How To Be A Christian Without Going To Church by Life Network

How To Be A Christian Without Going to Church

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Doctrine is truth lifted from Scripture and dedicated to purpose.â&#x20AC;?

Books by Dr. Bernie L. Wade Does God Have a Name?

Baptism According to Matthew 28:19

The Next Wave â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Restoration of the Charismata

I Was the Ugly Duckling

A History of Apostolic Reformation

The Biblical Marriage Manual

How to Be a Christian Without Going to Church

IS CHRISTMASs CHRISTIAN?

The Israel of God - A Destiny Enjoyed

History of the Apostolic Faith Church of God

History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World

History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ

BOOKS BY OTHER AUTHORS CHURCH GOVERNMENT – By Dr. Barney Phillips

The Church – Dr. Robert Straube

The Ministry – Dr. Robert Straube

________________________

Foundational Discipling Principles Dr. Robert Straube Ephesians 4:11-14 "And He Himself gave some [to be] apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ"

Foundational Discipling Principles is now on sale on Amazon.com: www.amazon.com/Foundational-Discipling-Principles-RobertStraube/dp/1615799354/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273604574&sr=1-1

HOW TO BE A CHRISTIAN WITHOUT GOING TO CHURCH ÂŠ2012 Dr. Bernie L. Wade

Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8 Billy Graham on Going to Church .............................................................................. 12 Breaking Bread ....................................................................................................... 14

What is Church? ....................................................................................................... 20 The Church as a Building ........................................................................................... 24 The Court of the Gentiles ....................................................................................... 26 We Hold This Treasure in Earthen Vessels ………………………………………...…….. 29 The Upper Room ……………………..……………………………………………………… 35 Constantine Creates His own Church ………………………………….………………….. 40 American Pilgrims ………………………………………………………………...…………. 46

What is a Christian? ………………………..……………………………………………….60 Two Groups of Christians ………………………….……………………………………….. 65 Joining the Church ………………………………….…………………………………….…. 69 Pay to Pray …………………………………………………………………………………… 70 Be the Church …………………………………………..……………………………………. 76 Beth-EL ……………………………………….………………………………………………. 78 38000 Schisms …………………………..……………………………...…………………… 81 Reformation ………………………………..…….………………….……………………….. 82 Sola Scriptura ………………………………………………………………………………… 83

Biblical Christians ………………………………………….…………………………….. 110 Church: An American Corporation ………………………………...………………….….. 116 Sylvester Stylone on Christianity …………………….…………………………………… 117 The Lone Ranger ……………………………………………………………...…………… 118 Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………… 122 7

INTRODUCTION

“Can You Be a Christian and Not Go to Church? As Shakespeare would say, “That is the question”. One pastor answered the question this way, “I used to believe, Yes indeed, you can be a Christian without going to church. My understanding of Christianity was you only had to believe and ‘voila!’ you were a Christian. Therefore going to church was unnecessary.” From this author’s perspective there simply must be more to being a follower of Jesus Christ than just easy believism1. As I studied to make an appropriate answer to this question I realized the challenge. To begin with, we understand that there would be no Christianity without the Church. When we use the word Church here we are not indicating any group that claims to have a monopoly on the word or attempts to control the people of God. Rather, we are speaking of the continuation of the ministry that Jesus Christ began some 2000 years ago. This ministry is commonly referred to as the New Testament Church. Thus, the Church in our references throughout this book. When Christ finished his physical ministry on earth, He departed and left the dispensation of the good news, the gospel, in the hands of a small band of followers. These were later called Christians or like Christ. These we reference as Biblical Christians. From the very beginning the Apostles, elders, the five-fold ministry and other believers gathered together for regular worship, prayer, food and fellowship under the banner of ‘breaking bread’ (Acts 2:42). This activity took place primarily in the homes of these early believers. While we understand that Church was very important to this initial group of followers of Christ we must also understand that between those early beginnings and today the concept and implementation of church has changed dramatically. While the New Testament references only the gathering of the followers of Jesus Christ as the Church, many historically have identified a particular denomination or even a building as the Church. In Jerusalem the early followers of Jesus Christ sold everything they had and gave it to the Apostles. In the Church, the apostles were constantly devoting themselves to prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his

What is Easy Believism. http://www.gotquestions.org/easy-believism.html

brothers (Acts 1.14). These devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers (Acts 2.42). Thus, the early Christians immediately formed gatherings in each area and met together as a matter of course. There was no rigid ecclesiastical structure or building but the early church gathered as an extended family of followers of Jesus Christ. These gatherings were the function of the body of believers. These gatherings were not some effort to create an entity, corporation or religious social order or club. The New Testament (NT) concept of Church was not some formally incorporated entity. The NT Church was a fellowship of followers of Christ gathering together toward their mutual interests in completing the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20). To be identified with Christ was not vogue. To be identified with Christ was often at the peril of one’s life. The effort to bring continuity to this gathering of the body of believers, designated as the Church in a multitude of Biblical references, produced the larger body of believers referenced as the Church. The New Testament as it has been handed down to us was written by church leaders for instruction, encouragement, and reproof. The earliest writings of the New Testament were written no earlier than 45 CE, more than a decade after the implementation of the church in Jerusalem. Yet, there was no charter, no bylaws, no formal organizational structure, no building, no furnishings, and nothing else that we would generally identify with what most think is part of the church. Interestingly, while we seem to have placed great emphasis on those type things it has been said that “If Jesus came to day most churches would be doing 95% of what they are doing on Sunday morning even without the Spirit of God”. On the other hand the Church had a strong, vibrant and active five-fold ministry (Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers and Evangelists) a gift from God to His body. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and the gift of the Spirit was operational in the Church. This is often referred to as the Charismata and has been often replaced in the implementation of the modern church. Many denominations do not accept the continued use of these gifts to the Church in their operation. For more on this topic see: The Next Wave: Restoration of the Charismata by Dr. Bernie L. Wade. The implementation of the NT Church is as practical as A, B, C. The Church had the directive to encourage all men to repent. After repentance they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (see Acts Chapter 2:38, 39) and they expected to be “endued with power from on high” in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in an unknown tongue as the Spirit gave them utterance. A – Repent, B- Be Baptized, CReceive the Holy Spirit. This simple message given by Jesus Christ in Matthew 28 and affirmed by Apostle Peter in the presence of all the Apostles was the foundation for NT 9

believers. These Biblical Christians were the original, the true followers of Jesus Christ. They are the pattern for us to follow. Today we have many contenders who have formed a vast collection of religious denominations, written more creeds and issued more religious orders than one could understand in a life time. It is evident that like the Corinthian Church what began in the Spirit men have decided they can perfect in the flesh (Galatians Chapter 3). You were probably drawn to this book by the title. For most Christians the topic of being a Christian without regular attendance at a building recognized by some denomination as a church is somewhat taboo. You may be asking, “Is this book really about how to be a Christian without going to church? Yes! The follow-up question then becomes, “How is that possible?” Let me assure you this is not an effort to explain away the contribution to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ of hundreds of millions who consider going to a church building important. Neither is it an effort to stop people from going to church buildings for the benefits they receive. However, it is about whether going to church is required for one to be a Christian. Why or why not? We also want to know in what way church is important and what is its purpose in the life of a follower of Jesus Christ. I realize that to some, it may even be considered sacrilegious to talk about being a Christian without going to church. For many the idea of being a Christian is solely connected to church membership and subsequent attendance. These may be saying, “How dare he write such a book. We all know you can’t be a Christian without going to Church!” I imagine fundamental Christians waving their King James Version (KJV) of the Bible at me while expressing their disgust at anyone who would write on this subject. I understand their frustration. Yet, when I talk to people about God, they admit this is one subject that they wish that people (especially people who are part of the Church) would discuss. These express great dissatisfaction and/or frustration with the Church or what offers itself as the Church and many of these have found no solace in their church attendance or membership. Some of these express to me that they “hate church” or “hate the church” or that they “hate religion”. Hate seems like a strong word, but that is the word that is generally used. Internet blogs and forums are full of people asking this and other similar questions. I wonder what these mean when they say, “I hate the church”. Is their statement a declaration against God? Are they opposed to the extended family of believers in Jesus Christ gathering to break bread? Or is their frustration 10

something else? Those that say they ‘hate church’ seem to be greatly annoyed with the institution that the church has become rather than the message, values and fundamental truths of the followers of Jesus Christ. Here is how one person explained the statement: I love Jesus, but I hate "church". I hate what "church" has become. I'm tired of being a part of an organization that encourages people to prove how close they are to God by staying busy teaching Bible class and volunteering to bring food to the newly bereaved. I'm tired of having my relationship with God measured by the number of baby showers I attend. I'm tired of showing up at the next appointed time only to sit on the pew and struggle with knowing that there are people "out there" who won't come "in here" because they think we're perfect and they aren't. I think busyness is numbing. I think it's Satan's way of keeping us so in tune with what is next on the schedule that we forget to form relationships. Meaningful relationships. Relationships that form disciples of Jesus. Relationships that, by the grace of God, multiply the kingdom.2 Like Apostle Paul, this author confesses that after the manner some call heresy; I worship the God of my fathers.3 Let me make it clear that I am not against people “going to church”. Neither are we opposed to people having specific buildings dedicated to the worship of God or activities that are Christ centered. “Going to church” or going to a place people reference as the church has been a very important part of my life. My family and I have benefited immeasurably from what I have learned while “going to church”. As far back as the 11th Century my family has been actively involved in the Christian faith and faithfully serving as ministers and subsequently going to church. Personally, I have gone to church since I was two weeks old. As a small child I was often found asleep on the pew after the evening service. Most of my life we have gone to church multiple times a week. So, for our family going to church has not been some casual (twice a year) event. At our home church there were times when we had church meetings every day for weeks. Someone said we once had church meetings everyday for 19 weeks – continuous revival. The challenge is what constitutes the Church and the Biblical Christian? In the 2000 years since the advent of the Church we have seen a vast transformation. There have 2

Conversations with my Hair Dryer. I Love Jesus, But I Hate Church. Jenni at Talking Hair Dryer. July 23, 2007. 3 Acts 24:14. KJV. King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: http://bible.cc/acts/24-14.htm

been abundant attempts (reformations or restorations) to return the Church to the original doctrine as taught by the Apostles of Jesus Christ. The largest of these is generally termed the Protestant Reformation. A term attributed to the ‘protest’ of these reformers of the State approved church system(s). Today, many of these self proclaimed reformations are little different than the groups they once protest. There has been a pattern of groups protesting the inaccuracies of others and forming new and reformed efforts. In the Old Testament there was a similar pattern. One king would restore Israel to worship of the one true God and then the following ones would gradually allow the people to fall back into idol worship. In the last 2000 years we have repeated this familiar pattern leaving the Church in 2012 looking very little like its NT founders and much more like its Roman contributors. So, if the church today is not like the original, then what have we changed and why? By what authority were these changes made? Almost everyone in the debate would agree that Jesus Christ is the ultimate authority of the church. So, since He certainly did not make the changes, then by whose authority were these changes made? The Apostles gave us certain instruction on who could make such departures from the original. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8 Every Sunday (and sometimes on weekdays) tens of millions of people go to church. On Christmas and Easter Sunday the number of people who go to church increases substantially. Congregations that have 100 on a normal Sunday could experience 4 or 5 hundred in attendance on Easter and Christmas Sunday. All of these, whether they attend once or twice a year or every Sunday consider themselves Christians. Regardless of the week of the years, at these Sunday gatherings they listen to sermons, sing, some clap, give money, and a wide variety of other ‘Church’ activities. Those in attendance range from active participants to observers. In most cases, observers vastly outnumber the participants. To most of these people the idea of not going to a building designated as the church building seems strange, foreign or even false doctrine. In many cases, their families (like mine) have gone to a building designated for church for generations. When I ask people, Can you be a Christian and not go to church? They are generally shocked or think that I am trying to trick them. Often, I am asked, “How can you be a preacher, an apostle, a bishop (or whatever title they want to associate with me) and even ask that question?” It is as though the very idea of being a Christian and going to church is inseparable. Perhaps being a Christian and going to church are inseparably connected. That is the purpose of this book. To uncover the roots of our faith and to

see if it is anchored in church attendance, property ownership and management or in something far more imperative. What I wonder aloud is why do we go to church? Again, I know that some will think that I am offering sacrilege by questioning. I am sorry to tread on their sensitivities, but I need to know in what it is we believe. Do we go to church simply to meet some expectation or obligation? In whichever case what is the frequency of this obligation? Is this a weekly obligation or just something we do for weddings and funerals and twice a year at Christmas and Easter? Who decides or decided how often one must attend? Do we go to church because that is what our family has done for generations? Do we go because of peer pressure, business opportunities or appearances? Or, is there some deeper meaning and purpose in our church going? Is being in attendance what is important or is there some other measuring stick of our piety? On the one hand, I am not convinced that ‘going to church’ is near as important as ‘being the church’. On the other hand, I am also not saying that one should not go to church in the sense of attending a place called the church (building). However, what is the meaning of all this that we are doing? Blind faith is wonderful, but purpose driven faith seems far more effective. While I appreciate all the attention to attendance at a building designated the church, I wonder if we have not missed something far more important.

Billy Graham on “Going to Church” According to Reverend Billy Graham, the 20th Century evangelist it is possible to be a Christian without going to church. Of course there are also many who would contend with the Evangelist that this is not so, but let us observe his comments on the subject. Reverend Graham was asked this question: “I haven't been a Christian very long, and going to church is kind of intimidating to me. In fact, I've almost quit going because I'm afraid I'll stand at the wrong time or won't know what to say when everyone is repeating a prayer. Can I be a Christian without going to church? — N.S.”4 Reverend Billy Graham’s answer, “It's possible to be a Christian without going to church but you will be missing out on an important part of what God wants to do in your life. Just as we need a balanced diet to be strong physically, so we need a balanced "diet" to be strong spiritually—and part of that "diet" is the Church. Let me explain. 4

http://www.billygraham.org/articlepage.asp?articleid=4770

“What you have done by accepting Christ into your life is very important—in fact, it's the most important decision you will ever make. But becoming a Christian is only the beginning—the beginning of a whole new life with Christ. Now God wants you to grow and become strong in your faith, so you can resist temptation and become more like Jesus.” “One of the ways we grow spiritually is through our fellowship and worship with other believers—in other words, through a church where Christ is honored. Not only do we learn from the Bible as it is taught, but we also learn from other believers who can help and encourage us. The Bible says, Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another (Hebrews 10:25).”5 It is interesting that in his response Reverend Graham makes the point that by not going to church the follower of Jesus Christ is “missing out” on what God wants to do in his/her life. It may seem that he is connecting the life of a believer with a church building or this could be semantics as he never equates the building as the church. Yet, we know in practical application that is where people go to church. Reverend Graham does not make a distinction of being part of the church in a daily interaction like the New Testament church would have instructed. Perhaps the change has been necessary. How can we tell? While Reverend Graham’s point may be true in the sense that in our culture we have made it necessary to go to church to get spiritual instruction we must ask if it should be that way. Do we need to go to a building called the church to receive spiritual instruction? Should we have a plethora of other methods for spiritual instruction so that we do not miss these important things that God wants to do with our lives? In his answer, Reverend Graham makes a defense of the church more as an institution as manifested in denominations rather than a defense of the Church. This should not be surprising. Reverend Graham was raised as a Presbyterian and then ordained by the Southern Baptist Convention.6 His response is representative of both of these denominations (schisms) organized into separate, distinct groups. The Presbyterian Church originated in Great Britain and the Southern Baptist Church tracing its roots also to Great Britain but more recently to schism between them and other Baptists over slavery; with the Southern Baptist Convention choosing to retain slavery as acceptable. While Reverend Graham‘s response points toward participation in an organized church, the main focus of his own ministry has been outside of the institutional church. He is widely known for his crusades which had the support of the church but certainly are not perceived as going to church.

5 6

Billy Graham. The Religious Affiliation of Evangelist Billy Graham. Adherents.com. Modified November 10, 2005

Reverend Graham connects going to church as fulfilling Hebrews 10:25. This is his proof text for his answer. Is this a correct application of the text? Was this passage in Hebrews speaking about church attendance? Was the New Testament writer speaking about going to a church building and being counted on the roles, stopping at the church book store, getting a latte at the church coffee shop, getting your hair done at the church beauty salon and working out in the church gymnasium, or was he speaking to New Testament Christians who were facing persecution and encouraging them to continue to meet in their “as likely that it means here private religious meetings, for the purpose of mutual exhortation”.7 This is obviously important instruction being given to the followers of Christ. So, the proper application of that instruction is important.

Breaking Bread “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another.” Hebrews 10:25 From the standpoint of Scripture, the writer of Hebrews seems to be addressing and reinforcing that basic tenet of the early church when they went house to house ‘breaking bread’. "Breaking bread" was an idiomatic phrase among the people of Israel. Indeed, it is an idiomatic phrase among a great many peoples of the world, both primitive and modern, both biblical and non-biblical. It is a phrase fraught with richness of meaning, both spiritually and culturally.” 8 These Biblical Christians used the opportunity of their family meals as an opportunity for evangelism, fellowship, encouragement and more. “At the same time, we must not overlook the reality that originally, and in its most common and frequent usage, it simply referred to people eating a meal. Any deeper significance to be associated with the partaking of food would come from the depth of relationship of the participants and the motivation underlying the meal itself.”9 We understand that the Biblical Christians of the New Testament were using these daily occasions to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There are many references to the subject.

Clark Commentary. Hebrews. Pg. 523 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005. 9 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005. 8

“To “break bread” in Bible times referred to the eating of common meals. God once warned His prophet Jeremiah not to “break bread for the mourner” (Jeremiah 16:7, RSV). Jesus “took bread...and broke it” with the disciples to whom He appeared on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:30, 35). The early Christians are said to have continued daily “breaking bread from house to house” eating “food with gladness and simplicity of heart” (Acts 2:46). Paul once “took bread and... broke it” and instructed his companions on board a ship to Italy to eat it for their “preservation” (Acts 27:3435, NASB). In ancient times, to “break bread” was a figure of speech known as synecdoche where a part (to break bread) was put for the whole (to eat a common meal, regardless of the kind of food and drink consumed).”10 “For example, at the feeding of the 4000 (Matt. 15:36; Mark 8:6) we see that Jesus "directed the multitude to sit down on the ground; and taking the seven loaves, He gave thanks and broke them, and started giving them to His disciples to serve to them." We also see the same at the feeding of the 5000 (Matt. 14:19; Mark 6:41; Luke 9:16), where "He blessed the food and broke the loaves ... and they all ate and were satisfied." We understand at these occasions that Jesus was teaching, but He took time to also address the physical needs of His following. At the town of Emmaus, following His resurrection, Jesus dined with a couple of disciples, and it came about that when He had reclined at the table with them, He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began giving it to them (Luke 24:30).”11 This took place in His resurrected body. Giving rise too many questions about the need for food in that state. It is evident that the breaking of bread was important to the Lord. “Later on they came to realize that they had been dining with the Lord. They went to Jerusalem, found the eleven and some of the other disciples, and "began to relate their experiences on the road and how He was recognized by them in the breaking of the bread".12 This breaking of bread for the New Testament Church was not merely getting together to eat, but it was the fellowship, encouragement and daily interaction in each other’s lives that gave the NT Church it’s strength. The NT church was born during Roman occupation. Assembly of large groups would have drawn suspicion but going to a neighbor’s house for dinner was very normal. So the house to house method was an easy path to maintain communication and fellowship while growing in strength and 10

Apologetics Press. Breaking Bread on the First Day of the Week. Eric Lyons. Apologetics Press. Breaking Bread on the First Day of the Week. Eric Lyons. 12 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005. 11

number. While some have attempted to take the fact that they were sharing a meal with each other out of the equation, this is simply not the case. Even Jesus when He was teaching the multitudes took time to stop and feed them and it was so important to Him that some of his greatest miracles were in these times of breaking bread. The Methodist preacher and commentator, Adam Clarks notes about the passage from Hebrews 10:25: “It is evident that the Church was now in a state of persecution, and therefore their meetings were most probably held in private. For fear of persecution, it seems as if some had deserted these meetings as the custom of certain persons is. They had given up these strengthening and instructive means, and the others were in danger of following their example.”13 So, is the instruction from the Apostle more about going to church or about continuing to interact with and congregate with other believers for spiritual strength? Are they the same thing? We Adam Clarke should realize that while we have relative freedom in many places in the world, there are a number of countries where followers of Jesus Christ live in circumstances similar to that of the NT church in Jerusalem. Many followers of Jesus Christ worship in what we refer to as ‘the underground church’. For these, this passage from Hebrews has even deeper meaning. It is difficult to continue to break bread under circumstances where your life could be in peril, but the Apostle let us know that this interaction was important. In his answer to the questions about church going for Christians, Reverend Billy Graham continues: “Don't be embarrassed or feel awkward because you haven't been in church much; you'll soon become familiar with its ways. And remember: You are now part of the family of God, and no one is going to look down on you if you make an occasional mistake.”14 Billy Graham makes good points in this response. We expect as followers of Jesus Christ to have become part of a larger family of humankind. Those who follow Jesus seek out the common bond we have with each other through our faith in Christ. While we would applaud the words of encouragement, most Christians would say that the idea that no one is going to look down on you is extremely optimistic on the part of the Evangelist. Billy Graham also speaks about being familiar with the ways of the church. 13 14

Clark Commentary. Hebrews. Pg. 523 Graham.

Is this really what Jesus had expected when He left His church in the care of the Apostles? Did he intend for the Church to be something that you had to become “familiar with its ways” or was the interaction to be natural, dynamic and spontaneous? Were the ways of these Biblical Christians that different than others of their day who did not follow Christ? While the breaking of bread became a method of the New Testament church; this was simply part of their culture that they used as an evangelism tool or a teaching tool. This breaking of bread was not some unique concept developed by the New Testament believers, nor something that was unique to Biblical Christians. Breaking bread was common among the Jewish people. They fellowshipped in this manner. A Jewish friend of mine explained to me that this continues to be part of Jewish culture till this very day. She said this is the guiding concept behind Jewish holidays. Jewish holidays are a celebration of life. Somewhat tongue in cheek my friend explained it this way, “Jewish holidays are about they tried to kill us, we survived, let’s eat!” We realized that even a good thing can be abused and some of that may have happened, but we will leave that for another study.

The Family of God Learning about family on a daily basis is how children learn. By interaction with their parents, siblings, and extended family children learn everything from talking, to where to sit at the dinner table, to how to interact in various social environments and much more. These are not foreign to the family; they are part of family. Families of all faiths operate in a somewhat similar manner. So there are no apparent differences in the ways of a follower of Christ and others. What is different is our faith in Jesus. It is evident that going to a house does not make someone part of a family. The reality is they were either born or adopted into their family. Birth or adoption made them family. It is not their entrance into a house that makes them family. They may learn how to enter the house but it does not make them part of the family or secure their place in the family. Now it could be said that they go to their house because that is where 18

their family lives. Yet, this does not make them family; it is where their family resides. If they leave the house and never return they do not cease to be family? This not how a natural family operates; why should a family of Biblical Christians be any different? What we call church in the modern world is something that is external to the family or body of Christ. The reality is that even mature Christians would be uncomfortable in some or even many of what we call churches. These churches are not merely extensions of the family of God; they are social organizations under the framework of American religious corporations. These have a plethora of rules, regulations, and expectations not found in either general society or the bible. Followers of Christ can find these unfriendly and unnatural. I know many people who have been asked to leave the church because of a decision by the pastor or the board or even an usher. You probably know someone who has faced a similar situation. Can you imagine being asked to leave the family? If the church is an extension of the family of God (as some propose) then how could anyone be asked to leave? Could you imagine asking your brother, sister, father, mother, aunt, uncle, or grandparents to leave the family? Is this even possible? If they ‘left the family’ would they not still technically be family? I hope that these questions sound absurd to you, because that is the environment what we call church has fostered. In reality, if the church as we operate it is the family of God then we are more like an orphanage or foster home than a family. Can you imagine singing the song, “I Am Glad to Be a Part of the Family of God” like this, “I so glad to be part of the orphanage of God!” What happened to “joint heirs with Jesus”!? In the example given by Jesus of the Prodigal Son was there ever a moment when he was no longer considered family? Was he ever not part of the family even though he was no longer in attendance for family events and the traditional Sabbath get-together? The answer is no, this was not the case. The Prodigal Son was part of the family whether or not he was in attendance. Even though he had left the family home, left the father who loved him, left friends and no longer participated in the family get-togethers he was still part of the family. The father never asked or encouraged him to leave.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.â&#x20AC;?

â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Justin Martyr c.155AD

Family has always been part of the plan of God. Long before He gave imprimatur to the New Testament (NT) Church He designed the family. Family is the beginning. In Eden God forms the first family. From this the family becomes the cornerstone of civilization. God never changed His mind on the importance of the family. The idea of Church was not some foreign idea but rather it was to be an extended family (a gathering) with common interest being those who were born of the water and of the Spirit and thus becoming part of the family. This was as spiritual restoration of the natural family. There was no original intent or design for a long process to become part of the family but rather like joining a natural family it was to be by birth. In this later case it was through commitment and actions that constitute new birth. "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God!"

