by Bud Cocherell (written 1983)
Today, Christianity is one of the world's largest religions.
There are literally hundreds of organizations which say they are
Christian and are worshipping the one and only Creator God. Each
professes to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, as expounded
in the pages of the Bible; each feels they have a keen
understanding of the Bible and God's will for mankind.
It seems very strange indeed that the majority of these
various denominations use the same Bible on which to base their
life styles, but they all differ in how they perceive what is
written in this book.
Is the Bible really a book that no one can understand? Has
God purposely confused its meaning? Does it matter how we worship
God, or which church organization we belong to?
Let us examine these and other questions, using what the
Bible really says as the final authority. The answers may
surprise you and give you a new understanding of the real God of
the Bible.
THE CHURCH DISAPPEARS
Shortly after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we
find a dynamic evangelizing church spreading God's truth
throughout the world. Their spiritual zeal literally changed the
course of history. But, dynamic as the church was, it all but
disappeared from history after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70
A.D. From 70 to 120 A.D. there was very little recorded about the
true church of God. When historians again took up their pens to
write about the church, we find that it had changed from the
simple faith once delivered. Or could it be that the true church
was all-but-destroyed, and then replaced by a false Christianity?
(But the NT shows that false ministers were coming within the
true Church of God and twisting and changing and perverting the
original truth once delivered to the saints. History does record
a movement away from 7th day Sabbath keeping to 1st day - Sunday
observance. And history does record the Roman church adopting
Easter in the second century A.D. So there is SOME history of
what was taking place. It is written about it in various studies
on this Website - Keith Hunt)
Today we find churches, calling themselves Christian, that
do not even faintly resemble what the early church was. We find
confusion among the so-called Churches of God, many with
differing teachings and views as to what constitutes the true
Church of God pictured in the Bible.
THE EARLY CHURCH
The Apostle Paul admonished the Church of God at I Corinth
to avoid confusion and division. "Now 1 beseech you, brethren, by
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same
thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that you be
perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same
judgment. For it has been declared unto me of you, my brethren,
that them who are of the house of Chloe, that there are
contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you say,
I am of Paul; and I, of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and, I of
Christ." (1 Cor.1:10-12). Paul asks, "Is Christ divided?" (1 Cor.
1:13). It is absurd to think that Jesus Christ is not quite sure
how He wants His church to function, and really does not care how
we worship and serve Him and His Father.
Our great God is not the author of confusion (I Cor.14:33),
but is an orderly being. Look at the order of all that exists.
From the balance of the galactic systems down to the smallest
atomic structure, all of the physical creation shows great order,
not confusion.
Since God set all the physical creation to function orderly,
doesn't it make sense that He would have us to worship Him in an
orderly structured manner, and not in many different ways?
WHAT IS A CHURCH?
To understand where the true church of God is, we must first
understand what a church is. The English word "church" is
translated from the Greek word "Ekkiesia" (ek-klay-see-ah),
meaning a calling out, i.e. a popular meeting, an assembly,
especially a religious congregation. Church simply means a group
of people meeting together. So, you see, attaching the word
church to a group or organization does not necessarily make them
Christian.
Some could contend that any group that meets in the name of
Jesus is Christian. It is true that Jesus said, "For where two or
three are gathered together in My name, there am I am in the
midst of them." (Matt.28:20). It is, however, very obvious when
the entire chapter is read, that Jesus is only talking to His
true followers and not to people in general.
So we see that the church is an assembly of Christians and
not a building or a corporation. The church is a group of
Christians that assemble together. Many think just because they
are a member of an organization called a church and believe in
God, that they are Christians and are worshipping God correctly.
This is a very dangerous assumption to make, especially when our
eternal life depends upon the way we worship and obey God.
ABOUT THE CHURCH
Let us take a look at what the Bible says about the people
who are the church. One of the first things we find about the
members of the church is that they are not very popular. In fact,
they are usually hated by most people. Jesus knew this would be
the case and asked God the Father to protect them. "I have given
them thy word; and the world has haled them, because they are not
of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou
should take them out of the world, but thou should keep them from
evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Sanctify them through thy truth, thy word is truth." (John
17:14-17).
Why are they hated by the world? The answer is really quite
simple when we understand that Satan has deceived the whole world
into following him. (Rev.12:9). Jesus warned of Satan's
deception... "Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall
come in my name, saying, I am the Christ, and shall deceive
many." (Matt.24:4-5). Jesus knew that the vast majority of people
would find it easier to follow a false Christ than to follow Him,
hence, the warning to the Church.
DENOMINATIONS
If Christ is not divided, then why are there so many
differing churches and denominations professing to be Christian?
The first reason is the same today as it was from the first days
of human existence. That reason is rebellion. Adam and Eve
rebelled against God In the Garden of Eden. The children of
Israel rebelled against God in the wilderness, after he had
delivered them from slavery in Egypt. Mankind has been rebelling
against his Creator from Adam until now. (See: Ezk.20:12-13; Isa.
30:9-10 and 66:3).
For some reason people seem to think they can worship God
any way they want. But, notice what He says through the Prophet
Isaiah. "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your
ways my ways, says the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than
the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts
than your thoughts." (Isa.55:8-9).
Jesus called the religious leaders of his day hypocrites,
snakes, liars, and deceivers because they were not teaching God's
truth, but were teaching their own philosophy, which was
rebellion. "Ye hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you,
saying, This people draws nigh unto me with their mouth, and
honors me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in
vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments
of men," (Matt.15:7-9).
Even some of the very elect of God fall into rebellion. Paul
warned the young evangelist Timothy, "Preach the word; be instant
in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all
long-suffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they.
will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall
they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears. And they
shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned
unto fables." (2 Tim.4:2-4). "Now the Spirit speaks expressly
that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving
heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies
in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron." (I
Tim.4:1-2).
Rebellion can come in many forms and always separates the
rebellious people from God the Father and Jesus Christ, no matter
what organization they belong to.
SATAN'S DECEPTION
The second reason for so many differing churches and
denominations is Satan's deception. In the early days of the
church, Satan started his master deception and tried to destroy
the true church from within. The Apostle Paul warned the church
at Corinth, "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers,
transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no
marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be
transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be
according to their works." (2 Cor.11:13-15).
Yes, Satan has ministers and even churches disguised as true
churches of God. (Rev.2:9 and 3:9). If you were to ask one of
these ministers if he was a false minister of God, he would most
likely become very offended.
The vast majority of people today have been deceived into
thinking they are worshipping God correctly because of Satan's
deception. "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent,
called the Devil, and Satan, which deceives the whole world: he
was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with
him." (Rev.12:9). Jesus knew this would happen and warned, "Take
heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name,
saying, I am the Christ; and shall deceive many." (Matt.24:4-5).
Jesus was not saying that people would say that they
themselves were Christ, but would say that He was indeed the
Christ. When we read Matt.24:11 & 14 with Gal.1:6-9, we can
understand what Christ was saying. He was foretelling the time
when false ministers would preach another gospel in His name, and
many would be deceived into thinking they were following Him.
Jesus' prophecy has come true. The majority of professing
Christians today believe and preach a false gospel, not because
they have predetermined to do so, but because Satan has deceived
them. Satan is indeed the master deceiver.
It is very obvious that the early church was not divided
into many different denominations. It is also obvious that if all
professing Christians submitted to God's rule in their lives,
denominations would disappear.
Contrary to what most believe, Jesus Christ does not
sanction the many divergent churches that exist today. Jesus
said, "I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it." (Matt.16:18). He did not say He would build
many churches, but that He would build His church, and it would
endure.
After being crucified and resurrected from the dead, Jesus
instructed His disciples how He wanted His church to be
constructed. "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Spirit: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end
of the world." (Matt.28:19-20). Notice, Jesus told his disciples
to teach the things He had commanded. Christ was not only
referring to the things He had taught during his earthly
ministry in human form, He also meant for them to teach the
things He had taught to Israel when He was their God before He
became flesh. (Read John 1:1-11 & Eph.3:9).
THE CHURCH PERSECUTED ... SCATTERED ... SMALL
Jesus said, "If they have persecuted me, they will also
persecute you." (John 15:20). Paul said, "All that will live
godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." (2 Tim.3:12).
Jesus Christ understood mankind's nature and mind as no
other man could. As the Creator God of the Universe and mankind
(John 1:1-3: Eph.3:9), He had observed man's behavior down
through the centuries and knew people would continue to oppose
His truth as long as they were influenced by Satan. God's way of
life is opposite to the way most people want to live. Most people
do not like to be told they are living in sin and usually dislike
people that tell them they are. John the Baptist was beheaded
because he spoke out against Herod's sin of adultery (Mark
6:17-28). It is no different today. The true followers of Christ
will be persecuted for speaking the truth of God. The prophet
Zechariah foretold the church would be scattered after Jesus'
crucifixion (Zech.13:7). Jesus himself repeated the prophecy,
"And Jesus said unto them, All ye shall be offended because of Me
this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the
sheep shall be scattered." (Mark 14:27). Also see John 16:32. The
early church suffered much persecution and was scattered as
Christians fled for their lives. "And Saul was consenting unto
his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against
the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered
abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the
apostles." (Acts 8:1). There are many other scriptures that show
God's people will be very unpopular. (Read Dan.11:33-35; Ezk.
34).
Even though the church has been persecuted and scattered
throughout the centuries, it will continue to endure (See Matt.
16:18). Jesus called the church a little flock. "Fear not little
flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the
kingdom." (Luke 12:32). Though hated, despised, maligned,
persecuted, and scattered by the world, this small
group of people is the Church of God. But does being small and
hated make a group of people the true church? Of course not!
There are many small groups that say they are Christian, but are
so far out of line with what Jesus taught they do not even come
close to or resemble true Christianity.
How about being hated? True, some small groups are hated for
what they teach, but so are some large groups. "...and ye shall
be hated of all nations, for my name's sake." (Matt.24:9). In
these two scriptures (Luke 12:32 & Matt.24:9), Jesus is talking
about a relatively small group of people compared to the world's
population. The vast majority of the people "professing
Christianity" would hate His people, just as the Jews of Jesus'
day professed to believe in God and hated Him for what He taught.
So it is in this age. God's people will be hated for preaching
the truth as Jesus taught it. (John 17:14).
A SIGN OF GOD'S PEOPLE
Is there an identifying mark or sign upon the people of God?
Is there something that one could observe and by it tell that the
people, organization, or group, are true Christians? The answer
is yes! True Christians can be identified and separated from
those who are not.
COMMANDMENT KEEPING
The first mark or sign of a Christian is that he will be
keeping the Ten Commandments of God. Jesus said, "if ye love me,
keep my commandments." (John 14:15). True Christians will have
love and concern for each other. "By this we know that we love
the children of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments.
