go. They therefore, having been sent forth by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia” (Acts 13:2-4).
It is clear from these verses that the Lord, by the Spirit, is the One Who sends His servants. The church should recognize a gift as being sent of the Lord, and should give the person “the right hands of fellowship”—which might include a practical gift of financial help (Gal. 2:9), but it does not send them. Those at Antioch encouraged Barnabas and Saul to go out, but they had no power to send them. They simply “let them go,” because they recognized that the Lord, by the Spirit, was sending them. As the passage shows, it is the Lord by the Holy Sprit that sends them.
J. A Trench said, “We may here pause for a moment to survey the work [in the book of the Acts]. Samaria evangelized, Gentiles admitted into the kingdom in Ceasarea, Greeks converted at Antioch: such is the record in brief. Besides the work in Judea and in Jerusalem, all was carried out without apostolic direction or human authority. The Holy Ghost opened out, as we have said, fields of labour independently of human direction. What He did then we may count on Him to do still. It is wise to let Him work as He will, and then, like the apostles, gladly to acknowledge what He has done. The exercise of ministry in the Word never was subject to apostolic direction in early days. Should it be subordinated to men now, however godly and earnest? We ask the question. The reader can surely answer it.”
If the Lord should send a person with the gift of a pastor among us, we are to recognize that gift, and let him minister as such. We are not to set up a vote choosing whether we want him as our “Pastor” or not: and if he is acceptable to us, to put him in an “office” in the church that does not exist in the Word of God! He is not our servant. He is the Lord’s servant. J. N. Darby said, “If Christ has thought proper to give me a gift, I am to trade with my talent as His servant, and the assembly has nothing to do with it: I am not their servant at all. ...I refuse peremptorily to be its servant. If I do or say anything as an individual, calling for discipline, that is another matter; but in trading with my talent, I act neither in, nor for, an assembly. When I go to teach, I go individually to exercise my gift. ...The Lordship of Christ is denied by those who hold these ideas; they want to make the assembly, or themselves, lords. If I am Christ's servant, let me serve Him in the liberty of the Spirit. They want to make the servants of Christ the servants of the assembly, and deny individual service as responsible to Christ. ...I am free to act without consulting them in my service to Christ: they are not the masters of the Lord’s servants.”
It is clear that a servant of the Lord who has God’s thoughts about the church, cannot be a Minister of a sect without compromising the truth. He may minister to those connected with sects if he should come across them because they are members of Christ’s body. But if he desires to be directed by the Lord, he could not confine himself to a sect, because then, he can only minister within its authorized circle of churches. The ground is too narrow. A. H. Rule said, “The Lord has the whole church before Him, and if the servant is responsible to Him, how can he submit himself to a sect, and be faithful both to it and the Lord? It is impossible. If a man is a Presbyterian Minister, it is plain he is not a Baptist Minister. If he is a Minister of any sect, it excludes him from all the rest, and his ministry is necessarily confined to the sect he is in, or to its interests.”
The servant of the Lord must not allow himself to be bound and fettered by a man-made denominational organization. The Apostle Paul did not allow himself to come under the power of any kind of man-made organization. He said, “Do I seek to please men? For if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10). He also said, “He that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant. Ye are bought with a price; be not ye servants of men” (1 Cor. 7:22-23).
We Cannot Rightly Hire God's Servant
Connected with the erroneous practice of electing a “Pastor” is the putting of that person on a salary. The Bible nowhere hints at this. Man (or an organization of men) must not hire God’s servant, for he is in the service of a higher Master. As we have already shown, it can be dangerous; because when one gets his salary from a particular organization, he tends to become the servant of that organization.
Of course, the church organizations do not view their salaried clergymen as being hired, but there are many things that could be cited that would show that the practicality of this arrangement is indeed not much more than that. A case in point is a letter we recently received from a man who included a business card identifying him as a “retired” Minister of a well-known denomination. If there came a point when he retired from that position, it necessarily implies that there was a point when he was hired. But does Scripture speak of God hiring and retiring His servants? It sounds like a business operation. We don’t want to question their motives, but still, it leaves a wrong impression before the world. People may conclude that it is a person’s employment. We realize that there are many who fill that place with zealous service for the Lord, and they do it to the best of their ability. Nor do we discount the fact that those in that position will be rewarded for their motives in a coming day, where the Lord sees fit to give a reward (1 Cor. 3:9-14; 4:4-5). Our point here is merely to point out that the position of a salaried clergyman cannot be supported by the Word of God.
How Should the Lord's Servants Be Maintained Monetarily?
The question might be asked, “How then, should the Lord's servants be maintained monetarily? If they are not to receive a salary, then how are they to be supported?” We must turn again to the Word of God for the answer. We find there that the Apostle Paul and others who served with him are an example of how the Lord’s servants are to carry on their service for Him (1 Tim. 1:16; Phil. 3:17). They were “servants of Jesus Christ,” not servants of a sect or division in the church (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Jude 1, etc.). They believed the Lord had sent them to their work. And that if He truly sent them, He would also take care of them. “Who ever carries on war at his own charges?” (1 Cor. 9:7). So they went forth “taking nothing of the Gentiles [the nations]” because they trusted that God would supply all their need (3 John 7; Phil. 4:19). To do this takes faith on the part of the servant. Hudson Taylor said, “God's work, done in God’s way, will never lack God’s supply.”
In those early days of the church there were two ways in which the Lord’s servants were maintained financially:
Firstly, they supported themselves by working with their hands. The Apostle Paul is an example of this. He worked as a tent-maker while he served the Lord (Acts 18:3). He said to the Ephesian elders, “Yea, ye your own selves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me. I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, It is more blessed to give than receive” (Acts 20:34-35). To the Thessalonians, Paul also said, “Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us” (2 Thess. 3:8-9).
Secondly, the Lord’s servants were supported by gifts from the saints who desired to express their fellowship with the work that they were engaged in. These gifts came from two sources: from local assemblies, as Paul said to the Philippians, “Ye have done well, in that ye did communicate with my affliction” (Phil. 4:14-17); and from individuals, as he said to the Galatians, “Let him that is taught in the Word communicate to him that teacheth in all good things” (Gal. 6:6; Heb. 13:16; 1 Tim. 6:17-19).
However, the Lord’s servants were careful to take “nothing from the Gentiles [nations]” among whom they went preaching the Word of God (3 John 7). The “Gentiles,” here, are the unbelieving world among whom they went preaching. They did this to guard against giving a wrong impression to the world that the gospel is something that a person can buy. We believe that this is still the pattern for God's servants today.
Parachurch Organizations—A Help Or a Hindrance to the Gospel?
William MacDonald said, “In recent years there has been an organizational explosion in Christendom of such proportions as to make one dizzy. Every time a believer gets a new idea for advancing the cause of Christ, he forms a new board, corporation, or institution! One result is that capable teachers and preachers have been called away from their primary ministries in order to become administrators. If all mission board administrators were serving on the mission field, it would greatly reduce the need for personnel there. Another result of the proliferation of organizations is that vast sums of money are needed for overhead, and thus diverted from direct gospel outreach. The greater part of every dollar given to many Christian organizations is devoted to the expense of maintaining the organization rather than to the primary purpose for which it was founded.”
How true this is! We spoke to someone who was quite high up in one of the largest organizations in the world that gathered funds from churches to send to the foreign mission fields. When he had left the organization, he said, “Most people don’t know it, but only 9% of what they take in actually gets to the mission field! The rest is used in administrative salaries and overhead.”
Summary of the Main Errors Of the Clerical System
In the preceding pages we have conclusively shown that the concept of the clerical system—having a so-called “Pastor” or “Minister” set over a congregation of Christians to lead them in worship and ministry—is unsupported by Scripture. Not only is it unsupported; it is contrary to the teaching of the New Testament.
The following points are a brief summary of the principles we have covered in the preceding pages that show why the clergy system in the Church is not according to the Word of God:
1) The Spirit of God is not given His proper place of presiding in the assembly. Since He is present to direct and regulate the proceedings, the setting up of a clergyman in that place practically displaces the Spirit and interferes with His leading (Phil. 3:3; 1 Cor. 12:11).
2) As a result of the Spirit not being given His place to lead in the assembly as He chooses, the priesthood of all believers is violated in practice (1 Peter 2:5; Rev. 1:6; 5:10; Heb. 13:15-16). The Spirit of God should be able to use any brother He chooses to offer thanksgiving and praise on behalf of the whole assembly, but this system hinders it.
3) Another result of the Spirit not being given His place to lead in the assembly is that the free exercise of gifts in the assembly is prohibited by arbitrarily limiting ministry to one person (the so-called Pastor) who has an official right to it (1 Cor. 14:27-33).
4) Furthermore, there is little or no recourse to check and balance the teaching. Where there are one or two men responsible for the teaching in a local assembly, as is the case with a so-called "Pastor" or "Minister," there is a danger of one-sided interpretations, if not of erroneous doctrine itself. On the other hand, where the Holy Spirit has liberty to speak through the various gifts in the assembly, more facets of the truth are brought to light, and there is also a greater immunity from error when all the saints are assiduously comparing Scripture with Scripture (1 Cor. 14:27-32).
5) The clerical system tends to promote apathy among those in the congregation. Since it does not allow liberty for the people to contribute in the ministry, there often develops a lack of exercise in divine things. Many have the idea that they do not need to concern themselves with ministry since the church organization they belong to is paying someone (the clergyman) to carry on this service for them. Consequently, the development of spiritual exercise and growth in the saints is hindered by this arrangement (1 Cor. 3:1-4; Heb. 5:11-14).
6) The system caters to people gathering themselves around a gifted speaker, and thus violates God's principles of Christians gathering together by the Spirit unto the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ alone (1 Cor. 1:12-13; 3:3-4; Matt. 18:20).
7) The system interferes with the servant's immediate responsibility to the Lord in the exercise of his gift. The person (the clergyman) becomes answerable to the man-made organization over him, which looks after him in practical issues such as his salary. He is responsible to maintain its standards and methods of ministry, and to achieve the goals the organization set out for him; and thus, he tends to be controlled by the organization rather serving directly under the Lordship of Christ (1 Cor. 7:22-23; Gal. 1:10).
What Do “Pastors” and “Ministers” Think Of These Things?
Perhaps some will ask the “Pastor” of their denomination about these things, and will be told that these things are all wrong. This is quite understandable. Most likely he will not accept these truths because they condemn the very position wherein he stands. If these things are true, then where does it put a man who occupies the position of a “Pastor?” Being in “the ministry” as a profession, for him, the practical ramifications of accepting this truth means that he will be out his regular income. It is highly unlikely that a person in that position will ever accept these things.