2000 years after Jesus Christ said, “It is finished”, we are in a quandary about, “What is church?” This seems like an easy question. The sort of question one might answer in a simple sentence, or a word or two. Some might ask the question as “What is a church?” What is a church and what is church could result in at least two different answers. “A church is a building in which Christians meet for worship,” is one obvious possibility. “A church is a group of Christians who gather for religious purposes” is another. A critic of Christianity might says, “A church is a club for insiders and 22

hypocrites.”15 Further inquiry will reveal that this is not a simple issue and there are a plethora of answers that are perceived to be correct on the subject. Some religious groups claim that only their particular group is the one true church; thus placing all other groups as illegitimate. This would include the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) with a billion adherents which postulates that all other Christians have come out from their ‘one true universal church’.16 They reference their group as the “one, true, catholic and apostolic church” and call these words the “four marks of the church”.17 While there is little doubt that Jesus intended for his church to be all of those things: holy, universal, apostolic and one; there are more than 38,000 Christian denominations and many of them claim they are the only legitimate one!18 In direct contrast many groups, most notably the Wisconsin Synod Lutheran’s claim that their religious group is the one true one and that the Pope (leader of the RCC) is the Antichrist. From their vantage point this doctrinal positions not only positions them as the true church but puts the (RCC) in the position of being in support of the enemies of the cross. The RCC not only claims to be the only church they make it quite clear that they hold contempt for Protestant congregations (like the Wisconsin Synod) and do not even consider them part of the church. To this end the RCC proclaims to all groups who do not answer directly to the Pope and the RCC, “These ecclesial communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Opening ceremony of the Roman Eucharistic mystery cannot, according to Catholic Catholic Church Vatican II 19 doctrine, be called churches in the proper sense.” This Counsil has prompted some Protestants in the last 50 years to seek out the imprimatur of the Pope to bring some perceived legitimacy to their group. However, the RCC does not find its beginning in Jerusalem but in Rome.

According to the RCC’s Vatican II Counsel, “membership in the Catholic Church is necessary for salvation.”20 The RCC further asserts, “This has been stated numerous

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. Catholic Church Alone is One, True, Catholic Church says Vatican Congregation. Catholic Online. www.catholic.org 17 Wikipedia. The Four Marks of the Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Marks_of_the_Church 18 Wikipedia. List of Christian Denominations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations 19 Catholic Church Alone is One, True, Catholic Church says Vatican Congregation. Catholic Online. www.catholic.org 16

times from the Bible (Acts 4:12) and Tradition (Unam Sanctam). No one can be saved apart from the Catholic Church.”21 The Scriptural text is correct but the application is a huge stretch. While this may seem extreme, nearly every Christian denomination or group asserts the same thing; that heaven is predicated (in some form or fashion) on membership in their group. In contrast to the idea of the authority of the RCC some Christian denominations make statements like, "The Bible is the only God-given authority which man possesses; therefore, all doctrine, faith, hope, and all instruction for the church must be based upon, and harmonize with, the Bible."22 Despite the corporate efforts of the RCC, which is the largest religious body in the World, it is doubtful that anyone reading this book is surprised that the explanation of what the church is has hundreds of answers. Could Jesus have intended for His Church to be so confusing? Or have men just gotten us so far from the original plan that we have become disoriented? It is interesting that when we asked people about their perceptions of the NT Church that there is general agreement among ministers and laypersons alike that the Biblical Christians met in houses, synagogues and even in Temple (Herod’s Temple or the Second Temple at Jerusalem). While this is the general perception the questions remains, “Is it true?” It is interesting that what is often generally believed among us is not necessarily the truth of the matter. “The New Testament does reference the Church in Jerusalem meeting together in a public space (e.g., the outer court of the temple in Acts 2:46) and in smaller groups in houses (e.g., the house of Mary, mother of Mark, in Acts 12:12). This practice must have been carried on in many cities of the Roman Empire. For the most part, the church was dependent on members or supporters (patrons) who owned larger houses, providing a place for meeting. In Rome, there are indications that early Christians met in other public spaces such as warehouses or apartment buildings. Even when there

Cfr. Leo XIII, Epist. Apost. Praeclara gratulationis, 20 iun. 1894; AAS 26 (1893-94) p. 707. Cfr. Leo XIII, Epist. Encycl. Satis cognitum, 29 iun. 1896: ASS 28 (1895-96) p. 738. Epist. Encycl. Caritatis studium, 25 iul. 1898: ASS 31 (1898-99) p. 11. Pius XII, Nuntius radioph. Nell'alba, 24 dec. 1941: AAS 34 (1942) p. 21. 21 Cfr. Leo XIII, Epist. Apost. Praeclara gratulationis, 20 iun. 1894; AAS 26 (1893-94) p. 707. Cfr. Leo XIII, Epist. Encycl. Satis cognitum, 29 iun. 1896: ASS 28 (1895-96) p. 738. Epist. Encycl. Caritatis studium, 25 iul. 1898: ASS 31 (1898-99) p. 11. Pius XII, Nuntius radioph. Nell'alba, 24 dec. 1941: AAS 34 (1942) p. 21. 22 Meet the United Pentecostal Church International, p. 46

were several meeting sites in a city, the Christians had the sense of being one church.”23 Today, most people equate the church building with going to church. This perception was begun by the RCC. As an approved state religion of the Roman Empire the RCC was afforded a unique place in history. Like Judas these leaders were willing to do what they needed to accomplish their agenda. The RCC had the imprimatur of the Roman Emperor, the finances and military assistance of the Roman Empire and the use of facilities controlled by the Empire including a plethora of temples formerly dedicated to a pantheon of pagan deities such as Mithras and others. Did Jesus intend for Biblical Christians to build a large collection of buildings that we call the church? Or did he intend something quite different?

The Church as a Building “On Reformation Sunday it is common for many Protestant Churches to sing Martin Luther's wonderful hymn, "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God." A portion of those words: A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing; our helper he amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing. For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe; his craft and power are great, and armed with cruel hate, on earth is not his equal. But I think if we in the Western Church in the 21st century were honest, we would admit that we treat our church buildings more like a mighty fortress than the God in whom we trust in all times and places and circumstance..”24 Most people driving by a cathedral or modern place of worship would call the building “the church” or ‘a church’. These are both indications that the building is identified as the church. If riding in a taxi cab in a modern city one may get the cab driver to point out “the church” or more likely “churches” as in most cities in the Western world we have a collection of buildings that we refer to as churches from a variety of different denominations. While we recognize that this is merely a building called the church, the idea of the church as a building is definitely part of our culture.

Why and when did Christians Start Constructing Special Buildings for Worship? Everette Fergusson. Christian History. 24 The Church Has an Ediface Complex. Alan D. Bevere.

When I was in London (UK) some years ago the cab driver was pointing out various sites of interest and then he said, “There is the gay church”. When I looked I instantly knew, because of their red doors, that this was an Anglican (Episcopalian in America) building. The cab driver had connected the Anglican’s encouraging people who are homosexuals to serve as ministers with the place they hold as the church and thus the reference to that being the gay church. How sad it was to me that common people referred to the church as a building and in this case associated some of this particular denominations failed policies with their membership and buildings. We should ask, how did this idea of the church as a building become a part of our common understanding? “Among first century Greeks the word "church" had nothing to do with a structure used for religious purposes. In fact, it had nothing to do with religion.”25 Its literal meaning was of people in groups, gathered together for a common purpose. So a church was a gathering of people. There were various kinds of churches. A city council meeting would be a "church" of citizens gathered to consider matters of public concern. Calling religious-purpose buildings "churches" began about the fourth century of our Christian era.26 For the first three centuries of the New Testament church there is no reference to or reason to believe that they had buildings dedicated solely to activities for or referred to as a church or the church building. Some have reasoned (and have it as part of the tenets of their denomination) that early Christians met in Jewish temples or synagogues they simply have not thought this through or referenced the historical facts Model of the Temple on the subject. Most Christians agree that the early church met in the Temple and in synagogues even though there is no Scriptural or historic evidence for such claims. We know assuredly that early Christians met in homes. There is reference to meeting in public places such as the Outer Court of the temple. This later reference has given rise to the idea that the New Testament church met in Jewish synagogues and in the Temple in Jerusalem. Certainly, to the uninitiated this reference sounds like the Christians were meeting in the Temple. Yet in reality, nothing could be farther from the truth.

25 26

The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson. The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

During the first century (before the advent of the ministry of Jesus Christ) King Herod enclosed the outer court of the Temple with colonnades. This area was referred to as the Outer Court. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Gentiles" (non-Jews) were permitted to enter the Temple area; but they were never allowed entrance into the Temple itself. They could walk within this area, but they were forbidden to go any further than the outer court.27 This was not a small thing. Separation was an integral part of the Jewish culture. Among the Jewish people there was great segregation. Their culture was segregated by gender, birth right, interpretation of the Torah, religious faction, financial status, tribes, families, occupation, race and more. There were 10 gates to enter the area of the Outer Court. Women were only allowed to enter through one of them. Women had their own area in the Outer Court called the Court of the Women. "The length of the Women's Court was a hundred thirty-five cubits, and the breadth a hundred thirty-five cubits. And there were four chambers in the four corners of it, each forty cubits, but not roofed."28 In traditional Judaism, women are for the most part seen as separate but equal. Women's obligations and responsibilities are different from men's, but no less important.29

The Court of the Gentiles

The Outer Court. http://www.newjerusalemcommunity.net/?c=54&a=2188 Ezekiel 46:21, 22 29 Judaism 101. The Role of Women. 28

The Court of the Gentiles area was primarily a bazaar, with vendors selling souvenirs, sacrificial animals, food, as well as currency changers, exchanging Roman for Syrian money because the Jews were not allowed to coin their own money and they viewed Roman currency as an abomination to the Lord, as also mentioned in the New Testament account of Jesus and the Money Changers. Guides that provided tours of the premises were also available. Jewish males had the unique opportunity to be shown inside the temple itself, but not Jewish women. This fact alone shows the impossibility that a diverse group of men and women met in the Temple in some â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Christianâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; service or meeting. The Kohanim (Priests), in their white linen robes and tubular hats, were omnipresent, directing pilgrims and advising them what kinds of sacrifices were to be performed. Behind one as they entered the Court of the Gentiles was the Royal Portico, which contained a marketplace, administrative quarters, and a synagogue as well. On the upper floors, the great Jewish sages held court, Cohanim and Levites performed various chores, and from there tourists were able to observe the events. To the east of the court was the Portico of Solomon, and to the north, the Soreg, a giant stone structure separating the public area from the area where only Jews could enter. Within the Soreg was the temple itself.30 There is a general idea that the New Testament Church was meeting in the Temple. This would be the Second Temple not the one built originally by Solomon. This is simply not close to being true. The disciples were hated throughout the realm by Jewish people. They were not meeting in their places of worship. Yet the perception exists that the followers of Jesus were meeting in synagogues. An example of this is that some years ago we had a meeting on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. In fact at one time our ministry had an office on Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, DC. Because of this some people assumed that we had some close connection with the US leadership or at least had access to them. Some might even associate our meeting in such a place as we had a meeting at the White House

Wikipedia. Second Temple. Court of the Gentiles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Temple

but that would also not be true. We didn’t meet at the White House, Congress or with any member of the US Congress. The fact is it is unlikely to think that they even knew we were there even though we were in close proximately to where they meet. It is true that the White House is on the same street as our office, but the similarities end there. Even if the New Testament had met in some synagogue it holds no value. The synagogues were merely places for meeting. They were not considered particularly holy. Like my Pennsylvania Avenue example, the Outer Court was nearby the Temple and the outer court but access was provided to nearly everyone not just a privileged group. Yet, most of those gathering in the outer court had nothing to do with the activity of the Temple. The Outer Court was known as the Court of the Gentiles because Gentiles were allowed no further into the Temple area.31 Now, the reference to the New Testament believers gathering in the Outer Court is not without significance. To the contrary, it is most significant. It shows clearly that these followers of Christ even though they were Jews were held in contempt by other Jews and were considered no different than Gentiles. Like Gentiles they were permitted in the Outer Court their entrance into the Temple for the worship of Jesus Christ was not tolerated. The idea that the early church was having their meeting in the Temple or that the Upper Room was in the Temple is based in fantasy. As a popular commercial says, “It sounds good if you don’t think about it.” “According to Jewish Law, men and women must be separated during prayer, usually by a wall or curtain called a mechitzah32 or by placing women in a second floor balcony. There are two reasons for this: first, your mind is supposed to be on prayer, not on the pretty girl praying near you. Second, many pagan religious ceremonies at the time Judaism was founded involved sexual activity and orgies, and the separation prevents or at least discourages this activity. Interestingly, although men were not permitted to see women during prayer, women were permitted to see men during prayer. This seems to reflect the opinion that women are better able

The Mechitzah is a divider separating the men's and women's sections of the synagogue. The fundamental principle of prayer is to establish a relationship between one's self and G-d. The social dimension and distraction which sometimes accompanies mixed groups is therefore eliminated. In some synagogues instead of a mechitzah, there is a separate women's balcony. 29

to concentrate on prayer with an attractive member of the opposite sex visible.”33 “The combination of this exemption from certain mitzvot and this separation often has the result that women have an inferior place in the synagogue.”34 This is not to indicate that women are mistreated rather, “women are not obligated by Jewish law to attend formal religious services, and cannot participate in many aspects of the services.”35 This is quite surprising to many but is a point that brings greater clarity to a number of passages in the NT. To think that the early church was meeting in the Temple or having their services in Jewish synagogues would have necessitated that the women be excluded from meetings like the Upper Room where Scripture tells us there were about 120 men and women gathered together. It is evident that the facts do not support the notion that there were men and women gathered together praying out loud in some Jewish Synagogue in Jerusalem. The Upper Room was obviously some building (probably a home) where the disciples had access either because the home belonged to a believer or they rented the space for the occasion.

We Hold This Treasure in Earthen Vessels While much is made in the modern era of going to church this is a custom borrowed from the pagans. In ancient times it was the pagans who visited their temples while followers of Jesus Christ, according to the New Testament, met in houses. The attempt to connect this weekly worship with the worship in the Temple or Tabernacle is ill conceived. The keeping of the Sabbath was not done by visiting the temple. The Sabbath was kept at home. There is little doubt that the early church continued this tradition and no doubt incorporated the worship of Jesus Christ into their Sabbath worship. However, this tradition was only kept by Jewish converts as Gentile converts held no such traditions. None of the New Testament church had a shrine or temple. Many are unaware that even the Jewish Temple (the Second Temple) was only a façade. When Jesus was on the cross the veil of the Temple was ripped in two. This revealed the hypocrisy of those who hid from the people that there was no Ark of the Covenant in the Temple. The 33

Judaism 101. The Role of Women. Judaism 101. The Role of Women. 35 Judaism 101. The Role of Women. 34

expectation of the people in the First Temple was the continuation of the presence of God from the Tabernacle in the Wilderness would continue in the Temple because of the Ark of the Covenant. In the rebuilding of the Temple there was no Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant had been carried away by Nebuchadnezzar and never recovered. Since it was between the cherubim of the Ark that God had promised to dwell the idea of the Temple in Jerusalem being the dwelling place of God was a popular myth, not a reality. Because of the obvious ease of the Ark being lost, God’s gift to mankind of the Holy Spirit dwelling in man was a welcome upgrade from the vulnerability of the Ark of the Covenant. “The Ark could not be found when the Jewish people rebuilt the Temple at the time of Ezra and Zechariah.”36 “Thus, the Holy of Holies in the Second Temple was an empty chamber, without the Ark of the Covenant. When the Roman General Pompey conquered Jerusalem around 63 B.C., he demanded the privilege of entering the Holy of Holies. When he did, he came out saying that he could not understand what all the interest was about the sanctuary, when it was only an empty room.”37 The last mention of the Ark of the Covenant in Scripture was King Josiah of Judah ordered the caretakers of the Ark of the Covenant to return it to the temple in Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 35:1-6; cf. 2 Kings 23:21-23). Forty years later, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon captured Jerusalem and raided the temple. Less than ten years after that, he returned, took what was left in the temple, and then burnt it and the city to the ground. The veil being torn from top to bottom at the time of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a fact of history. The profound significance of this event is explained in glorious detail in Hebrews. The things of the temple were shadows of things to come, and they all ultimately point us to Jesus Christ. He (not a man made curtain) was the veil to the Holy of Holies, and through His death the faithful now have free access to God. Likewise we (the people of God) comprise the Church and God did not intend for us to return our focus to a building.

36 37

Where is the Ark of the Covenant. Zola Levitt Ministries. Thomas S. McCall. January 1997. Where is the Ark of the Covenant. Zola Levitt Ministries. Thomas S. McCall. January 1997.

The veil in the temple was a constant reminder that sin renders humanity unfit for the presence of God. The fact that the sin offering was offered annually and countless other sacrifices repeated daily showed graphically that sin could not truly be atoned for or erased by mere animal sacrifices. Jesus Christ, through His death, has removed the barriers between God and man, and now we may approach Him with confidence and boldness (Hebrews 4:14-16). 'Like most new ‘religions’ the New Testament believers had no houses of worship, nor is there any record that they sought to have buildings. Buildings would have required finance that they did not have in order to build and maintain. Additionally for a persecuted Church as the New Testament Church was, to have buildings would have made them more predictable and vulnerable. The emphasis of the New Testament Church was on people. Unlike their forefathers they were not seeking a temple made with hands or a Tabernacle in the Wilderness, but they held interest only in the treasure they held in earthen vessels. “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels that the Excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed; Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal flesh. So then death worketh in us, but life in you.”38 When asked, most people will indicate that they thought the New Testament church met in the Temple or in Jewish synagogues. This is really a laudable notion that has been passed down to us through tradition and by imprimatur of the RCC. The history revision that accompanies this notion is a work of art. However much this concept is liked is not the point. This notion is not what Scripture records nor, for those who think about it, does it make any sense. First, in Jerusalem there was little space given to anyone who did not worship the one true God Temple to Mithras at Hadrian’s wall in the and while followers of Jesus Christ know that United Kingdom He is the one true God, those in power in Jerusalem did not share this view. Neither the Jews or nor the Romans were going to welcome a new religion. There was a great deal 38

KJV. Cambridge Edition. 2 Corinthians Chapter 4.

of political unrest in Jerusalem and there was little tolerance for religious zealots. Even the Romans who occupied the land did not have a building that they could call a true temple. They were not worshippers of the one true God they primarily worshipped Mithras. There were temples to Mithras built in other places by Roman soldiers, like in Scotland near Hadrian’s wall where the remains of a temple built by the Roman to Mithras still stands; but not in Jerusalem. The idea of a temple to another entity would have had the potential to cause the people to riot and the Roman directed government was cautious not to incite the people over something like which god they worshipped. The Romans were fairly tolerant of other religions but the Jews were a special case and the wanted no trouble. Under these circumstances, how could an upstart group of people expect to have a building for worship when even the rulers of the world had no designated house in Jerusalem for their idols? “The early Christians were small in number and often persecuted, so they couldn't build special buildings for their own use. Instead, they used whatever buildings were available to them when they came together - private homes, public halls).”39 Secondly, it would have been wonderful if the Jewish synagogues had been among those buildings that were made available to the New Testament believers for worship. Synagogues were religious clubs much like our modern churches. These synagogues had very particular rules about membership and the use of their facilities. No doubt, some of the Biblical Christians held membership in these synagogues previous to their conversion to following Jesus Christ. As such, these members held access to the synagogue and we have record of some of them using their access for debating with others. However, to expect they would be allowed to openly worship Jesus Christ at such a place is not likely. It would be about as likely as a large, black, Southern Church allowing the Klu Klux Klan to hold a meeting in their building. Anything could happen, but it is highly improbable. To expect this to have been some kind of norm is unrealistic. There is simply no evidence that such was the case and when you think about it you can readily realize that such availability would not have been offered. What synagogues there were would NEVER have allowed followers of Jesus Christ to meet there. We need to realize that from the perspective of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish Supreme Court, Jesus Christ was a criminal convicted by their counsel of 71 men of “Blasphemy”. Not just any form of Blasphemy. The Sanhedrin convicted Jesus of

Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Billy Graham’s My Answer. http://www.billygraham.org/articlepage.asp?articleid=3566

claiming that He was God. The leader that represented all the Jewish religious system, the High Priest, rent his clothes in protest to Jesus Christ. We might notice that Jesus Christ ‘returns the favor’ by rending the veil in two. Remember, Jesus was crucified not for proclaiming to be a son of God. This would have been a general reference which would not have been generally offensive. Jesus is crucified because He proclaims that he is “I AM” a reference to God speaking to Moses and clearing meaning that He was God. For this offense the Jewish court found him guilty of blasphemy. Mark 14:61: "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One? Then Jesus answered, ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power." Jesus is asked if He was the promised Messiah; when God would come in the flesh. Under Jewish law this was a crime that was punishable by death. Generally the guilty person would be stoned. Under Roman law the guilty would be crucified. The synagogues that were in Jerusalem represented the Jewish religious system with the Temple being their most Holy place. None of the leaders of this network of nearly 500 synagogues would have allowed the followers of someone condemned of blasphemy to hold services in His name in their synagogues. The name of Jesus Christ for followers of Judaism was anathema40. An example of this: For those of us who live in the United States it would be like a lower court defying the Supreme Court of the United States. Thus, as Scripture plainly states, the New Testament believers went from house to house. They had no ‘church’ buildings. Now, make no mistake, this is not a treatise against having a special building. If a group of people is blessed enough to have a separate building that they meet in a couple of times a week solely for worship, that is certainly wonderful, but the New Testament Church had no such expectation or requirement. The idea of a separate building only for worship was completely foreign to them. They worshipped in the way they conducted their everyday lives. Their homes were dedicated to God. Their very lives were an expression of living for Christ. Christ Jesus had instructed them to live for Him. As part of their continued heritage they held their most important religious services not at the Temple or a synagogue, but at their homes. There was no substitute for the temple for Jewish believers. The local synagogue was not a replacement for the Temple. There was only one Temple and if they did not know it before, they certainly did after the crucifixion; the temple was only a pretense, a form of Godliness. These Biblical Christians were not looking for a building or seeking to

Meriam-Webster Dictionary. Anathema: a ban or curse solemnly pronounced by ecclesiastical authority and accompanied by excommunication. In the case of Jesus Christ he was summarily executed.

build a temple. They were looking for a building not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. “For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.” (2 Cor. 5:1). The New Testament believers relying on their faith in Jesus Christ and understanding that they held this treasure not in the Temple and not in a substitute building for the Temple like a synagogue held that they were the Temple of God. The Aramaic Bible in Plain English (©2010) says it this way: “Do you not know that you are the Temple of God, and that The Spirit of God dwells within you?” The economy in Jerusalem was difficult, taxes were high41 and the land was under Roman rule. In order to give even a little relief to their economic plight the Jerusalem followers sold everything they had and brought it to the Apostles in the expectation that living in a communal environment would relieve some of the burdens. This worked for the New Testament church in Jerusalem. However, there is no evidence that this pattern was repeated in other places as the church expanded. This author is not so naïve to suggest that we all return to communal groups like the church in Jerusalem. We, especially Americans, are like the rich young ruler, too focused on what we have to consider such a notion. Most Americans are not willing to be slightly inconvenienced in such a manner. As a chief in an African village related to me, “In America you live as individuals; in Africa we live as family.” In the New Testament times, these Biblical Christians lived as family. It was in this communal environment that the early church nurtured its fledgling following, grew, expanded and flourished. This simple model of living for Christ and living as followers

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. 35

of Christ was a lifestyle that they lived 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. There was no idea of ‘going to church’ like the pagans or ‘going to temple’ like some Jewish people. These New Testament believers simply were the church. They lived as the church in their daily activities and lives. They gathered wherever there was a place to gather, a home, a market or in the outdoors. Later, it would be the pressure and influence of the Greeks and pagans to bring ‘legitimacy’ to these followers of Christ by them having their own temples. It seems strange that there would be pressure to be perceived as being ‘legitimate’. Yet, peer pressure is a powerful thing.

The Upper Room After the departure of Christ the disciples almost immediately go to the now famous “Upper Room”. This Upper Room was most likely in the home of one of the disciples.42 The Upper Room was not as the RCC has attempted to offer, some palace or grand place. It was humble, simple and normal to the lifestyle of the everyday follower of Christ. Later, the RCC would make the claim that the upper room was also the site where the Last Supper took place and was in the Cenacle.43 The RCC claims that this structure ‘miraculously survived’ the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. This is a great fairy tale offered by the Catholics as not only did the Apostles not use such a grand place; the real upper room (wherever it was) was destroyed in 70 AD by the Roman Army. All the historians of the day (especially Tacitus and Josephus) record that not only was Jerusalem totally destroyed but that they even used plows to plow the ground where the city stood.44 The historian Josephus wrote this: “That there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind.” We are left with a choice to believe the historians who were there or to believe the revisionist account changed to make a religious system seem more viable or relevant. 42

Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page 364. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenacle 44 Josephus. Wars of the Jews. XX. Chapter VIII. Chapter 5. 43

The RCC claims that the original structure was a synagogue and used by the followers of Christ on the day of Pentecost. This is another fabrication. As we have discussed Judaism regarded Jesus as a heretic, they had just crucified him and His followers were certainly not going to be welcomed to tarry in one of their synagogues for the better part of two weeks (through at least 1 or perhaps 2 Sabbaths) to wait for the promise from what in the minds of more Jews was a false Messiah, a charlatan, a fake. The RCC has offered this answer as part of vast history revision they have propagated on the rest of the world. Scripture records that the activity in this upper room was one of prayer with both men and women participating. This was an innovation that was simply not allowed in the synagogue. It is uniquely Christian and just like Apostle Paul said, “In Christ there is neither male nor female.” “For as many of you as have been baptized World’s Largest Synagogue into Christ have put on Christ. There is In New York, USA1 neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”45 Yet from the inception of the Church there is strong representation of a plan to not just spiritually establish the Church in Jerusalem but also legally. It was not among the disciples merely that he stood, but among the whole company, which amounted to one hundred and twenty. “It is remarkable that this was the number which the Jews required to form a council in any city; and it is likely that in reference to this the disciples had gathered together, with themselves, the number of one hundred and twenty, chosen out of the many who had been already converted by the ministry of our Lord, the twelve disciples, and the seventy-two whom he had sent forth to preach (Luke 10:1). Thus, they formed a complete council in presence of which the important business of electing a person in the place of Judas was to be transacted.”46 Later, the legitimacy of the original church with its seat in Jerusalem was transferred to Rome by the strength of an Empire, not by the will of God or the power of the Holy Spirit. There was no transfer of leadership, lineage of leaders or a plethora of other dogmas offered as the reasons we should be inclined to believe those who pretend to be the continuation of the Jerusalem Church.