For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and
His commandments are not grievous." (1 John 5:2-3). The apostle
has a stinging rebuke for those who say they are Christians and
do not keep the Ten Commandments. "He that says, I know him, and
keeps not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in
him." (I John 2:4). A requirement for maintaining the Christian
status is commandment keeping.
A second mark or sign of God's people is that they will be
observing God's Sabbaths and Holy Days. Notice what God says in
Exodus 31:15-17. "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh
is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever does any work
in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death."
The prophet Ezekiel was inspired to write, "Moreover also I
gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that
they might know that 1 am the Lord that sanctifies them." "And
hallow my Sabbaths; and they shall be a sign between me and you,
that you may know that 1 am the Lord your God." (Ezk.20:12,20).
Other sabbath observances to be kept by Christians are the
annual Sabbaths or Holy Days spoken of in the twenty-third
chapter of Leviticus. Notice, they are a statute forever and are
a sign of God's people. (Ex.13:9). Also see: Isa. 56:1-6; 58:13;
and 66:22-23).
Many will say the Sabbath and Holy Days were for ancient
Israel and not for Christians today. But, what does the Word of
God say? Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the
law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."
(Matt.5:17). The apostle Paul told the Galatian Christians that
if they were Christ's, they were Abraham's seed, that is
"Israelites." "And if you be Christ's, then are you Abraham's
seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Gal.3:29). Also see:
Acts 7:1-7). Paul also told the Church of God at Colossae, "Let
no man therefore judge you (in meat, or in drink, or in respect
of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which
are a shadow of things to come) but the body of Christ." (Col.
2:16-17).
A third sign of God's people is their love and concern for
one another. "By this shall all men know that you are my
disciples, if we have love one to another." (John 13:35). While
this would not seem to be a major sign of God's people, it is
nonetheless, in a world torn with strife, war, divorce, murder,
anger, hatred and violence. Love and hue concern for another
human being is rare indeed, and is truly a sign of the people who
follow the one who loved the world enough to give His life for
it.
THE CHURCH WILL NOT BE PAGANIZED
The true Church of God will not be observing pagan festivals
and holidays, such as: Christmas, Easter and Halloween. Although
many "professing Christians" will say there is nothing wrong with
observing these days, they do admit they are pagan in origin. The
prophet Jeremiah gave this warning from God. "Learn not the way
of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for
the heathen are dismayed at them. For the customs of the people
are vain: for one cuts a tree out of the forest, the work of the
hands of the workman. with the axe. They deck it with silver and
with gold; they fasten It with nails and with hammers, that it
move not." (Jer.20:2-4). Paul warns the church at Corinth not to
bind themselves with Satan's false worship. "Be ye not unequally
yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship have
righteousness and unrighteousness? And what communion has light
with darkness? And what concord has Christ with Belial? Or what
part has he that believes with an infidel? And what agreement has
the temple of God with idols?" (2 Cor.6:14-16).
The Church of God will be doing the work of God in preaching
the soon-coming Kingdom of God. This is the same gospel (good
news) that Jesus Christ taught. "Jesus came into Galilee,
preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God. And saying, The time
is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and
believe the gospel." (Mark 1:14-15). This gospel is a far cry
from the teachings of main-line Christianity today. It is a
gospel so dynamic, so powerful, so diametrically opposite to what
is taught in most churches around the world today, that most
reject it. "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season;
reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine, for
the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but
after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers,
having itching ears. And they shall turn away their ears from the
truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Tim. 4:2-4).
BE YE SEPARATE
In a letter to the church at Corinth the Apostle Paul
exhorted them to avoid mixing paganism with Christianity. (2 Cor.
6:14-16). He also told them to separate themselves from that
day's religions. "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye
separate, says the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I
will receive you." (2 Cor. 6:17).
The Church of God is not to participate in, or be a part of
the world's religions or politics. This would constitute
spiritual adultery, since the Church is to be the Bride of
Christ, and is to act as His ambassador to this world. (2 Cor.
5:20).
Surprising as it is, Jesus Christ did not form His Church to
become a large powerful organization which would try to make this
world, under its present leadership, a better place in which to
live. Instead, He said, "I have given them thy word; and the
world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as
I am not of this world. I pray not that thou should take them out
of the world, but that you should keep them from the evil. They
are not of the world, even as 1 am not of the world." (John
17:14-16)
THE PURPOSE OF THE CHURCH
If Jesus did not intend for His Church to become a powerful
force and challenge Satan for world rule, then what did he form
it for?
The purpose of the Church is fourfold.
Its first purpose is to prepare a people to help Jesus
Christ rule this world at his second coming. "And has made us
(them) unto our God kings and priests; and we (they) shall reign
on the earth." (Rev.5:10). (Also see: 1 Thes.3-13; Rev.3:21 and
20:4-6).
The second purpose is to preach the Good News of the soon
coming government of God. "And this gospel of the kingdom shall
be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and
then shag the end come." (Matt.24:14).
(Often this is misunderstood per se. Jesus at another time said,
we will not have gone over all the cities if Israel before the
Son of man comes. The gospel will be preaches - shouted - to the
word by the ANGEL that does so shortly before Jesus comes again.
See Revelation 14:6 and mt comments on that part of Revelation in
my "New Testament Bible story" - Keith Hunt)
The third purpose is to preach the message of repentance.
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,
teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you." (Matt.28:19-20).
The fourth purpose is to provide a place for those called of
God (John 6:44), to grow in grace and knowledge (2 Peter 3:18),
and to learn and perfect the ways of God in their lives so they
will be able to fulfil the great calling of the Saints. (Rev.
5:10).
ONE CHURCH
Does it really matter which church a person belongs to? If
there is no God, and the Bible is not His Word put to print, then
it does not matter which church a person goes to. In fact, why go
at all? But, there is abundant proof that God the Father and
Jesus Christ do exist and that the Bible is their Word and
instruction manual to the human race. If one is truly seeking to
obey God, then he should want to be with the group of people who
are His. Jesus said, "I will build my Church." (Matt.16:18). And,
to this church, His Father would call and place those who should
be saved in this age. (Acts 2:38,39 & 47).
There is only one Church of God, so says the Apostle Paul.
"There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you are called in one
hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God
and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you
all." (Eph.4:4-6). Jesus Christ has only one church He rules
over. (Eph.1:22-23; 1 Cor.12:12-13). He has no other. The true
Church of God has existed from the day Jesus organized it. It has
endured the test of persecution and martyrdom throughout the
centuries, and still exists today wherever true Christians gather
to worship the Creator God and serve Him. (Matt.18:20)
...............................................
NOTE:
The one true Church of God, is its scattered members around the
world. It is NOT just "one organization" of men. The body of
Christ, are the SALT of the earth, sprinkled here and there. They
are indeed the "very little flock" as Jesus said it, for that is
how the Greek reads. The Greek is a double diminutive - LITTLE
LITTLE flock.
If you are willing to learn, to hunger and thirst after
righteousness, willing to be corrected, willing and wanting to
grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior, willing to
live by every Word from God, as Jesus said we should do
(Mat.4:4); THEN with humility in your heart, loving God with all
your body, mind, and life, YOU can be a member of the ONE TRUE
CHURCH OF GOD! Keith Hunt
Church Government #2What the New Testament teaches on how churches should be governed
Ancient Israel, before the New Testament Church of God began, was
called the "church in the wilderness"(Acts 7:38). It was
organized from the TOP down. There was God, then Moses, under
Moses there were Elders, captains over thousands, and hundreds
and so on down the pyramid of the chain of authority. Israel's
church - state government - was THEOCRATICAL, from God down to a
specific human leader who had total authority and leadership over
every other person in the nation. Was Israel's type of government
to be carried over into the Church of the New Covenant? If so
then we should be able to find ample evidence to support this
teaching from the writings of the New Testament. Let us humbly
search to find the truth of the matter.
by
Keith Hunt
Using a "Harmony of the Gospels" book, we find that the
first recorded person we would classify as one of Jesus'
disciples was Andrew, who spent part of a day with Him(John
1:35-40). Andrew soon introduced Simon his brother to Jesus. When
Jesus saw Simon He instantly diagnosed his basic personality and
said: "So you are Simon the son of John. You shall be called
cephas(which means 'stone')." Harmony of the Gospels by Ralph
Heim.
Now did Jesus by giving Simon a new name establish him as
HEAD apostle? The next day Jesus found Philip and he brought
Nathaniel to Jesus. Again Christ discerned the character of
Nathaniel, "Behold an Israelite indeed in whom is no guile"
(v.47).
Because you were the first to be called as one of Jesus'
disciples, or given another name, or have Christ state your
personality in a miraculous way - does that mean you are head
disciple?
If so, Andrew could claim it as first named or recorded
disciple in the ministry of Jesus. Peter could claim it as being
given a new name. Philip could possibly claim such an office as
he was the first recorded person that Jesus said the words
"follow me" to.The truth is, in none of these passages did Jesus
name anyone as HEAD disciple.
Actually the official calling of Peter and Andrew was some
time later, see a "Harmony of the Gospels" book. And James and
John were also called at the same time. If you study the Harmony
of the Gospels you will see that between these two incidents
in John chapter one and Luke chapter five(also recorded in
Matthew 4 and Mark 1) Jesus had disciples already following Him.
Jesus chose 12 to be His close inner circle (Mark 3:13-19).
In the list of these twelve as given by Mark and Luke, Simon
Peter is put first. Now does this automatically of itself prove
that Peter was the CHIEF apostle? Let's not assume anything but
prove all things from God's own word.
WHO WAS THE CHIEF APOSTLE?
For three and one half years Jesus was in close fellowship
with His chosen twelve disciples. He knew their strengths,
weaknesses, and their personalities. He had ample time to
determine WHO if anyone should be head apostle, who should be
second in command, who third, and so on down the line.
We have recorded for us in the four Gospels three separate
incidents where Jesus could have made it very plain to them who
He had chosen to be chief among them and head of all the
ministers in the Church, the one with final authority and the
power of veto.
The first incident is found in Mark 9:33-35 (the same
account is also given in Mat.18 and Luke 9) where we read: "And
they came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house He asked
them, ' What were you discussing on the way?' but they were
silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who
was the GREATEST. And He sat down and called the twelve."
Here was Jesus' golden opportunity to tell them the
governmental structure He wanted among themselves, here was His
chance to declare to them, the one, two, three, in the authority
line. But what DID He say? "And He said to them, if anyone would
be first(desired to be, wanted to be) HE MUST BE LAST OF ALL AND
SERVANT OF ALL" (RSV, emphasis mine).