We are not insinuating that these so-called “Pastors” and “Ministers” are only in “the ministry” for a job. They may do their work conscientiously, but to give up that post will cost such a person a lot. If the average Christian should want to give up the man-made order of things in the churches to practice Biblical Christianity, he doesn't have as much to lose as someone who is a clergyman. Yet if a clergyman will be faithful to God’s Word, and acts in obedience to the Lord, God will take care of him, for He has said, “Them that honour Me, I will honour" (1 Sam. 2:30; 2 Chron. 25:9).
Local Administration in the Church
The Difference Between Gift and Office
Christians almost always confuse “gift” and “office”. Attempting to localize a gift (such as a pastor) to function as an office in a local church is a clear proof of this misunderstanding. Gift and office are two distinct things in Scripture. Gift is exercised in relation to the body of Christ; office is a responsibility in connection with the house of God. Gift is for edification, whereas office is to do with government. As gift is universal (for the whole body); office is a local charge (i.e., for a local assembly).
There is one exception to this—apostleship. Apostleship is both an office and a gift. It is the only case in Scripture where office is a universal thing (Acts. 1:20; 1 Peter 5:1). Twelve of the Lord’s disciples were appointed to the office of apostleship (Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; Acts 1:20). The Lord did this when He was still on earth. Judas fell by transgression and his “office” was given to another man—Mathias (Acts 1:16-26). However, they received the “gift” of apostleship by the Spirit after the Lord ascended to His heavenly position at the right hand of God (1 Cor. 12:28). Gifts, as we have mentioned, flow down from Christ in heaven. These men were then given to the church to help it get established in the truth. “When He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men... He gave some apostles” (Eph. 4:8-11).
An individual who has a local charge (office) in an assembly may also have a gift for public teaching or preaching (1 Tim. 5:17), but when Scripture deals with the subjects of gift and office, it never confounds the two.
When we understand the difference between these two things as Scripture distinguishes them, we will see how far from the truth a statement, such as, “He is the Pastor of a church,” really is. Under normal circumstances, the Lord’s servant is never “the” single gift in a local church. Nor is he to restrict the exercise of his gift to “a” local church, or even to a certain sect within the church. His gift is for the whole body of Christ. To be Scripturally accurate, people should say, “He is a pastor in the church.”
Elders, Overseers [Bishops], & Guides
Apart from apostleship, there are only two offices in the church. One is an overseer (bishop)/elder/guide. The other is a deacon.
As to the office of an overseer/elder/guide, it is the Lord’s normal means of guiding a local assembly in its administrative responsibilities. The focus of their work pertains particularly to the spiritual welfare of a local assembly. The three words in the epistles used for those who function in this office are: “elders,” “overseers [bishops],” and “leaders [guides].” These words can be used inter-changeably for the same office. See Acts 20:17 with 28; Titus 1:5 with 7; 1 Peter 5:1-2.
“Elders” (Presbuteroi) describes the maturity and experience that should mark those who fill this place. It refers to those advanced in age. However, not all aged men in the assembly necessarily function in this place of responsible leadership. (1 Tim. 5:1; Titus 2:2) This is because all may not have the experience, or the exercise, or the moral qualifications that are necessary (1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:6-9).
“Bishops” or “overseers” (Episkopoi) describes the work that they do; shepherding the flock (1 Peter 5:2; Acts 20:28), watching over souls (Heb. 13:17), giving admonition (1 Thess. 5:13), etc.
“Leaders” or “guides” (Hegoumenos) describes the leadership they are to give in the local assembly.
Scripture refers to those in this place as, “Them that take the lead among you” (1 Thess. 5:12-13; Heb. 13:7, 17, 24; 1 Cor. 16:15-18; 1 Tim. 5:17 – J. N. Darby Trans.). Notice, it is “them,” not “him.” Whenever they are spoken of as functioning in their place, they are always referred to in the plural. They may be spoken of in the singular, if it is in reference to their personal character (1 Tim. 3:1-7), but when performing their work, it is in plural. This shows that under normal conditions this work is not to be carried out by one man. It is a God-given guard to have more than one elder in a local assembly, so that no individual would attempt to rise up and preside over an assembly. Sad to say, this has not been heeded, and men at times have risen up and have taken over in local assemblies. (Acts 20:30)
Furthermore, the Authorized Version (KJV) renders the verses quoted above as, “them over you in the Lord” (1 Thess. 5:12); and, “them that have the rule over you” (Heb. 13:17, 24). These renderings might convey the idea that these men are to preside over the flock of God. But this is not true. These verses should be translated, “Them that take the lead among you.” This shows that they have a place, like all the other members of the body of Christ, “among” the flock. The only place in Scripture where we have somebody presiding over a local assembly is in the case of Diotrephes, and he was an evil man. (3 John 9-10)
How different all this is from the order that men have arranged in their man-made denominations. God’s way is to have a number of bishops in a local church (assembly) (Phil. 1:1; Acts 20:28; Titus 1:5); man’s way is to have one bishop over many churches (assemblies)!
Taking “the lead among you” does not necessarily refer to leading in public teaching or preaching, but to the administrative affairs of the assembly. Again, to confuse these two things is to misunderstand the difference between gift and office. These men, however, should be “apt to teach" (1 Tim. 3:2). This refers to being able to expound the Word as they have been taught, even though they may not necessarily be gifted as a teacher (Titus 1:9). Some of them that “take the lead” may not teach publicly at all, but it is very good and helpful when they can. And such should be “counted worthy of double honour” when they do (1 Tim. 5:17).
Those in this place of responsible leadership are viewed under the figures of “stars” and “the angel of the church” in the book of Revelation (Rev. 1:20, 2:1, 8, 12, 3:1, 7, 14). As “stars” they are to bear witness to the truth of God (the principles of the Word) as light bearers in the local assembly. This shows that they must be instructed in the Word (Titus 1:9). When the assembly is confronted with a problem or an issue, they should be able to provide light from God’s Word as to what the assembly should do. Acts 15 gives us an illustration of their work. After hearing the problem that was troubling the assembly, Peter and James, as “stars,” gave light on the matter. James applied a principle from the Word of God, and then gave his judgment as to what he believed the Lord would have them to do (Acts 15:15-21).
As “the angel of the church,” those same ones in that place of responsibility act as messengers to carry out the mind of God in the assembly in the performance of those things that have been decided. This is also illustrated in Acts 15. After they had determined what was believed to be the Lord’s mind in connection with the problem, they “took the lead” in the local assembly in carrying out His mind. They spread their conclusions before the assembly so as to not act independently of them, who also believed it to be the mind of the Lord. This was followed by a letter being sent to the brethren in Antioch notifying them of how the problem was solved (Acts 15:22-33).
In some respects, the work of pastors (shepherds) and elders are similar. Both are called to shepherd and feed the flock. But the two are never equated. The pastor does not localize his service, whereas the elder/overseer/guide does.
Deacons
While those in the office of an elder/overseer/guide are occupied with the spiritual welfare of a local assembly, those in the office of a deacon are to be occupied with the temporal cares of a local assembly (Acts 6:1-6; 1 Tim. 3:8-13). The word “deacon” could be translated “minister,” for ministry in the Bible is not confined to spiritual things only (Luke 8:3; Acts 6:1 – “daily ministration,” 12:25; 13:5; Rom. 16:1). Deacons minister in temporal things, but their service for the Lord does not need to be confined to that exclusively. If they should have a gift for ministering the Word they could exercise that gift as the Lord may lead them (1 Tim. 3:13). Both Stephen and Philip, who were deacons, also had gifts for ministering the Word. Stephen was gifted as a teacher (Acts 7); and Philip was gifted as an evangelist (Acts 8:5-40; 21:8). Sisters can also serve as deaconesses. Romans 16:1 says, “I commend to you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister [deaconess] of the assembly which is in Cenchrea.” However, they would not fill that place in an official capacity, because Paul said to Timothy that such were to be “husbands of one wife,” which shows that such were men (1 Tim. 3:12). Those in this office also had to have moral qualifications in their lives similar to those of elders/overseers/guides.
The Choosing of Elders
The question might be asked, “How did people get into these offices?” In every case in the Scriptures, they were chosen. But, nowhere in Scripture do we read that elders were chosen by the church—the local assembly. Just as we have shown that there is not one local assembly in the Bible that chose its pastor, there is also not one assembly that chose its elders! Regardless of this, in Christendom today almost every church group chooses its elders. But where do they get their authority for doing this? Nowhere in the Bible was an assembly entrusted with a choice so difficult as choosing its elders, regardless of the piety and intelligence of those who made it up. The Word of God says that they were chosen by the apostles. It says, “When they [Barnabas and Paul] chose for them, elders in each assembly and prayed with fastings, they commended them to the Lord on Whom they had believed” (Acts 14:23—W. Kelly Trans.). On certain occasions delegates of the apostles chose elders. Titus is an example. Paul sent him to the island of Crete for the purpose of ordaining elders there. Even then, his commission was for that place only. He had no authority to ordain elsewhere, unless commissioned by the Apostle (Titus 1:5).
The wisdom of God is seen here in having elders specifically chosen for an assembly and not by an assembly. If a local church chose its elders, it might be biased and pick leaders that favoured its inclinations. But being an apostolic function, the assembly would be delivered from this danger.
In the case of deacons, however, local churches did choose them. A case in point is Acts 6:1-6. Seven men were chosen by the church at Jerusalem to fill the place of deacons (though not directly called deacons in that chapter), but they were officially appointed to that place by the apostles. A local church today could choose ones to carry out temporal cares in the assembly, but they could not officially appoint them to the office of a deacon, because there is no apostle or apostolic delegate to do it.
There Are No Apostles Today To Appoint Elders and Deacons
The whole value of a person’s appointment to an office, hangs on the validity of the power that does the appointing. Scripture allows no appointing power except that of an apostle, or an envoy who had a commission from an apostle for that purpose. But where is such a delegate today that can produce adequate evidence of having an apostolic commission for the work of appointing? The Word of God does not even hint at the continuance of ordaining powers. Hence the church today has no power to appoint elders/overseers/guides to their office, or a deacon to his office, simply because we do not have an apostle or a delegate from an apostle to do it.
We realize that this is contrary to the belief and practice of some Christians who think that there are apostles on earth today. The Bible, however, indicates otherwise. It says that the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the Corner-stone. In Whom all the building fitted together increases to a holy temple in the Lord; in Whom ye also are built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit” (Eph. 2:20-22). In this passage of Scripture, the formation of the church is likened to the building of a house. It begins with the laying of the chief Corner-stone (Christ); then the foundation is laid (the apostles and prophets); and then finally, the building goes up wherein every true believer is added, until the whole building is complete at the coming of the Lord. This shows that the place the apostles and prophets occupy in the church is that of the foundation. They were directly used by the Lord to establish the church in the beginning. The epistles they wrote set out the order and function of the church: in them the foundation of Christianity has been laid. The Lord no longer gives apostles to the church because He is no longer building the foundation. It has been laid. In fact, the building is just about complete. We are waiting for the last persons to be saved, so that the last few (living) stones can be put into place in the building. The ministry of the apostles and prophets still remains with the church in their inspired writings, but we no longer have them personally with us on earth (Eph. 4:11-13).