45 46

KJV. Cambridge Edition. Galatians Chapter 3. Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page. 365-6.

The Synagogue There were nearly 500 synagogues in Jerusalem at the time of Christ and none of them would allow a woman to pray openly in their synagogue. Women were not allowed at all in the Temple. At synagogue women were forced to sit in their own section separate from the men.48 And the women in the upper room were evidently not in some serene prayer as the noise of the Upper Room experience was spread throughout the city. “These continued in prayer and supplication”.49 This inference is not just simply in prayer. “Prayer may simply imply any address to God, in the way of petition or request; supplication, the earnest, Ancient Synagogue in Capernium affectionate, and continued application to God for the blessing requested from him by prayer. Prayer asks, supplication expostulates, entreats, urges and re-urges the petition.”50 It is of note that there is only one synagogue that historians agree visible today that dates from the first century; this is the building excavated at Masada. 51 In those days, “any qualified Jewish man could read from the Scripture as Jesus is recorded doing in the Scripture.52

The word synagogue comes from a Greek root meaning "assembly” (The most widely accepted term for a Jewish house of worship. The Jewish equivalent of a Catholic church, mosque or temple) has come to mean a building. Yet, the original Jewish idea was for this to be a school or a place of study not a temple like the pagans. For Jewish believers there was only one Temple, but after the destruction of the temple and the subsequent return from Babylon Jewish people began building substitute ‘temples’. This infuriated (and still does) Orthodox Jews as they see no substitute for the Temple and prefer the term synagogue.53 So, like the migration of the followers of Christ who started as a family meeting in their tents and houses, the Jewish people migrated to adopting the pagan idea of a building as a place to meet God. Unlike Church buildings

The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996. KJV. Acts. 1:14 50 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page 365. 51 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996. 52 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996. 53 Judaism 101. http://www.jewfaq.org/shul.htm 49

the Synagogue is the center of the community rather than merely a proposed house of worship as adherents to Judaism live their lives around the tenets of their religion. The Jewish synagogue was not birthed from Scriptural context. Some expect that all things from ancient Judaism are somehow God ordained, but that is certainly not the truth. The synagogue is an innovation borrowed from the pagans. Like the idea of putting the Ark of the Covenant on a cart, Jewish captives returning from Babylon decided to build their own dedicated places. These were not places of worship as no place could usurp the Temple. The Jews had learned this idea from the multiplicity of temples to various gods in Babylon and brought the idea to Jerusalem in the 6 th Century BC.54 These synagogues were divided up by class with the wealthy having separate synagogues from the poor or the servants.55 There was even a separate synagogue for the slaves so that the wealthy class of patrons did not have to go to their synagogue with them. As they expanded the New Testament Church continued to meet in more homes such as Philemon whom Apostle Paul addresses in a letter to him and the Church that is in his house indicating that there was a group of Modern day women at the “Wailing Wall”. believers that met in the home of Philemon. Evidently, Philemon had enough resources to host a gathering of believers in his home. This was the church. Throughout history there have been others who have used this same simply New Testament model with great success. Among these would be Francis Schaeffer.56 “Nowhere in the Bible is the place where Christians meet referred to as a “church.” This word appears around 75 times in our English Bibles, depending on the translation (around 110 times if you include the plural). In almost every instance “church” is a translation of the Greek ekklesia (from which we get words like “ecclesiastical” and “Ecclesiastes”). Never does ekklesia refer to a building in which people gathered, for worship or for any other purpose. Ironically, one might say the same thing for the use of the word ekklesia in the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, abbreviated as LXX). This word appears about 100 times in the LXX, almost always translating the Hebrew term qahal. Both words, ekklesia and qahal, have the basic meaning of “assembly” or “gathering.”

The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996. The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996. 56 http://www.labri.org/history.html 55

They can be used to describe a gathering for religious purposes, but the words themselves don’t have religious connotations. They need something like “of the Lord” to make the religious setting clear. “In Rome, there are indications that early Christians met in other public spaces such as warehouses or apartment buildings.”57 The Roman followers of Jesus also met in the Catacombs. So, if “church” in English always suggests something religious, whether buildings or gatherings of people or organizations, and ekklesia does not have this meaning in the time when the New Testament was written, then translating ekklesia by “church” almost certainly leads to some level of misunderstanding on the part of the reader. When it comes to the vocabulary of the New Testament, truly “a church is not a church.”58 From our modern perspective, where most people closely associated a building as the church, the fact that the association of a separate building for church meetings has historically been the exception is hard to imagine. Yet, for nearly three centuries there were no ‘church’ buildings. As some early church congregations grew they began to remodel homes to accommodate more people. “One example of this is the famous home of Dura-Europos (AD 232) in modern Syria, which is the earliest identifiable Christian meeting place. It was a private home remodeled by removing one interior wall, so that it could hold about 70 people.”59 While most followers of Christ were focused on living for him and gathering together with friends and neighbors for fellowship, encouragement, impartation and spiritual strength there were others who were seeking ways to control the church. The Roman Emperor Constantine was one of the later.

Constantine Creates His own ‘Church’ The Emperor Constantine saw Christianity as a powerful tool to control the people. Although he held no particular affinity to Christianity. While he gave official state recognition to the RCC he also gave the same to a plethora of other false church systems that worship a pantheon of God. You might say that Constantine was an ‘equal opportunity worshipper’. He really didn’t care what god the people worshipped as long as they gave him (Constantine the Great) his proper obeisance. To

Constantine’s cross a symbol that was never used by followers of Jesus Christ previous to Constantine.

Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson. Christian History. 58 What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. 59 The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals.

ensure that this is would be the case he made himself Pontifus Maximus of all the approved religions of the Roman Empire, including the Roman Catholic Church which claimed to be the sole voice of all those who followed Jesus Christ. Yet, nothing could be further from the truth. The stance of Biblical Christians Constantine found of interest. As a General he had seen the bravest of the brave. Yet, none of those compared to followers of Christ who were willing to die for their faith. This was a tool that Constantine could use. However, there were many parts of the New Testament experience that did not fit with Constantine’s image, so he decided to sponsor change to those and/or use his power and affluence to influence those within the church at Rome that he could get to see things his way. Of great importance here to Biblical Christians is that in all of the changes the RCC would make that detoured them away from Biblical Christianity, they did not follow the model of the New Testament church in consulting with the Apostles and key church leaders in Jerusalem like the Antioch church did in Acts Chapter 15. Thus, from the standpoint of the Biblical model, Biblical Christians should consider their corporate decisions as illegitimate. While the RCC makes much of Constantine’s supposed conversion there is no record that Constantine ever obeyed a single commandment from Jesus or the Apostles as they answered to the question, “What must we do to be saved.” Constantine was not baptized in Jesus name nor filled with the Holy Spirit. Instead the RCC offered that as Emperor and nearly God himself, Constantine was above such formalities. The story of Constantine’s conversion is just that, a story. It is a clever tale that Eusebius wove that included symbolism of all the pagan religions in the Roman Empire. The RCC hangs their hat on Constantine’s use of the Cross. However, the cross he used on his legions was an X not a T as is commonly used by people today.60 The T cross is even older than the X cross finding its root in Egypt. Whatever the mystery behind the ‘conversion’ of Constantine it is obvious that he became part of the RCC but not a convert to Jesus Christ. This instituted a powerful change from being converted to Christ (as mandated by the NT Church) and “joining the church” as mandated by the RCC. Those who joined the RCC were compelled to go to church on Sunday. Today people are still encouraged to ‘join the church’ by many denominations as opposed to following the instruction of Jesus Christ and the Apostles.

Life of Constantine. Eusebius. B. i. Sec. 28 -31.

“Mixing the Church and State together is like mixing manure and ice cream. It’s not a big deal to the manure, but it sure ruins the ice cream.” It would be amazing to think that Constantine converted to following Christ and even more wonderful to suppose that he converted an Empire. Yet, Constantine, like most politicians, was willing to be whatever he had to be to control his empire. The RCC claims Constantine has a conversion experience based on seeing the cross, yet in all of Scripture there is no basis for such a claim. No one was ever converted by or encouraged to convert by ‘seeing the cross’, venerating the cross, or anything even close. Further, the cross is a symbol that is pagan in origin and predates Christianity by centuries. Only the imprimatur of an empire could invoke such a claim. When Jesus was approached by the rich young ruler (obviously one not nearly as rich as Emperor Constantine) he gave him this instruction: And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother. And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up. Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich. And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. And they that heard it said, Who then can be saved? And he said, the things which are impossible with men are possible with God.61 While it is evident that Constantine had not kept the Commandments of God from his youth nor for that matter at any point in his life, neither did he follow the instruction of Jesus Christ. Constantine had a better plan. He did it his way. Like King David bringing the Ark of the Covenant home, Constantine and his minions designed an even better ‘cart’ to carry the church. Constantine used his power to give imprimatur to those Christian leaders who were willing to compromise and created a new religious experience which was palatable to the pagan origins of the Roman people and their leaders and compatible

KJV. Cambridge Edition. Luke Chapter 18.

with his religious background in Mithraism. Bringing together the power of the Roman Imperial Cult, Hellenistic philosophy, Neo-Platonism, Gnosticism under one religious banner Constantine inaugurated his new religious entity as the official State religion of the Roman Empire (replacing Mithraism). They then claimed the mantle of being the continuation of the New Testament church and proclaimed themselves the one true church. Later Pope Benedictine XVI would proclaim that only the Roman Catholicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s could be called the church.62 Constantine offered protection to his new church, allowing buildings (churches) to be built or converted throughout the empire, and allowing the new â&#x20AC;&#x153;Emperor Approvedâ&#x20AC;? version of Christianity to spread. This created official places of worship. Like embassies of a country. These embassies were staffed by a new priesthood approved in Rome, trained in Rome and dispatched like an army to the far reaches of the Roman Empire. Those followers of Christ who opposed the new religious system were ostracized, eliminated, imprisoned or killed. Anyone who dared take an opposing view was branded a heretic by the new religion. This is a charge that usually ended in death. Rome had found a new, somewhat more subtle, way to kill the followers of Jesus Christ. By A.D. 392 his new religion which claimed to represent all Christians had become a powerful force in Rome. It was practiced from border to border. In this The Temple of Augustus owes its survival to being converted from its same year, the emperor Theodosius declared pagan use to use by one of the new Christianity the state religion, and outlawed all other state religions: Catholicism religious practices. With this new imprimatur Christians began to organize their church into parishes, which were overseen by new breed of professional clergy. This new Roman religion merged concepts found in Mithraism and other pagan practices with historic Judaism and some of the tenets of the New Testament Church. \

Pope says Protestants not churches 'in the proper sense'". Religion News Service. July 11, 2007. Retrieved December 28, 2011.

Pontifex Maximus “Constantine took the traditional title, "Pontifex Maximus." The title originally applied to Roman "high priests" who were the "great bridge builders" between man and the gods. The Emperors used it to designate themselves head of all the state religions. I want you to note that Christianity is not the state religion at this time, although it enjoys imperial favor. Believing he was "God's man," Constantine referred to himself as a "bishop, ordained by God to oversee what is external to the church."63 All religions were welcome in his kingdom as long as they gave veneration to his gods and did not invoke some insane notion of there being only one god. Pluralism was the centerpiece of Statue of Constantine as Apollo on top of Constantine’s religious empire. No doubt, he would have fit Constantine's Column well in the modern political scene. “Constantine did not in Forum Constantine. patronize Christianity alone, however. After gaining victory in Divine Emperor of the the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312), a triumphal arch—the Christian Golden Age Arch of Constantine—was built (315) to celebrate it; the arch is decorated with images of Victoria and sacrifices to gods like Apollo, Diana, and Hercules.”64 “In 321, Constantine instructed that Christians and non-Christians should be united in observing the venerable day of the sun, referencing the esoteric eastern sunworship which Aurelian had helped introduce, and his coinage still carried the symbols of the sun cult until 324. Even after the pagan gods had disappeared from the coinage, Christian symbols appeared only as Constantine's personal attributes: the chi rho between his hands or on his labarum, but never on the coin itself.65 Even when Constantine dedicated the new capital of Constantinople, which became the seat of Byzantine Christianity for a millennium, he did so wearing the Apollonian sunrayed Diadem. In the fourth century the RCC organized several parishes formed what was called a diocese. Each diocese was led by a bishop. These bishops were political titles not recognition of Apostolic authority in a man’s life such as Apostle James who was the Bishop at Jerusalem. The New Testament churches had been independent and locally sovereign answering to the Apostles and Elders. However, under Constantine’s new religion the bishop in Rome began to claim authority over all other bishops, and gave 63

Constantine and the Christian State. Church History for the Masses. Modified 5/30/2007 Constantine the Great. Religious Policy. Wikipedia. 65 Cf. Paul Veyne, Quand notre monde est devenu chrétien, 163. 64

himself the title of ‘papa’, or Pope. The Western parishes readily accepted the authority of the Pope; however, the Eastern churches did not. The churches in the West eventually became known as the Roman Catholic Church, while the churches in the East joined together to form the Eastern Orthodox Church. “Before Emperor Constantine recognized Christianity as a legal religion in 313, corporate ownership of property by the church could be legally ambiguous. It seems that the first property owned by the Roman church were the catacombs. These were not places of meeting, however, but burial sites.”66 “The earliest building certainly devoted to Christian use is at Dura Europos on the Euphrates River in eastern Roman Syria. It was a house that came into Christian possession and was remodeled in the 240s. Two rooms were combined to form the assembly room, and another room became a baptistery—the only room decorated with pictures. Dura was destroyed by the Sassanian Persians in 256, so the house's use as a church was short-lived. The church's house at Dura represents an intermediate stage between meeting in members' houses or other suitable places, and constructing buildings specifically for church meetings.”67 “Examples like this cannot be called ‘church buildings’ but rather homes modified to accommodate larger assemblies. They were never called temples or considered sacred spaces.”68 “As Christianity became the privileged religion of the Roman Empire, simple utility was superseded by buildings that made a "statement"; they became architectural expressions of cultural taste and values, and reflections of status and affluence. So church buildings morphed from being utilitarian places that provided meeting space to elaborate and sometimes opulent expressions of piety and doctrine.”69 New Testament scholar Graydon F. Snyder writes: “There is no literary evidence nor archeological indication that any such home was converted into an extant church building. Nor is there any extant church that certainly was built prior to Constantine. The first churches consistently met in homes. Until the year 300 we know of no buildings first built as churches.” “In the 1st centuries of Christianity churches were either house churches in whatever houses were offered for use by their owners, or were shrines on the burial-sites of martyrs or saints, which following the usual classical practice were invariably on the (then) edges of cities - the necropolis was always outside the polis. In Rome the

Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson. Christian History. 67 Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson. Christian History. 68 The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals. 69 The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

early basilica churches of St. Peter's, Saint Paul Outside the Walls and San Lorenzo fuori le Mura, all follow this pattern. This distinction was gradually broken down, perhaps earliest in Roman Africa, as relics of the saints came to be kept in city-centre churches. By the 6th century bishops were often buried inside their cathedral, and other Christians followed. After the Peace of the Church, the old pagan temples continued to function but gradually fell into disuse, and were finally all closed by the decrees of Theodosius I at the end of the 4th century.”70 “Initially they were shunned by Christians, perhaps because of their pagan associations, but also because their shape did not suit Christian requirements: "To the early church (this being the RCC not to be confused with the NT Church), only one sort of building seemed suitable for Christianization: the basilica", which had previously always been a secular type of building. Some of these basilicas were private ones in the homes of wealthy Christians: examples include the 4th century foundations of San Lorenzo in Damaso and the Basilica di San Clemente. Eventually the prime sites of the pagan temples were very often occupied for churches, the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva (literally Saint Mary above Minerva) in Rome, Christianized about 750, being simply the most obvious example. However this process did not really begin in Rome itself until the 6th and 7th centuries, and was still under way during the Renaissance, when the Pantheon was made a church and Santa Maria degli Angeli e dei Martiri and San Bernardo alle Terme made from parts of the enormous Baths of Diocletian.”71 During Medieval times, the Roman Church made the church building of eminent importance. The Medieval Church played a far greater role in Medieval England than the Church does today. In Medieval England, the Church dominated everybody's life. All Medieval people - be they village peasants or towns people - believed that God, Heaven and Hell all existed. From the very earliest of ages, the people were taught that the only way they could get to Heaven was if the Roman Catholic Church let them. Everybody would have been terrified of Hell and the people would have been told of the sheer horrors waiting for them in Hell in the weekly services they attended.

70 71

Wikipedia. Christianized Sites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianised_sites#cite_note-3 Wikipedia. Christianized Sites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianised_sites#cite_note-3

The control the Church had over the people was total. Peasants worked for free on Church land. This proved difficult for peasants as the time they spent working on Church land, could have been better spent working on their own plots of land producing food for their families. This is one reason why the Church was so wealthy. One of the reasons Henry VIII wanted to reform the Church was get hold of the Catholic Church's money. People were too scared not to pay tithes despite the difficulties it meant for them. Like Constantine, King Henry VII, saw an opportunity to control the people through religion. Creating his own church would give him that control. In Medieval times one had to pay for baptisms (if you were not baptized you could not go to Heaven when you died), marriages (there were no couples living together in Medieval times as the Church taught that this equaled sin) and burials - you had to be buried on holy land if your soul was to get to heaven. Whichever way you looked, the Church received money. While none of these were tenets of the Apostles or the followers of Jesus Christ, these were tenets of the Roman Catholic Church. The people paid 10% of what they earned in a year to the Church (this tax was called tithes, but did not resemble the Old Testament tithing pattern). These tithes could be paid in either money or in goods produced by the peasant farmers. As peasants had little money, they almost always had to pay in seeds, harvested grain, animals etc. This usually caused a peasant a lot of hardship as seeds, for example, would be needed to feed a family the Roman Catholic Tithe Barn following year. What the Church got in tithes was kept in huge tithe barns; a lot of the stored grain would have been eaten by rats or poisoned by their urine. A failure to pay tithes, so the peasants were told by the Church, would lead to their souls going to Hell after they had died. In affect the Roman Church owned the people. Church congregations, from the 4th century onwards, sought to construct church buildings that were both permanent and aesthetically pleasing. This led to a tradition in which congregations and local leaders have invested time, money and personal prestige into the building and decoration of churches.72 â&#x20AC;&#x153;The epitome of this trend was the medieval cathedrals, almost worlds unto themselves. This would only change gradually over the years. John Wycliffe would be one of the first recognized voices to stir the hearts of men to return to the Scripture to do â&#x20AC;&#x153;only those things that are Apostolic (meaning like the Apostles) and nothing that the Papacy dictates. Wycliffeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_architecture

devotion, even in the face of death, to return the church to the doctrine of the New Testament Apostles produced a bible in the language of the people (English). He was convinced that the Clergy led church of his day had to be returned to the people. Returning the church to be based only in Scripture would claim the lives of many who opposed the Roman Catholic system.

American Pilgrims: A Break from the Puritans Hundreds of years later the continued manifestation of the ideas of Wycliffe would be demonstrated through immigrants to America generally known as Pilgrims. The Pilgrims welcomed the restoration of some of the original Apostolic tenets brought through the efforts of the Puritans who using the power the growing English empire had given definition to a church quite different than the one Henry VIII had given them when he orchestrated the break from the Roman Catholic church. However, the Pilgrims envisioned a more complete restoration toward those original Apostolic tenets of the New Testament Church. The Puritans, like the Roman Catholics had grown accustomed to having the favor of the English Monarchy and were unwilling to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;rock the boatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Those willing to risk disfavor with the Crown were willing to do so even to the point of losing their homes and citizenship. These were generally identified as Pilgrims. The discovery by European powers of the New World created a place for the Pilgrims to live in a new level of religious freedom. The Pilgrims were committed, â&#x20AC;&#x153;theirs was a religious, not a political agenda; moral and theological principles were involved, and from their perspective, there could be no compromise. For them 2 Corinthians made it clear: "Come out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord." To achieve and preserve a simplicity and 'purity' that they felt had been lost amid the some of the surviving features of Catholicism--the rituals which continued through into the Anglican Church and were epitomized in its statement, "'I believe in...the holy Catholick Church'" (Gill, 19). To establish themselves as rightful interpreters of the Bible independent of an inherited social and cultural order, they removed from the Anglican

Church in order to re-establish it as they believed it truly should be. This of course meant leaving the country, and they left for Holland in 1608.”73 “After 12 years, they decided to move again. Having gone back to England to obtain the backing of the Virginia Company, 102 Pilgrims set out for America. The reasons are suggested by William Bradford, when he notes the "discouragements" of the hard life they had in Holland, and the hope of attracting others by finding "a better, and easier place of living"; the "children" of the group being "drawne away by evil examples into extravagance and dangerous courses"; the "great hope, for the propagating and advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world"74 “The immigration of the Pilgrims to New England occurred in stages. But that they had to go somewhere became apparent soon enough. Theirs was the position of the Separatist: they believed that the reforms of the Anglican church had not gone far enough, that, although the break with Catholicism in 1535 had moved some way toward the Puritan belief in and idea of religious authority grounded solely in Scripture, by substituting king for pope as the head of Harvard College in 1770 from an engraving by Paul Revere the church, England was only recapitulating an unnecessary, corrupt, and even idolatrous order (Gill, 19-21). In one basic respect, the Pilgrims are a logical outcome of the Reformation. In its increasing dissemination of the Bible, the increasing emphasis on it as the basis of spiritual meaning, the subsequently increasing importance of literacy as a mode of religious authority and awareness, a growing individualism was implicit.”75 So committed were these Pilgrims to their vision that they would put everything at risk to build and establish not a church building, but a school – Harvard College. Pop culture and American holidays like Thanksgiving have given us a tainted view of the Pilgrims. At the center of each Pilgrim village was a meeting house not a church as many think. At the meeting house, the men of the village met to make the laws and settle the problems of the community. The Pilgrims wanted every child to read the bible. So they passed a law requiring parents to teach their children to read. Another

The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments. The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments. 75 The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments. 74

Puritan law required every village with 50 or more families to have a school. There was no law to have a separate church building. Puritan children were taught how to read, write and do arithmetic. “In villages with less than 50 families, children went to schools run by women in their homes. These schools were called Dame Schools.”76 Harvard College was a Pilgrim College. It was the first college in America. It was named after a John Harvard a pilgrim minister77 who donated 400 books to start the school.78 In time this religious freedom would birth a plethora of American based denominations. What had been a vast blessing to those facing death for their beliefs would become a stumbling block to the uninitiated. “The growth of American Protestantism, when fine points of theology and doctrinal differences required five Methodist, seven Baptist, and at least two Presbyterian churches in a town of 4,000 population, having a "church of your own" was more important than the quality and usefulness of the building. After all, pre-destinarian Calvinists could not properly worship with people who held an Armenian maybe-yes-maybe-no view of eternal salvation.”79

The Pilgrims ‘church’ Building While we often hear of the religious piety of some of America’s early settlers (especially around Thanksgiving), the idea of Pilgrim Church buildings is a misnomer. Like many of the reformers who had come before them, the Pilgrims put no great stock in buildings. While there was much focus on living for Christ in their daily lives the idea of a single building only for Sunday worship was a foreign concept. Pilgrim Fort with the lower level used for all community purposes, including church Rather, they held church in a building that was meetings. built for other purposes. “The church building itself had no significance to the Pilgrims, and was kept intentionally drab and plain, with no religious depictions, crosses, windows, fancy architecture, or icons, to avoid the sin of idolatry. At Plymouth, the Pilgrim's church was the bottom floor of the town's fort--the top floor held six cannons and a watchtower to defend the colony. The church room was also the town's meetinghouse, where court sessions and town meetings took

The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments. http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/The-HARVARD-PROJECT-Harvard-Theological-Seminary.html 78 Europeans Settle Throughout North America. The Massechusetts Bay Colony. 79 The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson. 77

place.”80 Those who espouse that the Church is not allowed to meet in public places based on some perception of separating the Church out of the affairs of the State have no history on their side. Isaac de Rasieres, who visited Plymouth in 1627, reported how the Pilgrim's began their church on Sunday: "They assemble by beat of drum, each with his musket or firelock, in front of the captain's door; they have their cloaks on, and place themselves in order, three abreast, and are led by a sergeant without beat of drum. Behind comes the governor, in a long robe; beside him on the right hand, comes the preacher with his cloak on, and on the left hand, the captain with his side-arms and cloak on, and with a small cane in his hand; and so they march in good order, and each sets his arms down near him."81 During the early years of Plymouth, failing to bring your gun to church was an offense for which you could be fined 12 pence.”82 Modern proponents of “bring your gun to church” certainly have nothing new.

Pioneer America For American pioneers the procedure of the Pilgrims was much the same. Wherever they worshipped the ability to be prepared to defend their homes was important. What we must realize from our vantage point is for Pilgrims and American Pioneers, like so many throughout history, the resources to build a separate building to use only for Sunday worship just were not practical. Further, the Pilgrims did not deem such a building as an Methodist Episcopal meetings in Bozeman important part of their devotion and worship to Montana were held in this schoolhouse. God. The Pilgrims lived a simple, practical gospel and the building of edifices for worship was not a priority. It did not mean that they did not hold that the worship of the Lord was not of the utmost importance.