Jesus did not even hint that there was to be a pyramid type
of Church structure. He told them that if anyone in their own
mind desired such a position as being "top dog" that person had
better put himself last and be servant to all the others.
To be the greatest in God's sight is to be humble and put
such a desire of exaltation out of your mind and go about
serving!
Months went by and the disciples, or at least two of them,
forgot what Jesus had taught them. It is human nature to think
that in a group of twelve surely someone must be the greatest,
and maybe that someone is ME!
On a certain day James and John came to Jesus and asked Him
if THEY could be the ones to sit on His right and left hand in
the Kingdom. Jesus said only the Father had the authority to
decide who would be given those positions, it was not for Him or
for them to decide (Mark 10:35-40).
The account in Mark continues to say: "And when the ten
heard it, they began to be indignant at James and John, and Jesus
called them to Him and said to them, 'You know that those who are
supposed to rule over the Gentiles LORD it over them, and their
great men exercise authority over them. BUT IT SHALL NOT BE SO
AMONG YOU."
They were not to exercise rulership over each other, they
were not to be like the governments of this world, having a
system of dictatorial pyramid authority. Continuing:
"But whoever would be great among you must be your SERVANT, and
whoever would be first among you must be SLAVE of all" (verses
43-44).
How this incident must have come to the apostle Peter's mind
when he exhorted the elders: "Likewise you younger(in age and/or
length of service) submit(honor, respect, look to with
appreciation) unto the elder(in age and/or ones who have served
longer in the ministry). Yes, ALL of you be SUBJECT one to
another and be clothed with HUMILITY. For God resists the
PROUD(the self-important ones, those who would rule over others
and put themselves in some great office of authority) and gives
grace to the HUMBLE" (1 Peter 5:5, emphasis and amplified
myself).
What words from a mighty man of God. Mighty in the way the
Lord used him. Think about Acts chapter two, then chapter 10, and
15. Think about the great miracles Peter did even to the point
that when his shadow passed over people they were healed!
Peter was a pillar in the Jerusalem Church of God (Gal.2). Yet he
also made his errors and went away from the path of truth at
times, so that the relative new comer to the apostle function,
the apostle Paul had to correct and rebuke him openly (Gal.2).
But he took it as a true child of God, he did not allow his pride
to get in the way, or allow his "ego" to be hurt and a root of
bitterness to spring up. He was exercised to bring forth the
fruits of righteousness from all the corrections he received from
the Lord. And so could pen those great words above. Peter was a
humble man, he was willing to be subject "one to another."
Oh, how all the ministers of the Church of God need to
exhibit the character of Peter in this matter. I have personally
seen the exact opposite manifested many times by some who call
themselves the ministers of God. I wonder how many times the Lord
has seen this wrong attitude practiced down through the
centuries?
Even after these two separate incidents, there still arose a
third time when: "A dispute also arose among them, which of them
would be regarded as the greatest" (Luke 22:24, RSV).
Jesus again told them they were not to be like the
governments of this world. He gave them HIS EXAMPLE! Be a
servant, do not have the "I'm the greatest" attitude.
He did specifically promise those twelve(Matthias replacing
Judas, Acts 2) a throne each - ruling one tribe of Israel in the
Kingdom(Mat.19:28). But He never said any of those thrones would
be above the others. Just as He never said any one of them would
be above the rest in authority in this physical life within the
function of the Church.
What Jesus taught them over and over again was to have love
and service among themselves. What He inspired Peter to tell all
Elders was that they should be humble and be willing to be
subject to each other.
DID JESUS MAKE PETER HEAD OF THE CHURCH?
Some teach that Christ made Peter chief apostle over the New
Testament(NT) Church. Others teach that the true Church today is
headed by ONE man!
Those who teach this idea often give Matthew 16:18-19 as
proof to the supremacy of one authoritarian man as head of the
Church. The Roman Catholic church claim the Pope is the direct
descendant of Peter who they say was made chief apostle by
Christ. But what is the real truth? Let's examine these verses in
Matthew very carefully.
Jesus speaks about Peter. Yes Peter was used by God in a mighty
way at the start of the New Testament church. This is clearly seen in the first chapters of Acts. it is clear that Peter was the leading spokesman for the Church of God, both in preaching and in miracles. But was that to be the set in stone forever way the church of God was to function from then on out, one man to dominate as the chief authoritative leader? The Roman Catholic Church teaches one man was to lead the Church established for the New Testament age. by one head man. So we have the succession of the Popes. All of the New Testament must be searched to find the answer as to if one man was to be head of the Church of God in this age. THE DISCIPLES GO FORTH
Mark tells us that Jesus chose 12 special disciples (chapter
3:13,14). Luke says He called them apostles(chapter 6:13). It is
written He sent them "out to preach and have authority to cast
out demons" (Mark 3:14,15).
Notice it! They were sent out to do WHAT? Have dictatorial
power and authority over the members of the Church? Have
authority of each other, over other ministers of Christ? NO! They
were given authority over DEMONS not other ministers. Jesus never
said they were to rule God's children with an iron hand, lording
it over them, acting like some little Hitler cracking the whip.
Later again Christ sent out the twelve. He gave them POWER
and AUTHORITY yes, but over what? Not over each other - no! He
gave them authority over demons and power to heal every disease
and infirmity (see Mat.10:1-4; Mark 6:7; Luke 9:2).
He sent them out TO PREACH! Preach what? Personal authority
over one another, a pecking order of Church organization? God's
word says, "......to PREACH the KINGDOM OF GOD."
Jesus later appointed 70 others. He sent them out "two by
two" to do His work. He did not say that one of the two was chief
of the other. They were obviously a TEAM - two by two - two
standing alongside each other, neither having binding authority
over the other, but both being subject to each other and the
younger respecting the older as we have seen in 1 Peter 5.
Please read carefully this account as given in Luke 10. The
only authority they had was to heal, cast out demons, and preach
the good news of the Kingdom.
Jesus had ample time and opportunities to explain in some
detail to His first disciples how the Church should be structured
along a pyramid authority line if that was what He wanted it to
be like. But we find no such teaching from the lips of Christ in
the gospels. On the contrary, we find the exact opposite
teaching.
His people and ministers were to be organized on two basic
pillars - LOVE to each other and a SERVING SERVANT attitude. Only
those who have some personal gain to follow for the wrong reasons
can fail to see these two pillars taught over and over again in
the four Gospels.
The rest of the NT shows this does not mean ministers and
members are to be "door mats" to each other. Everyone walking
over each other, ignoring one another. It does not mean there is
to be no "correction" within the Church. It does not mean there
is to be no logical organization, for Paul was inspired to say
that things should be done "decently and in order" and that God
was "not the author of confusion" (1 Cor.14).
What it simply means is that everything the Church does, its
ministers (elders/overseers) and members, is to be done with
respect of each other, humility and submissiveness to each other,
and with love and service for one another in all things.
Some of the last words Christ said to His disciples was not
that they should try to dominate and establish authority over
each other in a hierarchy Church structure, but that collectively
they should with team work effort, "Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them.. ....teaching them to
observe all that I have commanded you...." (Mat.28: 19-20).
Here Jesus gives a THREE PART commission to His ministers
and followers: 1) make disciples 2) baptize 3) teach what Jesus
commanded.
This is NEW Testament instruction for the NEW Covenant
Church of God and there is not one word here or anywhere from the
lips of Christ about establishing a "pecking orde" of authority
for His ministers and members of His spiritual body.
Take a good look at Jesus' words found in Mark 16:15-18.
Again we have instruction to go and teach and baptize. The sheep
of the fold are to be fed and taught. Disciples are to be made
from all nations - preaching of the gospel. The Bride is to be
prepared for the Bridegroom.
Certain signs (as the Lord gives and directs, see 1 Cor.12)
would follow within the Church. These signs were very evident in
the apostolic Church of the first century. In somewhat of a
lesser degree they are evident today among God's people, but will
be more powerful and more abundant near the return of Christ.
Again you will notice in all this, in all these signs, there
is not one word about some GREAT order of hier-archal Church
structure to prove to the world the Church of God is the true and
only body of Christ.
The largest "Christian'' church in the world today(with over
one billion members) claims that its church structure from one
head man down, is part of the proof that they are the true Church
founded upon the apostle Peter.
As we can see from the four Gospels, NOTHING COULD BE
FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER!
Famous King Arthur of British history who fought with his
noble Knights against the invading Anglo-Saxons, is famous in
part because of his establishing the "round table." He and his
top Knights, we would call them today by the name of "generals" -
all gathered round to discuss their plans of attack and defense,
seated at a ROUND table. King Arthur said he wanted it so, so
that there would be no head or no tail. All would feel as
important and as necessary as the next, including himself. In the
center of the table going in a full circle were the words: BY
SERVING EACH OTHER WE ARE FREE.
Christianity had been well established for centuries in the
British Isles before Arthur came on the scene. It had been
brought there by many of the original disciples of Jesus. It was
a much purer Christianity than came later to Britain via the
Roman Catholic church. King Arthur was a God fearing man and his
realm was founded upon the "good book." I'm sure he knew and had
read the words of Christ as found in the gospels, part of those
words being "the Truth shall make you free."
Arthur did not choose those words for his round table, but
took the teachings of Jesus that we have been looking at, and put
the heart of them into a phrase for his famous table -
"By Serving Each Other We Are Free."
If only the Church of God, its branches and its ministers,
down through the centuries, had always taken King Arthur's
attitude of heart, many problems springing from self-important
vanity and ego would have been eliminated, and much hurt and
damage and falsehood would have given way to humble teachableness
and growth.
There are MANY truths in the word of God, one of them is
what King Arthur had come to so clearly see. No organization, no
government, no body of people can survive for long if it is not
founded on some basic godly principles. Arthur knew service was
one of those true foundations to keep a people out of the chains
of bondage and sin, and so he had engraved in the round table: By
Serving Each Other We Are Free.
About 1500 years after King Arthur led his people with those
words, another leader over another part of the same peoples in a
different land, led his people with similar words that history
will etch into stone.
His words were: "Do not say what can my country can do for
me, but say, what can I do for my country."
Those words of President John F. Kennedy are the essence of
what Jesus taught His ministers and disciples.
Please allow me to paraphrase what Christ taught His
followers:
"If any one of you would desire to be the chief minister
with all and final authority. If any one among you would get
close to adopting the attitude of 'How can the other ministers
and people of God, the Church of God, serve me' then that
individual had better humble himself and go about serving
everyone that belongs to me, and for whom I gave my life. For I
did not come to put my feet up and be served by you all, but I
came to serve you. So you go and do likewise to each other. Do
not say,' what can I get from the Church' but ' what can I do
for the Church.' "
It is time for some in the Church of God to REPENT! To
repent of the rotten stinking, filthy, arrogant, conceited, vain,
attitude of mind and actions of words and deeds, that manifests
itself too often and by too many ministers towards other
ministers and members in the Church, an attitude of being a
self-righteous authoritarian dictator over others perceived to be
of lower in "rank" than themselves in the chain of Church
ministry and structure.