Three Qualifications for Apostleship
We list the following three things that qualify a person for apostleship. These things show that there could not be apostles on earth today.
• They had to have seen the Lord personally (1 Cor. 9:1; 2 Cor. 12:2).
• They had to be chosen and sent directly by the Lord (Luke 6:13; John 6:70; Acts 9:15; 22:21).
• They had to be a witness of His resurrection (Acts 1:22; 1 Cor. 15:8, 15).
The Bible does tell us that there will be impostors posing themselves as apostles. Therefore, any person who claims apostleship today could only be putting themselves in that category (Rev. 2:2 – “them which say they are apostles;” 2 Cor. 11:13-15 – “false apostles;” 2 Tim. 3:13)
Mr. Kelly said, “It is clear that we have neither apostles living on earth, nor representatives, like Titus, charged by an apostle to do quasi-apostolic work. The consequence is, that now, if subject to the Word of God, you cannot, and do not, look for elders in their precise official form. If any man allege these can be, it might be well to hear his grounds from Scripture. What has been produced, in my judgment, is amply sufficient to disprove it. You cannot have persons formally and duly appointed to this office, unless you have a power formally and duly authorized of the Lord to appoint them. But you have not that indispensably needful power to authenticate elders: this is your fatally weak point. You neither have apostles or functionaries commissioned by the apostles to act in their stead: and therefore the entire system of appointment breaks down for want of competent authority.”
Are There Elders Today?
Some might ask, “Does this mean that you don't believe in having elders?” Though we do not have anyone to appoint elders today, we mustn’t think that the work of oversight does not go on. If that were so, God has left the local assemblies without leadership when He took the apostles away to heaven. The Holy Spirit still raises up men to carry on this work (Acts 20:28). In a gathering of Christians meeting together according to Scripture, there will normally be men who will carry on this work. They will be known by the work they do, and are to be recognized as such, even though they have not been officially appointed to that office. We are to:
• “Know” them (1 Thess. 5:12, 1 Cor. 16:15).
• “Esteem” them (1 Thess. 5:13).
• “Honour” them (1 Tim. 5:17).
• “Remember” them (Heb. 13:7).
• “Follow” their faith (Heb. 13:7).
• “Obey” them (Heb. 13:17).
• “Submit” to them (Heb. 13:17).
• “Salute” them (Heb. 13:24).
But nowhere in Scripture is the Church told to ordain them, simply because the church has no power to do so. The Spirit of God has fully anticipated a time when the apostles would not be on earth to appoint elders, and He has given us some guiding principles in the Word so that we might know those whom He has raised up to carry on this work in a local assembly. There were at least two assemblies that Paul wrote to that did not have ordained elders. Nevertheless, in writing to them he marked out a principle that set apart certain ones for that work in those assemblies, and it gives us a valuable guideline today when we have no official appointment of elders.
In writing to the Corinthians, he told them to acknowledge those of the house of Stephanas, and others like them who “addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints.” He said that they were to acknowledge such as leaders and to submit themselves to them (1 Cor. 16:15-18).
In writing to the Thessalonians, Paul told them to acknowledge those that laboured among them for the good of the assembly. They would be known by their labours among the flock. Consequently, the assembly was to “esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake” (1 Thess. 5:12-13).
Mr. Kelly said, “What then? Are there none suitable to be elders or bishops, if there are no apostles to choose them? Thank God, there are not a few! You can hardly look into an assembly of His children without hearing of some grave elderly men who go after the wanderers, who warn the unruly, who comfort those who are cast down, who counsel, admonish, and guide souls. Are not these the men who might be elders, if there were a power existing to appoint them? And what is the duty of a Christian man as things now are in the use of what remains? I say not to call them elders, but surely to esteem them highly for their work's sake, and to love and acknowledge them as those who are over the rest of their brethren in the Lord.”
No Ordination Today
The so-called church organizations that we have been speaking of, use ordination as a sanction for a person to minister among them, but Scripture never does. If a certain number of Christians organize themselves into what they call a church, with their own creeds and rules of government, surely no one could be free to minister in their organization without its sanction. It could hardly be otherwise. After all, it’s their system. If someone wants to minister in that sect, he will have to subject himself to its rules and regulations. But all this is only further proof that these organizations are sects indeed.
Even though most Christians believe that a person must be ordained before he can minister in the church, there is not one person in the Bible who was ordained by men to preach the Word to the church! Not one! It is time that we got back to a Scriptural practice in these things.
"But People Were Ordained in the Bible!"
People often reply to this, “But people were ordained in the Bible.” Yes, the Bible tells us that Paul and Barnabas ordained elders in every city on one of their missionary journeys (Acts 14:23). But there is not a single instance in Scripture where Paul, Barnabas, Titus etc., ever ordained a pastor, teacher, or evangelist! For that matter, there is no Scripture where they ordained a prophet or a priest either! There is not the slightest hint of any of these being ordained. Where do the denominational churches get authority in the Word of God to do this? To repeat W. T. P. Wolston’s remark, “The idea is in people’s heads, but not in Scripture.” If it was God’s will for the church, then He would have instructed us in His Word about it.
Now, it is true that gifted men were ordained, but not for the purpose of carrying out the ministry of their gift! Those who were ordained by the Apostle (or an apostle’s delegate) were chosen to fill the office of an overseer/elder/guide in an official way. Since all believers have a gift, these men must have had a gift too. Some of them may have even had the gift of pastor or teacher (1 Tim. 5:17), but we repeat, their ordination was not to exercise their gift, but to fill the office to which they were appointed.
The Laying On Of Hands
What about Acts 13:1-4, which says, “Now there were in Antioch, in the assembly which was there, prophets and teachers: Barnabas and Simeon who is called Niger, Lucius the Cyrenian, and Manaen, foster-brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. And as they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, Separate Me now Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them. Then having fasted and prayed, and having laid their hands on them, they let them go?” This seems to show that it is necessary for a person, even an apostle, to be ordained before he can go forth preaching.
Many.ideas that people have on divine subjects, come from casually reading of the Word of God. People often do not take time to carefully and prayerfully search the Scriptures before drawing their conclusions. This subject of the laying on of hands is a prime example. First of all, we have no authority to say that this was ordination. It does not say that it was. The word (ordain) does not even appear in the passage. It mentions the laying on of hands, but it is an assumption to think that ordination comes through the laying on of hands. In each case where elders were ordained in the Bible, there is no mention that hands were ever laid on them! It may be that hands were laid on those who were ordained, but Scripture does not say so. For that matter, the apostles (or their delegates) may have done a lot of things when they ordained elders, but it would be pure assumption on our part to say they did, simply because Scripture is silent about it. W. Kelly said, “I have no doubt that the Spirit of God knew the superstition that would be attached to it in later years of church history, so He took care never to connect laying on of hands with ordaining elders. ...My assertion is that in this very matter of ordination, Christendom has missed God's mind and will; and is ignorantly, but not without sin, fighting for an order of its own, which is mere disorder.”
It is clear from Acts 11:25-26 and Acts 12:25 that Barnabas and Saul were already in “the ministry” before those in Antioch laid hands on them. Paul did not become fitted for the ministry as an apostle through these men laying hands on him. He said that the Lord did it. Writing to Timothy, he said, “I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry” (1 Tim. 1:12). He did not receive his apostleship from men. Writing to the Galatians, he said, “Paul, an apostle (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, Who raised Him from the dead)” (Gal. 1:1).
If this incident in Acts 13 was ordination, who ordained them? Simeon called Niger, Lucius, Manaen, and perhaps others there? These were prophets and teachers who were second and third in the church (1 Cor. 12:28). If they ordained the apostles, the lessor ordained the greater. This cannot be. Mr. Kelly said, “Did the apostle Paul consider the laying on of the hands of others ordination to his special office? Surely we may believe he did not. Else why, when vindicating his claim to be an apostle, did he not refer to this time and this act? (1 Cor. 9:1; 2 Cor. 11:5; 12:12).”
Acts 14:26 explains what really happened when the hands of others at Antioch were laid on Barnabas and Saul. It says, “They sailed away to Antioch, whence they had been committed [or commended] to the grace of God for the work which they had fulfilled.” This shows that the brethren at Antioch had extended “the right hands of fellowship” to them (Gal. 2:9). They had given Barnabas and Saul their full fellowship and support in the work they were about to do. This may have included a practical gift of financial help and their continued prayers for them in the journey, though Scripture does not specify it. There is nothing in Acts 13:1-4 about Barnabas and Saul being ordained for a place among the clergy.
More than this, the commending of Paul to the grace of God was repeated. It was something that the brethren did for the Lord’s servants each time they went forth in a new work of spreading the gospel (Acts 15:40; Gal. 2:9). This surely proves that it was not ordination, for even those who think they see ordination in Acts 13 do not believe that a person needs to be re-ordained every year or two.
Now if a person’s ordination turns on the validity of the power that appoints him, and Scripture allows no appointing power except that of an apostle, or an envoy from an apostle, then it is clear that those who are trying to ordain today have no power from God for it. A brother who had once submitted to man’s system of ordination aptly put it, “They laid their empty hands on my empty head!”
What about 1 Timothy 4:14, which says, “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of hands of the presbytery [eldership]?” This passage also has the laying on of hands in it, but again, there is no word about ordination. It is an assumption in people’s minds. It really is quite simple. Timothy had a gift from the Lord; and it was prophesied by a prophet (or prophets) that he would be used of the Lord in the exercise of it. The elders recognized the gift that he had from the Lord, and extended the right hands of fellowship to him in his work. Paul wrote to Timothy, exhorting him not to neglect his gift, and reminded him that others (the elders) were also behind him with their support. This must have been a tremendous encouragement to him.
Collections Versus Tithing
Another thing that has become an integral part of the denominational church services is the use of tithing (giving 10% of one’s income). It is something that is distinctly Jewish, and has been borrowed from that earthly order of things that the epistle to the Hebrews calls “the camp” (Lev. 27:30-34; Num. 18:21-24; Heb. 13:13). It has no place in Christianity. Christianity operates on wholly different and much higher principles than the Mosaic system of law. To impose such a standard on the children of God today in Christianity is to misunderstand grace, and the distinction between Judaism and Christianity.
Tithing was a statute put upon the children of Israel under law. In Christianity the new man does not need a law. He delights in pleasing God and doing His will (Rom. 8:4). To put the new life in Christ under the principle of law is to suppose that there is something in that life that wants to do otherwise, but there is no such impulse in a believer walking in the Spirit. In Judaism, it did not matter whether a person was willing or not, he still had to give his 10%. It was law. This is not at all the principle on which Christians are to give. In 2 Corinthians 8-9, we have the principles for Christian giving. Carefully notice that there is no word in these chapters, or anywhere else in the New Testament, that tells Christians to use the legal method of tithing in their giving.