Here Shall I Die Ashore: Stephen Hopkins, Bermuda Castaway, Jamestown Survivor, and Mayflower Pilgrim. Caleb Johnson 81 William Bradford's Of Plymouth Plantation. Along with the full text of the Pilgrims' journals for their first year at Plymouth. Edited by Caleb Johnson 82 Mayflower History. Caleb Johnson. Church and Religion. Mayflowerhistory.com

As American settlers went west they worshipped in the great outdoors, caves, schools, community buildings, wagons, cabins, soddies, saloons, hotels and anywhere else there was space and opportunity to gather in worship. This was not an opposition to a separate building for worship, but rather an economic fact. The first church services in most communities were held in houses or cabins just like in the New Testament Church. A good example of this is the Methodist Episcopal Church in Bozeman Montana whose first service was in a cabin. “The first church service held in Gallatin County (Montana) was by W. W. Alderson, a pioneer farmer, who had been licensed to preach in Illinois, and whose license was also issued in Montana. This service was at the cabin of Merritt W. Penwell and Oscar Penwell on East Gallatin, about 12 miles north of Bozeman on Sunday, June 4, 1865. Services were conducted again at the Penwell Ranch and in Bozeman by Mr. Alderson, who organized the first Sunday school at the log house known as the Masonic Building, in July 1866. As religious denominations became more influential in America; they also became more competitive with each other. As the number of denominations increased the number of church buildings increased. As the number of church buildings increased the competitive nature of men demanded that these edifices be more and more elaborate in a massive scheme to either ‘keep up with the Jones’ or to build a more elaborate building than the church down the street or across town. Evangelism became focused on the how impressive the edifice of the denomination. These structures were not built as testimony to the greatness of God, but rather as stations of the denominational franchise in that community. For some denominations uniformity was also important; kind of like a McDonald’s franchise. As Chuck Colson said in his book, “Being the Body”, “the importance and success of the church is directly measured by the size and grandeur of the structure itself.”83

Being the Body. Chuck Colson. Page 20.

The Edifice Complex A common misconception first offered by the RCC was multiplied by planting the concept in the fertile soil of America. The palaces (commonly called cathedrals) built by the Roman Church symbols of the power and influence of the European World became the benchmark of what a church building should encompass – awe inspiring, modern, and an effort to manifest a convincing argument to the masses of that the power of God was invested in the men who served these institutions. These palaces are a long way from the humble surroundings of the God of the Universe who chose to stage his arrival in a stable associate with the common people and said publically, “The poor you have with you always.” Matthew 26:11 There are many who do not agree that this focus on impressive structures is compatible with Christ likeness nor are they convinced that this is a valid endeavor for those who carry the mantle of followers of Jesus Christ. “Our houses of worship are not any more holy than any other place, including our own homes, or public buildings, schools, bars, and the like. Holiness and sacredness have nothing to do with physical things or places. Separating the secular and sacred was a Gnostic idea, a heresy that the early church constantly battled. Ascribing sacred or holy qualities to objects of any kind is idolatry.” 84 Howard Snyder notes that "Christians did not begin to build church buildings until about A.D. 200. This fact suggests that, whatever else church buildings are good for, they are not essential either for numerical growth or spiritual depth. The early church possessed both these qualities, and the church’s greatest period of vitality and growth until recent times was during the first two centuries A.D. In other words, the church grew fastest when it did not have the help or hindrance of church buildings". Further, the departure from the key tenets of the Apostles doctrine and the pattern of the New Testament church came with the promotion of edifices. The Church had remained much the same during its first 200 years. However, with power, influence and finances the church changed EVERYTHING. “There is nothing wrong about meeting in a building per se. However, if a group chooses to do so it must be careful to not erect a structure or procure internal furnishings which stifle mutual edification and participation from the saints (e.g., pulpit, pews, a rigid "order of worship," etc.). In other words, any property or building must be held lightly and should be an expression of a clear biblical understanding of the true

The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals.

nature of the church.”85 This is certainly the general idea of the separation of church and state. The founding fathers in America did not have in mind a vast network of religious structures when they ensured the protection of religion, but rather that those who practiced religion were free from interference by the government. Unfortunately, as the church has expanded its influence into all realms of society, conflict has developed. “Buildings, therefore, should be functional and conducive to the body-life principles of the New Testament (Romans 12:4-8; 1 Corinthians 12:4-14; 14:12,26-32; Ephesians 4:11-16; Colossians 3:16; Hebrews 10:24-25; 1 Peter 4:10-11). Structure, you see, is important, for the structure of your congregational meetings can either liberate the saints for ministry, or it can suppress genuine interaction and participation!”86 It may be surprising to some, but there are some in a movement that feel that the idea of the church as a building is not just off from the concept of the New Testament Church, but that the idea of building buildings specifically for church services is error. Daryl M. Erkel explains it this way, “To spend large sums of the Lord’s money on building projects, maintenance and renovation is a waste of God’s money (at least in most cases). It is to squander money on that which is to perish. Instead of using such funds to send out more church planters, feed the poor, assist needy believers, and promote the spread of the Gospel, we "evangelicals" have used it to build elaborate cathedrals and huge auditoriums which, in most cases, are only used once or twice a week. Is this being a good steward of the financial resources which God provides? How many churches even stop to consider the necessity of a church building in the first place? Do you think that on the great Day of Judgment Christ will be pleased with our plush and gaudy edifices? Does it grieve your heart that most "evangelical" churches have a larger budget for building projects, staff salaries, and maintenance than for missions, the poor and people-oriented ministries? What does this reveal about our priorities?” Erkel continues, “The building of permanent and extravagant structures appears to betray our belief that Christ is coming soon and that, as believers, we are a pilgrim people. One brother has said it well, "To spend wasted money and time building large, beautiful places of worship knowing that the Lord might come at any time was unthinkable to the New Testament church. The fact that the church today has no problem with the idea of spending both time and money building large, extravagant

85 86

Biblical and Practical Advantages for meeting in Homes. Darryl M. Erkel (1997). Biblical and Practical Advantages for meeting in Homes. Darryl M. Erkel (1997).

buildings is really only a reflection of just how much we’re not expecting Jesus to come back any time soon! The church of the first century followed in the footsteps of Abraham and other Old Testament saints who were "looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God" (Hebrews 11:10) . . . The question must be asked, has today’s church demonstrated this ‘alien’ mindset by its plethora of building plans? Or is it rather the case that our actions show forth a materialistic mindset that has been conformed to this world; one that reasons to the effect that ‘We’re going to be here for a while so we might as well settle down and get comfortable?’"87 Some have supposed that if Christians were to meet in homes, a great deal of reverence would be lost. The "service" would lose its formality and the proper reverence directed toward God would diminish. But this argument assumes that a Christian gathering is to be "formal," whereas we know from the New Testament that early church meetings were quite simple and informal. They were nothing like the highly liturgical and formalistic meetings that mark our places of worship. Moreover, we must remember that reverence is the attitude of one’s heart toward God and is, therefore, not dependent upon its external surroundings. Besides, why can’t reverence for God be maintained within the house-church setting?88 Even the great Protestant Reformer, Martin Luther, believed in and understood the value of having Christians meet within homes in order to have their services. In fact, Luther wrote about three types of divine services. The Latin liturgy and the German service were for the unlearned people, many of whom were not even believers. Those services should continue, he believed, for the primary purpose of evangelism. However, a third kind of service was most needful – a "truly evangelical" one. It would be held privately for those "who want to be Christians in earnest and who profess the Gospel with hand and mouth." Luther describes such a gathering: “[They] should sign their names and meet alone in a house somewhere to pray, to read, to baptize, to receive the sacrament, and to do other Christian works. According to this order, those who do not lead Christian lives could be known, reproved, corrected, cast out, or excommunicated, according to the rule of Christ (Matthew 18). Here one could

87 88

Biblical and Practical Advantages for meeting in Homes. Darryl M. Erkel (1997). Biblical and Practical Advantages for meeting in Homes. Darryl M. Erkel (1997).

also solicit benevolent gifts to be willingly given and distributed to the poor, according to St. Paul’s example (2 Corinthians 9). Here would be no need of much and elaborate singing. Here one could set out a brief and neat order for baptism and the sacrament and center everything on the Word, prayer, and love.”89 When settlers came to America many of them brought a hunger for spiritual freedom. These had no church buildings and it took some time before a structure would be dedicated solely to church meetings. They were not focused on ‘services’, their lifestyle was a service to their God. As America pioneered the West there was a great need for Biblical training, but there was seldom the luxury of a building solely for church. Rather, they used homes, barns, schools and the like. It was often a rare treat to have a minister who had actually been formally trained to speak to these gathering, but most of the people were not worried about the formal training. Rather, like the New Testament Church there were usually elders (respected men of the community) who lived for Christ that would lead the gatherings. These were generally focused on prayer, reading of Scripture and singing. In like manner, when the Apostolic Faith movement (the mother of both the subsequent Pentecostal movement and the Charismatic movement) began in the early 1900’s it was much the same as previous reformations. These were often people who had sold all they had to follow Christ. They met in houses, hotels, healing houses, tents, schools or anywhere they could find to gather. Fortunately, as American’s they had the right to assemble. The focus was not on fine buildings but rather on spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and they did! Today, all across the world, followers of Jesus Christ meet in tents, alleys, buses, community centers and more.

Ulrich S. Leupold, Liturgy and Hymns, Vol.53 of Luther’s Works, ed. Helmut T. Lehman [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1965] pp.53ff

A Child Shall Lead Them “One of my favorite answers to the “What is a church?” question came during a children’s sermon preached by a young seminarian. This story was related to me by someone who was in the congregation that fateful day. For those of you unfamiliar with this genre, a children’s sermon comes in a worship service when the folks twelve and under are brought forward for a sermonette by the pastor or some other church leader. Often the sermon begins with a question like, “What is God?” The preacher gets a bunch of funny – and incorrect – answers, and then offers the right answer, usually with a visual aid. At any rate, a young man was doing his seminary internship at a church. As the low man on the totem pole, he got tabbed for the children’s sermon and decided to talk about what the church really is. He gathered the children together in the front, and began with his question: “So, boys and girls, what is a church?” He fully expected that the kids would say a church is a building and a place to go on Sundays and so forth. He’d get to wrap up with the correct answer, that the church is not the building but the people. As soon as the seminarian uttered his question, one of the boys shot his hand into the air. “Yes,” the young preacher said, “what is a church?” “The gathered assembly of believers in Jesus,” was the boy’s answer. The seminarian was speechless, not knowing where to go from here. The kid had stolen his punch line. From the seminarian’s point of view, there wasn’t anything more to say about the church. So after a few seconds of embarrassed silence, he thanked the boy for his answer and dismissed the children. What the seminarian did not know was that the theologically-precocious boy was the son of a seminary professor in the congregation! It is evident that most people don’t get their ideas of church from their seminary professor fathers. Rather, they get them from a wide variety of less sophisticated sources.”90

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011.

A Survey of Church We need to look toward is not as much what is a church but rather, What is Church? Is Church a building, a place, people? What exactly is Church? When people are asked to explain what Church there is a variety of answers. A Survey revealed the following answer to, “What is Church?”91 a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.

k. l.

m. n. o.

The church is a word used to describe followers of Jesus Christ. A place where Christians can worship God be encouraged and equipped. A place where salvation comes to the lost. The redeemed elect united to Christ and gathered in heaven. We also meet on earth. A way to connect with other Christians, a house for your spiritual family. Church is meeting with Christians with aim for fellowship and worship The kingdom of Jesus being perfected by the work of the Holy Spirit The Church is the Pillar and Bulwark of the Truth. Gods people gathering together A Church is not a building. It is rather a community of people who accept Christ Jesus as their Savior and are willing to show God’s Grace others. This community gathers together to profess that Jesus is Lord, through worship, prayer and biblical teachings. God’s people meeting in God’s place A body of people who seek to build each other up in Christ – through prayer and encouragement – as they worship together and grow in God’s Word The new covenant people of God, gathered in temporal local community and eternal heavenly community Gods people gathering together for His glory Church is Christ’s body – we are the group of spiritual people who do the work of Christ in the world, particularly spreading the Good news of God’s salvation and training others in obedience to Christ. The collection of believers, where ever thy gather, to worship the Lord.

“Church Is” Survey Results Q1: What is Church? Calum Henderson. The “Church Is” project was an interactive animation that was made as part of a Christian art exhibit in June 2011. The project was based on a survey of 31 people. All the participants remained anonymous and gave permission for their answers to be used.

q. Christ’s body of believers praising God, learning from His Word, and loving and supporting one another in Christian community. r. God’s redeemed people s. Church is not a building, temple or a meeting place, BUT it is the group of people meeting together to study God’s word and have fellowship with one another t. The Church is the body of Christ, made up of believers – a community. u. A meeting together of God’s people v. The regular formal public gathering of an identifiable community of Christian believers. w. Meeting with God’s people to spur each other on x. The church is the people, and NOT the building. It is the followers of Christ being the hands and feet of God, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, giving shelter to the homeless and loving people as God loves them. y. For the Christian, church is the gathering of those who are part of your family in Christ to build each other up and equip you to bring Jesus’ good news to the world. z. Do you mean the local or the universal? aa. Place of peace, calm, love, goodwill, where people can worship together, or just reflect on being a better person bb. Church is the gathering of God’s people cc. The body of Christ gathered together to bring God praise. dd. God’s people meeting together ee. A gathering of God’s people92 As you can see from this survey, there is a wide variety of answers and belief’s as to what is a Church. In all of these answers there is an element of truth and without doubt this is what these people have been taught or at least their perception of what they have been taught. “Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox believers affirm the authority of Scripture as God’s Word. But they add the parallel authority of tradition, especially as embodied in the creeds and historic teachings of the church, and in the bishops who guard and pass on this tradition.”93 Some believe that Christian tradition ought to be taken very seriously while others have little interest in the history but are only focused on what the Apostles doctrine was in the New Testament the influence of Roman Emperor, the Roman Catholic Church, counsels, creeds and other additions made by men.

92 93

“Church Is” Survey Results Q1: What is Church? Calum Henderson. What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011.

Have It Your Way One of Burger King’s advertizing slogans is “Have it Your Way!” In some ways we’ve made the church into a Burger King or McDonalds; pretty buildings with popular (or traditional) functions. A choir, wooden seats, a pipe organ, or, hip-hop rock and roll Jesus parties--and yet, there are a set of rules which are always adhered to. The “house of God/sanctuary, a “must-have” meeting place used once-a-week for worship and teaching, but is this the Church that Jesus died for or that he entrusted to His disciples? Those who hold that Christian tradition is important say, “We Christians have much to learn from our brothers and sisters who have gone before us and who have sought to understand and to be the church.”94 Yet most of these would agree with this author that, “Scripture trumps church tradition”95.When we look closely at the question, “A church is either a building used for religious purposes, or it is a group of people who have gathered for religious purposes, or it is a larger configuration of people who have been organized for religious purposes.”96 So what then is a church? As we have explained the idea of a Church as a building really doesn’t apply to the entire history of the church since much of the church historically didn’t have church buildings and even once church buildings were built many met in many places other than those designated as ‘church’ buildings. Today there are vast populations of Christians that do not have ‘church’ buildings and for those who do one of the things that concerns leaders about church buildings is “less than ten percent of those who go to a church building are actively involved in the congregation.”97 “The Christian church can be seen in two ways: the visible and the invisible. The visible church is comprised of all who claim the name of Christian and who gather together for worship and participation of the sacraments: the Lord's Supper and Baptism. The members of the visible church claim the name of Christian (excluding the cults like the Mormons and

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. 96 What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. 97 Connecting With Christians. Bible Truth Tabernacle. Michael Smith. 2011. 95

Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.). The visible church contains both believers and nonbelievers; that is, there are people in the visible church who are not really saved. The members of the invisible Church are the actual body of believers. They are the ones who are truly regenerate and have trusted, by faith, in the true Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. The true Christian is indwelt by the Lord Jesus (John 14:23) through the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Christian church is figuratively said to be the body of Christ. Rom. 12:5, "So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another." Eph. 4:12, "For the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ." The word "church" comes from the Greek "ekklesia" which means "gathering" or "assembly." Therefore, the church is the gathering of the believers who come together to participate in fellowship with one another as they worship God and hear from His Word, the Bible. The church as a whole has been equipped with people possessing different spiritual gifts (Rom. 12:58). The purpose of the gifts is "for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ,” (Eph. 4:12-13).”98 To His church Jesus Christ gave the fivefold ministry. “When I was young, I learned the little rhyme that goes like this: Here is the church, Here is the steeple, Open the doors, See all the people. Of course it didn’t dawn on me at the time that I was getting deficient theology. Only later in life did I realize that I should have learned a better rhyme: Here is a building, On top there’s a steeple, Open the doors, The church is the people!”99

98 99

What is Church? Matt Slick. What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011.

The cause of divisions in the Church: 1. The superintendents lose the life of God, neglect the souls of the people, become greedy of gain, and, by secular extortions, oppress the people. 2. The members of the Church, thus neglected, oppressed, and irritated, get their minds alienated from their rapacious pastors. 3. Men of sinister views take advantage of this state of distraction, foment discord, preach up the necessity of division, and thus the people become separated from the great body, and associate with those who profess to care for their souls, and who disclaim all secular views. In this state of distraction, it is a high proof of Godâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s love to his heritage, if one be found who, possessing the true apostolic doctrine and spirit, rises up to call men back to the primitive truth, and restore the primitive discipline. -- ADAM CLARK

“If a Christian traveler showed up on the streets of Corinth in the first-century A.D. and asked for the location of the ekklesia, nobody outside of the tiny Christian community there would direct him to a religious gathering. Nobody would think he was asking about anything that had to do with the gods or with religious practices. An ekklesia in their day wasn’t anything like a church. The Greeks had words for religious gatherings, words such as thiasos (cultic society) or synagogue (Jewish gathering). But ekklesia wasn’t one of these words.”100 As we have previously shown, the idea of the Church as a building was a foreign idea to the New Testament Church. Christians were not people who went to a building called ‘the church building’. Followers of Jesus Christ were the Church. In order to bring clarity to what we mean we have to identify exactly what is a Christian. This has to go beyond opinion or simple definition and beyond people who just claim that they are Christians. On the other hand, as followers of Jesus Christ, we are not required to demand proof of everyone’s citizenship. Ultimately, citizenship is a matter for God. However, if anyone who claims to be a Christian is considered a Christian then being a Christian really has little meaning. So, we have to do better than just lip service. Being a Christian is about citizenship. It’s not about some rogue claim of being a citizen, but genuine citizenship. For example, there are many people around the world who would love to be citizens of the United States. Some of these are more than willing to do whatever it takes to become a citizen; legal or illegal. In both cases, earthly and heavenly, in the end result only legitimate citizenship will matter. Some are willing to even violate our laws in an effort to appear as citizens. Everyday people illegally come into our country in an effort to be part of our nation. While these illegal residents may be present in our country they are certainly not citizens. Citizenship requires that one is either born in our country or go through a process to be made citizens. In like manner, Christians are those who have completed citizenship with the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, not just people making claims. Jesus gave clear instruction on those who would attempt to come to come into the Kingdom of Heaven by means other than legitimate citizenship. In the Gospel of John Chapter 10 Jesus gave this instruction:

100

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.101 Thieves and robbers make claims about many things that are not true. Nothing stops a thief or a robber from making illegitimate claims about their citizenship. We are not talking about mere claims. Scripture gives us clear instruction on the ‘application process for citizenship into heaven. Apostle Peter in Acts Chapter 2 gives the assembled multitude direct instruction on the subject. In his directive he says that all followers of Jesus Christ must: A) Repent of their sins, B) Be baptized into Christ while invoking his name and C) Received the gift of ‘citizenship’ from heaven, the Holy Spirit. These are earmarks of those who have heavenly citizenship while here on earth. Those who do not meet these citizenship requirements are the same as thieves and robbers. Those who have not repented of their sins, been buried in baptism with Jesus Christ and received the manifestation of His Spirit in their lives have not completed the application process and have not been adopted as sons into the Kingdom of Heaven. These are things that other believers can understand and know about those claiming Christ. Belonging to a religious order, denomination, religious corporation and the like are not proof positive of heavenly citizenship and are attempts to enter into heaven another way. These are not my rules or ideas. This is not my Kingdom. This is the Kingdom of Heaven and God Himself, manifested as Jesus Christ set the rules and entrusted them to His disciples. When I think about what is a Christian I think of a story from when my mother was in high school (circa 1960). They had an exchange student come to their school in suburban Cleveland Ohio. Mom became friends with the exchange student. When my mother asked the student what religion she was, she replied, “I am a Christian like everyone in America”. While there certainly were more Christians per capita in America in 1960 when this took place it is safe to say that ‘everyone’ in America is not a Christian, now or then. While there are Christian principles that are part of our Constitution even those who signed the Constitution and the previous Declaration of Independence were not all Christians. Yet, the perception is that America is a ‘Christian’ nation.

101

KJV. Cambridge Edition. Gospel of John 10:1.

In America, apostasy has reared its ugly head in the church. There are those who do not hold Christ in the highest of regard, as God in flesh, and because they fail to do that, they fail to understand the gospel, they fail to become saved, and they fail to understand what it means to be a Christian. Take the following quote as an example. "Glide Memorial Methodist Church in San Francisco has this Call to Worship in their printed bulletin on Sunday and recited by the leader: "We are all of us Christians, Jews, liberals, Bolsheviks, anarchists, socialists, Communists, Keynesians, Democrats, Civil Righters, Beatniks, ministers, moderate Republicans, pacifists, teachers, doctors, scientists, professors, Latin Americans, New Africans, Common Marketers, even Mao Tse-Tung. Doubtless. From Lyndon Johnson to Mao Tse-Tung, we are all Christians." When I first saw this I thought it was someone playing a sick joke. However, these folks are serious. John Wesley is doing the proverbial, â&#x20AC;&#x153;turning over in his graveâ&#x20AC;?. This church once preached the Gospel and from which, several decades ago, a most powerful evangelistic note was sounded. Today, many of its services are performed in the mode of the modern dance. Suggestive gyrations are indulged in and the church has become a haven for dope addicts, hippies, homosexuals, and sex-pots."102 Those that adhere to such religious edicts are attempting to find another way into heaven. These are some of those thieves and robbers that Jesus warned were not His followers. According to recent polls 92% of all Americans believe in God while 83% call themselves Christian. If you went to any major American city and asked, "Are you a Christian?" you would get all sorts of answers: "I was raised in a Christian home." "I'm a baptized Catholic." "I'm a Methodist." "I go to Woodland Park Baptist Church." "I read my Bible every day." "I walked an aisle, said a prayer, signed a card, and raised my

102

Tan, Paul Lee, Encyclopedia of 7,700 Illustrations, Garland, Texas: Bible Communications, Inc. 1996.

hand." “Humpty-Dumpty or you could make it simpler and say, "A Christian is anyone who calls himself a Christian," which is basically how the pollsters came up with that 83%. It's very American to say, "I'm a Christian if I say I am." That reminds me of Humpty-Dumpty who said, "When I use a term, it means whatever I choose it to mean--nothing more, and nothing less." Is this what Christ intended when He gave Himself for His Church? Did being a follower of Christ simply have to do with saying you followed Christ? On the one hand we often hear the verse recited, “Confess with your mouth…” While on the other hand there is a volume of Scripture dealing with those who obviously worshipped with their lips while their heart was far from God. Since only God can see the heart we must have other indictors to understand what being like Christ really comprises. One pastor in the United Methodist denomination gave this tongue in cheek retort, “A Christian? I have been a Methodist all my life, why would I want to be a Christian?” This is not a profound statement, but it does point to the problem of the generic use of the word Christian and in impending influence of denominations. Here is another example of a creed offered for what is a Christian. “We accept as Christian any individual or group who devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully regards themselves to be Christian. Included are: the Roman Catholic church; the Eastern Orthodox churches, conservative, mainline, and liberal Christian faith groups; The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons); Jehovah's Witnesses and a thousand or so other religious organizations that identify themselves as Christian. Also included are those who consider themselves to be Christian even though they do not identify themselves with any particular religious group.”103 These are nice words but as we have pointed out the idea of anyone who says they are a Christian being one is as weak as gravy made from the shadow of a starving chicken. Seriously, all of these are Christians because they say so? People that hold that Jesus Christ is the brother of Lucifer are Christians by this explanation. Also adulterers, homosexuals and pedophiles as long as they regard themselves to be Christian.