It is time for those who have been guilty of such errors to
humble themselves under the mighty hand of the Lord, and to
prayerfully re-study this whole subject of the MINISTRY and
CHURCH GOVERNMENT to see more clearly from the teachings and
examples of the New Testament what the plain truth really is!
THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH IS STARTED
After Jesus had ascended to heaven(Acts 1:6-11) the
disciples were together in Jerusalem(v.5). Peter stood up and
spoke to them. Did that make Peter the head apostle? The account
does not say it did. Those who claim this proves Peter was chief
minister, must read into the account something that is completely
absent, and they do this to try to uphold a teaching that can not
be established with Biblical fact.
In any group of persons you will have dominant leader type
people who will naturally lead out, Peter was one of those
individuals. Many studies today have been done by Business Firms
looking for leaders to prove this human natural phenomenon.
Peter was a"'born leader" as we say.
He told the others that someone had to be chosen to replace
Judas (v.16-22). Now notice verse 23, " And THEY appointed
two...." It does not say that Peter chose two, or James, or some
other "chief/s" among the apostles, but it says "They" the whole
120 of them (v.15) chose the two.
The account does not tell us HOW they chose the two men. So
that indeed does leave room for some administrative variance
within the workings of the Church.
They could not decide which of these two men should take the
place and office of Judas. The teaching is clear, no apostle
standing up here to tell everyone that he and he alone had final
authority to decide the matter.
What did they do? The account tells us they prayed and cast
forth lots (v.24-26). It is not the purpose of this study to
examine what these lots may have been(the readers can avail
themselves with the Bible Commentaries for such inquiries).
Whether this was a voting ballot or pulling of straws makes no
difference to the point we want to make here.
NO ONE MAN DECIDED THE ISSUE! Not even two, or three, or
four, or some board of persons. The matter and decision to be
made was too LARGE and IMPORTANT to be left to one man or a few
men.
Peter certainly did not have sole authority to decide who
would take Judas' place. Not only that, but once that decision
was made, he did not have authority to ANNUAL it either!
Is this an example that some issues are only for God to
decide and an organization may have to resort to casting some
type of "lot"? Well yes it is and then no it isn't. Let me
explain.
Both men were qualified in the eyes of human beings. They
had met certain necessary criterion. Obviously, for whatever
reasons, the Holy Spirit was not giving the brethren any "clear"
or "obvious" mental answer as to which man should take Judas'
place within the twelve disciples.
This was a once in a life time problem, maybe a once in the
life of the New Testament Church. This was not an every year, or
every 10 year occurrence for the Church of God. It was unique!
God had chosen the twelve disciples - it was only fitting He
should choose the man who would become part of that special
company, after all that man would be given one of the thrones to
rule one of the tribes of Israel(Mat.19).
If an issue or situation should arise within a Church of God
organization that could be seen as just as important to the one
here in Acts, then I say this is an example left for us that
could be followed. But then, I must seriously question any
organization that believes it has a problem as important as
choosing one of the twelve apostles.
PETER'S POWER?
After the Holy Spirit had come on the day of Pentecost, the
apostle Peter was very bold in his preaching of Christ. Thousands
were converted by his sermons. Great miracles were done by Peter.
We can read of all the things that Peter did and said in the
first five chapters of the book of Acts.
Indeed it is true that Peter did take a leading role in the
early days of the Church. But is there any word in these first
chapters that Peter was chief or head in authority over the other
eleven apostles or the whole Jerusalem congregation? No! Not one
single word!
Can we find in these chapters or anywhere(we shall come to
Acts 15 later) in the entire book of Acts, where ANY apostle
claimed he was "boss" of the rest of them and they had to comply
with his demands and "jump to his tune"? No!
Does having the ability to speak with authority - preach
powerfully - do miracles - automatically qualify a person to be
chief or head of the Church? If it does, then the apostle Paul
would have been qualified to have dethroned anyone and taken over
the Church.
Look at his record! When some men wanted to boast of their
deeds and talents, and others were looking at these men with
great admiration, Paul said to the Corinthian church, "Seeing
that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also.....are they
ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more, in labors
more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more
frequently, in deaths often" (2 Cor.11:18,23).
Paul continued to list his deeds for the gospel in verses
24-28. He was given visions and revelations of the throne of God,
possibly he was taken up to the throne of the Lord, although he
was unsure if it was reality or in the minds eye vision (chapter
12:1-7). At another time he told the Corinthians he spoke in
tongues more than any of them (1 Cor.14:18). There were times
when Paul did great miracles through the power of God's Spirit
(Acts 19:11-12). God used him to write 14 books of the inspired
New Testament scriptures. The number 14 is the number for
deliverance and salvation as used by God in His word. The number
7 is the number for perfection and completion. The number 2 is
for the Godhead(presently only the Father and the Son). Now 2 x 7
= 14. Paul was used to write not only salvation but DOUBLE
perfection.
With ALL THIS Paul never once wrote that he was the human
head of the Church, nor did he ever state that Peter or any other
man was the head of the Church under Christ. The nearest thing we
can find in Paul's writings is the acknowledgement that some
men were looked upon as leaders and pillars of strength in the
Jerusalem church: "Then fourteen years after I went up again to
Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went
up by revelation....but privately to them which were of
reputation. But of these who seemed to be somewhat...." Notice
what Paul goes on to add to that statement, " whatever they were,
it makes no matter to me: God accepts no man's person, for they
who seemed to be somewhat, in conference added nothing to me, and
when JAMES, CEPHAS(Peter) and JOHN, who seemed to be pillars,
perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave me and
Barnabas the right hand of fellowship (Galatians 2:1,2,6,9).
It is I think more than interesting to note the order of the
names of the individuals Paul stated "seemed to be somewhat" in
the Jerusalem congregation - Peter's name does not appear first
in line. If there is any significance to the order of names(and
that question could be very debatable) and if Peter had been made
head of the Church by Christ, then Paul was doing an injustice to
Peter's authority by placing his name after that of James'.
But the truth is, Paul is not stating in this passage that
any ONE man was head of the Jerusalem church or the Church of God
as a whole. There were leading men in the church at Jerusalem
just as there would be in any other local church where there was
a plurality of ministers. Yet that fact does not prove certain
ministers "lorded it over" other ministers with dictatorial
authority.
While we are on the subject of the order of names as used in
the NT I will take some time to answer the argument put forth by
some concerning Paul and Barnabas. Some have claimed that Paul
was "over" Barnabas - that Paul had authority over Barnabas. They
have given as proof of this, the order of names.
One Church of God organization in a piece of literature on
Church Government admitted that before Acts 13 the name of
Barnabas appeared BEFORE the name of Paul - see Acts 12:25 and
13:1,2. Then they went on to say that AFTER the Holy Spirit
separated Barnabas and Paul(Acts 13:1-3) for a special work, it
was Paul's name that appeared before Barnabas' name. They quoted
certain verses to prove this, thus claiming Paul had authority
over Barnabas. The verses they gave were as,
Acts 13:13,43,44-46,50; 15:2, 35.
Now that looks pretty good IF you believe there is
significance in the order of names, IF you believe the NT teaches
an authority "pecking order" of ministerial structure, and IF YOU
READ THE BIBLE WITH TUNNEL VISION!
It blows my mind that some would try to prove a point of
doctrine by giving you certain verses they claim shows the truth
they preach WHILE WITHIN THE SAME CHAPTERS ARE VERSES PROVING THE
OPPOSITE, if you believe the order of names has meaning in
authority.
Read carefully from Acts 13:4 all the way to chapter 15:35.
Ah,ah, did you spot the verses that some glide right over with
blinkers on their eyes?
There's one in chapter 13:7. The name of Barnabas is put
before the name of Paul, and that is AFTER verses 1-3. Another is
in chapter 14:12. Yes Paul was the chief IN WHAT? He was the
chief in speaking! Not authority! Paul like Peter was a fine
speaker. All ministers are to be able to teach(1 Tim.3:2), they
do not have to be great speakers or preachers. When conducting
evangelistic meetings as Barnabas and Paul were doing it is only
natural and wise to let the man with the gift of preaching do the
speaking most of the time.
Notice verse 14 of chapter 14. The name of Barnabas appears
BEFORE that of Paul's. Then after Paul's name was put before that
of Barnabas' in Acts 15:2 Luke(the writer of Acts) turns right
around and places Barnabas' name BEFORE Paul's in verse 12. In
verse 22 Paul's name is placed before Barnabas' by Luke, then in
verse 25 he again reverses it and puts Barnabas' name first.
Such is the folly of men who want to cling to false
teachings and will not be corrected by the word of the Lord. They
just do not have the "love of the truth" (2 Thes.2:10).
From reading the first few chapters of the book of Galatians
and the rest of the epistles of Paul, together with the book of
Acts, one thing becomes very clear to those who have an honest
heart and will accept the truth of the word. Paul acknowledged
there was a work of the Lord coming from Jerusalem, an
organization with leading men such as James and Peter, a work
that belonged to God, preaching the same basic truths that he
Paul and Barnabas and others were preaching. But not for one
minute or one second did he ever believe God was not also using
him and others to also do the "work of God."
Paul believed with all his might that he was just as much an
apostle as the twelve were. That he had just as much authority in
Christ as any of the rest. It is clear from the writings of Paul
that he did not believe in any hierarchy pyramid, one man down
authoritarian Church of God government, where men ruled over men
with dictatorial power. Paul respected other ministers who were
truly called and faithful to God. Paul had deep love and respect
for all of God's children, especially for those who went the
extra mile in serving the brethren and doing "the work." Paul was
a humble man, and God made sure he would stay that way by giving
him a "thorn in the flesh" (2 Cor.12:7-9).
Paul was a submissive man, he was both submissive to God and
to man. Concerning his submissiveness to other men/brethren, we
can find many examples. A few will suffice. The account in Acts
9:23-25 was no doubt at the request of the disciples who did not
want to see Paul killed. Notice the humility Paul exhibited even
after being personally taught by Christ Jesus, in what he wrote
in Galatians chapter 2:1-2 (with chap.1;12). He was willing to
let other ministers examine his beliefs and teachings so nothing
would be done in vain. He recognized they also had the Spirit of
God and were able to ascertain truth from error.
What an attitude! Think about it! Jesus had personally
appeared to him on the road to Damascus and brought him to
repentance and conversion. He had been personally taught by
Christ. The Lord had given him many of the gifts of the Spirit.