In these chapters, the principles of Christian giving are laid out quite simply. There is first to be a giving of ourselves to the Lord and to the will of God, then a giving out of our substance according to the measure of what we have. It says, “It is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not” (2 Cor. 8:5, 11-12). Christian giving is something that has to come from the heart before it has value before God. If there is not a “willing mind,” then a person’s giving is really just a legal thing, and there would be no real sacrificial value in it.
These chapters also unfold the purpose of Christian giving. The Apostle shows that it was:
• To express fellowship to the other members in the body of Christ (2 Cor. 8:4).
• To abound in every aspect of Christian experience (2 Cor. 8:7).
• To prove the reality of our love (2 Cor. 8:8, 24).
• To imitate our Lord Jesus (2 Cor. 8:9).
• To help meet the need of others (2 Cor. 8:13-15).
• That we might have the practical experience of God abounding toward us according to His all-sufficiency (2 Cor. 9:8-10).
• To give occasion to others to thank God (2 Cor. 9:11-15).
• That fruit may abound to our account (Phil. 4:17).
In God’s order there are to be collections made on a regular basis on the first day of the week, when the saints come together. The Word of God says, “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches [assemblies] of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him” (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Although the collection mentioned in this verse was for the specific needs of the saints at Jerusalem, the principle holds good for us today. There still exist specific needs in the church.
The time when the collection should be gathered is when the saints gather together for the breaking of bread on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). Hebrews 13:15-16 links the sacrifice of “communicating out of our substance” with “the sacrifice of praise” which is offered at the breaking of bread.
What is appalling in Christendom today, and certainly a dishonor to the Lord is the encouraging of those who are not even saved to give in the collections. The impression this leaves in the minds of those of this world is, that they can do something that is acceptable to God in their unregenerate state. More than this, it also gives the impression that Christianity is a take-and-get system. As one person remarked, “Your God sure must be poor, because He always has you Christians asking for money!”
In the Bible we do not read of collections being taken from those who were not saved. The practice of the early church was to take no public collections. To guard against such notions that the world might have, the servants of the Lord in the early church, were careful to take “nothing” from those in the nations to which they carried the gospel, who didn't know the Lord (3 John 7). This is still God’s order for the church today.
Discipline in the Church
Another subject to do with local church government that is neglected in the so-called churches is that of discipline and excommunication. As we showed in the chapter entitled “A Call to Separation,” every individual Christian is responsible to separate from evil. It is obvious, therefore, that an assembly of Christians is to keep itself pure from evil too. This is a corporate responsibility. The reason for this is because association with evil defiles the whole assembly.
As we have already mentioned, the three main kinds of evil that are to be kept out of the midst of a company of Christians are: moral evil, doctrinal evil, and ecclesiastical evil. If a person in an assembly becomes involved in or associated with such evil, the local assembly is responsible to put that person out of its fellowship. The Apostle Paul said, “Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from yourselves that wicked person” (1 Cor. 5:12-13). This shows that the assembly is responsible to judge evil in its midst when it appears.
There are three main reasons why the assembly is to put away evil persons.
1) The Lord’s Glory
The assembly must be careful to not allow the Lord's Name to be associated with evil before the eyes of the world. When the Corinthians acted for the Lord’s glory and put out the person engaged in sin, the Apostle wrote commending them, saying, “Behold this self-same thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge!” (2 Cor. 7:11). They acted with vehement zeal and revenge for the Lord's glory.
2) Holiness in the Assembly Must be Maintained
There are two reasons for this: firstly, the assembly is God’s dwelling place. It must be kept as a fit place for His holy presence. The Lord dwells in the midst of His people gathered to His Name (Matt. 18:20), and therefore, the assembly is to keep evil out of its midst so that it would remain a fit place for His presence. “Holiness becometh thine house, O Lord, forever,” is a principle that holds good for all ages (Psa. 93:5). “He that worketh deceit shall not dwell within my house” (Psa. 101:7; 1 Corinthians 3:17; Num. 5:1-4). The second reason is the leavening character of sin. As we have mentioned earlier, association with evil defiles. The Apostle Paul said, “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump” (1 Cor. 5:6-8; Gal. 5:9-12). He also said, “Evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33). If the assembly did not put away evil from its midst, before long others would be affected by it.
3) The Correction and Restoration of the Offender
The action of putting someone out of fellowship should always have the good and blessing of the erring person in view. He is put out and not socialized with, so that he might be broken down in repentance and restored to the Lord. “I have written unto you, if anyone called a brother be a fornicator, or avaricious, or idolator, or abusive, or a drunkard, or rapacious, not to mix with him; with such a one not even to eat” (1 Cor. 5:11). When the person is repentant and has judged his sin, the assembly is to receive him back into fellowship. Concerning the sinning person that the Corinthians put away from among themselves, the Apostle Paul said, “Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him” (2 Cor. 2:6-8).
The assembly should always take the matter up as their sin. Their attitude in regard to excommunicating someone, should be that of mourning—owning they have failed in not being able reach him when he was on a course toward the sin. This is what the Corinthians had not done. Paul said to them, “Ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you” (1 Cor. 5:2). Each one in the assembly should search his heart asking themselves, “What could I have done that might have stopped this person from failing?” We must see that we have had a part in it; in that we have not shepherded this person properly, or that we have not prayed for that person enough, etc. This is what is referred to as “eating the sin offering” (Lev. 6:26).
This kind of care for the Lord’s glory is something that is almost non-existent in Christendom today, but nevertheless, should be done by every Christian assembly.
Reception—A Responsibility of the Local Assembly
Another thing the early church practiced that is almost non-existent in Christendom today, is carefulness in receiving persons into fellowship.
Now in view of what the Bible teaches in regard to the purity of the assembly, when someone desires to break bread at “the Lord's table” (1 Cor. 10:21), the assembly must be careful not to bring someone into fellowship who may be involved in evil; whether it be moral, doctrinal, or ecclesiastical. The principle is simple. If a local assembly is responsible to judge evil in its midst, as we have shown (1 Cor. 5:12), then it naturally follows that it must be careful what or who it brings into its midst.
It has been rightly said that the local assembly is not to have an open fellowship, nor is it to have a closed fellowship, but rather, a guarded fellowship. The assembly is to receive to the Lord’s table every member of the body of Christ, whom Scriptural discipline does not prohibit. If it did otherwise, it would be acting inconsistently with the ground of the one body upon which it professes to be gathered (Eph. 4:4).
While every Christian has a title to be at the Lord’s table, every Christian does not necessarily have a right to be there, because his privilege may be forfeited by his engagement in some evil.
Who Decides Who Should Be In Fellowship?
It is important to understand that the brethren in the local assembly do not decide what is suitable to the Lord’s table and what is not. The Word of God does. This is because it is not their table: it is “the Lord’s table.” Personal preferences, likes and dislikes, of those in the assembly have nothing to do with reception. The Word of God decides all. When there is no Scriptural reason why a person should be refused, the person is received. If a believer has been baptized, is sound in faith and godly in walk, there is no reason why he should be refused. Knowledge of Scripture is not a criterion. A person may be a simple believer, but Scripture says, “Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations” (Rom. 14:1).
However, whether one is sound in faith and godly in walk, often cannot be determined immediately. The greater the confusion from which a person comes in the Christian testimony or in the world, the more difficult it may be to determine. If this be the case, then wisdom would dictate that the assembly should ask the person desiring to be in fellowship to wait awhile. This does not mean that the assembly is saying that the person is connected with evil. He could be, but they simply do not know, and should wait until they are satisfied that he is not; for they are ultimately responsible to God for whom they bring into fellowship. Scripture says, “Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins” (1 Tim. 5:22). Although the application of this verse is broader than reception to the Lord’s table, it gives a principle by which the assembly can be guided in reception. It should not offend a mature and godly person, for certainly no godly Christian would expect the assembly to violate a principle of Scripture. In fact, it should give him confidence that he is coming into a fellowship where there is a concern for the Lord’s glory and the purity of the assembly.
Are Personal Testimonies Enough?
An important principle that needs to be understood in connection with this subject is that the assembly, functioning Scripturally, does not do anything in the mouth of one witness. Things to do with the assembly must be done according to the principle, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses, every word shall be established” (2 Cor. 13:1). Compare also John 8:17 and Deuteronomy 19:15. Accordingly, the assembly is not to receive persons on the basis of their own testimony. And especially so when all people tend to give a good report of themselves, as the Scripture says, “All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes” (Prov. 16:2). And again, “He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory” (John 7:18). This is why a person desiring to come into fellowship may be asked to wait, and especially when the assembly does not know anything about him. Once the local assembly has gotten to know a person who desires to be in fellowship, it can receive him on the basis of the testimony of others.
This is a principle that runs throughout Scripture. Even the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, submitted to this principle when He presented Himself to Israel as their Messiah. He said, “If I bear witness of Myself, my witness is not true [valid].” (John 5:31). He then proceeded to give four other witnesses who testified as to Whom He was: John the Baptist, His works, His Father, and the Scriptures. (John 5:32-39) While having plenty of witnesses of His Messiahship, the Lord warned the Jews that there was a day coming when they, as a nation, would receive a false messiah (Antichrist) without witnesses. He said, “Another shall come in his own name, and him ye shall receive” (John 5:43). Thus the Lord denounced the practice of receiving someone on their own testimony.
The children of Israel failed in this very thing, when they received the Gibeonites on their own testimony (Josh. 9). This is recorded in Scripture to warn us of the danger of such a practice.
Acts 9:26-29, gives us an example of the carefulness the early church had in receiving someone into its fellowship. When Saul of Tarsus got saved, he desired to come into fellowship with the saints at Jerusalem, but was refused. Even though everything he may have said to the brethren in Jerusalem of his personal life was true, still, he was not received on his own testimony. It was not until Barnabas took Saul and brought him to the brethren, and testified of Saul’s faith and character, so that there was the testimony of two men, that they received him. Thereafter, “he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem” (Acts 9:28). If the early church did not receive Saul of Tarsus immediately, surely Christians today should not expect to be received immediately when they desire to be in fellowship at a local assembly.
The Test of a Person's Profession
Another important principle in receiving is that there is such a thing as putting a person's profession to the test. If a man says that he is a Christian, he is to prove it by departing from all known sin. Second Timothy 2:19 says: “Let everyone that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity.” See also Revelation 2:2 and 1 John 4:1. If he does not depart from iniquity, he is not true to his confession. This is especially important in a day of ruin and breakdown in the Christian testimony, where all kinds of evil doctrine and practice abound. An example of this is seen in a type in 1 Chronicles 12:16-18. David was the rejected king of Israel at that time. As ones from various tribes in Israel realized their wrong in rejecting him, they came and owned him as Israel's rightful king. When those from the tribe of Benjamin (King Saul’s tribe) came to him, he put their profession to the test. When their confession was deemed to be real, and they showed that they were truly on David’s side, it says, “Then David received them.”