103

What is a Christian? Dr. Ray Pritchard. President of Keep Believing Ministries

Strangely missing from these manmade creeds is the supporting Scriptural references for their dogmas. Apostle Paul’s charge of turning the Grace of God into lasciviousness is wantonly disregarded in pursuit of labeling almost everyone a Christian. If this is what Christianity is then it really is not very valuable. Certainly not important enough for men and women to hazard their lives in defense of a Gospel that already included almost everyone. This simply cannot be Biblical Christianity. These are not of those who gave their lives, their fortunes and sacred honor to bring the Gospel to those who needed something to live for and the hope of eternal life. What we are looking toward in this effort is an explanation of Christianity that explains or addresses what the intent of our founding fathers (in this case the New Testament Apostles and other followers of Jesus Christ) held as tenets of a follower of Jesus Christ. John Piper explains the situation quite well in this quote, “A Christian is not a person who believes in his head the teachings of the Bible. Satan believes in his head the teachings of the Bible! A Christian is a person who has died with Christ, whose stiff neck has been broken, whose brazen forehead has been shattered, whose stony heart has been crushed, whose pride has been slain, and whose life is now mastered by Jesus Christ”.104 None of these self made creeds offering to include everyone who says he or she is a Christian include this most important criteria and no one will attain the goal of Christianity without giving their life first and foremost to Christ. Just saying that you are a Christian will NEVER suffice. “Sadly today, many accept only a profession of faith as evidence of true salvation, whether or not there is any behavior that shows a commitment to Christ. John the Baptist was the first to chide those who held such uncommitted lives and instructed his followers to show ‘fruit’ for repentance. This meant “the proper fruits of reformation; the proper evidence that you are sincere. Do not bring your cunning and dissimulation to this work; do not carry your hypocrisy into your professed repentance, but evince your sincerity by forsaking sin, and thus give evidence that this coming to Jordan to be baptized is not an act of dissimulation. No discourse could have been more appropriate or more cutting.”105 “Fit for repentance; appropriate to it the proper expression of repentance.”106 Profession alone does not give evidence that one has truly accepted Christ as their Lord and Savior. Without any evidence of a changed heart there can be no assurance of one’s’ salvation.”107

104

Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson. Barnes Notes on the Bible. Fruits. See Matthew 7. 106 Ibid. 107 Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson. 105

Two Groups of Christians It was the believers at Antioch that were first called Christians. These who demonstrated, just like Jesus Christ, forgiveness for even those who despitefully used them earned the designation of being like Christ or Christians. Never before had the World seen such Grace or forgiveness. Christ had modeled a level of forgiveness foreign to the ways of the world when He even forgave those who put Him to natural death, “Father forgive them…” We obviously realize that all those claiming to be Christians do not fit the definition. Comparing those who lay claim they are Christians by simply saying, “I am a Christian” or answering in the affirmative when asked, Are you a Christian?, to those who actually are endeavoring to be followers of Jesus Christ by a lifestyle that makes Him the center of their life or who demonstrate forgiveness like Christ is a lot like comparing apples to oranges. Both are certainly fruit, but not of the same tree. What has happened is that the definition and use of the word Christian has become so broad that the term Christian has no distinct meaning. Using the word Christian for almost every related application would be like calling everything in the ocean a fish. The rationale we would use is that if it is in the ocean then it is a fish. Sounds kind of silly but it is infinitely more reasonable than calling anyone who says they are a Christian a Christian. You would ask what kind of fish, what size fish? Are turtles fish? What about sharks? You call it a shark but if I call it a fish does that make it so? Strangely, there is no similar inclusiveness in other religions. One is not included among the Muslims, Buddhists, or adherents to Judaism based simply on something they say. While there may also be those who claim to be followers of those religions because they say so, their lifestyle and decisions will show otherwise. This was the point that John the Baptist was focused on. There is more to a changed life than confession and for Biblical Christians that is only the beginning. For lack of a better term, we have to agree that there are at least two distinct groups of Christians. You may decide to divide them up into even smaller designations but for our purpose here we have chosen to use these two so that people can understand the difference we are making in explaining what really encompasses one who is a Christian.

Humpty Dumpty Christians Humpty Dumpty Christians are those who are Christians because they say or in some cases someone else labels them a Christian. The first group is comprised of those who are Christians by association, default or by joining a religious order, denomination or group. These might identify themselves by a number of designations. These would consider their faith a casual matter and certainly not a top priority in their life. These may well find their numbers included in the numerous polls, censuses and other efforts to label, catalogue or group them among some religious denomination with roots in Evangelical thought, historical religious bodies or the State sanctioned religions. These are what we would call the everything in the ocean group referring to our previous point of calling everything in the ocean a fish. For some reason people confuse doing something good with being a Christian. It is true that people referred to Jesus Christ ‘the one who goes about doing good’ but this is solely a Christian tenet. Almost all religions have the auspices of doing good as part of their religious make-up and lots of good people realized that was not good enough, but that they needed to follow Jesus Christ. Among these is the first recorded non Jewish Christian; Cornelius. “Cornelius is depicted in the New Testament as a God-fearing man who always prayed and was full of good works and deeds of alms.”108 In spite of his record of being good Cornelius recognizes that he is not a Christian, but comes to understand that he needs to follow Christ. It may be that because he was accustomed to doing good he is propelled in the direction of Christ but just doing good and saying that he followed Christ would never suffice. In Acts Chapter 10 Cornelius becomes a Christian not by saying, “I am a Christian but by baptism both in the Spirit and in water. “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have

108

Wikipedia. Cornelius the Centurion. Biblical Account

received the Holy Spirit just as we have." So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. The pattern for those who become Christians is consistent and repeated often by the New Testament Church. Those who were inclined to follow Christ repented of their sins, and received the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in other tongues subsequent to being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. In contrast to these Biblical examples of Christianity we find these Humpty Dumpty or some might say politically expedient Christians. Many of these embrace creeds like the one from the aforementioned Methodist Church embracing virtually everyone as Christians. Humpty Dumpty Christians find much agreement with the religious views of men like Constantine. From their view anyone is a Christian who says he is a Christian or doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t deny he or she is a Christian. Biblical Christians understand that we must be light to the whole world, but this does not mean that the whole world is Christian. If we were to compare this group of politically expedient Christians to Old Testament times this group would compare to the mixed multitude mentioned in Exodus Chapter 12. Some say that Humpty Dumpty Christians include anyone who is not a follower of Islam, Buddha or Judaism. This broad based inclusivity is probably even too general for the most all-encompassing of Christian groups, but in a media directed world it makes sense to someone. Under this explanation Atheists, Agnostics and a plethora of smaller religious groups who would not be identified as Christian would be included. For the purposes of this discussion we will consider all those who say they are Christians part of this first group. People who live in countries that are predominately Christian fall into this politically expedient or some would say PC (politically correct) category. Humpty Dumpty Christians are the predominate political force in what is historically referenced as Christianity. Surveys show as high as 83% of Americans consider themselves Christians.109 These surveys ask if you are a Christian. Since Christian thought dominates most of the civilized world (primarily because of European and American Colonialism) most are inclined to answer in the affirmative. According to the Barna Group 90% of Americans are committed to some religion. This leaves those who are not saying they are religious in the minority. Even the Supreme Court of the United States has chimed in on the debate declaring the United States of America a Christian Nation.110 A point that is hotly debated in factions both pro and con.

109

Robert D. Putnam and David E Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us (2010) Ch 1 at note 5 110 Church of the Holy Trinity VS the United States. 1892. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/143/457/case.html

According to the Barna Group's survey while 90% of Americans claim some religious affiliation only 12% of American adults say that faith is a top priority in their life. This would be the point of vast discrepancy between those who say they are Christians (more than 80%) and those who are Biblical Christians (less than 10%). The Humpty Dumpty group of Christians embraces and promotes an Ecumenical movement that embraces all who claim the designation of Christian and many are strong proponents of inter-faith meetings hoping to include adherents of Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and more. In the United States most politicians fall into this first group. Some Buddhist Monks and Catholic Priests politicians are committed to their religious beliefs but at an inter-faith meeting. just as many see their association with the Church as a necessary evil or a place to connect socially. This was powerfully demonstrated in the 2012 Republican Primaries in the United States. In 2012, a U.S. Presidential candidate in Minnesota left her Wisconsin Synod Church for political convenience hoping to distance herself from controversial doctrinal positions held by that religious denomination.111 It is the position of the Wisconsin Synod Lutherans that the Roman Catholic Church is a perversion from Biblical Christianity (a view held by most Protestants) and further they hold that the Pope is the Anti-Christ spoken of in the Bible. Thus in distancing herself from her long association with her church the political candidate expected to curry favor with more voters, especially Catholic voters which make up a large voting bloc. From a purely political standpoint this is understandable. Politicians are concerned about votes not the Bible. It is evident, at least till this point in our history, that a US candidate for President (regardless of political party affiliation) would have little chance of election if they did not make some claim to be a Christian in a nation where the majority of the population identifies themselves as Christians. Politicians curry the favor of these Humpty Dumpty Christians. These same politicians if they lived in Israel would claim to be adherents of Judaism or if they lived in Pakistan (where you cannot be President if you are not a Muslim) claim to embrace Islam. These are politically expedient choices. These are not Christians in the sense of those we find immortalized in Hebrews Chapter 11 or in Foxes Book of Martyrs.112

111 112

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/ http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html

I know a funeral home director who is a great example of a Humpty Dumpty Christian. Those who know him would speak about him as a Christian. He holds membership in a number of Churches. His interest has little to do with the function of that particular religious schism. Rather, his interest is strictly business. By holding membership in a number of congregations he places his name among them as a ‘member of their church’. It is like joining a number of country clubs. It helps those seeking funeral services decide to do business with his funeral home. After all he is a member of their church and there is a comfort level with doing business with fellow church members. There is certainly nothing illegal about such activity. There are many people who go to church or attend a particular church because of similar social, business or political reasons. While these are generally Coptic Christians in worship

labeled as Christians it has nothing to do with their following Christ and everything to do with their membership in a religious denomination. Churches, like country clubs, have various levels of social acceptance. The reality is that many of these would be better described as religious country clubs, but that is not politically expedient. Humpty Dumpty Christians cling to these religious denominations for part their identity. Humpty Dumpty Christians include those who attend services only on religious holidays because of family, tradition or social obligation. These are sometimes referred to as C & E (Christmas and Easter) Christians. If asked these would say that they are Christians but would be in the 88% of people that do not consider their religious faith a high priority in their life. While there are many devout Roman Catholic Church (RCC) followers; the predominate number of RCC adherents would fall into this Humpty Dumpty group. This is not about their religious denominational affiliation, doctrine, or dogma but about their proximity to the tenets of the Biblical Christians as preserved for us in the writings of the Bible. In many places, particularly Spain, when someone identifies themselves as a Christian they are saying there are a Catholic. Many followers of Jesus Christ are offended to be lumped together with Catholics under a generic label of Christian. Unfortunately over time, the word “Christian” has lost a great deal of its significance and is often used of someone who is religious or has high moral values but who may or may not be a true follower of Jesus Christ. Many people who do not believe and trust in Jesus Christ consider themselves Christians simply because they go to church or religious social club or they live in a “Christian” nation. As we have previously discussed going to church, serving those less fortunate than you, or being a good person does not make you a Christian. Going to 73

church does not make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage makes you an automobile. Being a member of a church, attending services regularly, and giving to the work of the church does not make you a Christian. Here are some points to consider on the word Christian.  The name "Christian" was not invented by early Christians. It was a name given to them by others. It was offered partially as a slur and partially as a compliment as this designation was given to followers of Jesus Christ at the Antioch church because of the level of forgiveness that they demonstrated being reminiscent of Jesus Christ.  Christians called themselves by different names—disciples, believers, brethren, saints, the way, the elect, etc.  We can get a flavor for it if we take the word "Christ" and keep that pronunciation. You "Christ-ians."  It literally means "Christ-followers."  Over time a derogatory term became a positive designation.  Occasionally you will hear someone spit the term out in the same way it was used in the beginning. "You Christians think you're the only ones going to heaven."  There was a sense of suffering and reproach attached to the word in the New Testament. It was a “Red Badge of Courage”. The Bible teaches that the good works we do cannot make us acceptable to God. Titus 3:5 says, “He saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” So, a Christian is someone who has been born again by God (John 3:3; John 3:7; 1 Peter 1:23) and has put faith and trust in Jesus Christ. Ephesians 2:8 tells us that it is “…by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.” “Many think they are Christians because they claim to believe in Jesus. But, believing in Jesus often means nothing, or anything, particularly here in America where pluralism and relativism are rampant. Many say they believe in Christ but without any evidence of the transforming work of the gospel in their lives it is only a profession of belief. Does

your life bear evidence to what you say you believe?”113 “Christ will be master of the heart, and sin must be mortified. If your life is unholy, then your heart is unchanged, and you are an unsaved person. The Savior will sanctify His people, renew them, give them a hatred of sin, and a love of holiness. The grace that does not make a man better than others is a worthless counterfeit. Christ saves His people, not IN their sins, but FROM their sins. Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord.” C.H. Spurgeon

Joining the Church One thing that may surprise the uninitiated, joining one of these politically correct religious groups may not be as simple as one might expect. Many Humpty Dumpty Christians have rules and regulations for joining and continuing membership. These are much different than those adhered to by Biblical Christians in 33 A.D. and most often more is required to join their religious group than one would have to do to become a follower of Jesus Christ. While an initiate could expect membership in the New Testament Church after repentance, baptism and infilling of the Holy Spirit (which could be accomplished in as little as a day or less) modern initiates may find they are required to take as long as several years to come in ‘full communion with the church’.114 The primary difference is that New Testament believers were expected to be baptized into Christ while modern believers are most often join and/or are baptized into the church. The follow-up to being baptized into the church is going to church. This highlights a primary difference in those who adhere to going to church in contrast with those who expect to be the church. The Humpty Dumpty Christian is content with going to church even if it is only once a year while the Biblical Christian understands that a follower of Christ will have to be more committed than just joining a religious group.

113

Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson. Our Catholic Faith. Joining the Catholic Church. What are the Steps of the RCIA. http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/rcia.html 114

Ongoing there are also a volume of expectations denominations have of members from continuing educational requirements to attendance expectations, and the list is virtually endless for the various factions of Humpty Dumpty Christendom. Like a smorgasbord a Humpty Dumpty Christian can choose the denomination with the requirements that they are most comfortable. With 38000 schisms there are certainly more than 38000 expectations of those who adhere to these religious systems. Historically, there have been other interesting requirements to being part of some religious denominations. Some have required that a couple give one of their children to the church. While it was not slavery, there was an expectation placed upon families to indenture at least one of their children to the service of the church. There are volumes of stories (some positive and some extremely negative) about children who were ‘pressed into service’ by this religious system. Some years ago while pioneering a new church plan in a large metropolitan area I was surprised to often hear the question, “What are the rules for coming to your church?” The area the church was in was an area where there were many people from large very liturgical religious denominations. The people were accustomed to thinking about church in the terms of rules and regulations. They understood Christians from the vantage point of Humpty Dumpty Christianity. When I would explain that to attend our meetings we did not have such requirements most of those questioning seemed to be in disbelief. Like, I was trying to fool them or something. From their vantage point a church had to have rules even for basic attendance. Our church met in an old, large warehouse building. We called it Church in the Warehouse. We were anything but conventional or traditional. After a number of these “What are the rules” inquiries I asked one of the men in our church to make a sign for us. We posted this sign on the door of our church. It read: Rule #1 You can’t come to church naked (If you don’t have clothing we will help you get some). Rule #2 – You can’t stay if you cause trouble. Now, I realize that these are certainly not tenets of New Testament or Biblical Christianity and we did not offer them as such. Rather it was our hope to differentiate our gathering from those of Humpty Dumpty Christians. 76

CHURCH RULES Rule #1 - You can’t come to church naked. (If you don’t have clothing we will help you get some). Rule #2 - You can’t stay if you cause trouble.

I am not certain that these simple rules satisfied all the questions about church rules but people started coming and our sign caught the attention of the local media. When I would talk with people in the city and at the mention of Church in the Warehouse I would often get, “Is your church the one where you can’t come naked?” I would smile and say “Yes”, and then I would smile and say, “You know that you can’t come naked!”

Pay to Pray There are other barriers erected by these religious systems that attract Humpty Dumpty Christians. Some are financial, some are racial, some of political and the list goes on. Denominations operate very much like country clubs. It is not a generally appreciated comparison but in practical application most churches and the denominations that they belong to operate like clubs and/or a network of religious clubs or some say religious country clubs. Membership into one of the various 38000 sects or schisms will likely be much more difficult than joining a country club or lodge. Like a country club or lodge membership is often predicated on finances. Being a member of denomination costs money; it is not generally free for a local congregation to belong to a religious denomination. Now, I am not explaining away biblical requirement on giving. There is no evidence that tithing was abolished in the New Testament and by all appearances they took giving to a new level. Tithing is not a tax or a system of tariffs. Tithing is about connecting to inheritance, blessings and favor. This is not the topic of this book but those who seek to live for Christ and keep their finances separate for that commitment are deceiving themselves. Religious denominations operate overseers, staff, head quarters buildings and more. This all costs money and someone has to pay the bill. This money comes in the form or fees or dues or assessments (each of the 38000 has their own words for this money) that are paid to the denomination. These fees are based on the membership numbers or the income of the local assembly. Essentially, the local church is like a franchise. Just like in a franchise the local church is required to adhere to a list of rules and regulations and financial considerations. In recent years it has become increasingly common for members of a denominational church to be asked to pay to pray. What I mean by pay to pray is that many churches 77

require members to make a financial contribution either annually or monthly or they will find that they no longer have membership. Can you imagine being asked to leave the family? Especially the family of God? No, but there is where most of us make a mistake. These churches are NOT posturing as the family of God. They are religious groups operating as American Corporations and functioning much like country clubs and virtually nothing like the New Testament Church. The Humpty Dumpty creeds could well be defined by the postmodernists. Intolerance is the only thing not tolerated by the postmodernist who says, "My truth is different than your truth, so don't judge me with your outdated morals."115 “Such commentary by the non-thinking and spiritually dead is all too common. But it doesn't change the true meaning of what it means to be a follower of Christ. So, what does it mean to be a Christian?”116 Some denominations have something as simple as a membership class others required years of study and instruction. So, the simple answer of a Christian by definition may not really be close. Even someone who is a Christian by definition may find entrance to some denominations difficult.

Biblical Christianity The second group of Christians is more than just Christians by virtue of being born in a Christian country, by virtue of infant baptism, infant dedication or to parents who profess Christ. These are followers of Jesus Christ because of their professed belief that Jesus Christ is the manifestation of God in flesh.117 Biblical Christians hold that Jesus Christ came to redeem mankind from our sins. We chose to explain this group, Biblical Christians. When someone says, “I am a Christian” you can respond by asking, “Are you a Biblical Christian?” This will generally invoke the response of either “Well, not like those in the Bible” or a confirmation that they are trying to live their life for Jesus Christ. This will help you to understand if they perceive themselves as a Humpty Dumpty type Christian or a Biblical Christian. 115

What is a Christian. http://carm.org/christianity/devotions/what-christian What is a Christian. http://carm.org/christianity/devotions/what-christian 117 1 Timothy 3:16. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. 116

Biblical Christians are people who are followers of Jesus Christ and the tenets handed down to us by his disciples (Apostles) through the New Testament. Historically, this group has been in the shadows of the history of what has called itself the Christian church. Biblical Christians have been overshadowed, by the State sponsored church. Biblical Christians have numerically been in the minority. Yet, for the most part this has not dampened their resolve to follow Jesus or promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Oft times, Biblical Christians have been condemned to death or relegated as heretics by the State sponsored church system. Today because of the advance of personal and religious freedoms Biblical Christians appreciate the greatest amount of freedom in recorded history. Based on the surveys of top church marketing consultants like the George Barna group Biblical Christians would be the largest share of the 12% that hold faith as a top priority in their life. It may be that some of the remaining 71% who claim to be Christians would also be in this group. However, it would be hard to imagine someone as a Biblical Christian who did not consider faith a top priority in their life. Biblical Christians object to those who claim Christ because purely for social relations, business connections or because it is politically expedient. This group rejects the notion that those who have rewritten the bible or have other books that they consider equal to the bible are Christians. This would include the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons), a cult with more in common with the Free Masonry than Christianity. Biblical Christians are not necessarily defined by a particular faith or movement although there have been movements that were committed solely to Biblical Christianity. Certainly the general theme of the Protestant Reformation was a movement toward restoring Biblical tenets of Christianity and away from State run religious systems in general and the Roman Catholic Church in particular. Biblical Christians have been represented by people like the Pilgrims, the Lollards,118 Anabaptists119, Quakers, Apostolic Faith movement and other like minded followers of Jesus Christ who reject the non biblical tenets of the established or State sponsored church in favor of the Biblical

118

Lollardy was a late medieval reform movement ca. 1382-1430. The movement was based on the writings and teachings of the Oxford University theologian, John Wyclif. The movement started from Oxford and spread. The term Lollard was used as a abusive term for its questionable religious views. http://www.exlibris.org/nonconform/engdis/lollards.html 119 Anabaptist comes from the Greek meaning "rebaptiser". The term was usually used as a form of derision. Individuals did not refer to themselves as Anabaptists, some groups used the term Brethren to describe themselves. By 1525, Anabaptist congregations were spreading across most of German speaking Europe. Continental Anabaptist congregations rejected the corrupted doctrines and practices of the Roman Church, and the new Reformed Protestants Churches of the Reformation. Anabaptists sought instead to reestablish a true Christian community based on their concepts of the early New Testaments congregations. They saw themselves as the new saints of the one true Church.

model established by Jesus Christ and promulgated by his Apostles. This is not to proclaim that adherents of these groups are perfect or that all factions of these groups and movements achieved the ultimate goal of restoring the original doctrines of the Apostles. Rather, we are recognizing their commitment to such a goal. Like the church at Antioch where people were first called Christians, these have ‘earned the right’ to be considered genuine followers of Christ. Only God Himself can make the final designation and determination if these are worthy to hear the words “Well Done My Good and Faithful Servant…” “A dictionary definition of a Christian would be something similar to “a person professing belief in Jesus as the Christ or in the religion based on the teachings of Jesus.” While this is a good starting point, like many dictionary definitions, it falls somewhat short of really communicating the biblical truth of what it means to be a Christian. The word “Christian” is used three times in the New Testament (Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16). Followers of Jesus Christ were first called “Christians” in Antioch (Acts 11:26) because their behavior, activity, and speech were like Christ. The word “Christian” literally means, “Belonging to the party of Christ” or a “follower of Christ.” A Biblical Christian is a person who has put faith and trust in the person and work of Jesus Christ, including His death on the cross as payment for sins and His resurrection on the third day. John 1:12 tells us, “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” The mark of a true Christian is love for others and obedience to God’s Word (1 John 2:4, 10). A true Christian is indeed a child of God, a part of God’s true family, and one who has been given new life in Jesus Christ.”120 It was at Antioch, the predominately Gentile church that the reference was first given to followers of Christ as like Christ or Christians. The reason for this designation was that they were like Christ in the way that they had unconditional love and forgiveness. No other group of people had ever manifested such a spirit of forgiveness. This was exemplified by Jesus Christ when he was undergoing His trial and subsequent execution at the hands or unrighteous men. The epitome of this was when Jesus Christ said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”121

120 121

http://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-a-Christian.html KJV. Cambridge Edition. Luke Chapter 23.

Followers of Christ faced similar great persecution when Saul of Tarsus (later Apostle Paul) came to their area and brought letters leveling great tribulation on the people of Antioch. This resulted in many followers of Jesus Christ being killed, imprisoned and more. Later, after his conversion, Apostle Paul comes to Antioch under the tutelage of Apostle Barnabas. These followers of Jesus Christ in Antioch embraced Apostle Paul and forgave him just like Jesus had given as example prompting observers to labeling them Christ like, thus the idea of a Christian was born. Volumes could (and have) been written about Biblical Christians. This is the model, the true, the goal for all those who are genuinely following Jesus Christ. Like the lyrics of an old song, â&#x20AC;&#x153;To be like Jesus, to be like Jesus, on earth I long to be like Him.â&#x20AC;?

The church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. - Dr. Martin Luther King

In contrast to those we talked about in the introduction who say they “hate church”, I would say that I love church. No, not the politics, the Humpty Dumpty mentality, the deacon board wrangling with the pastor, the pomp and ceremony, the long robes, the pompous who watch what everyone else is driving, or wearing and so forth. These are frustrating to say the least. However, I love the people. I love coming together with those of like precious faith and corporately worshipping our God together. God seems to delight in it as well. I enjoy hearing a choir sing (even if they are not the most polished group of vocalist). To me church is a welcome safe haven from the storms of life. Time spent with fellow believers is time to forget (even if only for a little while) the trials of life. I could go on, but the question that I ask is does God love church? I am not talking about does God love The Church. That would be a no brainer. Of course God loves The Church. He gave Himself for His Church (Ephesians 5:25). The question is does God love what we call church? You might ask, “Does God love the church where I attend?” Or is my church a haven for Humpty Dumpty Christianity? Again, Jesus Christ definitely loves the people. Remember, Jesus loved the people and was always kind to them. However, the pretentious religious leaders received the full blunt of the wrath of Jesus including being physically chased from the Temple. These religious leaders had inherited the mantle leaders of the people of God, but they had abused that trust. First Jesus makes definite attempts to reform these religious leaders, but they only sought to keep their positions safe. They had no interest in seeing their religious movement reformed. Humpty Dumpty would have been proud of their efforts. Instead of reforming the existing church Jesus brought a total reformation. The New Testament church had to be the answer to the confusion that had become the people of God. Biblical Christianity became the model. However, in the process of time we have returned to this same abuse by religious leaders in what was originally entrusted to the Apostles. We now have socially relevant denominations and churches that are becoming more ‘socially relevant’, they are also becoming even less ‘spiritually relevant’, as they continue to water down the word of God and His instruction in righteousness in an effort to embrace more and more Humpty Dumpty Christians. The dogma of inclusion has developed in direct opposition to the word of God. Western churches have become more and more inclusive, as the Law of God is given lip service, but the core values and instructions of the scriptures have been so chopped up that

there is almost no identity of God left in the weekly services. 122

Beth El – The House of God In the Old Testament Jacob found himself in a serious predicament. He had gone back to his mother’s people, found a wife (or two, or four, depending on how you count). He had a full quiver of children, lots of material blessings, and life was good. Yet, God is calling to Jacob. As he began to make his journey back to his homeland his thoughts turned toward his walk with God and the promises that he had made. As a child I recall hearing a favorite minister, the late Roger Evens, 123sing an old song, “Back to Bethel”. I remember him so well with his according and singing the familiar words, “Bethel is calling and I must go!” Bethel was calling to Jacob. Here at the place where he had a close encounter with the eternal Creator of the Universe. Here where a ladder appeared to him that went up into the heavens. Here Jacob gets not only a dream but a prophetic glimpse into his destiny and that of his family. The dream “was probably a type of CHRIST, in whom both worlds meet, and in whom the Divine and human nature are conjoined. The LADDER was set up on the EARTH, and the TOP of it reached to HEAVEN; for GOD was manifested in the FLESH, and in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Nothing could be a more expressive emblem of the incarnation and its effects; Jesus Christ is the grand connecting medium between heaven and earth, and between God and man. By him God comes down to man; through him man ascends to God. It appears that our Lord applies the vision in this way himself, 1st, In that remarkable speech to Nathanael, Hereafter ye shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man, John 1:51. Secondly, in his speech to Thomas, John 14:6: I am the Way, and the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me.” Here Jacob makes a proclamation, “This is none other but the house of God” and “I knew it not!” Jacob is at a place by the road where there is nothing but a stone for a pillow. However, it cannot be ignored that he calls this place the “HOUSE OF GOD”. What no building? No pews, no altar? Jacob realizes 122

How Many Churches Can a Community Support. A. W. Bowman. http://hatalmidim.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=aw&thread=210 123 Apostolic Archives. Who’s Who. Rev. Roger Lloyd Evens. http://www.apostolicarchives.com/whoswho_e.html

that his church needs an altar so he stands a stone up to form a pillar. This was not an effort to place furniture but rather to give proper attention to prayer. Jacobâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s church has an altar. This is the house of God. He anoints it with oil and dedicates the place to God. He vows a vow to God to dedicate his life and that of his posterity to God. He references the connection that he has to his grandfather, Abraham, and the Divine promise that God made to Abraham and confirmed through the encounter with Melchisadec. This place Jacob dedicates for worship to his God. â&#x20AC;&#x153;I shall worship God in this place.â&#x20AC;? So, Jacob returns to his homeland. However, life comes at Jacob hard and a plethora of ugly things happened to him and his family. Finally, Jacob calls for a change. It is time to go back to Beth El. In returning to Bethel, Jacob gives instruction to his family to get rid of those things that should not be in their home. For all of us, it is past time to go back to Bethel. Time to turn our focus from Humpty Dumpty Christendom and toward Biblical Christianity.