He had performed healings and miracles. Yet, this man was willing
to be examined by some of the leading apostles to make sure he
had not run, or should run, in some useless vain manner that
would save no one.
Now that is some beautiful heart and mind. Every minister
who calls himself a minister of the Lord had better cultivate
that attitude of Paul.
He didn't go around acting like some pompous swell-headed
"know it all" from the number one University of the country. He
didn't proclaim to the world that he was the "only" apostle of
God. He never claimed that it was him who had the final authority
in the Church.
Those who can not be like the apostle Paul are destined to
find themselves wallowing in the mire of their own filthy
vainness with whatever religious empire they established being
taken away and given to others of more noble humility and
character.
How many ministers are willing to have their work and
teachings and writings, examined for possible errors by other
ministers filled with the Spirit of the Lord? In my experience I
am ashamed to say, it is very few. Even when done in the right
spirit of mind, most get their "back up" and think they are being
"attacked" if someone questions their teaching as being correct.
We may not all agree on every last little verse in the word
of God, but we should endeavor to disagree without being
"disagreeable."
Paul was willing for other reputable ministers to examine
the way he ran in the work of the Lord. Paul was willing to
submit to other ministers when it was right and correct to do so.
Another example of that can be found in Acts 21 and verses 17
through to 26.
What was Peter's power and authority? Well, it was no more
than Paul's! If Peter got out of line, if he was in complete
error, if he was in the wrong and committing sin, then Paul had
no hesitation in correcting him, and if need be in front of
others at that (Gal.2:11-21).
THE EARLY CHURCH AND COMMUNISM
There are some people who have put themselves into a
communal type of life. They all dress alike, eat together, work
together and share equally their pooled wealth. Often Acts
4:32-37 and 5:1-11 are quoted to justify this way of living.
Are these verses in Acts teaching this type of communistic
life for Christians? In verse 32 the multitude of disciples said
that their possessions they counted not just belonging to
themselves but to others also. That is an attitude of SHARING!
We must understand and remember that the Church was just
starting - people were being converted by the hundreds and
thousands(3, 000 on the day of Pentecost alone - Acts 2:41). They
had found the truth of God, they would be excited, joyous, and
naturally wanted to stay on in Jerusalem to rejoice with and
fellowship with the disciples who had been with Jesus for three
and one half years.
Imagine the monumental task it would have been just to have
fed and housed all those converts. They had come from all parts
of the known world to observe the feast of Pentecost and were now
converted to Christianity. Some were willing to sell their houses
and lands to give help to those in need. They gave AS every man
HAD NEED(v.45).
Yes, those who had some real-estate were willing to sell
some or all of it and give the money to the apostles who in turn
gave that money to those in need as the situation arose.
Even when they did sell a possession, it, the money, was
still THEIRS to do with as led by the Holy Spirit. "As long as it
remained unsold, was it not still your own? And (even) after it
was sold, was not(the money) at your disposal and under your
control?......" (chapter 5:4, Amplified Bible).
Ananias and Sapphira died because they LIED about the price,
not because they were unwilling to practice communism (see
chapter 5:3).
The NT Church never taught a communistic life style. God's
word teaches no such doctrine. But the word of the Lord does
teach a GIVING and a SHARING. A HELPING your brother as he needs
it (1 John 3:17-18).
There was a need at that time in the Church's early
beginning, an unusually LARGE need, and all who could and wanted
to help, feed, clothe and house the brethren, did so readily.
SEVEN ARE APPOINTED
As the Church grew there would(as with any growing
organization) naturally arise problems that would need resolving.
This is the case as we start into the sixth chapter of Acts.
Certain things were being neglected(v.1). This was brought
to the attention of the apostles. They called the other
disciples(many of them) and asked them to choose seven men, whom
the total 12 apostles would agree to appoint over this matter of
physical duties(v.l-4).
These seven men were chosen from among the "multitude of the
disciples." The apostles you will notice did lay down certain
qualifications that were to be found in choosing the seven. But
the initial choosing of these "diakonein" (today we call them
deacons) was done by the multitude of disciples.
No indication here of some head minister calling or
appointing seven of his personal choosing. Even the twelve
apostles did not do it all by themselves. They were quite
confident that the other disciples were qualified to find men in
whom was the Spirit of God, wisdom, and honesty.
Perhaps in this situation the multitude of disciples were
better qualified than the apostles in finding the right men, as
they were more personally and intimately acquainted with these
local men. Maybe they all lived in the same general area and
attended the local synagogues together.
Whatever the case, for this specific circumstance (which may
or may not arise today) the apostles felt the congregation should
get involved.
There had to be some system for choosing these men, but we
are not told what that system was they used. God merely gave us
the principle - we then have the liberty under the same situation
to work out the details. Perhaps all the disciples were asked to
submit a name either orally or in writing. Maybe it was a
"secret" ballot vote. Maybe some men even volunteered for the
responsibility. Whatever the method, one thing is for sure, it
was not some dictatorial man throwing his weight around who chose
them.
After this mutual search for the seven candidates it is
important to notice that the whole group of 12 apostles appointed
them to that duty. Verse three says: " whom WE MAY appoint over
this business."
I am sure that if the Holy Spirit had spoken to the twelve
that one or more of the seven was not suitable, they would not
have been appointed and the multitude would have had to find new
candidates.
What this means is that the bottom line, is that the
ministers have the last word on those chosen for the duties of
deacons.
This was a special situation, a never before situation in
the early life of the NT Church. It can not be used to claim the
NT Church of God is to be run from the bottom up, the members
picking by democratic vote their deacons and ministers.
Many Protestant churches so operate this way, but not one
verse in the NT can be found to support this view or practice. I
have personally witnessed members of a Protestant church hiring
ministers from a "preaching talent" contest, only they did not
call it that as such, but an "invitation" to preach with respect
to being hired. They chose a certain fellow who declined the
offer to go to another church, and then offered the job to the
runner up, who accepted.
God, through the Holy Spirit did things a certain way at the
start of the NT Church within certain circumstances of context,
because it was not already in place, and something needed to be
done to solve the problem. Acts chapter six and verses one to
seven was one of those contexts.
Later God inspired Paul to set down for the minister Timothy
and the Church of God, what specific qualifications were required
for the Eldership and deaconship (1 Timothy 3:1-15).
The word of God is clear that it is the already ordained
Elders in the Church who have the last word on who they will lay
their hands upon in ordination to Eldership or deaconship. The
members may have some input to ascertain or to help the Elders
ascertain that a man has basically reached the qualifications of
2 Timothy 3, but it is the Elders who must give the final
decision, and it is their hands that are laid on the candidate.
Any group of ministers within a local church or area of
churches would know over a period of time, by "their fruits" the
men whom God was calling to the ordained Eldership. The same
principle would apply to those worthy of ordination to
deaconship.
In a less structured situation more help from the
congregation could be needed to make sure 2 Timothy 3 was
followed and met. And in those circumstances the words of
Paul to Timothy(an already ordained Elder) would apply even more:
"Lay hands suddenly on no man...."(1 Tim.5:22).
................................................. To be continued
First written in 1983. Re-written and revised in 1996.
Church Government #3What the New Testament teaches on how churches should be governed LOCAL CHURCHES
As the NT Church started to grow - first in Jerusalem - the
Lord began to show that the ministers(12 apostles) should not
undertake to try and do all the spiritual AND all the physical
duties. Seven, wise, Spirit filled men were chosen to take care
of "this business" (the physical duties) so the apostles
(ministers) could "give ourselves continually to prayer and to
the ministry of the word" (Acts 6:1-4).
The FORM of local Church Government began in Jerusalem.
There was always more than one Elder ruling or guiding (and it is
the ministers who guide the church, not a board of deacons, or
congregational members, see Heb.13:7,17; 1 Tim.3:1-5,
14-15; 4:11-16) the Jerusalem congregation.
Paul acknowledged to the Galatians, some such as James,
Peter, John, were of reputation and seemed to be 'somewhat' in
Jerusalem. He stated they were pillars, but he never stated
they(James,Peter,John) had all power and dictatorial authority in
all matters within the church at Jerusalem.
The Jerusalem church was large in numbers. There were other
apostles there besides the three mentioned by Paul. There were no
doubt also other Elders there also, who had been ordained after
the Holy Spirit had come on the feast of Pentecost.
Nowhere can we find by teaching or example that any NT
church was under the dominance of a few self appointed
demagogues, not within the ranks of God's true ministers anyway.
We can find a false minister ruling like a Hitler, one of the
churches and casting out the true brethren, see 3 John 9-10.
The Church of God at Jerusalem was a fine example for all
churches to follow in the apostolic age. It is the ideal left for
us also, as is the church at Philippi.
There is no teaching in the NT that one man was to have all
the authority over a local church. Instead the example is all
churches were guided by a plurality of Elders!
Never, if at all possible, should the guidance of a church
be placed in the hands of just one individual. The person on whom
everything depends might acquire too great an importance, become
the center, the "king pin" and eventually distract the believer
from looking to the one and only true leader - Christ Jesus.
Human nature is such that it is just too easy for man to
start following another man(it happened to the people in Corinth
- 1 Cor.1:12) and POWER can turn the head of even a true minister
of God if he alone has all authority. It does happen! It has
happened even during this twentieth century in the Church of God.
It is indeed a true saying that goes, "Power corrupts, and
complete power corrupts completely."
Each NT church was pastored and governed by a plurality of
Elders as the following scriptures show:
When Paul and Barnabas had completed a tour through a number of
places, we are told that, "....they ordained them elder-s(plural)
in every church" (Acts 14:19-23). While at Miletus, Paul,
"....sent to Ephesus and called the elder-s(plural) of the
church" (Acts 20:17). The letter to the church at Philippi is
addressed, "....to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at
Philippi, with the bishop-s......" or overseers, elders - plural
(Phil.l:l). To the church at Thessalonica it was written, "We
beseech you brethren to know them(plural) who labor among you,
and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you" (1 Thes.5:12).
Titus was to ordain elder-s(plural) in every city (Titus
1:5). The activities of the Jerusalem church were carried on by
elder-s(plural), see Acts 15:1,2. And those who were sick were
instructed to call for the elder-s(plural) of the church for
prayer and anointing (James 5:14,15).
So clearly taught in the NT scriptures is this pattern, it
is hard to understand why so much of Christianity ever departed
from it. But then so many truths of the word of God have been
departed from by so many.
We need also to be honest with the instructions and examples
left us by the NT church and admit that, there is no evidence to
support the idea that churches were governed by the lay members.