If a person holds bad doctrine, it is clear that the assembly is not to receive him, for it will be in fellowship with the evil teaching. (Compare 2 John 9-11 and Rom. 16:17-18.) We do not speak of differences people may have on topics such as baptism, but things that touch the foundations of Christian truth. Scripture says, “Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Christ Jesus: that ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God” (Rom. 15:5-7). This shows that the assembly is to receive persons into fellowship when they can glorify God “with one mind and one mouth.” If a person were received who held some evil teaching, how could the assembly do this? They would be speaking one thing, and the person would be speaking another thing. It would be confusion. Paul said to the Corinthians, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10).
With ecclesiastical evil, patience and discernment are required in discerning it in a person. There is a difference between someone associated with clerical error out of ignorance and someone actively upholding and promoting it. A believer who may be ignorant of God's Scriptural order for Christian worship and ministry, may come from a man-made denomination which practices a clerical order of things, wanting to break bread at the Lord’s table. Even though he may be associated with ecclesiastical error, he is not at that point, in ecclesiastical evil. And if such a person is known to be godly in walk and sound in doctrine, there should be no hindrance to allowing him to break bread, even though he has not formally severed his association with that denomination. The whole question is, “When does ignorant ecclesiastical association become ecclesiastical evil?” We believe the simple answer is, “When the person's will is involved.” To ascertain this will require priestly discernment on the part of the assembly. In such cases the assembly needs to be much cast on the Lord to know His mind in the matter. Under normal conditions, the brethren should allow him to break bread, hoping and trusting that God has been working in his heart—and that he will, after being at the Lord’s supper, will leave that ground he formerly has been on and continue with those gathered to the Lord’s Name. This principle is seen in 2 Chronicles 30-31. Hezekiah allowed the people of Judah, and the some from the ten departed tribes, to partake of the Passover, and to worship the Lord at the divine centre in Jerusalem. After they did this, they went home and destroyed their idols and images. (We are not insinuating that man-made denominations are akin with idolatry. We are speaking of the principle only.) The interesting thing to note here is that Hezekiah had not told them to do it! It was a response from their hearts that came purely from their being in the Lord's presence in Jerusalem. However, if a person wants to continue to go to both places regularly, it should not be allowed. As J. .N. .Darby remarked, such a person is not being honest with either. He also said that as looseness and corruption in the Christian testimony rises; it will become increasingly more difficult to practice this principle. More discernment is needed as the days grow darker. In our day it is only acted on infrequently.
Another Old Testament type illustrates the care in receiving. When the city of Jerusalem, the divine centre on earth where the Lord had put His Name, was re-built in the days of Nehemiah, there was great danger from the enemies around them. Consequently, they did not open the gates to allow persons into the city until “the sun was hot [literally—midday]” (Neh. 7:1-3). They made sure there was no trace of darkness around before they received persons into the city. Until that time, they made those wanting to come into the city “stand by” or wait. As the darkness in Christendom grows in these last days, this kind of care must be exercised in receiving. See the same principle in 1 Chronicles 9:17-27 (“doorkeepers”).
All this usually seems quite strange to most Christians who know nothing other than the denominational methods of open fellowship. The emphasis in the churches is to get as many people in the group as possible. Great efforts are made to reach this end. To be careful who is brought into fellowship probably seems a little unusual, but nevertheless, it is what the Word of God teaches.
Too Exclusive!
Some object to these things, declaring that it is being exclusive. We would emphasize again that these principles are not something that we have devised, but principles that the Word of God teaches. Local Christian assemblies are to be exclusive to sin, and if they do not know what a person is connected with, they need to be careful. First Corinthians 11:28 is brought forward to support the idea that each person is individually responsible before the Lord to judge himself, and that it is not the responsibility of the assembly to “screen” people. The verse says, “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.” Those who have this idea are quick to tell us that the assembly is not to “examine” the person, but that the person is to “examine himself,” and then he is to partake of the supper.
Now if the verse meant that, then it would run in collision with the principles we have mentioned above—that the assembly is responsible to judge evil in its midst, and therefore, careful who was in fellowship (1 Cor. 5:12). Since the Word of God does not contradict itself, this verse must be referring to something other than reception to the Lord’s table. A closer look at the context of the chapter wherein the verse lies, gives us to see that the verse is not referring to those who desire to come into fellowship at the Lord’s table, but to those who already are in fellowship there. It is simply saying that each one who is in the fellowship has a responsibility to judge himself before he partakes of the supper. If he does not do this, he “eats and drinks damnation [governmental judgment] to himself” (1 Cor. 11:29).
It is something like the command parents give to their children before they sit down to eat dinner. They say, “Be sure your hands are washed before you sit down.” This command applies to the children who are in that family who partake regularly of the meals in that household; it does not refer to the neighbours down the street. Those in the household who are going to partake of the dinner are to be clean when they come to the table. It is the same in the assembly. Those who are in fellowship at the Lord’s table are the ones who are exhorted to examine themselves before they partake of the supper.
The Responsibility of the Individual
While the local assembly has a responsibility in this matter, on the one hand, the person seeking to come into fellowship with a local assembly has a responsibility too. If he desires to walk uprightly before the Lord, he will want to be careful in this step. Notwithstanding, many Christians think that they can associate with whatever they want and not be affected by it, but the Bible teaches that we are affected by those with whom we associate, and a person seeking fellowship with an assembly of Christians he knows little or nothing about, should be careful. The principle of association with evil defiles, works both ways. The assembly must be careful as to who and what is in its fellowship, but the individual seeking to be in fellowship should be careful too. Scripture says, “Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men’s sins: keep thyself pure” (1 Tim. 5:22). This was written to an individual in the house of God in regard to fellowship. The responsibility of every Christian is to keep himself pure because “evil communications corrupt good manners” (1 Cor. 15:33).
In view of this, why would someone come to an assembly of Christians, of which he has no knowledge of what they hold or practice, and insist on breaking bread with them, when it means that he is in association with all that goes on there? How does he know that he hasn’t stepped into a company of people that hold blasphemous doctrines or carry on with horrendous practices? Our only conclusion is that such a person has never considered these things, or that he simply does not believe them to be true.
This care that every individual believer ought to have is seen in a type in the Old Testament regarding Israel’s worship. The Lord said, “Take heed to thyself that thou offer not thy burnt offerings in every place that thou seest, but in the place the Lord shall choose” (Deut. 12:13-14). This principle will guide a Christian who is looking for the place of the Lord’s appointment today. The children of Israel were not to offer their sacrifices and worship just anywhere—and Christians shouldn’t either. A Christian shouldn’t just go any place to offer up his worship to the Lord. He is to do it only in the place where God would have him to be. In view of the evil and departure from the Word of God in the Christian testimony today, and the danger of being led into error, a person shouldn’t be in a hurry to offer his sacrifice of praise in fellowship with an assembly of Christians that he knows nothing about. He should find out a little about that company of Christians first. He needs to ask, “What do these Christians hold as to doctrine and practice?” If a person has found the place that he believes the Lord is leading him to, he shouldn’t be in a hurry to break bread with them. He needs to pray about it, and wait on the Lord until he is satisfied that he is not associating himself with something that is a dishonour to the Lord. May the Lord guide the reader in this important step.
Letters of Commendation
Another thing closely connected with receiving is the use of letters of commendation. This is a letter written from one assembly to another (signed by two or three), commending a certain person or persons to the fellowship of the saints in that locality to where they are traveling. Again, this is something that is not generally practiced in the churches in Christendom.
An example of this practice, among the early Christians, is seen in the case of Apollos in Acts 18:24-28. It says, “When he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace.” Apollos was an extremely gifted man, yet needed a letter of commendation from the brethren in order for him to be received by the assemblies in Achaia, who until then, knew nothing about him. This shows the care there was among the early Christians as to whom they were in fellowship with. See also Romans 16:1 and 2 Corinthians 3:1-3.
The Sister's Sphere of Ministry in the Church
Another area where the so-called churches in Christendom have departed from God’s order is in the place and ministry of sisters. The question could be asked, “Do you believe that a sister can be a minister?” We answer, “Yes, because Scripture says so.” Romans 16:1 says: “I commend unto you Phoebe, our sister, who is minister of the assembly which is in Cenchrea.” In fact, we believe that God would have all the sisters in the church to be ministers—that is, in the Biblical sense of the word. However, if the question is using the word “minister,” according to conventional terminology, which assumes the false position of the clergy; we do not for a moment, believe that a sister—or a brother for that matter—should be in such a place. It is quite clear from Scripture that the role of women in the church is not a public thing.
As to public prayer, the Bible says, “I will therefore that men pray everywhere” (1 Tim. 2:8). God gives no such word to the women. They are to pray, of course, but not everywhere—i.e. in a public forum.
As to teaching or preaching, the Word of God says, “Let your women keep silent in the assemblies: for it is not permitted to them to speak: but to be in subjection, as the law also says” (1 Cor. 14:34-38). And, “Let the women learn in quietness in all subjection; but I do not suffer a woman to teach nor exercise authority over man, but to be in quietness; for Adam was formed first, then Eve: and Adam was not deceived; but the woman, having been deceived, was in the transgression” (1 Tim. 2:11-12). If women were to minister the Word publicly in the assembly, Paul would have included them in his directions for public ministry. But in 1 Corinthians 14:29, where he gives those directions he says, “Let the prophets speak...” He does not say, “Let the prophetesses speak.” In fact, in the church at Thyatira there was a woman who had assumed the role of teaching, but the Lord gave His disapproval of it, saying, “I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest [permittest] that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach” (Rev. 2:20).
Likewise, when it comes to exercising authority in the administrative affairs of a local assembly, the Word of God says that those in that place were to be “husbands of one wife” (1 Tim. 3:2). In this connection, the Word of God says, “The apostles and elders came together for to consider this matter” (Acts 15:6, 7). There is no mention of women (or young people) being involved in this administrative work. Moreover, when those men came together to consider those administrative things, Peter spoke to them, saying, “Brethren, ye know ... ” The word “brethren” here is literally, “Men brethren” or “brothers”). He did not address the women because they were not there. This shows that the women, though they are an important part of the assembly, were not part of the administrative leadership in the church. Scripture speaks of “leading men among brethren,” but it never speaks favorably of women leading among brethren (Acts 15:22). They are not to “exercise authority” over men (1 Tim. 2:12).