38000 Schisms Apostle Paul warns us that we would see division in the body of Christ if we failed to follow Christ. We call these denominations; Apostle Paul called them schisms. Did he imagine that we would have 38000 major divisions and so many smaller ones that I doubt anyone has an accurate count? Probably no one could list all the various sub sects. Some say there are more than 1000 further schisms under just the Baptist denomination. The root concept of the word denomination signifies the dividing of the nation. Jesus Christ died for one church. Men have divided what he died for into various chunks and parts. Jesus Christ shed His precious blood to claim His church. Men continue to experiment with that which Jesus gave His life. Men taking parts and pieces of the body of Christ and creating different concepts have turned the body of Christ into a spiritual Frankenstein. In Matthew chapter 23 our Lord pronounces eight woes, or rather pathetic declarations, against the scribes and Pharisees. These are equally applicable to the 38000 denominations that claim to be the Christian church. This explains Humpty Dumpty Christendom. 86

â&#x20AC;&#x153;1. Their unwillingness to let the common people enjoy the pure word of God, or its right explanation: Ye shut up the kingdom, etc., Matthew 23:13. 2. Their rapacity, and pretended sanctity in order to secure their secular ends: Ye devour widowâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s houses, etc., Matthew 23:14. 3. Their pretended zeal to spread the kingdom of God by making proselytes, when they had no other end in view than forming instruments for the purposes of their oppression and cruelty: Ye compass sea and land, etc., Matthew 23:15. 4. Their bad doctrine and false interpretations of the Scriptures, and their dispensing with the most solemn oaths and vows at pleasure: Ye blind guides, which say, whosoever shall swear by the Temple, it is nothing, etc., Matthew 23:1622. 5. For their superstition in scrupulously attending to little things, and things not commanded, and omitting matters of great importance, the practice of which God had especially enjoined: Ye pay tithe of mint and cummin, etc., Matthew 23:23, 24.

6. Their hypocrisy, pretended saint-ship, and endeavoring to maintain decency in their outward conduct, while they had no other object in view than to deceive the people, and make them acquiesce in their oppressive measures: Ye make clean the outside of the cup, Matthew 23:25, 26. 7. For the depth of their inward depravity and abomination, having nothing good, fair, or supportable, but the mere outside.-Most hypocrites and wicked men have some good: but these were radically and totally evil: Ye are like unto whited sepulchers - within fullof all uncleanness, Matthew23:27, 28. 8. For their pretended concern for the holiness of the people, which proceeded no farther than to keep them free from such pollutions as they might accidentally and innocently contract, by casually stepping on the place where a person had been buried: and for their affected regret that their fathers had killed the prophets, while themselves possessed and cultivated the same murderous inclinations: Ye-garnish the sepulchers of the righteous, and say, If we had been, etc., Matthew 23:29, 30.â&#x20AC;?124

124

Adam Clark Commentary. Matthew. Chapter 23.

A Form of Godliness The challenge for Biblical Christians has long been how to embrace the tenets of the Apostles in the modern world. The State sponsored or denominational franchise that has replaced the Biblical Church, and those who have continued or in some manner embraced the same tradition, have exchanged structure for substance and are focused more on pomp, hierarchy and religious ceremony than on the tenets of the Apostles. This has led the modern ecclesiastical organization to fulfill the Scripture in 2 Timothy Chapter 3: 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 3:4 Traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. Adam Clark commented on this passage, â&#x20AC;&#x153;The original word signifies a draught, sketch, or summary, and will apply well to those who have all their religion in their creed, confession of faith, catechism, bodies of divinity, etc., while destitute of the life of God in their souls; and are not only destitute of this life, but deny that such life or power is here to be experienced or known. They have religion in their creed, but none in their hearts. And perhaps to their summary they add a decent round of religious observances. From such turn away â&#x20AC;&#x201D; not only do not imitate them, but have no kind of fellowship with them; they are a dangerous people, and but seldom suspected, because their outside is fair.â&#x20AC;?125 It would seem that Adam Clark wrote this about the plethora of denominations and mega church entities that dominate the modern church, but Adam Clark wrote this more than 100 years ago. Perhaps he knew of Humpty Dumpty.

125

Adam Clark Commentary. Second Timothy. Pg. 231.

Biblical Christians focus on “the early church which believed that Jesus was the very presence of God and that the body of Christ (the church) constitutes his temple.”126 “Jesus made some radical statements about the Temple127 in Jerusalem that angered the Jews of his day. One that angered them the most was the claim that if the Temple was destroyed he would build a new one in three days! (John 2:19-21) Though he was referring to the architectural temple as an example, he was actually referring to the real temple – his body – which he did raise up as Himself on the third day (Ephesians 2:6).”128 Jesus did not make this point to just make the Jews mad. He made the point in an attempt for them to understand that His interest was in people, not buildings. “The New Testament teaches that since Christ is risen, we Christians have become God’s temple through his “life giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:45). Through his spirit, he takes up residence with his believers, making them his house or temple. This is why the NT never refers to the church as a building, but as a people.”129 With Jesus, we no longer need a specific or special place to worship God. We can worship Him in spirit and truth from anywhere. “When Christianity was born, it was the only religion on the planet that had no sacred objects, no sacred persons, and no sacred spaces.” (James D. G. Dunn). As another scholar has put it, “The Christianity that conquered the Roman Empire was essentially a home-centered movement.”

Reformation This is not the first time in the history of the church that there has been a general call to restore the church to its original concept. Throughout history we have had these calls. In reality, the origin of the New Testament church comes from one of these calls. That call was away from the formalism of a building as the central theme of worship and to embrace a God that would come and dwell in you! This was revolutionary concept available to ‘whosoever will’. Since that time, what has generally come from these reformations or calls to reform is either a new denomination or a new movement. This approach is part of the problem. What happens is that denominations and other religious entities have either no

126

The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals. Pagan Christianity. Frank Viola and George Barna. 128 The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals. 129 The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals. 127

mechanism for this type of radical change or are simply unwilling to let this happen. The fact of the matter is that we don’t need another denomination, we have too many already. We have denominations that are for baptizing people three times forward and those against. We have denominations who all women must wear white hose and those who do not. We have denominations that allow women to pastor and those who do not even allow women to clean the furnishings on the pulpit area. I am not making these up! These are only a beginning of the multitude of reasons (or excuses) we have made to divide from one another. I often wonder what would happen if we just worked on reasons to come together. What is needed is not another denomination, but a simple return to the vision, mission and doctrine of Biblical Christianity. I know that I will be called a radical but why do we need any denominations? What is needed is simplicity. How to navigate through the maze that we have built around that simplicity over the past 2000 years may not be easy. The task may very well resemble peeling layers from an onion. When you remove one layer you will find just another similar layer. Yet, eventually you will reach the core which is the seed bed and the beginning of the onion. This is what needs to be done in stripping away the thousands of coats of paint that have been put on the church. We could liken the outer layer to the Humpty Dumpty Christians and the core as the Biblical Christians. As we know there is a skin on the onion that is discarded and not used. Denominations are very sensitive about their turf and they are not going to readily embrace anything that seems to challenge their territory. This is exactly the problem that Jesus faced when He came. The Pharisees, Sadducees and other religious leaders in Jerusalem were not about to listen to this upstart Jesus Christ fellow no matter how many miracles He did among the people. Jesus railed against the pseudo religious system that had been assembled to look like the continuation of the Torah, railed against the hypocrisy of the Jewish polity and sought to wake the leaders up to repent and return to the true. Over and over again He rebuked the Pharisees for their hypocrisy. What happened was a great awakening but it was forced to become a whole new movement; a New Testament, rather than renewing the Old Testament. Jesus saw this problem ahead of time and declared, “You can’t put new wine in old wineskins.” Thus, there for change to come it will have to come from outside of the organized Church. Humpty Dumpty Christendom is not going to lead the charge to return us to our roots. This will have to come from Biblical Christians.

“And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.” (Mark 2:22).

Sola Scriptura “Let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth.” – Basil of Caesarea (c. 330 – 379 A.D.) The words of men opposed to empirical authority and the doctrines of men and devils, words of wisdom like those quoted above from Basil of Caesarea were apparently not heeded in the development of the State run and denominationally oriented church structure. It is hard from our vantage point, to see what Basil was seeing in his day, but looking back through the telescope of time, we can certainly see what came as a result of men tinkering with the church. In the first 1000 plus years after the advent of the New Testament church there were so many changes made by men under the guise of ‘new truth’ or church counsels or whatever seemed to be the flavor of the day. The end result was something that had little resemblance to the original leaving us with the current maze of denominational schisms. Most of this change was accomplished because of a ministry that became dominated by the educational elite in contrast to men full of the Holy Spirit. These educational elite became the only ones who could read the Scripture because there was no translation into the languages that the common people could read. By the mid 1500’s the distortion has become so bad that it was difficult to tell if the State run and denominational churches had ever been based on Scripture. The Reformers began to rally around the concept of Sola Scriptura. Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture alone") is the doctrine that the Bible contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness.130 It is hard to imagine that anyone in the New Testament would have questioned such a position. Yet, this became a battle ground. “The issue of Sola Scriptura was an issue regarding the question of authority. 130

Wikipedia. Sola Scriptura.

Specifically, “is God’s authority invested in a book or in an Institution (the Church)?” The Protestant Reformers believed in Sola Scriptura (the Scriptures Alone), and would declare the Roman Church to believe and practice Sola Ecclesia (by the Church Alone), for quite simply, what the Roman Catholic Church says to be true, is true because the Church speaks with infallibility and cannot possibly be wrong.”131 Unfortunately, those who came in the wake of the various reformers and various waves of the Reformation stopped where they found some truth and erected monuments to that truth. These became the plethora of denominations that are now 38000 schisms.

Duplicate Fade How different these Biblical Christians operated from what we call Christians today. I remember reading an author who after writing the manuscript for his book shared it with one of his friends. The book was primarily about the function of the New Testament church. It was an effort to separate what we have generally believed (or what are denominations have taught us to believe) verses what was actually practiced by Biblical Christians. After his friend had read the book he commented to the author, “They were sure off on some points”. The friend did not see the obvious that if someone is off it cannot be the New Testament church which remains as the example or the original pattern. The Biblical Christians are those from which we should be patterning the current church. If there is something wrong then it is with what we offer today as the church not with Biblical Christians. It is we that have strayed Duplicate fade. After multiple reproductions a perfectly clear image becomes terribly distorted.

from the original pattern. It is like Jeremiah prayer, “We have sinned against you O’ God and against you alone!”

One of the things we have to get is a clear picture of what Biblical Christians believed. This is not as complicated as some would like to pretend. The picture has faded due to the passing of time, but restoration is quite possible. Dr. Robert Straube offered this word picture of our difficulty. “Ever hear of duplicate fade? It is a term used in image quality when a photograph is taken of a photocopy of a photocopy, etc. The 500th copy of copies would not be near as crisp as the first copy.

131

Effectual Grace. Sola Scriptura. By the Scriptures alone. John Samson. Part 2. September 28, 2011.

This term, duplicate fade, is also used in organizational management. There has been some 500, 40 year generations since our church founder, Jesus Christ, first uttered the Great Commission to His disciples. That's 500 times when one generation copied the previous generation's methods, that copied its previous generation's method that copied…” Dr. Robert Straube continued, “I believe that we not only have the Empirical agenda of Constantine, but also a measure of duplicate fade in the church, even with the best intentions.” In some cases duplicate fade is done on purpose and there is a relative science to the process. This may be applicable in the case of the modern church movement. Whether by accident or by design there is no doubt that we have faded from the original pattern. Being a Christian is now a generic term and Biblical Christians are a minority. We need to realize that function is preferable to presentation. Too often the church has decided that the main thing is the presentation. So while we build beautiful edifices, with the best equipment, and the most wonderful of furnishings, we have lost the point of accomplishment. While our modern presentation is wonderful we seem to have lost sight of the mission. It was said that Saint Francis Assisi was walking through the counting houses of the Vatican where there were vast sums of money being counted. Saint Francis was with the Pope. The Pope comments to Assisi, “Francis, no longer can the church say, ‘silver and gold have I none.” “Yes, your Excellency”, St Francis responded. “Unfortunately, we can also no longer say, “but such as I have give I thee, in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk!” So there we have the quandary. It seems that like Rehoboam we have traded our gold for brass. Instead of the demonstration and power of the Holy Spirit deemed so important by Apostle Paul we have buildings, wealth and influence. I expect that most concur that we did not do well in that trade. We have traded the gold of Biblical Christianity for Humpty Dumpty.

Orthodox

This picture of an Eastern Orthodox procession is what many claim is the orthodox position of the church. Yet, we could not find one theologian or church historian who was willing to claim that this was anything close to what was believed and practiced by the New Testament Church. Rather, they point to the Roman Empire to the source of the modern churches claiming to be Orthodox.

When you write a treatise like this one, people will ask you, “Are you saying that 2000 years of church history is wrong?” or more to the point, “Are you arguing with 2000 years of church history?” What they are indicating is that only the group(s) that has swayed history in their favor is correct. My response is simple. Yes! I am standing on the Word of God and with 2000 years of opposition to those who would change or alter Biblical instruction. I do so with good reason.

The Apostles gave us a volume of warnings on this subject. They warned us not to accept anyone, even an angel from heaven, who brought doctrine contrary to what is in Scripture. Unbelievably there is even one cult that claims that very thing, that an angel instructed their founder to change the Word of God. “The Apostle Paul warned in the strongest possible terms about the attitude of God toward those who would pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ. We can understand this, as it cost God his only begotten son, Jesus, a horrible death by crucifixion:”132 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8, 9 The definition of orthodox is “conforming to the Christian faith as represented in the creeds of the early church.” The challenge is, unless you use the Bible as the orthodox position there is no line of demarcation or line in the sand. When faced with this type of problem the great general Joshua made is simple. He drew a line in the sand and challenged those who were on the Lord’s side to join him. This is the position that the reformers have always taken. Using the Word of God as the Lord’s side, they have drawn their line in the sand there.

132

Danger. Another Gospel. http://www.sounddoctrine.com/another_gospel.htm

What has happened is the State sanctioned churches and denominational cousins first offered their own dogma’s to “explain” the doctrine of the New Testament church. These became the ‘new’ truth. This is not really a new approach. In the Old Testament the Pharisees and others did almost the same thing. The Old Testament manipulators did so under the guise of claiming they were building a fence around the law.133 God had given them the law but they took it upon themselves to build the fence. Jesus railed against this abuse of His law! This ‘fence’ was the major point of contention that Jesus had with the religious leaders of His day. So it is with the modern times. These changes, additions and subtractions from the State sanctioned church are simply not acceptable to Biblical Christians and with very good reason. God warns of severe eternal penalty for those who would make such alterations to His Word. I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.134 This change of the New Testament beliefs was accomplished by the imprimatur of kings through the commitment of elitists who generally assumed that they alone could understand truth and the rest of the people were unable to understand the things of God. Then, these groups decided that anyone who did not agree with them was a heretic. These quickly and viciously dispatched of all who disagreed with their ‘new truth’ and then declared that they alone held the orthodox view. The orthodox view being not really orthodox but just the truth as they defined. This book is not about the abuses of these self proclaimed ‘orthodox’ groups. It would take volumes to expose the hypocrisy of such men who have changed the word of God. To further complicate the matter, one would have to choose which group is orthodox as there is more than one religious entity making such claims. One of these groups even calls itself the Orthodox Church. This revisionist version of orthodoxy would be like a group of assassins going to the Ford Motor Company headquarters taking over

133

Judaism 101. Halakhah: Jewish Law. The Third Talmudic Claim: The oral law is a fence around the written Torah. 134 THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica. Revelation 22:18-19.

operations, firing or if necessary killing anyone who opposed the takeover, changing the name from Ford to Universal, putting in a motor from a Vega and calling it their new Universal vehicle the original (orthodox)! Now, it would still look like a car, possibly even run like a car, but original? Hardly. Yet, this is what we have in this self appointed “orthodoxy”. Reformers for the last several hundred years have faced this same hurdle. Fortunately, these Reformers, men like John Wycliffe and John Wesley have hazarded their lives to give us a platform for turning the people of God to the bible and away from the dictates of men. John Wycliffe, who is considered the “Morning Star of the Reformation”135 for repudiating doctrines that the State sanctioned church called orthodox that were not. I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. (Revelation 2:9).

Practical Christianity for Biblical Christians There are some things that are just not up for change or debate. We have basic salvation instruction given to us in Matthew chapter 28 by Jesus Christ. This instruction places all power in heaven and in the earth in the name of Jesus Christ. This is very important. It is evident that when we look toward salvation we should be inclined to look toward the one with all the power. The Apostles are often asked by whose power or under whose authority have you done these things? The people all knew that there was a genuine orthodoxy in the doctrine of the Apostles of the New Testament Church. In Acts chapter 2, when the Apostles are asked the formula necessary for salvation they reference the commandment of Jesus Christ in Apostle Peter’s instruction to repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and receive the Holy Ghost. These are given instructions. Any attempts to alter or change these should be ignored and/or opposed. The book of Revelation makes it very clear that the penalty for those who add to or take away from the word of God is very severe. "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that 135

http://www.bible-researcher.com/wyclif1.html

are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."

Church Counsel In Acts Chapter 15 there is a debate in the church about other necessary things for Biblical Christians. Here in the only church counsel ever recorded in New Testament times are assembled the leaders of the church. Factions that had developed from both Jewish and Gentile converts had agreed to have their leaders work toward an agreement. These were all already adherents of the commandment of Christ to repent of their sins. They had been baptized into Jesus Christ and filled with His Spirit. The topic of this counsel was whether or not the laws of circumcision and other related things were applicable to the New Testament church. Apostle James invokes the law of the Gentiles that was given in Genesis to Noah as the solution. From this we are reminded that we are not to worship idols, not to eat things dedicated to idols and certainly not to engage in sexual immorality. This combined expectation from Acts Chapters 2 and 15 is the foundational doctrine for Biblical Christians. Study this; commit it to memory and to your heart. As a Biblical Christian, once you have these basics, practice living for Christ. Your home and life should be tuned to Jesus. When interacting with people always be aware that people are hurting and have needs. Many times, if you are listening, they will ask for your help or your prayers. Be ready for these occasions and remember they have probably seen a number of ‘plastic Christians’. Plastic Christians are part of the Humpty Dumpty Christian group. These are those that say they are of Christ, but possess nothing. The Apostle Paul had some men mimic him in like manner. They invoked the “God that Paul serves” in an effort to exorcize some demons. The result was they became demon possessed. “A group of Jews was traveling from town to town casting out evil spirits. They tried to use the name of the Lord Jesus in their incantation, saying, "I command you in the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, to come out!" Acts 19:13.

Keep the Main Thing the Main Thing We are not suggesting that there is anything inherently wrong with going to a building designated for meetings of the Church. Neither is the idea of having a place designated for worship or prayer. However, we cannot allow these to be the main thing. As a friend of mine explains it tongue in cheek, â&#x20AC;&#x153;We have to keep the main thing, the main thing.â&#x20AC;? We must accept that having a building designated for church and gathering there is secondary to the mission. The mission of taking the Gospel into the highways and the byways must continue with or without nice buildings and all the finery associated with them. It must continue absent from the dictates of men and denominations. The idea of going to church was a foreign concept to the New Testament follower of Jesus Christ. Their focus was not on attendance. Rather, they were focused on results. Impacting the world with the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ was too wonderfully important not to entirely focus on the mission. The mission given to the followers of Jesus Christ is really simple. And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (Mark 16:14-18) From this simple instruction by Jesus, generally referred to as the Great Commission we have evolved (or some say devolved) into the current 38000 denominations creating a great turf war we have come to commonly refer to as Christianity. It is time to boldly admit that this is not the church that Jesus Christ commissioned. While various denominations vie for recognition as the one, true church it is likely that neither Jesus Christ nor the Apostles would recognize them as the continuation of the church that they left to their posterity. â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Christian church (ekklesia) was meant to be an alternative society, a society of a radically different order with radically different values. It was a thumbnail sketch of the kingdom of God. So, for example, in the ekklesia of God, Jews and Gentiles, so often separated in Roman society, shared life together as brothers and sisters. Slaves could also be full participants in the Christian gatherings, enjoying equality in Christ with nonslaves, even with their masters. Women could actively participate in the gatherings just 98

as long as they didn’t engage in the scandalous behavior of the pagan cults. The theological truth that in Christ “there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female” was lived out in the Christian assemblies (Galatians 3:28). Thus, they were a kind of alternative society, one that implicitly rejected the domineering, separatistic, and elitist values of the Roman world.”136 Many denominations have adopted some of the same divisive ideas of ancient cultures giving rise to the segregation of people in their worship services by class, gender, nationality, and financial status. While in the early church women were actively involved in the church. 2000 years later many churches do not allow women an active role and women often find they have to contend for the place given to them by God.

Going to Church Some people think that simply going to a church will make you a Christian. As we have pointed out this is the Humpty Dumpty Christian method. First join a church (some denomination of the 38000 claiming to alone possess all truth) and then you must go to church (a place franchised by the denomination as their official location in that area). Is it fair to say that Church attendance alone will suffice? If the point is just church attendance then why didn’t Jesus and/or the Apostles build buildings? Not only did they not build any buildings Jesus was very pointed about the one building that they reverenced - the Temple. While Jesus is being led to Calvary He instructs the women not to weep for him but to weep for themselves and their children. Then he speaks to the emptiness of the Jewish religious system in particular and to the Temple in particular, “Behold, I leave you your house desolate.” “The temple: this is certainly what is meant. It was once the Lord’s temple, God’s OWN house; but now he says, YOUR temple or house-to intimate that God had abandoned it.”137 “Our Lord plainly foresaw that, in process of time, a spiritual domination would arise in his Church; and, to prevent its evil influence, he leaves the strong warnings against it which are contained in the former part of this chapter (Matthew 23). As the religion of Christ completely spiritual, and the influence by which it is produced and

136 137

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. Adam Clark Commentary. Matthew. Chapter 23. Verse 38.

maintained must come from heaven; therefore, there could be no master or head but himself: for as the Church (the assemblage of true believers) is his body, all its intelligence, light, and life, must proceed from him alone. Our forefathers noted this well; and this was one of the grand arguments by which they overturned the papal pretensions to supremacy in this country (England).”138 In a note on Matthew 23:9, in a Bible published by Edmund Becke in 1549, the 2nd of Edward VI., we find the following words (translated by this author from old English modern: “Call no man your father upon the earth. Here is the Bishop of Rome declared a plain Antichrist, in that he would be called the most holy father; and that all Christen men should acknowledge him for no less than their spiritual father, not withstanding these plain words of Christ. It is true, nothing can be plainer; and yet, in the face of these commands, the pope has claimed the honor; and millions of men have been so stupid as to concede it. May those days of darkness, tyranny, and disgrace, never return!”139

Becke Bible of 1549

The Whole Church Apostle Paul chides the Galatian church for trying to perfect in the flesh what was begun in the Spirit (Galatians Chapter 3). Apostle Paul calls them foolish. Like the Galatian church we have been busy with our ‘cookie cutter’ trying to perfect in the flesh what began in the Spirit. We have used the flesh to decide what the church is, what a Christian is and who can participate in God’s church. In this experiment we have left behind too many of the body. We have systematically decided who is part of the church and what they should look like. While there are many different segments of society we have marginalized to some platform of ‘ministry’ rather than just acknowledging them as part of the church. We will examine some of these. Let us start with those we call sick or shut in. This designation is offered under the guise of some kind of humane gesture as though someone’s Christianity is predicated by location or physical ability or both. While we are busy ‘ministering’ to these people we might want to consider that they could minister to us were we to allow that opportunity. Rather than requiring or expecting attendance from these why not go to them. Or, should we expect that their Christianity gets repealed at some point due to a lack of attendance at a place approved by some denomination at a church? While this

138 139

Adam Clark Commentary. Matthew. Chapter 23. Verse 38. Adam Clark Commentary. Matthew. Chapter 23. Verse 38.