Lay persons were not authorized by God to ordain, to hire,
to fire ministers. They could bring their serious complaints
about a minister to another minister for judgement and
corrections (1 Tim.5:19,20). The lay members could not vote
on what would be the doctrines of the Church of God. They could
be present at important ministerial conferences as seen from Acts
15 and given proper respect by all. What could the lay member do
if after taking their grievances of an Elder/s apostasy into sin
or doctrinal error to other ministers and no repentance was
forthcoming, and the local church was falling into practicing
unrighteousness? They could leave that minister/s and attend
a congregation where the elder/s were faithful to the Lord and
truth was being practiced.
I also realize today that it can be very difficult in some
small Churches of God to find men(plural) who are called to
function as Elders. Often it is fortunate if there is ONE
who has met the qualifications given by Paul in 1 Tim.3. If
there is only one man who can be appointed as elder, what can be
done to safe guard against corruptions and vanity, on the elders
part, and idolizing him on the part of the congregational
members.
Here are a few suggestions.
1. A single local pastor/overseer together with the congregation
should diligently search for, find and maintain, contact(via
letter, e-mail, tapes, magazines, phone etc.) with other Elders
in other local churches. This should be done to inter-act as much
as time and distance allows, so the single Elder church is not
isolated.
2. A single Elder congregation should try as distance and
expenses allow, to have other Elders from churches with the same
beliefs, visiting and speaking and fellowshipping with them.
3. The one Overseer church must make sure that the Pastor is
using the gifts of the Spirit to the fullest, as given to the
saints. A true Elder under these circumstances will help, teach,
train, give every opportunity for other men to be used of the
Lord as the Eternal wills, and so the door is always open for
more men within that congregation to be called and appointed to
the Eldership ministry. He will regularly be encouraging the
congregation to keep praying that "God will send more laborers
into the harvest." Local men who can meet the qualifications of
1 Tim.3 and so join him in the Eldership.
THE EXAMPLE OF PHILIPPI
Paul founded the church at Philippi - his first in Europe -
during his second missionary journey(Acts 16). As we read the
first and last number of verses in chapter four, it is clear that
there was a special spirit of love and giving between Paul and
the brethren in Philippi.
Notice the governmental structure of the church there:
"Paul and Timotheus to all the SAINTS(believers) in Christ Jesus,
with the BISHOPS(elders/pastors) and DEACONS(servants)"
(Phil.l:l).
There were OVERSEERS(Bishops/Elders)-plural, governing the
church at Philippi. There were DEACONS(plural) serving the
church, and there were all the SAINTS(plural) at Philippi.
The church founded by Paul followed the example that the
Jerusalem church years earlier had been guided to adopt - a
plurality of ministers to oversee the spiritual and physical work
of the Lord - a plurality of deacons to administer the physical
duties of the church under the Elders. Both groups working to
serve the saints of the church, and ALL working together to
spread the gospel to the entire world as their means allowed
them, and as the gifts of the Spirit were distributed among all
present.
All of this done with love and respect of each other. That's
how it was between Paul and the church at Philippi - that's the
example - that's the ideal for us to follow!
THE OVER VIEW
As shocking as it may sound to some, the NT never designates
one particular town or city as "headquarters." There are no such
words as "the headquarters of the Church in Jerusalem" in the NT.
Not one writer even came close to claiming Jerusalem as the
"headquarters church" or any such title.
If any did think it was Jerusalem because the "temple" stood
there, then God put an end to that idea in 70 A.D. with the
destruction of the temple under the Roman boot. As Jesus said to
the woman at the well: ".....believe me, the hour comes, when you
shall neither in this mountain nor yet in Jerusalem, worship the
Father........the hour comes and now is, when the true
worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth, for
the Father seeks such to worship Him" (John 4:21-23).
The NT never designates any one man as chief apostle or
elder. All were equal as ministers, showing mutual submission and
humble respect to each other (1 Peter 5:1-5). All were
individually free to do God's work as led by the Holy Spirit and
within the bounds of the law of the Lord, yet all worked
together(as best they could for the age they lived in, and their
differing personalities and callings and gifts) to "make
disciples of all nations."
From the writings of Paul, and examples of the book of Acts,
we see different Church of God congregations working together to
serve the brethren(when in times of need during periods of
famine) and the ministers.
There is no way to close our eyes to the fact that the body
of believers during the apostolic age were divided into various
Church of God "camps." You had the work that the Jerusalem church
was doing. You had the work that God called Peter to do(and
probably others with him) - going to the circumcision. You had
the work that Paul and Barnabas were called to do by the Holy
Spirit. Then later the work Paul(and others with him) did to the
uncircumcised. There was the work Barnabas went off to do(and no
doubt some others with him). I am sure the Ethiopian eunuch that
Philip baptized did a work in Ethiopia. Apollos had his work in
the Lord.
It is clear in Paul's epistles, some were "with him" in the
work God was doing in "that branch" of the Church. Some were with
him in a "somewhat" way, others with an "off and on" way, while
some were fully 100% all the way with Paul and his "work of the
Lord."
There were brethren who were probably 100% with the branch
of the work that Peter was doing. Others were fully behind
Apollos and that branch of God's work. Barnabas I'm sure had his
faithful supporters.
If they had lived in our 20th century their work of God and
supporters would probably have legally registered as a charitable
work with the government and country they were living in, whereby
also having a legal name. So the many branches of the Church of
God today is not really so new after all. The apostolic age was
very similar in many respects to our age concerning the working
of the whole body of Christ.
God, through Paul only took exception to this somewhat
natural way of man and circumstances, when it exhibited itself in
carnal sin.
When the brethren allowed puffed up vanity, pride, and
arrogance to dominate their attitude into thinking their little
branch of the body of Christ was the only true work of God
on earth, and the only place where the Spirit of the Lord could
be found. When brethren started to look down their long vain
noses at other brethren. When some started to "compare" men with
men, and ministers with ministers. When they thought and voiced
that their group and their ministers were "the greatest" and
beyond that to the "only ones" then Paul was inspired to CORRECT
them without pulling any punches, see 1 Cor.1:10-31; 3:1-23;
4:1-21.
Read the above sections of scripture in a modern
translation. Let the corrective words sink deep into your mind.
Realize what was going on and the carnal party spirit being
exalted. Paul had to painstakingly prove to them that Christ was
"in charge" of His work. All true ministers of God such as Peter,
Apollos, and he Paul, belonged to Christ and were being used
where, and in what way, with what gifts they had been given, to
do the will and work of Jesus.
What a sad commentary is todays branches of the true Church
of God. While most of them preach and teach the same basic truths
and doctrines of the Lord, too many of them (their members and
ministers) act as if they had no idea there were other branches
of the vine out there, and many of those branches came from the
very same single branch at one time, the ministers all being a
part of the parent ministry. Now many of them display an attitude
of contempt and disdain towards each other, even to the point
of pretending the others do not exist.
The local churches were not governed/ruled/cared for, by
one head elder or by a "church board" of deacons or church
persons, but by a plurality of elders who were the bishops or
overseers, and who were helped by the servants of the "diakonate"
- deacons who administered the physical duties under the guidance
of the ministers, and who served the saints, respecting them as
also part of the team(again I refer you to Acts 15).
Each local church supported the local elders and other
ministers(out in the mission field) with their everyday
needs(personal and for the gospel) as the word of God
instructed and their generosity(over and above their duty)
allowed.
We today do live in an age that in many respects is far
different than the first century A.D. One of those differences is
we have the power to MASS evangelize via Radio, TV, Video, and
Magazines. Someone must have the responsibility to function in
those work stations if they are used to spread the gospel. The
Holy Spirit gives gifts of wisdom, knowledge, helps, and
governments (1 Cor. 12).
It is then only common logic and correct administration to
appoint to the work of mass evangelism, those who have the talent
and gifts to do such work for the Church.
Every person in the body of Christ has a part to play as
Paul so thoroughly explained in 1 Corinthians 12. Everyone is not
the hand, everyone is not the head, everyone is not the foot. The
body is not one member but many, yet the many members make one
body. Everyone is needed and necessary for the harmonious
function of the body.
This is a truth, yet it is also a truth that the elders
collectively have the oversight and pastorship(shepherds serving
and caring for the sheep of the flock) for the whole body and for
the whole work of that body.
We need to meditate on the words of Paul as found in
Ephesians 4:11-16. I will quote those word here as given by the
Amplified Bible.
"And His gifts were (varied; He Himself appointed and gave
men to us) some to be apostle(special messengers), some
prophets(inspired preachers and expounders), some
evangelists(preachers of the Gospel, travelling missionaries),
some pastors(shepherds of His flock) and teachers. His intention
was the perfecting and full equipping of the saints(His
consecrated people), (that they should do) the work of
ministering toward building up Christ's body (the church), (That
it might develop) until we all attain oneness in the faith and in
the comprehension of the full and accurate knowledge of the Son
of God; that(we might arrive) at really mature manhood - the
completeness of personality which is nothing less than the
standard height of Christ's own perfection - the measure of the
stature of the fullness of the Christ, and the completeness
found in Him. So then, we may no longer be children, tossed (like
ships) to and fro between chance gusts of teaching, and wavering
with every changing wind of doctrine, (the prey of) the cunning
and cleverness of unscrupulous men, (gamblers engaged) in every
shifting form of trickery in inventing errors to mislead. Rather,
let our lives lovingly express truth in all things - speaking
truly, dealing truly, living truly. Enfolded in love, let us grow
up in every way and in all things into Him, Who is the Head,
(even) Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed One. For because of Him
the whole body (the church, in all its various parts closely)
joined and firmly knit together by the joints and ligaments with
which it is supplied, when each part (with power adapted to its
need) is working properly (in all its function), grows to full
maturity, building itself up in love."
THE MINISTRY - ITS FUNCTIONS
We read about elders, bishops, apostles, evangelists,
pastors, and teachers. Do these names refer to different offices
of RANK within the church?
By a careful study of the scriptures and the Greek NT, the
word of God shows that EVERY minister of the Church is a bishop
and pastor as well as a teacher and elder.
Consider the following evidence from the scriptures on this
point:
Paul instructed Titus, "Ordain elders in every city as I
have appointed you" (Titus 1:5). Then Paul went ahead and
explained the qualifications of these elders and said that
an elder is a bishop(v.7). Note the word "for" connects verse 7
with verses 5 and 6.
Plainly the elders in each local church in every city were
bishops which in the Greek means "overseer."
This is quite different from the commonly assumed idea that
a bishop bears rule and authority over a group of churches or
less important ministers.
This truth is also seen in Acts the twentieth chapter.
Paul, "....sent to Ephesus, and called the ELDERS of the
church...."(v.17). Then in speaking to these elders he said:
" Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to the flock over
which the Holy Spirit has made you OVERSEERS (bishops - same
Greek as in Titus)" verse 28.
So again we see that elders and bishops are the same!