The Sister’s Ministry
It is clear then that Scripture affirms that sisters are not to have the role of public ministry, but they do, however, have a tremendous ministry to perform for the Lord—which the men often cannot do. Their ministry is in a private or domestic sphere; they have no need to rival the brothers in their sphere of public ministry and administration. Scripture says, “The aged women....that they might admonish the young women to be attached to their husbands, to be attached to their children, discreet chaste, diligent in home work, good, subject to their own husbands, that the Word of God be not evil spoken of” (Titus 2:4-5). And, “I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house...” (1 Tim. 5:14). “Thy wife shall be as a fruitful vine in the inner part of thy house” (Psa. 128:3). Many other Scriptures could be quoted here to show the sphere wherein the sisters are to minister.
How sad it is to see in almost every Christian assembly today, that this order is not observed. Women are preaching and teaching from the pulpits and are in leadership roles in the various so-called churches. The Scriptures we have quoted are either explained away or regarded as antiquated and prejudiced. Far too often we see the order of the roles of ministry for brothers and sisters reversed. For instance, we hear of brothers (in the role of a Pastor) taking aside women—often young women—for the purpose of counseling them in regard to their personal lives. And then, all too often, they fall into some immorality to the dishonour of the Lord. One report we have tells us that over 80% of men in “the ministry” who have fallen morally, had their fall come as a result of these counseling sessions! Much of this wouldn’t have happened if the women in the church did that ministry.
Scripture indicates that this kind of personal counseling is not a ministry for brothers; it belongs to sisters, preferably older sisters. This is taught in Paul’s epistle to Titus. Among other things (choosing overseers, etc.), Titus was to convey a word of exhortation to the Cretian believers of every class. There was something he was to deliver to “the aged men,” to “the aged women,” to “the young women,” to “the young men,” and the “servants” (Titus 2:1-10). Titus was to deliver these messages personally to each—except to the young women. Paul specifically indicated that he should tell the older sisters to convey that message to them. That pastoral work was not a sphere of ministry for Titus. W. Kelly said, “We may observe the wise and holy way in which the latter [Titus] is told to admonish the young women, not directly, but through the elders of their own sex.” If a brother is to be involved at all in such counseling, it would be with his wife. This is just one example of a ministry that God has given to sisters that is not given to brothers.
Yet sisters who have accepted God’s order, as far as their sphere of ministry is concerned, have found a peace and a contentment in doing God's will that is beyond explanation.
Three Reasons Why Sisters Have A Subordinate Place in Christianity
We realize that this is not popular today, and will be particularly hard to accept for some who lean toward the philosophy of the “Women’s Liberation Movement.” Regardless of today’s popular philosophy, the Bible gives at least three reasons why sisters are to have a place of submission in Christianity. After the Apostle Paul spoke of the sister’s place in the house of God, in 1 Timothy 2:9-12, he went on to tell us why, using the word, “For,” in the following verse (13).
1) Creatorial
“For Adam was first formed then Eve” (1 Tim. 2:13). God could have made the man and the woman at the same time, but He chose to make Adam first. He did this to indicate that it was His intention from the beginning that the man should have the place of leading in the creation. Men have not taken or seized that place—as some think—it was given to them by God. Furthermore, the fact that God made man the stronger gender of the two also indicates that it was His mind that the man should be in the place of leader (1 Peter 3:7). Also, the very make-up of women is largely emotional. This is much needed for their God-given sphere of service, but can be disastrous in administration and other leadership responsibilities where emotions must be kept under control. He gave the woman to the man to be his helpmeet and complement, not his rival (Gen. 2:18, 1 Cor. 11:9). The two complement each other wonderfully, when they function in their God-given places.
2) Governmental
“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression” (1 Tim. 2:14). Paul goes on to gives a second reason. When Eve acted independently, and took the lead in Adam’s house, failure came in. Her place from that time on would be that of subjection to her husband. It was God’s governmental judgment upon her. This may seem a little severe, nevertheless, the Lord said to the woman, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Gen. 3:16). The sister that acknowledges this place that God has given to her, and submits to His will for her in it, can be a real blessing (Psa. 128:3 – “fruitful”). In Scripture, the women who refused to accept their God-given place, who took the lead in things, usually brought in confusion and ruin (Gen. 3:6; 1 Kings 21:25; 2 Kings 11:3; Matt. 13:33; Rev. 2:20; 1 Cor. 14:33-34). We must not think that God’s governmental dealings have only been on the woman. The man is under God's governmental judgment too. He must submit to God’s governmental judgment in the place that he has been put. Since the fall of Adam, the man has been responsible to work laboriously to provide food and shelter for the woman whom he marries, and his household (Gen. 3:17-19). A man who will not, is worse than an infidel (1 Tim. 5:8).
3) Testimonial
Elsewhere, the Apostle Paul says, “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be subject to their own husbands in everything... This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph. 5:22-24, 32). This is a third reason why Christian women are to take a place of submission. The sisters who are in a marriage relationship can by their subjection to their husbands, exhibit to the world a little picture of the church's submission to Christ.
"But the Bible Says That Women Are To Pray and Prophesy!"
Some do not believe that the passages quoted in 1 Corinthians 14:33-38 and 1 Timothy 2:11-14, concerning the women’s place, could be referring to preaching and teaching, because it would contradict 1 Corinthians 11:5, which says, “Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth...” It is argued that God would not tell women to pray and prophesy in one place, and then turn around and tell them not to do it in another. They conclude that the “speaking” in 1 Corinthians 14 must be referring to some local problem in Corinth where the women were interrupting the congregational worship by asking unrelated questions that could be asked at home.
Firstly, if we believe that the Bible is inspired by the infallible God, then certainly we must accept that there could be there are no contradictions or mistakes in His holy Word. The “workman” needs to rightly divide the Word of truth to get the meaning of a particular passage (2 Tim. 2:15). If we look more carefully at 1 Corinthians 11, we will see that the verse that speaks of women praying and prophesying (vs. 5) comes before the directions for the saints when they are assembled together (verse 17). Verse 17 of that chapter marks a new paragraph and goes into the order of things when the saints are assembled for worship and ministry. It says, “But in prescribing to you on this which I now enter on, I do not praise, namely that ye come together, not for the better, but for the worse. For first, when ye come together in assembly...” From this verse on through the 14th chapter, the Apostle addresses issues directly related to when the saints are together in an assembly. This is indicated by Paul repeatedly saying, “When ye come together” (1 Cor. 11:17, 18, 20, 33, 34; 14:23, 26). As we have said, the verses that refer to women praying and prophesying are found in the section preceding his directions for the saints when assembled. This shows that in that passage (vss. 2-16), he is not referring to activities exclusively when the saints are assembled for ministry. It is broader than that; and therefore, would include the domestic sphere, etc. R.K. Campbell said, “This passage (vs. 2-16) permits such activity by a woman, but does not indicate where it was to be exercised. But the 14th chapter distinctly says that such ministry of women is not permitted in the assembly.” This shows that God did not restrict sisters from praying and prophesying. They had plenty of opportunity to do so, in their domestic sphere outside the public meetings of the assembly. There is then, no contradiction in these two passages. One is referring to when the saints are “in the assembly,” as the verse duly specifies (1 Cor. 14:34); and the other refers to a more general thing, not being specific to the assembly (1 Cor. 11:5).
In answering the objections people have to the plain statements of Scripture, we are constantly faced with ideas that people have reasoned into the Scriptures. The assumption that the Corinthian women were disturbing the meetings with unrelated questions and gossip is a classic example of this very thing. Scripture says nothing about it. The habit of the Apostle Paul in how he handled the Scriptures was quite the opposite to Christians today. He did not reason into the Scriptures, he reasoned from what he got out of the Scriptures (Acts 17:2). This should be a guideline for us.
The context of the chapter is the exercising of one’s gift in prophesying (ministering) in the assembly, not gossip. The word in the original language translated “speak” in 1 Corinthians 14:34, applied to women, is the same word used elsewhere in the chapter when it says, “Let the prophets speak...” and “if any man speak...” etc. All without argument would take these references to speaking to mean the ministering of the Word. Yet many, when they come to the verse in the same chapter that prohibits sisters from speaking, want to change the meaning of it to gossiping. It seems that they will accept almost any explanation of meaning—even if it is irrational, as long as it is not prophesying or ministering the Word. This wresting of the Word of God is only done because there is an agenda—they want the women preaching, and are looking for some excuse to explain away the plain words of Scripture.
"But We Are Not to Regard Distinctions of Male And Female in the Church!"
Others will agree that God has distinctive roles for the man and the woman, and believe that they should be observed, but only in our natural relationships at home. When it comes to the assembly, they think that such distinctions of male and female are not to be regarded, because the Word of God says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28). It is believed by many theologians that this universal statement supersedes the narrower dictates of Paul’s other statements in 1 Corinthians 14, and 1 Timothy 2.
This misunderstanding comes from failing to distinguish between position and practice. The key that unravels the confusion that exists in the minds of some lies in understanding what the term “in Christ Jesus” means. It describes our place of individual acceptance before God, in the very position that Christ now occupies as Man in the glory. It denotes the full Christian position before God in new creation, and is inseparably bound up with the Holy Spirit's indwelling. Paul uses it many times in his epistles (Rom. 8:1; Eph. 1:6; 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15; Eph. 2:13, etc.). The point in Galatians 3:28 is that all believers, regardless of their nationality, social background, or sex, are all equally blessed in that place of acceptance before God in heaven. It is a positional term. However, 1 Corinthians 14, and 1 Timothy 2, refer to a practical order of things among Christians on earth. There are two terms that distinguish these two things; “in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28), and “in the assemblies” (1 Cor. 14:34). One speaks of what the saints are in Christ's place before God in heaven, the other speaks of what they are when gathered together for worship and ministry on earth. There is then no difference among believers when it comes to their place of acceptance in Christ; and a very great difference in their practical functioning in the assembly. When we understand the difference between the two things, we will see that the place and service of brothers and sisters in the assembly are quite distinct.
"But Those Things Only Apply To Corinth!"
Others say that this prohibition of women speaking in the assembly applied to the Corinthian assembly only, where the city was particularly noted for having loud and brazen women. It is supposed that these Corinthian women, after they were saved, would carry on in their old habits, and thus, it led to disturbances in the meetings. Paul’s answer to this local problem was to have them be silent until they knew how to behave better. It is therefore concluded that this injunction has no application to women in the church today.
Again, it is pure assumption to say that the women were acting in this way. Scripture does not say this was the problem. Furthermore, there is simply no truth to the idea that these instructions were only for Corinth. The beginning of this epistle shows that the principles given in the epistle are for more than just those in that assembly, but for “all in every place who call on the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor. 1:2). Also, the very passage in question in 1 Corinthians 14 clearly tells us that this injunction was for “all the assemblies of the saints” (1 Cor. 14:33-34).
"But We Don't Want to Turn People Away From Christianity!"
Some believe that we should not practice these things because it might offend unsaved people (especially women) who are onlookers of Christianity. They believe that it may turn people away from God altogether, because they will think that Christianity makes women second rate.
This argument suggests that how the world perceives Christianity is more important than obeying Scripture. It implies that it is acceptable to disobey the Word of God if, in the end, we can win someone through it. But Scripture says that obedience to God is greater than any service we can do for Him. “Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams”(1 Sam. 15:22). We must obey God first and leave the results in testimony to Him. As we have said earlier, our responsibility is to take care of principles and God will take care of the persons. Let us remember that it is His work. Ultimately He is the One Who produces spiritual exercise in people by His quickening power. The Lord commended the assembly at Philadelphia, saying, “Thou hast a little strength, and hast kept My Word, and hast not denied My Name” (Rev. 3:8). Surely we cannot expect to have His commendation and blessing if we disobey the plain teaching of His Word. Let us do what we know we should do, and leave the rest to Him.
"That's Just Old Paul!"
Others look at the things written by the Apostle Paul on the woman’s place as being ignorant, insensitive to women. They view his teachings on this subject as being just some of his own personal ideas resulting from being a bachelor.
For people to reason this way leaves us to wonder whether they believe in the inspiration of Scripture. Let us remember that these things are divinely inspired Scripture. They are not just the far out opinions of a bachelor: they are the commandments of the Lord! In the same chapter that Paul spoke of those things concerning the woman's place, he also said, “If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. If any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant” (1 Cor. 14:37).
Head Coverings
Another thing that has been disregarded among Christians today is the use of head coverings. First Corinthians 11 gives very clear and explicit instructions for sisters to have their heads covered when divine subjects are in discussion. Since this passage of Scripture does not specify where head coverings are to be worn, we have no authority to say that it only applies to assembly meetings. It is broader than that. Its application extends to whenever the Word of God is studied, whether it is in public meetings or in private study.
A question is sometimes asked, “Why would God have the sisters to cover their heads? What point is there in it anyway?” God not only tells us to do something, but He also tells us why. This is the beauty of Christianity. We have an “intelligent [reasonable] service” (Rom. 12:1). When we understand why God would have us practice something, we should be even more interested in obeying His Word, for we are able to do it intelligently and with purpose. This is in contrast to the service rendered under the legal system; much of what they did in their service of God they did not understand.
The acts of uncovering the heads of brothers and covering the heads of sisters are a demonstration of the principles involved in the confession of Christianity. The Apostle shows in the beginning of the chapter, that in Christianity, the man’s head represents Christ. He says, “I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3). Then he shows that since this is so, the brothers are to uncover their heads when divine subjects are in discussion. In doing this, they are acknowledging that all glory belongs to Christ. It is a deliberate act in testimony on the part of the brethren, and reflects our desire to bring all glory to Christ, our living Head in heaven. He said, “A man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God” (1 Cor. 11:7). This act glorifies Christ and should be undertaken with this in view.
On the other hand, the woman in Christianity represents the glory of man. It says, “Woman is man's glory. For man is not of woman, but woman of man. For also man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man. Therefore ought the woman to have authority [a token of authority] on her head on account of the angels” (1 Cor. 11:7-10). The woman’s hair is a sign of the natural glory of the first man. It is her permanent veil of beauty and glory (1 Cor. 11:15). The Apostle taught that the woman’s hair should be covered when divine things are in discussion because of what it represents. When sisters wear a head covering they are telling out the fact that we do not recognize the first man as having any place in Christianity. It is a confession that man and his glory has no place in divine things.
Paul added, “Because of the angels’ (1 Cor. 11:10). God has established a certain order in His creation. Christian men and women are not to neglect this order, but to remember that they are a divinely appointed spectacle. The angels are learning the wisdom of God in His ways among Christians on earth (1 Cor. 4:9; Eph. 3:10).
"Head Coverings Are an Ancient Cultural Custom That Are Not to be Regarded Today!"
It is argued that these instructions from the Apostle Paul were only for the Corinthians of that day. Hence, the wearing of head coverings is explained away as being an ancient cultural custom that doesn’t have any application to women today.
Again, this is pure assumption. Paul never said that it would be for that day only. If these things were only for that day, why is it that the church has observed these instructions regarding head coverings from its inception until about 50 years ago? That is over 1900 years! Has the church been wrong in doing it all these years? The Spirit of God appears to have anticipated this time in which we live, when there would be those who would argue about these things. So the Paul was led to write, “If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God” (1 Cor. 11:16). The “we” in this verse refers to the apostles who were given to the church to lay the foundation of Christianity through their ministry. He is saying in this verse, that if there are those who want to argue about these things, let them know that the apostles have “no such custom,” that women should appear with their heads uncovered when the Scriptures are read. They did not at any time deliver any such custom to the church.
We again remind the reader that things that Paul taught regarding head coverings is not something that was exclusively for the Corinthians, but is for “all in every place” (1 Cor. 1:2).
"But the Woman's Hair is Her Covering!"
Another common argument used to explain away the use of head coverings is verse 15. It says, “If a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given to her for a covering.” They take from this that if a woman has long hair (and some not so long), then she is fulfilling this Scripture, for her hair acts as a covering. Therefore, women do not need to wear an artificial head covering because they have a head covering on their heads already.
However, if we looked at this passage more carefully, we would see that there are two coverings mentioned in these verses. Paul purposely used two different words to distinguish the two things. Unfortunately in most English Bibles, the translators have not indicated it; and therefore, a reader might honestly conclude that the woman's hair is a sufficient covering. However, the word in the original language for “covering” in verses 4-6, is a different word than the one used in verse 15. The word in verse 15 [peribolaiou] indicates the hair flung around the head. Modern language might call it a hairdo or something equal to that. Hence, the woman's hair is a veil (or covering) of glory and beauty that nature has given to her. But the word in verses 4-6 [katakalupo] indicates an artificial covering for the hair, such as a hat, or a scarf, etc. From this, it is quite clear that there is no basis for the idea that women do not need to wear head coverings.
Some of the arguments people come up with so that they can do their own will, are usually quite ridiculous when you think them through to their logical conclusion. This particular idea that a woman’s covering could be deduced to mean her hair is an example. If hair is the covering referred to in this passage, then the men have a covering on their heads too, for they have hair just as much as women do! And if their hair is a covering, how would they ever be able to pray and prophesy in obedience to God’s Word, for the brothers are not to minister with their heads covered? (1 Cor. 11:4) Did Paul mean that all the brothers in the meeting who minister the Word are to have shaved heads? Surely those who have these objections don’t believe this. And if they do believe that, why don’t they practice it? We do not know of one Christian group that has such a practice. It, of course, is not the meaning of the passage.
"Bearing His Reproach"
When we look at this subject of the sister’s place and ministry in the church in view of the decline of the Christian testimony in the last days, it is quite obvious that the refusal of women to accept their God-given place is just another evidence of the great departure.
The problem with this—and many other subjects we have touched on in this book—is that Christians do not want to bear the reproach connected with practicing Biblical Christianity. Consequently, they come up with all sorts of excuses why they should not go by the plain statements of the Word of God. Those who heed the exhortation to “go forth unto Him without the camp” are going to bear “His reproach” (Heb. 13:13). There is no getting away from it; it is normal Christianity. We, therefore, must be prepared to accept it. While we may bear reproach for His name’s sake, we will also have a sense of His approval in our souls. This is because there is joy in the path of doing God's will that is known only by those who walk in it. “I delight to do Thy will, O my God” (Psa. 40:8; Jer. 15:16).
Conclusions
Which Denomination Would Peter, Paul and John Join?
Let us put the whole question of denominational (and non-denominational) church organization another way. Suppose for a moment we could transport Peter, Paul, and John, and some of the others from the early church into our day. Let us suppose that we have brought them fresh from one of their meetings where they have been gathered unto the Name of the Lord Jesus alone (Matt. 18:20); where they have broken bread in remembrance of the Lord as a regular thing each Lord's day (Acts 20:7); knowing nothing other than the liberty of the Spirit in leading whomever He would to speak in the assembly in worship and ministry (1 Cor. 14:23-32), where they have maintained Scriptural discipline (1 Cor. 5:9-13; 1 Tim. 5:20; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14-15; 1 Thess. 5:14; Gal. 6:1, etc.), where they have endeavored to maintain the truth in practice that “there is one body” in matters of reception and discipline (Eph. 4:3-4), etc. From this, we bring them onto the streets of one of the major cities in North America where they see Christendom in all of its full-blown confusion, with the numerous sects and divisions, the evil and erroneous doctrines, the lavish and ornate buildings for worship borrowed from Judaism, the clergymen interfering with the simplicity of God’s order of worship and ministry, women in the pulpits preaching, women with their heads uncovered, the robed choirs, the orchestras, the world famous athletes testifying of their conversions, the rock concerts, gay persons in positions in church government, etc. We calmly pause and ask the question, “What denomination do you think they would join?” It does not take a great deal of discernment to conclude that they wouldn’t join any of them.
To put the question closer to home, if you walked with the apostles down the streets of one of these cities, having known something of the truth of God's order for the function of the church that Scripture shows, and seeing the confusion that they see as you look with them at these various so-called churches, “Which denomination would you join?”
"Should We Start Up A Christian Fellowship According To These Biblical Principles?"
After learning some of these principles having to do with the church and its order as found in Scripture, someone might ask, “Since we shouldn't be joining a denomination on account of its man-made order, should we then start up a fellowship following the true Scriptural order?” Our answer is no, because we believe that it may be an act of independency. We do not mean that new gatherings should not be formed, but that there is another principle that must be taken into consideration before such a thing would meet God's approval. Christians are to meet together on the ground of the “one body” (Eph. 4:4). To do this, a group of Christians needs to meet together for worship and ministry in fellowship with other assemblies of believers similarly gathered with whom they can express this truth practically, in matters of reception, discipline, letters of commendation, etc. A few Christians, who would seek to meet together in the Lord’s name independently, cannot practice this truth by themselves. To form a fellowship of Christians without this in view is really taking the ground of independency.
The Ground of the “One Body”
Before we speak of what exercised Christians ought to do, we feel it necessary that we establish the importance of the truth of the “one body.” God’s purpose is that the Lord Jesus “should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad,” so that there would be “one flock and one Shepherd” (John 11:51-52; 10:16). While these verses actually refer to the oneness in the family, they clearly show that God desires that His people would be found gathered together in a visible unity on earth. Matthew 18:20 also indicates this. It says, “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them.” The passive tense (“are gathered”) indicates that a power beyond their own has gathered them together unto the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. This power is that of the Holy Spirit. He is the divine Gatherer. But notice, not only does the Spirit gather believers unto the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, but that He gathers them “together” unto His name. This refers to a practical unity; and we learn from other Scriptures that this practical unity is not just in the locality where those believers meet; it refers to believers in other assemblies who are similarly gathered on that same ground (1 Cor. 1:2; 4:17; 5:3-4; 10:16-17; 11:16; 14:33-34; 16:1). Binding decisions made in one assembly are to be acknowledged and bowed to in the other assemblies, so that the truth of the “one body” will be practically expressed on earth.
If one local assembly should make a binding decision in putting someone away from its fellowship, the body at large is to act in fellowship with that local assembly and recognize the action. They are to bow to the judgment made in that local assembly, so that the person “put away” is regarded as “without” in other gatherings too, not just in the locality where he resides. We see this in 1 Corinthians 5:13, where the local assembly at Corinth was to put away that wicked person from their midst. But 2 Corinthians 2:6 tells us that the “rebuke” was “inflicted by the many.” The “many” here refers to the body at large as J. N. Darby’s Translation footnote indicates, citing 2 Corinthians 9:2 as an example of its usage and meaning. Hence the offender is made to feel the rebuke by more than just his local assembly. This shows that a binding decision made in one local assembly is really made on behalf of the body at large. What is done in the name of the Lord in one local assembly should affect the whole in practice. It is one of the ways the church is to “endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit;” and thus, give expression to the truth that there is “one body” (Eph. 4:3).
The Exercise For Every Believer Now is to Seek The Fellowship of the Existing Testimony to The Truth of the One Body
We find in Scripture that when the Spirit of God began a work in some in regard to the truth of gathering, He was careful to link them together with others on the same ground, so that the “unity of the Spirit” would be kept in expressing the truth of the “one body.” It says of the Thessalonian saints, “For ye brethren became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus” (1 Thess. 2:14). The Thessalonians followed on after the assemblies in Judea, being linked to them in practical fellowship, even to partaking of the sufferings of the gospel. It was not that the assemblies in Judea were more important or more spiritual than the Thessalonians; it was simply that the Spirit had begun His work of gathering souls to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ first in Judea. As others were saved they were linked on in practical fellowship to what the Spirit of God had already begun.
This principle is borne out in Acts 8:4-24. Many in Samaria had come to believe on the Lord Jesus through Philip's preaching, yet the Spirit of God did not own them as being on the ground of the “one body” until they had practical fellowship with those whom He already gathered unto the Name of the Lord Jesus in Jerusalem. In seeking to keep the “unity of the Spirit,” two representatives came down from Jerusalem and laid hands on those in Samaria (an expression of practical fellowship—Gal. 2:9), whereby the Spirit of God identified Himself with them. C. H. Brown said, “God did not permit the Samaritans to get official recognition as belonging to the church (assembly) until they got it from these emissaries that came down from Jerusalem.” We see here that great care was taken by the Spirit of God to link these believers to those in Jerusalem so that there would be one practical expression of the “one body” on earth.
When the Apostle Paul came across a group of believers at Ephesus who were unaware of others with whom God had worked, he found that the Spirit of God had not owned them as being on the divine ground of the assembly (Acts 19:1-6). They were not recognized as being on the ground of the "one body" until there was practical fellowship (the laying on of hands) with those whom the Spirit had already gathered. In reference to this group of believers C. H. Brown said, “They needed something. They had to be brought into the same unity that already existed. They could not be owned as occupying a different ground to the rest of them. Paul could not say, 'You folks are not on the same ground as the folks up at Antioch, or at Jerusalem, but you have a lot of truth, and I will just go on with you.' Oh no. He is going to see that they are brought onto the same ground as the rest. They were brought into the same thing that had been formed before they ever heard of it.” Again we see the care and wisdom of God in maintaining “the unity of the Spirit” so that there would be one practical expression of the truth of the “one body.”
It is true that these two examples cited from the book of the Acts are cases where the people did not yet have the Spirit, and therefore were not yet properly on Christian ground. But as brother Brown has shown, they give us an important principle upon which God works in respect to maintaining the practical expression of the truth of the “one body.” And thus, by them, the mind taught of the Spirit will learn God's thoughts in these collective assembly matters.
This point is typically illustrated in Ezra 7-10. God had begun a fresh work in bringing His people back from Babylon to the divinely appointed center of that day which was Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:32; 14:21). Some 42,000 returned under Zerubbabel and Jeshua (Ezra 1-3). However, about 68 years later, others were similarly stirred up to return to Jerusalem (Ezra 7-8). When they returned they found that God had been working in a similar way with others long before they were exercised about such things. And when they got to Jerusalem they did not find a perfect group of Jews there (Ezra 9), but they knew that it was the only right place for God's chosen people to worship, so they identified themselves with the already existing testimony in Jerusalem. There was no thought of establishing an independent testimony apart from that which was already there.
We believe that this gives us an answer to the question as to whether people should start up a Christian fellowship. Since God’s objective is to gather His saints on earth together in one unto the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ on the ground of the “one body,” we do not believe that the Spirit of God would lead persons to go out and practice these truths on the ground of independence. We realize that some are doing it; but we do not believe that it meets the Lord’s approval, for in doing so it is only furthering the outward division that should not be in the Christian testimony.
What we need to understand is that the Spirit of God has already begun a work in the Christian testimony in the early 1800s in gathering believers out of the denominations unto the Name of the Lord Jesus. He is still working with Christians to that end today. We believe that He is willing and able to guide those whom He has shown the truth, into fellowship with that which He has already begun. We believe that the Spirit of God would not be satisfied until He completed His work in not only showing believers the Scriptural way to gather, but also in associating them practically with those whom He has gathered so that they too could be on the ground of the “one body.”
Should there be a group of Christians under such exercise in an area where there is no gathering of Christians on the ground of the “one body,” they still should not take the ground of independence, forming an independent assembly. They need to get in contact with those who are on the ground of the one body, so that the Lord’s table could be spread in that locality. In doing so, the “unity of the Spirit” would be kept. From the principles of Scripture given above, we believe that this is the way new gatherings should be established. When the Lord's table is spread in a new locality it should be done in fellowship with other assemblies already on the ground of the “one body.”
Another Sect?
Perhaps someone might say, “If we did all that you say, and began to meet with those who meet on Scriptural ground, wouldn’t we just be joining another division or sect in the church?” The simple answer to this is that obedience to God's Word can never be schism. It is what Christians should have been doing all along. If Christians meet together in obedience to the Word of God, according to the truth of the one body, they can never be a sect, even if there were only two or three that took that ground. If they are gathered by the Spirit around the Lord Jesus they are not on the ground of sectarianism: they are at the divine center, for Christ is the gathering center of His people (Gen. 49:10; Psa. 50:5; Matt. 18:20; 1 Cor. 5:4).
"You People Think You Are the Only Right Ones!"
Sometimes we are faced with people asking us, “Will you come to our church with us?” It is hard to refuse them, knowing that they mean well, and especially when they do not understand the force of our conviction. When we answer, “No, we do not believe that it would be the Lord's will,” they are often offended. Sometimes we are charged with bigotry and exclusiveness. They say, “How is it that you don't mind us coming to your meetings, but when we ask you to come to ours, you refuse? You people think you are the only right ones! You don’t love the other members of the body of Christ!”
On our part, we believe that it could not be the will of God to desert Scriptural ground for unscriptural man-made order. Therefore, it is not the want of love for souls in these denominations that keeps us from going with them to their services, but the fear of sin.
We wonder if these people have ever weighed what bigotry really means. Mr. Kelly said that it is “the unreasonable attachment, without solid divine warrant, to one's own doctrine or practice, in defiance of all others.” We ask then, “Is it bigotry to give up one's associations with the denominational churches to go with those who desire to meet together for worship and ministry according to the Word of God?” If indeed these denominations are marked by the confusion and departure from the Word of God as we have described in the earlier part of this book, then how could anyone expect us to be so inconsistent with our convictions as to go with them to these so-called churches from which we have separated? “If I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor” (Gal. 2:18).
Mr. Kelly also said, “Surely he is a bigot or worse, who would urge or expect me to join him against my positive conviction, that in so doing I should sin against God. Sin is a man doing his own will, or another's, which is not God's. If you ask me to depart from what I know to be the will of God, it would of course, be sin in me to comply.”
This reminds us of the old prophet of Bethel (1 Kings 13). He attempted to get the prophet from Judah, who was sent by the Lord to cry against the unscripturalness of the worship at Bethel, to have fellowship with him in the very place which he cried against! The old prophet did this, so that his conscience might be eased, because then he could say that other prophets were there with him. When the prophet from Judah complied with his wishes, a lion met him in the way and killed him. We take this as a warning for ourselves.
As we have said, very often there is animosity on the part of those who reject God’s order toward those who want to obey God's Word. To choose to remain in a man-made system of worship in Christendom is one thing, but surely one cannot rightly fault a person for wanting to be among Christians who want to practice God's order. After all, they are only doing what is in the Word of God!
If a Christian desires to remain in a man-made system of church order, and if he is going to try to use the Word of God for the support of such an order, he will have to infer things into the plain statements of Scripture. For instance, he will have to infer that the Old Testament tabernacle is indeed the pattern for Christian worship; that head coverings were only for women in the local church at Corinth; that women preached in the church gatherings; that hands were laid on those that were ordained, etc.
On the other hand those who simply accept the things of Scripture as God has written it, will have the quiet confidence that they are doing God's will. This is because there is a peace that comes from doing God's will that is known only to those who walk in it. To return to simple Biblical Christianity without all the frills of modern Christianity is a privilege indeed!
An Appeal
As the reader has seen, we have presented a different order for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry from what is traditionally accepted in the so-called churches. What more needs to be said in regard to the differences? We have sought to prove from the Word of God that the order in the denominational churches in general is simply not Scriptural. We have shown that there is a simple pattern in God’s Word for Christians meeting together for this purpose. And that faith and obedience are necessary to practice these Scriptural truths. If we call ourselves Christians and claim that the Bible is the Christian's guide, then why not go by the Bible when it comes to the subject of Christians meeting together for worship and ministry?
Having completed our examination and exposure of the unscripturalness of traditional church order, and have presented God’s order for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry, our prayer and hope is that the reader will not misunderstand our purpose in this book. We have not sought to criticize the various church denominations in the Christian profession just for the sake of criticism, but to faithfully—and we trust lovingly—point out the error of the whole thing. From the outset our desire has been to make known the truth, so that all God's people may know true Biblical Christianity, if their hearts are willing.
We trust that through all the many things we have touched on, that there can be seen a genuine love and concern for the whole family of God. We also realize that regardless of how many loving words of grace that we couch in the presentation of these truths, it will not be enough for some. They still will reject it because they think it is unkind and unfair. Sad to say, it appears that the real reason is that their will is at work, and they simply don’t want it. It would be useless to try to tone down these things to suit such people. They simply do not want anything that will touch their consciences. With such, we can only leave them with the Lord.
We now appeal to the reader to heed the truth herein compiled. Our prayer is that each Christian that reads the material in this book will be honest, spiritual, and mature enough, to see and acknowledge the truth as it has been presented. May God give us the grace to do His will.
B. Anstey
5th Edition – August 2018