100

is may or may not be a stated position of religious denominations it is how most religious organizations operate in regard to these good people of God. I think of my late Grandmother who was unable to attend church services during the last several years of her life. We called her Mammaw. Mammaw was a young woman who came up in rough times. Born to a poor family that did not go to church or speak of God she lived like the world. She married my Grandfather who had once been baptized by representatives of a religious denomination and would be categorized as a non practicing Southern Baptist. Had you asked him if he was a Christian he would have certainly said, “Yes”. However, if you had asked him if he was living a life style that would take him to heaven that would have brought an entirely different answer. While not living for Christ he understood what being a Biblical Christian really entailed. Together, my grandparents they lived life like most non believers in the 1920’s. As we say in the South, Mammaw was rougher than a corn cob. Then in the height of the Great Depression my Grandfather visited an Apostolic Faith Church was born again of the water and of the Spirit and it changed his life. Later Mammaw had her own conversion experience. My Grandparents became mainstays of their local church. If there was a meeting of virtually any kind my grandparents were there. They were instrumental in impacting two churches (one in Cleveland Ohio and another in Knoxville, Tennessee). After their retirement they help establish another church in Columbia Station, Ohio). Then in their later years they moved back (again) to their home in Knoxville, Tennessee where my grandfather eventually went to his eternal reward. Mammaw lived on for another 20 years after my Grandfathers death. This was a woman who’s walk with Jesus Christ was a model to the believer for over 70 years! Those who knew her often spoke of her witness for Christ. She was more than just one who claimed Christ. She lived Christ. It was not uncommon for her to be cooking (something she really enjoyed) and begin speaking in tongues, shouting and praising God. I recalled in my book, I Was the Ugly Duckling140 a Thanksgiving dinner where Mammaw danced out of the kitchen with a bowl in hand stirring and dancing and praising God with her eyes closed! What a sight to see! It made the unbelievers in the family uncomfortable but thrilled the believers. I have never forgotten this wonderful woman of

140

I Was the Ugly Duckling. An Ugly Ducking is Born. Bernie L. Wade. Chapter 1. Truth, Liberty and Freedom Press. 2011.

101

God who gave as a continual example her devotion to Jesus Christ or the power of the Holy Spirit that was demonstrated in her life. As she aged into her 90’s her physical ability to attend church meetings was often affected by her body’s ability to get out and to sit through a church service, but she lived for Christ and was the church in action. As Mammaw neared 100 years (her age at death) she was often visited by nurses. Many of these nurses became believers in Jesus Christ because of the powerful testimony of this woman of God. The conventional wisdom offered by a plethora of religious folks says that those who do not attend a church building are back slid or cold in their faith or a plethora of other adjectives used by religious organizations to control their adherents. Mammaw loved God, often talked about how she wished attendance with the greater body of believers was more possible and those who visited her always heard her talk about Jesus! Like the scripture in Malachi, “They that loved the Lord spake often one with another…” I know that the pastor of her home church and his wife, Bishop Billy McCool and his wife Betty, never forgot this faithful saint of God. They were faithful to visit and encourage this aged saint. These were highlights of her day to day life. Her home church, First Apostolic remained a constant thought in her life, but attendance was not attainable. This woman remained a valuable part of the church till the day of her death. Her role in the body of Christ and her commitment as a Biblical Christian was not predicated on her location, church attendance of physical participation. She had made a commitment to her God, a commitment that never wavered through more than 70 years. This is not one segment of the body of Christ that has been affected by “the church is a building” mentality. Of the more that 38000 denominations only a couple of small ones offer regular meetings at their buildings they call the church on a day other than Sunday. These primarily do so due to some religious tenet rather than a sense of church. Thus, all those who by virtue of vocational responsibility that are unavailable to gather on Sunday morning are relegated to non church status by the majority of these religious entities. The current model of going to church has been with us for so long it is entrenched in our very society. Most that say they are Christians think Sunday worship is a Biblical commandment rather than an Empirical mandate. No longer do most people call the body of Christ or the people the church; rather they refer to the building as the Church because that is where their denominational leaders have taught them they go to church. If we apply this model to practical question we would ask: 102

Do you cease being a Christian when you don’t go to a building called the church? The answer from many might surprise you. The reality is that many church groups teach that if you don’t come to their building for your going to church you are not a Christian. This would include if you go to another building that the people there call ‘the church’. To this idea Apostle Paul chided, “IS CHRIST DIVIDED?” (I Cor. 13:1) Even the best of followers of Jesus Christ are confused by this division of the body of Christ into separate sects or groups. Indeed it is evident that like the Galatian Church the modern church has concluded that which was born in the Spirit will be perfected in the flesh. In an appeal to reason Apostle Paul asks, “Was Paul crucified for you?” (I Cor. 13:1). As if he said: Did I ever attempt to set up a new religion, one founded on my own authority, and coming from myself? To the contrary, have I not preached Christ crucified for the sin of the world; and called upon all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles, to believe on Him? Let us be honest. Today we have a plethora of religions all claiming to be of Christ and they are founded on men and on the authority of men and some of these men claim they alone are speaking for God. Unfortunately, none of these are like the New Testament church nor are they preparing people to live as Biblical Christians.

The Church as the Body of Christ

Because of the obvious abuse by the church is a building mentality some have adopted names for their religious group like “Church without Walls” to emphasize a new approach to the church structure. This may be a step in the right direction or it may be just a façade. Only God really knows. Unfortunately, many of these efforts end up being more structured, authoritarian and legalistic than the denominations they propose to replace. However, it is evident that we must include the whole church and not just those who attend the variety of buildings we have designated as the church. In Acts chapter one verse 4 we find these simple words describing the New Testament Church at Jerusalem, being assembled together. Which refers to “living or eating together.”141 Indeed Jesus Christ had modeled the behavior of His Church in the way 141

Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page 359.

103

that he conducted His life. Jesus spent His earthly ministry in close proximity to his disciples, teaching and ministering. Like His forerunner John the Baptist there were no fine cathedrals or the invitation for the use of the Temple for the followers of Christ. Rather they met in the country side, or by the Jordan River, on the shore of a lake or other natural amphitheaters, in houses or wherever they could safely and peacefully gather. They were not welcomed into the fine places of Jerusalem and any large gathering was certainly suspect to their Roman masters. Today it is no different. No large well placed group with a national presence and fine edifice is going to offer the use of their facility to some small, what they would consider insignificant group who claims to follow Jesus. People in Jerusalem were divided by many things as we have outlined. People today are equally divided even those who claim to follow Christ. We have to admit that the idea of a building as the church is a terrible distortion. A building may indeed be a place where the church meets but it is certainly not the church. When Apostle Paul gives instruction to take matters to the church he is not referring to a building and he is not referring to a hierarchy or denomination. What he is referring to is the local body of believers. In the myriad of references to the church in the New Testament not one of them is speaking about a building. In Acts Chapter 12 we find THE CHURCH in prayer concerning the imprisonment of Apostle Peter. God answers in a miraculous way and delivers Peter. Then Peter goes to THE CHURCH. This is not a building, but it is the gathering of the body of believers who in this case are meeting in a house. Yes a house. THE CHURCH was not having a concert or a social gathering, they were praying. Acts chapter 14 talks about the gathering of the Church together. This is a reference to calling all the body of believers to come together. They were not building some edifice called the church. In Acts chapter 15 the writer talks about Paul and Barnabas being received by the church and the Apostles and elders. Clearly, the writer is making sure that the reader (or hearer) understood that the church was the people and included the Apostles and elders who were the leadership of the body of Christ. The reference here is to â&#x20AC;&#x153;the whole body of Christian believers.â&#x20AC;?142 Further, it is evident from the passage that Paul and Barnabas were submitting themselves to the church body at Jerusalem and to their leaders; the Apostles as representative of the fivefold ministry and the elders as officers that were

142

Adam Clark Commentary. Volume 5B, John-Acts. Page 620

104

in the church under them.143 There was never a transfer of power from the New Testament Church in Jerusalem to the leaders of the RCC in Rome. The Jerusalem Church working with other church bodies like those in Antioch was the body of Christ working in harmony. When Acts 15:32 refers to the “whole church”. This is a reference to all the body at Jerusalem; the people not a building. In stark contrast to the reference to the followers of Jesus Christ as the church, we find that Apostle Paul referring to the pagan (Greek) buildings to their pagan gods as their churches. While the followers of Jesus Christ were referenced as being the church, to the pagan buildings were their church. The pagan churches were obviously deposits of some wealth as the town clerk makes it clear that the Apostles were not ‘robbing’ the pagan churches. In verse 6 of Acts chapter 1 we are again reminded, “When they were therefore come together”, this is reference to “assembling on one of the mountains of Galilee there meeting our Lord.”144 If the church is, as Scripture offers, the gathering of the body or followers of Jesus Christ then we should see many examples of this beyond the buildings so fondly called “the church”. Scripture is filled with references to the church as the body of Christ and none about the church as a building. Much of what we have classified as ‘ministry’ is really the gathering of the body of Christ and should be considered church. These would include:

Campus Church In fairness we have seen some softening of denominational positions in this area. Campus ministry used to only be an out cropping of some church system but we have had some recognize those gathering at college campuses to be the church in their own right. These groups are on the front lines and in many cases facing persecution like that forced upon the early church. Here is one recent example of an active campus church: “Christian student organizations at Vanderbilt University may be forced to go underground or meet in secret after university officials doubled down on a policy that bans student religious groups from requiring their leaders to hold specific beliefs, according to a university law professor. Vanderbilt University said their nondiscrimination policy ensure that campus

143 144

Clark Commentary. Volume 5B, John-Acts. Page 620 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page. 361.

105

groups are open to all students. But opponents said the ban restricts their freedom of speech and could force some nationally-known groups off campus.” “There are people on campus who are very threatened by the idea of religious freedom and they would like to create an environment where no one hurts anyone else’s feelings – unless it’s Christians,” said Carol Swain, a Vanderbilt law professor and the advisor to the Christian Legal Society.145 This article sounds like the headline from a church in a country not receptive to Christianity. A country like China where the church is vibrant and relevant but does not meet in public places or buildings they call the church building. This is very much like the New Testament church. Public meetings and public buildings were not conducive for these Biblical Christians. This is the church.

Prison One of the most powerful conversion stories of the entire New Testament is that of the Phillippian jailer. The story is related to us in Acts Chapter 16. The Apostles (Paul and Silas) are thrown in jail because of accusation from Jewish people that they were teaching things that were against law. Notice, this was not the Romans who were concerned with the Apostle’s doctrine but rather their fellow Jews. Comparing this to one of our earlier topics where we discuss that people think that the New Testament church was having their meetings in Jewish synagogues. We need to realize that there was great opposition to the message of Jesus Christ as brought by the Apostles and other Biblical Christians. The Apostles are thrown in jail over this message. It is unfathomable that these same people were opening up their synagogues to them. At any rate, the Jailer of the prison in a fabulous story becomes a convert to Jesus Christ. He and his family are saved. That very night they are baptized and received the Holy Spirit. This is the New Testament church in action. His story has been told all over the world. There is no doubt through this and other stories that the Apostles considered even prison a suitable place for church. Today the church establishment has either ignored or relegated the growing prison population to

145

http://nation.foxnews.com/vanderbilt-university/2012/02/01/vanderbilt-university-defends-crackdownreligious-groups#ixzz1lC7dHNEc

106

‘ministry’ ignoring the vast number of inmates that are part of the church. I can only imagine that many of the Apostles and New Testament believers who were imprisoned for their faith, would feel more at home in a meeting with prisoners than they would in some of the places where people “go to church”. Whether we appreciate it or not there are many prisoners that are part of the church. We can reduce their role to ‘prison ministry’ if we like but they are church none the less. This is the church.

Nursing Homes We are so focused on attendance that a gathering at a senior home or care facility is generally ignored as being church. Much like sick and shut ins we have relegated these people to a secondary role rather than embracing their inclusion as part of the church. Those Biblical Christians gathering in the nursing facility are church. This is the church.

Gatherings Around the world there are many incidents of the body coming together which qualify as church whether we recognize them as such or not. On Monday mornings our family gathers to pray, read scripture, sing, teach, share, learn and grow in Christ. This started while my mother was living as just a prayer meeting for our immediate family, but has grown to be much more. Though we are scattered across a number of states in the US we are able to communicate due to the telephone and communicate quite effectively. This activity usually takes most of our Monday mornings. We have added the benefit of setting this aside as a day of fasting. Traditional church goers and denominations would not sanction our activity as church since we are not meeting in one of their franchise locations. Nevertheless there can be no doubt that we are being the Church. For us church is not something we do on Sunday, rather we are the church. How to be a Christian without going to church? Just be the Church! This is the church.

107

SUPERCHURCH Few people would think of going to Wal-Mart as connected to the continuation of the New Testament church. However, Wal-Mart is much like a modern version of the Outer Court of the Temple. It is a place where people meet, gather, exchange, buy, sell, fellowship and more. We have modeled going to Wal-Mart as church or at least it can be depending on how you go to Wal-Mart. Some reading this will say, “NO WAY!” Others are saying, “Count me in, I want to know more about Wal-Mart Church!” This is not about a shopping experience. This is about being the church. We have to realize that the church is not something you do; rather it is who you are and how you conduct your day to day activity. Living for Jesus Christ should be such a part of your daily life that it is as natural as breathing. Here is the thing that is so important, live your life for God. Make every activity the outcropping of that life and church will happen in a variety of ways and places. This is the church. This is not a commercial for Wal-Mart. My point is much more important than some shopping activity. In our American society Wal-Mart (Kmart, the local Mall, or wherever people gather) is a place that most people go to shop. In our local ministry we have always regarded our trips to Wal-Mart as much more than shopping. When we go to Wal-Mart we usually see a number of our fellow believers. We take time to visit, share, and often pray. We expect to have these encounters and are prepared for them. “In the middle of Wal-Mart!?” Yes. This is not some activity to draw attention to ourselves but we have ministered many times to both Biblical Christians and unbelievers while at Wal-Mart. These are not planned meetings, there are no offerings taken up or announcements for church services (Wal-Mart might be making announcements but we are not paying too much attention). This is church, the gathering of the body of Christ. We are breaking bread with the body. I sometimes refer to some of our ministers as “pastor at Wal-Mart”. Wal-Mart is a mission field and people going there are hungry for more than natural food. These folks may never come to our church buildings but if we will change our mind set we can have church almost anywhere. This will work at any place people are gathering including but not limited to flea markets, garage sales, and more. This is the church. 108

In America we are privileged to enjoy the opportunity and availability of many places of worship. This has not always been the case nor is it the case for many. In many places in the world they do not have this luxury. In Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s early days there were many places that also did not have the luxury of church buildings. Yet, there were many Biblical Christians in these times and places and Christianity flourished. The ability to have, build or attend a building did nothing to separate them from Christ. Can a building or attendance truly separate us from the love of Christ? I expect not.

Church Membership by Country

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, for your sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creation, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:35-39).

109

McChurch Yes, this is really about church at McDonalds. No commercial here just some thought on the activity of the Church. Some years ago we created a program to reach children through McDonalds. This will work at other places as well. There have been a number of jokes about McChurch but we found there a real opportunity for church. The concept is simple. Go to your local McDonalds or some similar establishment. Many of these type places have separate party rooms where you can have an hour for meetings or parties or groups. In this environment you can organize some simple teaching and outreach to children. The local establishment is not likely to be willing to endorse a church but they are not going to be opposed to some people getting together to break bread and offer activities to children. There are many ways that you can offer this depending on your area. McChurch could be a very viable option or replacement for what most church movements call Sunday School. While Sunday School has become a part of most denominational church movements its origin was not about church at all. â&#x20AC;&#x153;It is important to realize that Sunday schools were originally literally schools: they were places were poor children could learn to read. The Sunday school movement began in Britain in the 1780s. The Industrial Revolution had resulted in many children spending all week long working in factories. Christian philanthropists wanted to free these children from a life of illiteracy.â&#x20AC;?146 This is the church. Because of this millions have been impacted by the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For the simple cost of a few cheeseburgers (must less expensive than a church building) you can find plenty of people open to ministry. Children love McDonalds so why not give them a drink and a cheese burger while sharing the Gospel message with them. This can be done on a weekday or weekend. The time when most churches are meeting (typically 10 am) is one of the slower times of the day for most McDonalds because most of the people who are up at that hour are at church, but you can find the time that works best for your McChurch. Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s face it; many children would rather go to McDonalds than to church especially those who are unchurched. Rather than fight against the trend, embrace it, meet the challenge and win a generation for Christ. How many McChurch pastors could we train and dispatch? Do not be surprised if other local churches are not happy if you are

146

When did Sunday Schools start? ChristianHIstory.net

110

having such activity on Sunday morning when they are trying to get everyone to come to their church building.

Disaster response The idea of disaster response being part of the church should not come as a surprise to anyone. Galatians 6:1 instructs us to “bear one another’s burdens”. People in disastrous situations like floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, fires, etc., need people to step up and help them. Here the Church can be actively involved in the lives of others. While it might not seem religious to give a hungry neighbor a meal this was the exact type of activity that Jesus equated with serving Him. "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." James 1:27 “Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

Groups like Cities of Refuge Network are doing the work of the New Testament Church in reaching out to help those prepare for uncertain times.

When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matthew 25:34-40. Disaster should not be the only time we are there to serve. Those who need help are around us every day. We need to do all that we can to impact the lives of those around us. This is what the New Testament church accomplished. Some years ago a friend had youth gatherings at his home. He has a large home and organized lots of activities from four wheeling to swimming and more. They would gather on Friday evening, pray, read some Scripture and then the youth would have a night of fun and fellowship. His church denomination condemned this activity as not having enough ‘church’ involved. 111

What that means in anyone’s guess but it certainly shows how out of touch that group is with people. So, he quit having the gatherings. What a sad commentary on what we have done with what Jesus Christ entrusted to us. We could dedicate volumes to this subject of being the church. My expectation is that you will be inspired to just be the church. Other gatherings of the church include but are certainly not limited to: home bible studies, coffee houses, Christian concerts, cowboy church, tent meetings, pot luck dinners, men’s breakfasts, and a long list of other gatherings even those which might have other purposes could be church. Jesus said where two or three were gathered in His name He would be there. This is model of church as practiced in the New Testament.

The Online Church Technology had brought us a plethora of opportunities to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While we have had telephone for decades the introduction of I recently asked some of my Facebook friends to define Church. I received various answers. Some of them are reflected on other pages of this book. Of most interest was that some of them felt that our time of fellowship and sharing on the forum on Facebook could be considered Church. From this vantage point they explained that we were assembling together to share and encourage each other. While this may not be the ideal it certainly is in some ways more than some followers of Christ have been able to experience before the onset of technology.“What is Facebook, after all? It’s a community. What is church, after all? It’s a community. For us, doing church on Facebook isn’t innovative. It’s intuitive. Church and Facebook are places where we share in life together, learn about one another, encourage each other, laugh together and live our lives in some kind of ramshackle harmony with one another”147 Then there is the impact of the Internet on individual churches. Some Christians find that their primary interaction with other Christians comes in the form of an online church.

147

The Next Wave Magazine. Sharing Life in Church and Facebook. Brittany Smith. Pg. 20.

112

They believe this is an adequate experience of church. Many other churches see the Internet, especially the social media dimensions of the Internet, as crucial for the church, but they’re not quite sure what to make of it. I will not be focusing here on this issue, but I do believe that we will be unable to use the Internet wisely as churches unless we have a solid, right biblical ecclesiology. The church can assimilate via the internet. Does it meet the requirement of assembly? Consider this, “If all the churches were locked shut or were destroyed tomorrow would that force you to stop being a Christian?” While this line of thought is seldom voiced, it is a reality for many. Throughout history Christians have been restricted or forced not to meet in public places. This is common today in some countries. In these places or times church buildings were destroyed or simply not allowed. This is certainly the environment that the New Testament church faced when the Apostle encouraged them not to avoid meeting with other Biblical Christians. Now and then there was great risk in assembling. To assemble with other Biblical Christians increases the risk of exposure to the enemies of followers of Christ. The penalty is often torture or imprisonment.

Modeling the Church “A newly single mom was visiting with her Christian co-worker about her pending divorce. She was scattered, stressed and almost at her breaking point as she described how money was tight, her landlord wanted her out of her apartment, and she couldn't get a thing done because her youngest was ill. The co-worker, obviously feeling sorry for her knew she needed to help the woman. After hugging her and telling her that everything will turn out OK because God has a plan for your life, the co-worker couldn't understand why the single mom didn't feel any better. So, she took a deep breath and went out on a limb, "Why don't you come to church with me on Sunday morning?"148 “Although I admire the woman's courage, extending an invitation to church isn't always easy; the single mom wasn't in any shape to accept such an invitation. What she needed was someone to buy her some groceries, to come help her pack, to load the moving truck, to babysit the kids while she cleaned out her apartment. What she needed was a friend. Someone to share her burdens, someone to go along beside her and assure

148

Conversations with my Hair Dryer. I Love Jesus, But I Hate Church. Jenni at Talking Hair Dryer. July 23, 2007.

113

her that she isn't alone. Sometimes an invitation to church just doesn't make it better.”149 “This is the reason I want to simplify my life. I want to slow down enough to really see people. To form relationships with them. To be trusted by them. To be allowed to share their burdens. To be allowed to open my life and share my struggles. What could be a better testimony to the love of God than to watch a Christian struggle, handle the crisis in a Godly way, and come out on the other side more deeply in love with the Father? My passion is to be the kind of person who can love others so completely that I can find ways to serve them and meet their real needs. I want my hands and feet to deliver the love our Father has for everyone. When I am being this kind of friend, she'll get to know Jesus.”150 One of the things that the systematic denominalization which we commonly refer to as church has taught us is that church is difficult. As a popular radio commentator would say, “don’t try this at home”. We have lost the simplicity of the Gospel and the simplicity of the implementation of the Gospel. It is apparent that the two are connected. When the Gospel is presented as a long list of rules and regulations it loses simplicity. When it loses simplicity it loses ease of implementation. When we think about Jesus and His twelve disciples we envision a model that is nearly impossible to duplicate. Pardon the personal reference but let me tell you about my maternal Grandmother, Olive Ann (Brewer) Gillespie. I know of no better example of the church fulfilling its role. Grandma was a young woman who earned a living cleaning houses. That is how she met my grandfather. They married and in the process of time had 12 natural children. While few people would consider her a minister, nor did she ever claim such a

The Gillespie family church. Grandpap and Grandma Gillespie with 11 of their 12 disciples

149

Conversations with my Hair Dryer. I Love Jesus, But I Hate Church. Jenni at Talking Hair Dryer. July 23, 2007. 150 Conversations with my Hair Dryer. I Love Jesus, But I Hate Church. Jenni at Talking Hair Dryer. July 23, 2007.

114

designation there is no doubt that she raised her own ‘church’. Jesus had twelve disciples one of whom turned out to be a devil. Grandma Gillespie had twelve children, one of which died as a baby. You might ask here, “Are you really going to make the case that your Grandma was like Jesus?” I hope so. Isn’t that the point for all of us, to be like Jesus? This is what the church should be comprised of; people following Jesus. These followers should expect to strive to be like the example that Jesus gave to us. I am reminded of the refrain from song, “To be like Jesus, to be like Jesus, on earth I long to be like him…” Grandma Gillespie’s church was more than her 11 surviving children. Her children like the fulfillment of the passage in Malachi, have done exploits. Grandma Gillespie’s children all became followers of Jesus Christ. All of them became core leaders in the church. Four of them founded local church congregations. Four of them have pastored churches. Three of them founded Christian schools. At least three served as the Principal of a Christian school. Several play musical instruments. At least four play or played the accordion for church; three the organ and/or piano. Several have served in a variety of roles including Sunday school teachers, church board members, and more. The full impact on local and national church by Grandma Gillespie’s church can only be recorded in heaven. Grandma Gillespie’s church continues into two more generations as her grandchildren and great grandchildren number a plethora of evangelists, pastors, teachers, prophets and apostles. Her church has expanded to minister in countries all around the world. Her church members have served as missionaries to Asia, Africa, South America, and Europe. They have served as teachers in a number of Christian schools. They have served a variety of roles in ministering to others including founding charities, serving as overseers, Bishops, and a long list of other accomplishments. Her church has continued to plant church congregations and schools, all around the world. Olive Ann and George Gillespie The point is that one woman with nothing special about her other than she was committed to Christ, impacted her family who in turn has impacted the world. I didn’t mention that she spent the last 25 years of her life in a wheelchair because she was crippled by arthritis and could neither stand nor walk on her own. She could have complained, but like the blind poet John Milton she persevered and birthed a church. Family get-togethers at their home were more than just a family coming together; they were the assembling of

115

the body of Christ. I have often remarked that our family gatherings were more like church meetings. I guess they were. This is the church.

When I consider how my light is spent Ere half my days in this dark world and wide, And that one Talent which is death to hide Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent To serve therewith my Maker, and present My true account, lest He returning chide, "Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?" I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent That murmur, soon replies, "God doth not need Either man's work or his own gifts. Who best Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state Is kingly: thousands at his bidding speed, And post o'er land and ocean without rest; They also serve who only stand and wait."

John Milton (1608-1674)

116

A Biblical Christian Home One of the things we seem to have lost is simply living for Christ. This starts with the environment in our home. Our Jewish forbearers dedicated their homes to God, anointed the door posts, sacrificed, celebrated and worshipped with a variety of services in their homes. Christians seem to think the home should be separate from worship. To whom you dedicate your home your family will be dedicated. To this end, I am reminded of reading the story of infamous atheist Madelyn Murray O’Hare from the perspective of her son. He talked about how his grandfather purchased a television in the 1960’s, brought it home, put it in the living room, turned it on full volume and it was never turned down or off again. He explained that the family took their meals in the living room where the TV was blaring. Communication was done over the sound of the loud television. The center of their family home was obviously chaos. The result was chaos played out in their lives in hundreds of negative ways. The home of a Biblical Christian should be the model of moderation. Everyone has to determine how to make their home a sanctuary for the presence of the Lord. As followers of Christ we should be careful to keep a wholesome environment. Cleaning house from time to time is a great idea. I am not speaking about day to day house cleaning although that certainly helps. I know that is was John Wesley that said, “Cleanliness is next to godliness” but it is still a good idea.151 What I am speaking of is taking inventory of those things that creep into our lives and affect our walk with God. Apostle Paul referred to these as the ‘cares of life’. These things come into our life slow

151

CLEANLINESS IS NEXT TO GODLINESS - "This ancient proverb is said by some to have come from ancient Hebrew writings. However, its first appearance in English - though in slightly altered form - seems to be in the writings of Francis Bacon. In his 'Advancement of Learning' (1605) he wrote: 'Cleanness of body was ever deemed to proceed from a due reverence to God.' Near two centuries later John Wesley in one of his sermons (1791) indicated that the proverb was already well known in the form we use today. Wrote Wesley: 'Slovenliness is no part of religion.' Cleanliness is indeed next to Godliness.'" From "Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins" by William and Mary Morris (HarperCollins, New York, 1977, 1988). There are a couple more details in "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" (1996) by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996): ".According to the fourteenth edition of 'Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable,' it is an old Hebrew proverb used in the late 2nd century by Rabbi Phinehas ben-Yair. First attested in the United States in the 'Monthly Anthology and Boston Review' (1806). The proverb is found in varying forms."

117

but steady and taking occasional inventory and discarding some of these things is a good practice. When I was a child my parents made what seemed too many to be a radical choice. They decided to get the television out of their home. This was not the result of some right wing legalistic dogma or denominational edict. They just wanted to be closer to Jesus. I read recently where people were offered $100,000 to give up television for one year and declined! I thought you must be kidding we gave up our television for free! Now we would probably generally agree that the television programming in the 1960’s was not bad. Compared to today’s standards television in the 1960’s was not even ‘G’ rated. However, it was not so much about the television as it was the time. Mom and Dad were Georgia Wade with her focusing on dedicating more of their time to the Lord and the new record player circa 1969 television was a terrible distraction. So, out to the trash went a perfectly good TV. In place of the television Mom and Dad bought a record player and a number of gospel records. Our home was instantly transformed. Always in our home was the sound of Gospel music. The music of the Rambo’s, the Happy Goodman’s, Red Folley, and others set a tone in our home. Visitors to our home would often comment that they could feel the presence of the Lord. This was because He was welcome in our home and we invited his presence often. Prayer was the center of our home, not just at meal time. Later, my parents would pastor a number of churches, but the pattern of being an example of the believer began in our home. Our family prayed in the morning, prayed together every night before bed, read the bible individually and together. Without the television in the way; we played board games, talked, had bible drills, bibles studies and much more. As Biblical Christians church was never something that we did, church is who we are and we lived it in every aspect of our lives.

Going to Church As I stated in the very beginning of this book, going to church has been a very big part of my life. I thank God for it. Going to church is like going to a nursery school. Going to church should help us prepare to be the church. I don’t know that everyone should graduate from growing to church, but it should certainly be possible. There will always be a need for people to facilitate those type ministries that give birth. However, these oft times feel like they need to control the new convert for the rest of their lives. 118

Imagine a nursery or primary school where no one ever graduated. Can you see grown people trying to fit into those tiny desks? Who would have confidence in a school that never graduated students? This is what the going to church model is producing. Church has become much more about entertainment and production than in teaching and dispatching disciples. I am all for Christian entertainment. My goal in talking about going to church versus being the church is to encourage and empower those who feel like they should be leading a group much like the New Testament church. These can accomplish the same things the New Testament church did by gathering wherever they can find a place. All of the Church reformation efforts throughout history were accomplished through grass roots efforts. We need to do all we can to help those who are disenfranchised from the church as an institution. We are available to help you. If you want to connect with other Biblical Christians in your area, start a church meeting in your area, connect to fivefold ministry or just need encouragement feel free to contact me at International Churches of Faith. Phone: 502.410.4263 (ICOF). Email: bw@icof.net

119

120

“Church

is not where you meet. Church is not a building. Church is what you do. Church is who you are. Church is the human outworking of the people of Jesus Christ. Let’s not just go to Church, let’s be the Church.”

121

Bernie Wade (1995)

Kenneth and Barbara were a young married couple with a child when they first became involved with going to church. They had just graduated from college and were busy running a fledgling computer consulting business. Barbara a new mom and a young wife met a lady through who had a common interest with her as an extreme shopper. During one of their coupon clipping sessions together the lady invited Barbara to come to church with her. Barbara agreed and a few days later accompanied her friend to a local church. Barbara was wowed! She had never been to a church like this one! Her limited church experience had been mainly as an observer. She had grown up attending church with her family in a very ‘high church’ environment. Barbara had been raised in a ‘Christian’ home. This meant that both of her parents were baptized as into the church. In reality, Barbara’s family had only actually attended church services a couple dozen times in her 20 years at home, but she had been baptized as an infant and gone through her church’s confirmation process which verified that she also was a Christian. Barbara was accustomed to church beginning with a processional where the clergy entered the service with much pomp and ceremony. The service consisted of congregational hymns backed up by a pipe organ, a performance by a couple of choirs (sometimes even the Bell Choir), offering, sometimes Communion and then a sermon by the Pastor. The church where Barbara grew up was nothing like her new friends church. These people at her friend’s church acted as though they had a personal relationship with Jesus! I mean like they talked with Him or something. The people at Barbara’s friend’s church greeted her warmly before the service. They were so friendly and somewhat strange. She noticed that they called each other ‘brother’ or ‘sister’ depending on gender. These people expressed a genuine love and concern for each other that Barbara had never experienced. Barbara thought they acted more like a family than a ‘church’. During the church meeting the people stood on their feet and clapped and praised God. To Barbara the service seemed more like a concert than the church where she had grown up. No one would have been this demonstrative at the church where she was raised. However, Barbara loved what she had found and started going to church with her friend on a regular basis. She loved the singing and the worship. The minister seemed to speak right to her about living for God rather than pontificating on some subject that was not relevant. One night Barbara responded to the message and ran to the front, poured her heart out to God, repented of her sins and then something amazing happened! 122

Barbara was speaking in another language that she did not know. The Spirit of God was working through her. Later she would learn that she had received the Holy Spirit just like those in the book of Acts chapter 2. She had, of course, heard of such of thing but never thought it would happen to her. The pastor told Barbara that she needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus and Barbara was only too happy to comply. That night she was buried in baptism. Old things were passed away in Barbara’s life, all things had become new. God became very real to Barbara that night.

Reading the Bible When Barbara arrived home she was shocked to find Kenneth with a bible. They had been talking about Barbara’s growing interest and attendance at their friend’s church and Barbara had been reading her Bible. While Kenneth was an avid reader, Barbara did not ever remember him reading the bible. She could not wait to tell Kenneth what had happened to her! Kenneth was amazed. He had grown up in a Baptist Church and had friends who talked about receiving the Holy Spirit and stuff like that, but that this could happen to his lovely wife had never really crossed his mind. Kenneth told Barbara that he wanted the Holy Spirit too! Barbara said, “Next time there is a church service we will go together.” This was not enough for Kenneth. “Why can’t I get it tonight just like you did?” he asked. Barbara did not know. How did you get this Holy Ghost? Kenneth continued? Barbara told Kenneth that she had poured her heart out to God and repented. Kenneth began the work of repentance right there in their living room. Time stood still. Barbara, fresh from receiving the Holy Spirit launched into prayer and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave utterance. Kenneth continued his repentance. Then suddenly, it happened to Kenneth! The power of the Holy Spirit filled the room where they were praying and Kenneth began to speak in other tongues! What a happy day for Kenneth and Barbara. Later they recalled they could not believe that the baby slept through the whole thing. Kenneth and Barbara became avid members of the church. Over the next few years they read their bibles, prayed, attending every meeting at church from the normal church services to bible study to pot luck dinners! It was a wonderful life. Praise the name of Jesus! Several years later found Barbara, with four children now, and leading the Ladies Auxiliary at Church. She also taught a Sunday school class and helped with the 123

Children’s Choir. Kenneth was now the Assistant Pastor. God had blessed their computer consulting business and Kenneth and Barbara were doing quite well financially. Then one Sunday morning, their whole world went into a tail spin. That Sunday it was revealed that one of the main families in the church was in severe difficulty. The husband had been having an affair with the pastor’s wife for several years. The church family was shocked. People began to cry and weep. Finally, Kenneth got his wife and four children and put them in their SUV and went to their home. This was a terrible time for the family of Barbara and Kenneth. Their whole life following Jesus revolved around that church. They were not sure they could function as Christians without their church. They felt betrayed, confused and angry. In time, their church rebounded. The pastor left the church. The family that the husband had been sleeping with the pastor’s wife continued to be part of the church. A new pastor came and the church continued. However, Kenneth and Barbara did not return. Instead, they resigned their positions at the church. They started having a little service at home with their family. In time some of their neighbors asked if they could come and on Sunday about 15 people gathered with Barbara and Kenneth in their home for a small worship service. The folks at the former church of Kenneth and Barbara sometimes invited them to come back. Usually, in conversations among them they talked about how Barbara and Kenneth had ‘backslid’ and given up on God. They prayed that they would come back to the church. One of Kenneth’s clients, a member of the church, asked him when he was coming ‘back to God’. Kenneth was angry and confused by this question. The man had been a long time member of the church and a solid Christian example. When Kenneth explained that he was uncomfortable with the un-repented sin in the church and felt like he could better help his family by worshipping at home with a few others his client scoffed at such a notion.

124

Church: An American Corporation This story is fictional. However, for many across America and around the World the scenario is too real. While we would hope they would function like the New Testament church the fact is that churches in America are corporations. They are generally run like corporations. The pastor is most often the Chairman of the Board or the President. The Church may or may not belong to some denomination. They are overseen by a board usually made up of the members. These members run the gambit from the very committed to Christ to those who are just going through the motions. “Let’s be honest. Church folk sometimes say and do hurtful things. Unfortunately every Christian is not a perfect example of their faith. But that’s no reason to give up on the church.”152 We can make necessary changes that may include changing the group of people we worship with; this is not giving up on God or His church as we need to continue to interact, meet with and fellowship other followers of Christ. While it is true that Going to Church will not make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage will make you a car, it is equally true that cars do go to garages. In its basic application a car should be put in a garage to keep it out of the elements. This is a form of natural protection that shelter can offer. Valuable cars, antique cares, collector cars and other are stored in heated garages to give them even more protection and to keep them in pristine condition. Cars that are not ‘garage kept’ are susceptible to many things that garage kept cars are not, including the elements. Cars not kept in a garage are sloshed with salt, rain, snow, sleet and hail. They are pummeled with wind, leaves, branches, stones and other elements. Cars that need repair are taken from their home garage to a place where an expert works on them. These experts range from a small one man operation to large dealerships. Generally all of these are places that can handle repair. Some are specialized in repair of different makes of cars and others specialize in different areas of the car. There are mechanics that don’t have garages and while some of them have merit most people will not entrust the repair of their car to such. These are often referred to as ‘shade tree’ mechanics. The comparison is this, Christians are not Christians because they go to a building that is called ‘the church’, but rather Christians are part of the church and as such Christians

152

Just a Minute. Observations from a Biblical World View. Christian Becker. Monday October 29, 2007.

125

may go to church. Now, this is not just any ‘shade tree’ church. We are not to entrust our souls, the souls of our family and friends to just any situation, but we are also not required to go to some mega dealership or local church franchise in order to get service for our walk with God. While it is acceptable to find a group of Biblical Christians to worship with and these are not required to meet in a building that they call ‘the church’ we must remember that none of us are an island. If our group of Biblical Christians happens to meet in a building specifically designed for that purpose that is wonderful. The most important thing about the church is that we must remember that we are the church. As Biblical Christians we are accountable to God and to each other as part of the family of God. God has given us the five-fold ministry to assist us in this effort. There are Christ like elders that are part of the Church like in the New Testament these assisted the Apostles and other fivefold ministers their insight and advice is key in assisting us on our spiritual journey. So, you can be a Christian without going to Church. As we have covered, even great evangelists like Billy Graham agree that it is possible to be a Christian without going to church. At some point, we need to face the facts. Many people hate church as it has been defined in their lives. It is evident that we need to separate what they mean from what they are saying. Because most people define the church as a building or the institution that occupies a building those claiming to hate church are really saying that they hate what denominations or organizations have decided to define as church. These people are generally not saying they hate God or hate people who live for God. Rather, they are expressing their frustration with what they have been taught that they must do to serve God. The bible does not say that those who are Christians will go to a building that they call ‘the church’. Rather, Jesus told Peter that he would give him the keys to the kingdom. Remember: Religion is what men say that God said. This does not mean that it IS what God said. Religion since the Tower of Babel has been a means to control people. It was no different in the days of Nimrod and his Babylonian Kingdom than it was in the days of the Apostles with The Roman Emperor establishing His own church under the guise of Christianity. Then as now, religion is something created to control the masses. Like all good lies, religion usually has elements of truth. Yet, in the words of a Yiddish Proverb, “A half truth is a whole lie”.153 So, if religion is filled with half truths (and it

153

http://www.quotegarden.com/honesty.html

126

is) then it is merely a collection of lies. Jesus took the religious leaders of his day to task for their poor application of Scripture and failure to obey God. We have chosen to use the term Biblical Christians and Biblical Church. It almost seems like an oxymoron to say Biblical Church. However, it is our expectation to distinguish what the Bible intended for the church to be verses what men have determined. Some have used the term ‘organic church’ to describe the Biblical Church. We are not opposed to the term but the word organic seems to be more of a word that is popular. The Bible has stood the test of time and represents something that men have given their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to protect. Thus, we have opted for a term than is related to the church throughout history and points toward the source of our doctrine; the word of God.

Stallone on Christianity New Testament churches were full of problems. There were church bosses, false doctrine and people living in sin. But did the apostles give up on the church? No—they worked hard to help it become all God intended it to be: the Hope of the world. Did they instruct people to build building? No. There were much more interested in the people living for God. Their focus and instruction was to that end. Most of the New Testament is written proof that the Apostles of Jesus Christ were not willing to write off the church. Time and again they wrote to correct problems in the churches and to encourage Christians to live out their faith. The church is not a museum for perfect Christians. It’s a repair station to fix problems. Sylvester Stallone, who played Rocky and Rambo in the movies, told a group of pastors, “Living without the church is like working out without a trainer. You need to have the expertise and guidance of someone else. You can’t train yourself. I feel the same way about Christianity.” This is fairly good advice. “The church is the gym of the soul,” Stallone continued. “Pastors are like trainers that guide you through difficult times and take you to places you don’t believe you can go. A lot of people say, ‘I can do it on my own, I have a one-on-one relationship with God.’ Well, it’s not quite the same…The more I turn myself over to the process of believing in Jesus, listening to His Word and having Him guide my hand, the more I feel as though the pressure is off me now.” 127

Stallone is right from the aspect that we need pastors. These are part of the fivefold ministry and were a gift from God to his church. No matter whether you have church you need to have the input of qualified ministry in your life. The Apostles set the tone for this type of leadership for Biblical Christians. The responsibility for Biblical Christ likeness begins in the home. From the beginning of time the home was the first and last bastion. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were the models of being the priest of their home. This model did not end with the New Testament. In God’s economy the husband and/or father is to function as priest of that home. Just like your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, your home should be a prepared place for God. Your home should be dedicated to God. The atmosphere in your home should welcome the presence of the Holy Spirit. We have a generation that often quotes, “We are a nation of Kings and Priests, but they want the reward without the sacrifice and responsibility. Christian living does not take place in a building designated as the church building it takes place in the lives of followers of Jesus Christ.

The Lone Ranger All roads have two ditches. While on the one hand we realize that the institution or state run denominational church has gone much too far away from what God intended for his church. On the other there are people that have decided to “throw the baby out with the bath water”. We are not advocating that one person or even one family unit is the church in and of themselves. One person or one family is part of the church. While we move toward returning to Biblical Christianity there are some that have decided because of the abuse of the State run church, that we no longer need the fivefold ministry. This is a dangerous precedent. This is one of many errors religious denominations have made we should not repeat the errors of our past. We need NOT to start a campaign to do away with all church buildings. These are assets and tools that we have available to us. While we need not place emphasis on building buildings those congregations with them need to use them and all that are connected with them to help bring a restoration to the Church. It has happened before and will happen again. We need to fall on our faces and seek God for direction, open our bibles, study and apply all of this to restoring the Apostles doctrine. We realize that not everyone will want to see change. The Humpty Dumpty Christians and their 128

denominational overlords will be in opposition to our efforts. They will call us all lone rangers; claiming that we are rebels. There are many dangers for Christians who have been set free from the institution of Church. One of them is a tendency toward being a lone ranger. “Lone Ranger Christianity- when a person tries to be a follower of Christ all on their own, without any authority, relationships or accountability.”154 “There has been much said about Lone Ranger Christians (LRC). “The straw man of the LRC is someone who is arrogant and impossible to please. He is looking for the perfect church, and thinks he is the fount of all wisdom as to what that might be. When people don't listen to him, he picks up his jacks and runs away, thereby making himself vulnerable to heresy, pornography, drugs, and bad hairstyles. I've never known an LRC who was happy with his choice. They are just less happy with their options.”155 “I respect the mission of the organized church. I respect the people who give their time, tithes and energy to it. And I hope they'll accept us for who we are; conscientious objectors from the kinds of peace they wage. I don't know of any class of Christians so routinely and unanimously vilified as the "Lone Ranger Christian (LRC)." Not that it's difficult; you won't find an anti-defamation league or denomination of lone rangers to unite our voices in our own defense. Pretty much, the LRCs are sniped at from safely within groups of happily bonded believers - until that happy bond is broken.”156 “An assembly of believers is a precious thing wherever it gathers. “Within its walls all the fellowship of the Godhead is exchanged between saints. Unfortunately, that is not all that is exchanged between saints. There is also the mountain of doctrine and politics. I know saints in Australia, the Isle of Man, Scotland, Hungary, Romania and the US who are going it alone these days.”157 So, what we need to focus on is the gathering of the saints, the exchange of bible doctrine, encouraging and uplifting one another. Leave the Humpty Dumpty stuff to the denominational schisms.

154

The Way it Could Be. Lone Ranger Christianity. Chad Missildine. The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 156 The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 157 The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 155

129

“If anyone ever writes a statement of faith that says things like,” We don’t reject _____ or ______, “then maybe my resolve will be at risk. But denominations don't work like that, now do they? Denominations denominate. And that's a rub for me and my scattered brothers.”158 We respect the need for the church, all of us. We have to work hard to assemble ourselves together as Heb 10:25 demands, but we do it. All the LRCs I know find some way to assemble themselves meaningfully with brothers and sisters, even though sometimes those brothers and sisters would only barely fellowship with each other. It's worth the extra work not to be looked at askance when we assemble ourselves with "them”.159\ Chad Missildine pastor at LifeChurch.tv said this about the LRC syndrome, “I used to be a Lone Ranger Christian- set my own rules, played my own game. Yeehaaw! Sounds like fun, but even the Lone Ranger had Tonto by his side, watching his back, helping him out and kicking some serious tail! As a Lone Ranger Christian I got my tail seriously kicked, over and over again. Sadly, I see a lot of people go through the same thing every day. Lone Ranger Christianity breeds all kinds of forms of faith, with no real limit or constraint other than one’s personal belief or opinion. It is a reality of the world we live in and a struggle for many of us.”160 “Lone Ranger Christians don’t think they need the church or anyone else. They believe they can get along just fine by themselves. One once told me, “I can worship God on the tree stump in my back yard just as well as on a church pew.”161 “Often they became loners because, like the Lone Ranger, they were “ambushed”—usually by well-meaning church folks. With their feelings hurt, they retreat to a hermit-like faith. The reality of Christianity is not about “Lone Ranger Christians.” It’s not just about us. The early church “devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Community is necessary for the church to be the church.”162

158

The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 159 The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 160 The Way it Could Be. Lone Ranger Christianity. Chad Missildine. 161 Just a Minute. Observations from a Biblical World View. Christian Becker. Monday October 29, 2007. 162 Just a Minute. Observations from a Biblical World View. Christian Becker. Monday October 29, 2007.

130

While you can be a Biblical Christian without attending a building identified as the church there are several things that we need to remember are important. 1. Do you have the Word of God in your life regularly; centering your life on who you believe has authority on your life (Christ as revealed through the Word) not your own opinions? 2. Do you have accountability, living life close enough with others to help you live the way you say you believe? 3. Do you have prayer in your life? This is the way God will empower your belief and help you to be who He has called you to be, through His Spirit. 4. Are you helping meet other’s needs because of your belief? This includes trusting God with your resources as you help meet these needs. 5. Are you seeing growth or “fruit” in your life as a result of what you believe? What is different in your life because of your relationship with Christ? Who is different in your life, because of Christ living through you? The Bible uses the example of trees without fruit, claiming fairly harsh consequences of trees without fruit. If the answer to any of these is no, you may be some version of a Lone Ranger Christian! Without his Word, you have no authority in your life. Without relationships, you have no accountability. Without prayer, no have no source of connection or power. Without serving others or meeting other’s needs you have real love for others (yeah, I said it). Without others in your life helping you grow, you have no legs to your faith. Don’t Be a Lone Ranger Christian! Even the Lone Ranger had Tonto! Ask God to give you the wisdom to see what you need to do to leave the prairies and step into community. What can you do to take a step in the right direction? Who can you seek out?” 163 Remember you are NOT alone. There is already a Church. You don’t have to build the entire body of Christ. You role is to be part of that great international body of believers. There are many people willing to help you. If you are hearing from God you are not alone. God has spoken to people throughout the ages. You don’t have to act alone. The gifts that God gave the first Biblical Christians are still available for us today. Those are the Holy Spirit, the gifts of the Spirit and the fivefold ministry. We have never needed them more than we do today. For more on these see the book, The Next Wave – Restoration of the Charismata by Dr. Bernie L. Wade.

163

The Way it Could Be. Lone Ranger Christianity. Chad Missildine.

131

Five Fold Ministry and Leadership It has been suggested that the New Testament Church was a poorly organized effort with no key leadership. This idea is proffered primarily by those who are not committed to Biblical Christianity. We cannot ignore the fivefold ministry and its essential role to the body of Christ from the New Testament church until now. I boldly say that everything rises and falls on leadership. Careful study will show that the New Testament church had the fivefold ministry active, operational and effective. This would be replaced by a professional clergy, overseen by political hacks appointed by various kings and politicians who changed the vision, focus and doctrine of Jesus Christ and His Church into a form of Godliness.

A Paradigm Shift It is our expectation that this book will help to bring a paradigm shift to the church. It is past time for us to return the church to its New Testament roots.

132

Bibliography Barnes, Albert (1956), Notes on the Old and New Testaments: Acts (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker). Behm, Johannes (1965), “klao, klasis, klasma,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans). Jackson, Wayne (2005), The Acts of the Apostles: From Jerusalem to Rome (Stockton, CA: Christian Courier Publications). Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft). Miller, Dave (2003), Sunday and the Lord’s Supper. http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2304. Mounce, William D. (1993), Basics of Biblical Greek (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan). Pliny the Elder, The Natural History, trans. Bostock and H.T. Riley, [On-line], URL: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext Robertson, A.T. (1997), Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament (Electronic Database: Biblesoft). Woods, Guy N. (1976 reprint), Questions and Answers (Henderson, TN: Freed-Hardeman College). Wycliffe Bible Commentary (1985), Electronic Database: Biblesoft. Takes a Church to Raise a Christian: How the Community of God Transforms Lives. Tod Bolsinger. Will the Theologians Please Sit Down? Stephen Bercot The Purpose Driven Church. Rick Warren What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. Pagan Christianity. Frank Viola and George Barna. Conflict and Community in the Church. Ben Witherington Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up? Stephen Bercot Adam Clark Commentary Vision of the Church. http://www.visionofthechurch.com/Dontgotochurch.pdf Del Birkey, The House Church: A Model for Renewing the Church (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1988).[ed. Steve Atkerson] Toward A House-Church Theology (Atlanta, GA: New Testament Restoration Foundation, 1996). John R. Davis, "How Church Structures Can Effectively Help or Hinder Church Growth," Evangel (Autumn – 1992), pp.73-83. Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers Reprint, 1994). See also Robert & Julia Banks, The Church Comes Home (Australia: Albatross Books, 1986). Frank A. Viola, Rethinking the Wineskin: The Practice of the New Testament Church (Brandon, FL: Present Testimony Ministry, 1997). Lois Barrett, Building the House Church (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1986)

133

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Bernie Wade has dedicated his entire life to working in ministry. As a child he helped his parents pioneer a number of church plants. As a young man he served as an evangelist, assistant pastor, pastor and more. Today, he fills his busy schedule writing, teaching, preaching and traveling around the world ministering the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He is a focused on the restoration or reformation of the Church to the tenets that were taught by the New Testament Church and the original Apostles of Jesus Christ. Toward this end most of his writing focuses on those essential biblical doctrines. He is committed to teaching and focusing other church leaders to return to our Biblical foundation. He serves as President to the global ministry of International Circle of Faith (ICOF). ICOF is a global network of ministers, churches, ministries and more. ICOF’s global network has more than 40,000 ministers and some 20 million adherents, with representation in nearly every country in the world. For more information visit: http://www.icof.net International Circle of Faith Colleges Seminaries and Universities (ICOF CSU) is a global network of Christian schools of higher learning and represents ICOF’s leaders collective commitment to quality Christian education. Bishop Daniel Joseph, Bishop Joseph Rankin and Bishop Wade with many other ministers at an ICOF Leadership Summit in Ghana West Africa.

Dr. Bernie Wade sees the current spiritual climate as another great wave of the Holy Spirit similar to the wave of the Spirit that swept the world after the Wales and Azusa Street revivals a century ago.

With this wave of the Holy Spirit in mind, Dr. Wade is instructing leaders to position themselves and their followers to get ready for The Next Wave. In this light a magazine was launched appropriately called, “The Next Wave”. To learn more about The Next Wave Magazine visit: http://www.icof.net/index.php/thenextwave Welcome to The Next Wave!

134