Then Paul exhorted these elders of Ephesus, "to feed" (Greek
means pastor) "the church of God...."
These elders from Ephesus then were referred to as bishops,
and pastors as well as elders. All of these expressions referring
to the SAME office or function.
Then any minister of God, can at any time, be referred to
as, i.e. elder Jones, or pastor Jones, or bishop Jones. He is all
these words mean from the moment of his ordination, regardless as
to whether he is overseeing one or more individuals or one or
more local churches.
The above truths can be studied in such works as "Word
Studies in the New Testament" by Robinson, Earle, and other Greek
scholars.
APOSTLES, PROPHETS, EVANGELISTS, PASTORS AND TEACHERS?
Where do they fit into all this? Are they RANKS within the
ministry? Notice! "And God has set some in the Church, first
apostles, secondary prophets, thirdly teachers(l Cor.12:28).
In Ephesians 4:11 Paul adds "evangelist" after prophets, and
expands teachers to "pastors and teachers."
We have seen that all elders are pastors and bishops and
overseers. They are also teachers, for we see that one of the
qualifications for a bishop is that he is able to teach - l
Timothy 3:2.
Pastors and Teachers are the same - an ordained/appointed
minister - an elder. But not ALL elders were apostles or prophets
or evangelists in the strictest sense of those words.
It is something like this: All people living in the USA are
Americans, but not all Americans are Californians.
Who decides which man will be an apostle, or prophet, or
evangelist? Do men, other ministers pick an individual and ordain
him to the "rank" of prophet, or evangelist, or apostle? THERE IS
NO VERSE IN THE ENTIRE NT TO UPHOLD SUCH AN IDEA. If it is for
man to so do then truly it would be a ministry built on rank. But
what says the word of God? "And God(not man) HAS SET some in the
Church." God alone must determine who does what function in the
ministry. True, God uses His Holy Spirit to lead and inspire
other ministers concerning various functions that some elders
will perform as needed in the Church and as their individual
gifts allow. Such is an example in Acts 13 with Barnabas and
Paul.
And there may be certain prayers offered and a special
laying on of hands dedication for the work to be undertaken, BUT
you will notice in that example no person was ordained to another
"rank" of ministerial authority and power over other ministers.
Nor can any example of any Roman Catholic Church type rank
ministers be found in the NT.
Some minister/s may ASK and REQUEST another minister to
perform or undertake a certain task or job, but the minister has
the right to accept or refuse, God being the guide and his
individual circumstances coming into consideration. Again, there
should be an attitude of loving co-operation and understanding on
all sides. Maybe much prayer is needed, sometimes prayer together
with fasting is called for. All circumstances must be considered
including those of the wife of the minister called upon by
others.
Certainly the life of a minister of God and his wife(who is
also a part of his ministry) is a life of service to the flock of
the fold, but in some branches of the Church of God there has in
the past been too much "barking" and ordering around of each
other as if some were masters over puppy-dogs. Loving respect
tied together with humility is what Jesus wants from all His
servants as they work together to feed the sheep and make
disciples of all nations.
GOD HAS SET SOME in the Church, "FIRST (not in rank but
function in spreading the gospel) apostles, SECONDARY (in
function in proclaiming the good news) prophets (and evangelist
added in Eph.4:11), THIRDLY (in function not rank) teachers
(pastors in general, Eph.4:11), after that miracles, then gifts
of healing, helps(deacons), governments(those with good business
and administrative skills), different tongues"(1 Cor.12:28).
A STUDY OF FUNCTIONS
In studying the Greek words and examples in the NT on the
various functions of the ministry, I believe we can come to these
basic conclusions:
1. An APOSTLE was never an office of absolute, dictatorial
authority, but was "one sent" to preach the truths of the Kingdom
of God to a large area. As such it was a calling and commission
to do God's work, not some lofty rank within the Church. Peter
was an apostle and also an elder, as was John also (1 Pet.l:l;
5:1; 3 John 1).
2. PROPHETS were either inspired fore-tellers of events(such as
Agabus in Acts 21:10-12), or powerful preachers who taught within
the Church (1 Cor.14). Prophets of the latter type are most
definitely with us today in the Church, and prophets like Agabus
will come again before this age comes to a close. Some ministers
have a special gift to understand and put together the many
prophetic passages of the Bible, that could also be classified as
fulfilling the function of prophet.
3. EVANGELISTS were ministers who primarily preached to the
UN-believers, in contrast to Prophets who mostly preached to the
believers. An "evangelist" was a minister who had been given the
special gift of inspired preaching to the public at large. He
could also be pastoring one or more churches. The man Timothy was
such a person and elder. It is obvious from Paul's writings to
him that he was pastoring at least one church, and probably more,
yet he was requested by Paul to "do the work of an evangelist"
(2 Tim. 4:5). So it is understood he had the ability to function
in that office also.
4. PASTORS and TEACHERS. Many Greek NT scholars believe this is
referring to the one office and function of the eldership in
general, who were not fulfilling any of the above specific
functions.
5. ELDERS usually meant an older person in age as well as more
mature spiritually. And though used in reference to all the
ministry, was used by Paul to connote those among the
congregation who were already elders - already doing the work of
the ministry and now should be officially ordained/appointed in
recognition of that fact (Titus 1:5).
6. DEACONS were servants of the Church to administer much, if not
all, of the physical duties (Acts 6). Great was their work and
responsibility - great was their need for wisdom and other
qualities (Acts 6:3; 1 Tim.3:813). They, like anyone else in the
body of Christ, could receive any of the gifts of the Spirit
(Acts 6:8). Though not a part of the eldership ministry, at times
and under special circumstances would receive the gift of
powerful preaching as other congregational members did (Acts
8:1,4-8,12; 11:19-22).
7. DEACONESSES as Phebe(Rom.16:1) were women who served in the
Church, not only among other women but men also and the ministers
(Rom.16:2). The Greek had no separate word for female deacons -
the one Greek word covered both sexes. Contrary to the opinion of
some who think Paul was a male sexist and "put down women" is the
fact of many verses in Paul's letters where he had nothing but
high respect for women, and commended many to different church
congregations, with loving commands that they receive them with
all honor and dignity, as faithful servants of the Church and as
co-workers with him in the gospel.
Yes, there was and is a ministry in the Church of God. A
ministry that emphasized SERVICE more than being served - gentle
encouragement more than strong rebuke. Being "helpers of your
joy" more than policemen or authoritarian rulers. A ministry that
emphasized visiting, counselling, anointing the sick, teaching
truths, preaching truths, and encouraging the brethren to remain
steadfast to the "faith once delivered" more than criticizing or
condemning.
The ministry of the Church was seen as a life time calling
or profession which God placed upon a man. The apostle John was
functioning as an Elder right up to his natural death. Of course
I say this in the context that all normal mental faculties are
working correctly. There is no teaching or example in the NT to
suggest the appointment to the Eldership was limited to just a
chosen time frame of weeks, months, or years. All natural
reading of God's word shows the latter idea, to be just that,
an "idea" from man. Unless the man clearly had dis-qualified
himself by not upholding the qualifications to Eldership
as outlined in 1 Tim.3, he was when accepting the call to
spiritual overseership within the church, accepting an
appointment for the rest of his life. His functions and work load
as an Elder could vary along the way, from MORE to LESS,
depending on the situation, his health, the needs of the
churches, and God's giving of gifts to do the work.
There were apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and
deacons, but not necessarily in that order, and not every local
church had all of those ministry functions within its membership.
An elder could have one or more FUNCTIONS at the same time!
He could be a Pastor/Teacher in a local church, and an Evangelist
at the same time. Or he may function for a time primarily as an
evangelist. A minister may function both as an Apostle and
Evangelist. Or an Apostle may function for a time as a Pastor and
Evangelist. A Pastor could also be a Prophet at times. And so it
went and so it is as the Spirit of the Lord directs and gives
gifts to men. Paul at times was functioning as an elder/pastor
in a local church, an evangelist, as well as being an apostle -
all at the same time!
No one seemed to be keeping record but God, and a few carnal
minded enemies that had it in for Paul and others. There was a
work to be done and doing it was the prime concern for the true
men of God.
Jesus, as the head of the Church would decide WHO did WHAT
and WHEN.
LIVING OFF THE GOSPEL?
A true minister of God is a man who knows he has been called
to a life long service of unselfish giving of his time, energy,
and ability, to teach the word of the Lord to others.
It is a call to be employed not of men but of God - an
employment that is really a full time job - 24 hours a day - 7
days a week if required.
His boss(Jesus) can call on him to work in pastoring,
teaching, visiting, anointing the sick, performing weddings,
conducting funerals, as well as the basics of studying the
word and prayer. All this and more he can be called upon to
perform in his duty as a servant of the Most High and as an Elder
in the Church of God.
The true servant of the Lord has not been called to the
ministry to see what physical things he can accumulate for
himself, to see how much personal wealth he can acquire for his
family from others. He is, like Paul before him, willing to give
up all for the service of Christ. He is willing to labor
abundantly, suffer persecution and imprisonment for the gospel,
face perils from every direction for the works sake, going
without many of the comforts of life if needs be, and willing to
care for the Church of God (2 Cor.11:23-28).
This is the true minister of God! A servant to the people of
God, and the slave to his master the Lord Jesus Christ. He has
been called to do a special work within the body of Christ, and
in the course of doing that work sometimes the comforts and
stability that most members of the Church experience may have to
be sacrificed.
But the question must be asked and answered: Can the servant
of the Lord LIVE OFF the people he is serving?
Paul had to answer that question for the church at Corinth.
His answer is recorded in 1 Corinthians 9:1-18. The LIVING BIBLE
gets to the heart of the truth of his words.
"I am an apostle, God's messenger, responsible to no mere
man. If in the opinion of others, I am not an apostle, I
certainly am to you, for you have been one to Christ through me.
This is my answer to those who question my rights." Some were
saying Paul had no right to live off those he served. "Or don't
I have any rights at all? Can't I claim the same privilege the
other apostles have of being a guest in your home? If I had a
wife, and if she were a believer couldn't I bring her along on
these trips just as the other disciples do and as the Lord's
brothers do? and as Peter does?" Peter and others were married.
Celibacy for the ministry as taught by the Roman Catholic Church
can not be found in the pages of the Bible. Those ministers with
wives often travelled together at the expense of the brethren.
"But must Barnabas and I alone keep working for our living,
while you supply these others?" The people at Corinth were not
against supporting in a physical way the ministers of Christ, but
they would not support Barnabas and Paul for some reason.
"What soldier in an army has to pay his expenses? And have
you ever heard of a farmer who harvests his crop and doesn't have
the right to eat some of it? What shepherd takes care of a flock
of sheep or goats and isn't allowed to drink some of the milk?
And I'm not merely quoting the opinions of men as to what is
right. I'm telling you what God's law says. For in the law God
gave to Moses He said that you must not put a muzzle on an ox to
keep it from eating when it is treading out the wheat. Do you
suppose God was only thinking about oxen when He said this?
Wasn't He also thinking about us? Of course He was! He said this
to show us that Christian workers should be paid by those they
help. Those who do the plowing and the threshing should expect
some share of the harvest. We have planted good spiritual seed in
your souls. Is it too much to ask in return for mere food and
clothing? You give to others who preach to you, and you should.
But shouldn't we have an even greater right than them?"
Paul and Barnabas were instrumental in raising up the church
at Corinth.
"Yet we have never used this right but supply our own needs
without your help. We have never demanded payment of any kind for
fear that," not that they couldn't have asked for support, but
for fear that, "if we did you might be less interested in our
message to you from Christ."
They were not willing to give to Paul and Barnabas, but as
Paul found out they were willing to give physical support to
other ministers that preached to them.
"Don't you realize that God told those working in His Temple
to take for their own needs some of the food brought there as
gives to Him? And those who work at the alter of God get a share
of the food that is brought by those offering it to the Lord. In
the same way the Lord has given orders that those who preach the
gospel should be supported by those who accept it. Yet I have
never asked you for a penny."
A true minister of God will preach the word, but will not force
or demand any physical thing from those he serves. He will work
at an other job to supply those needs if he must, as Paul did at
times. He was by physical trade a tent maker.
"And I am not writing this to hint that I would like to
start now. In fact, I would rather die of hunger than loose the
satisfaction I get from preaching to you without charge."
That is the unselfish attitude of the true minister of God.
" ..........under this circumstance, what is my pay? It is
the special joy I get from preaching the Good News without
expense to anyone, never demanding my rights."
It was right for Paul to live off the gospel, but often he
did not.
TODAY'S ARGUMENT
In certain quarters some argue that overseers/elders should
never live off the saints, but should always hold a secular job
to support themselves and their families. Often this argument is
held on to by quoting just certain verses of scripture, while
ignoring others. Much deception has been promulgated in religious
circles by so reading and teaching the Bible.
Paul certainly held a job of tent making AT TIMES, but
nowhere can we find any example or statement that Paul ALWAYS
provided for himself because he worked full time at a secular
trade or occupation. After the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, we
cannot find any statement that any of the apostles worked full
time at a secular job to support themselves and their families,
for the necessities of this physical life. Some may have
worked at a trade some of the time, or had investments they lived
off, but we cannot know that either, because the word just does
not say. One thing we are told, people did GIVE to the church,
this we can plainly see from the early chapters of the book of
Acts.
It is proper at this time in our study to answer a few
arguments, and put the record straight. Some do not like this
concept of a paid ministry, because such would single out
certain ones that could be thought of as "a class or office of
people" somehow special(whatever they mean by special) because
the church would be employing and paying them for their work,
above all the others in the church. So they either do cartwheels
with the word of God to make it try and say something it does not
say, or they just do not want to discuss the topic of "paid
ministers." To them all members are "ministers" (and I
thoroughly expound all that in part two and three of this book),
so the idea of "church employed/paid ministers" doing spiritual
work, causes a problem, for it would indeed put certain men in a
class or office different than the rest of the membership
ministers. And if all are ministers or elders, who would decide
which men would be chosen to be full time and paid by the
congregation? A lot of in-fighting, politicking, and wire
pulling(brown nosing it is also called), could go on. Many church
groups have split in two or more ways for far less wrangling.
If to solve or never have to face such a problem, you teach
there never was a paid ministry in the NT church, then we are
back to showing that argument cannot be founded upon the word of
the Lord.
Was Jesus a minister of God? Oh, you bet! Was Jesus
called, and sent by God the Father to do His work? Christ
Himself said many times that He was sent by the Father! Did
Jesus work at fulfilling that calling? Yes indeed He did, very
much so. He did it for THREE and ONE HALF years - FULL TIME!!
Jesus did not work at some secular job while being employed
in the Father's ministry for those years. Nor did the chosen 12!
Peter stated they had "forsaken all and followed you" - Jesus(see
Mat.19:27).
Even a young child reading the gospels can see that Jesus
and His 12 disciples, WERE FULL TIME IN THE MINISTRY! They lived
off those they served and whatever money or investments they had
put away, which for some of them(who were not at all wealthy)
would have been very little if any.
Concerning Jesus collecting tithe money from people. One
thing is for sure, there is NO SCRIPTURE that says He and His
band of men DID NOT collect or receive tithes. They did have a
treasure bag, Judas was keeper of it the gospels relate. Further
evidence that they MAY have collected or been given tithe money
is the fact that the people living under the Old Covenant did
believe in tithing, it was part of their heritage and culture.
Jesus would certainly have had no hesitation in accepting tithes
that some would have thought belonged to the priesthood of the
temple under the OC law, because Jesus was GREATER than the
temple. He was the God who instituted the temple laws in the
first place.
Whether or not they collected or were given tithe money at
that time is beside the point. Jesus and His band(inner core of
men) did not have secular jobs during the three plus years of
Christ's ministry. They were full time in the service of the
Lord, and lived off 1) their investments, bank accounts 2) what
people gave them in the way of food, lodging, and money.
The example of Jesus should be quite enough, all arguments
to the contrary should now come to an end, yet it does not. Some
it seems love to argue just for the sake of arguing.
What about Peter's statement in Acts that "silver and gold
have I none." How does this prove they had secular jobs and did
not live off those they served? If they had secular employment,
then Peter would have had some silver and gold in his pocket!
It is obvious the apostles DID HAVE MONEY from chapter
2:42-47 of Acts(and also chapter 4:32-37; 5:1-2). The early
disciples pooled their physical wealth and gave to each as
needed. Peter would have need, and so he would have received as
needed, for his needs as others also. His living expenses would
have been provided for. There is no record anywhere that Peter
had a secular job after the day of Pentecost in Acts 2. The
pooled wealth was for their needs so I doubt that Peter was
walking around with piles of silver or gold nuggets in his
pockets. What Peter said to the lame man was a "figure of speech"
as well as the truth of the matter. He was going to give the man
far more than anything physical silver or gold could do for him.
He was going to give him his legs in full health to walk and run
on! What a miracle in the name of Jesus. A miracle which led
Peter to preach another sermonette to the people about Christ.
Some want to argue about this "money" thing as opposed to
"food and clothes." Let me ask you: What is the difference if a
church buys houses or apartments for its full time ministers to
house them in, and pays all costs of upkeep, taxes, heating/air
condition, utilities etc. brings them boxes of food each week,
buys their clothing, gives them a car and pays their gas and
repairs, all in order for them to do a full time work in the
church, OR gives them money to have all these necessities of life
whereby they can be full time in God's work? WHAT IS THE
DIFFERENCE? It all boils down to "governments" in the church(1
Cor.12:28).
One local church may want to do it the first way mentioned
above. Another local church may decide to use the second method.
Each local autonomous church(and I do believe in local autonomy)
has the liberty to decide how they will provide the necessities
of life to their full time servers.
The last question I want to answer under this section of our
study is the question often asked today as to WHY the law of
tithing to the church of God is NOT mentioned in the NT. Why did
Paul not plainly teach and preach that Christians should now
tithe to the church of God?
The answer is found in Acts chapter 21 to 26. Paul NEVER
PREACHED AGAINST THE OLD COVENANT PER SE! None of the Jews could
find any fault with Paul, even when they had tied up and before
the courts of the land. Many IN the church were zealous for the
law! It was their liberty in Christ to so do. The Old Covenant
with the Temple PRIESTHOOD AND RITUALS was still in operation -
70 A.D. had not yet come!
Was the OC instituted by God? Sure it was! Was the laws of
the priesthood and tithing to THEM instituted by God? You bet it
was from God! 70 A.D. had not yet come. The Temple still stood,
the priesthood, rituals, and tithing to that system was STILL IN
VOGUE! People in Judah were still following those laws, and GET
THIS, MANY IN THE CHURCH WERE STILL ZEALOUS FOR THOSE LAWS(ACTS
21)!
It was within Christian liberty to keep them if you wanted
to! It was then within Christian liberty to tithe to the temple
priesthood IF YOU SO CHOSE!
That is WHY you cannot find Paul or other apostles
DOGMATICALLY preaching or teaching that the members of the church
HAD TO TITHE to the church only, for they KNEW such was not the
case!
Many scholars claim the book of HEBREWS was written shortly
before 70 AD. Paul(I believe the evidence shows Paul was the
author) knew what was going to happen in 70 AD(by inspiration and
revelation) to the Temple and Priesthood(coming to an end), and
so was able to write what he wrote in chapter 7 about tithing,
the official one priesthood that would be left, and the changes
God had made from Old to New Covenants. The changes that would
officially come to pass in 70 A.D. Paul was answering the
question about priesthood and tithing once the Old Covenant
priesthood was literally gone.
Up to 70 AD Christians were at liberty to tithe to the
Temple priesthood IF THEY WANTED for it was STILL FROM GOD! It
was still an ordinance of the Lord's that He had not yet brought
officially to an end. Paul, Peter, James, or any other apostle,
could not demand that all tithing was to go to the church, not
while the temple and its priesthood still stood. Hence they never
taught such a thing in their writings. But they did teach that
the ministers of the Lord had the authority to live off those
they served. Early in the NT church that is one of the main
reasons(what I've stated above) as to why people sold lands etc.
to meet the needs(as tithing could not be demanded to be given
to only the church) of all the members who continued to stay on
in Jerusalem, and who had no secular work there because they were
far from home and where their work was situated. Remember many
who were converted after hearing Peter's sermon had come to
Jerusalem to observe the day of Pentecost. They had come from all
parts of the Roman empire.
ATTITUDE FOR THE LAY MEMBER
What does the Lord require of the congregational member of
the Church of God?
"REMEMBER them which are the guides over you" (Heb.13:7 KJV
with margin reading).
A true servant of the Eternal God should be worth
remembering, he has been called to serve the members of the
Church and preach the truths of the word of the Lord to all who
will listen. In remembering him you remember the Lord.
Jesus said, "The laborer is worthy of his hire." The servant
of the Lord labors in the care and feeding of the flock of the
sheepfold - the children of the Lord.
Paul was inspired to write, "Let the elders that rule
well(fulfil their calling with extra care and effort) be counted
worthy of double HONOR..... for the scripture says, You shall
not muzzle the ox that treads out the corn...." (1 Tim.5:17-18).
God loves a cheerful giver! (2 Cor.9:7).
................................................
First written in 1983.
Revised and edited in 1996.
To be continued
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment