1

2

How To Be A

Christian Without

Going to Church

3

\\

“Doctrine is truth lifted from Scripture and

dedicated to purpose.”

4

Books by Dr. Bernie L. Wade

Does God Have a Name?

Baptism According to Matthew 28:19

The Next Wave – Restoration of the Charismata

I Was the Ugly Duckling

A History of Apostolic Reformation

The Biblical Marriage Manual

How to Be a Christian Without Going to Church

IS CHRISTMASs CHRISTIAN?

The Israel of God - A Destiny Enjoyed

History of the Apostolic Faith Church of God

History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World

History of the Pentecostal Assemblies of Jesus Christ

5

BOOKS BY OTHER AUTHORS

CHURCH GOVERNMENT – By Dr. Barney Phillips

The Church – Dr. Robert Straube

The Ministry – Dr. Robert Straube

________________________

Foundational Discipling Principles

Dr. Robert Straube

Ephesians 4:11-14 "And He Himself gave some [to be]

apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some

pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the

work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we

all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the

Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature

of the fullness of Christ"

Foundational Discipling Principles is now on sale on Amazon.com:

www.amazon.com/Foundational-Discipling-Principles-Robert-

Straube/dp/1615799354/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273604574&sr=1-1

6

HOW TO BE A CHRISTIAN WITHOUT GOING TO CHURCH

©2012

Dr. Bernie L. Wade

Published by Truth, Liberty and Freedom Press

P. O. Box 72

Sulphur, KY 40070

Printed in the United States of America

All Rights Reserved

7

Table of Contents

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8

Billy Graham on Going to Church .............................................................................. 12

Breaking Bread ....................................................................................................... 14

What is Church? ....................................................................................................... 20

The Church as a Building ........................................................................................... 24

The Court of the Gentiles ....................................................................................... 26

We Hold This Treasure in Earthen Vessels ………………………………………...…….. 29

The Upper Room ……………………..……………………………………………………… 35

Constantine Creates His own Church ………………………………….………………….. 40

American Pilgrims ………………………………………………………………...…………. 46

What is a Christian? ………………………..……………………………………………….60

Two Groups of Christians ………………………….……………………………………….. 65

Joining the Church ………………………………….…………………………………….…. 69

Pay to Pray …………………………………………………………………………………… 70

Be the Church …………………………………………..……………………………………. 76

Beth-EL ……………………………………….………………………………………………. 78

38000 Schisms …………………………..……………………………...…………………… 81

Reformation ………………………………..…….………………….……………………….. 82

Sola Scriptura ………………………………………………………………………………… 83

Biblical Christians ………………………………………….…………………………….. 110

Church: An American Corporation ………………………………...………………….….. 116

Sylvester Stylone on Christianity …………………….…………………………………… 117

The Lone Ranger ……………………………………………………………...…………… 118

Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………… 122

8

INTRODUCTION

“Can You Be a Christian and Not Go to Church? As

Shakespeare would say, “That is the question”. One

pastor answered the question this way, “I used to

believe, Yes indeed, you can be a Christian without

going to church. My understanding of Christianity was

you only had to believe and ‘voila!’ you were a

Christian. Therefore going to church was

unnecessary.” From this author’s perspective there

simply must be more to being a follower of Jesus Christ

than just easy believism1.

As I studied to make an appropriate answer to this

question I realized the challenge. To begin with, we

understand that there would be no Christianity without

the Church. When we use the word Church here we are not indicating any group that

claims to have a monopoly on the word or attempts to control the people of God.

Rather, we are speaking of the continuation of the ministry that Jesus Christ began

some 2000 years ago. This ministry is commonly referred to as the New Testament

Church. Thus, the Church in our references throughout this book. When Christ finished

his physical ministry on earth, He departed and left the dispensation of the good news,

the gospel, in the hands of a small band of followers. These were later called Christians

or like Christ. These we reference as Biblical Christians.

From the very beginning the Apostles, elders, the five-fold ministry and other believers

gathered together for regular worship, prayer, food and fellowship under the banner of

‘breaking bread’ (Acts 2:42). This activity took place primarily in the homes of these

early believers. While we understand that Church was very important to this initial

group of followers of Christ we must also understand that between those early

beginnings and today the concept and implementation of church has changed

dramatically. While the New Testament references only the gathering of the followers of

Jesus Christ as the Church, many historically have identified a particular denomination

or even a building as the Church.

In Jerusalem the early followers of Jesus Christ sold everything they had and gave it to

the Apostles. In the Church, the apostles were constantly devoting themselves to

prayer, together with certain women, including Mary the mother of Jesus, as well as his

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

9

brothers (Acts 1.14). These devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and

fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers (Acts 2.42). Thus, the early

Christians immediately formed gatherings in each area and met together as a matter of

course. There was no rigid ecclesiastical structure or building but the early church

gathered as an extended family of followers of Jesus Christ. These gatherings were the

function of the body of believers. These gatherings were not some effort to create an

entity, corporation or religious social order or club. The New Testament (NT) concept of

Church was not some formally incorporated entity. The NT Church was a fellowship of

followers of Christ gathering together toward their

mutual interests in completing the Great Commission

(Matthew 28:16-20). To be identified with Christ was

not vogue. To be identified with Christ was often at

the peril of one’s life.

The effort to bring continuity to this gathering of the

body of believers, designated as the Church in a

multitude of Biblical references, produced the larger

body of believers referenced as the Church. The New Testament as it has been

handed down to us was written by church leaders for instruction, encouragement, and

reproof. The earliest writings of the New Testament were written no earlier than 45 CE,

more than a decade after the implementation of the church in Jerusalem. Yet, there

was no charter, no bylaws, no formal organizational structure, no building, no

furnishings, and nothing else that we would generally identify with what most think is

part of the church. Interestingly, while we seem to have placed great emphasis on

those type things it has been said that “If Jesus came to day most churches would be

doing 95% of what they are doing on Sunday morning even without the Spirit of God”.

On the other hand the Church had a strong, vibrant and active five-fold ministry

(Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers and Evangelists) a gift from God to His body.

They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and the gift of the Spirit was operational in the

Church. This is often referred to as the Charismata and has been often replaced in the

implementation of the modern church. Many denominations do not accept the

continued use of these gifts to the Church in their operation. For more on this topic see:

The Next Wave: Restoration of the Charismata by Dr. Bernie L. Wade.

The implementation of the NT Church is as practical as A, B, C. The Church had the

directive to encourage all men to repent. After repentance they were baptized in the

name of Jesus Christ (see Acts Chapter 2:38, 39) and they expected to be “endued with

power from on high” in the manifestation of the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in an

unknown tongue as the Spirit gave them utterance. A – Repent, B- Be Baptized, C-

Receive the Holy Spirit. This simple message given by Jesus Christ in Matthew 28 and

affirmed by Apostle Peter in the presence of all the Apostles was the foundation for NT

10

believers. These Biblical Christians were the original, the true followers of Jesus Christ.

They are the pattern for us to follow. Today we have many contenders who have

formed a vast collection of religious denominations, written more creeds and issued

more religious orders than one could understand in a life time. It is evident that like the

Corinthian Church what began in the Spirit men have decided they can perfect in the

flesh (Galatians Chapter 3).

You were probably drawn to this book by the title. For most Christians the topic of being

a Christian without regular attendance at a building recognized by some denomination

as a church is somewhat taboo. You may be asking, “Is this book really about how to

be a Christian without going to church? Yes! The follow-up question then becomes,

“How is that possible?” Let me assure you this is not an effort to explain away the

contribution to the Kingdom of Jesus Christ of hundreds of millions who consider going

to a church building important. Neither is it an effort to stop people from going to church

buildings for the benefits they receive. However, it is about whether going to church is

required for one to be a Christian. Why or why not? We also want to know in what way

church is important and what is its purpose in the life of a follower of Jesus Christ.

I realize that to some, it may even be considered sacrilegious to talk about being a

Christian without going to church. For many the idea of being a Christian is solely

connected to church membership and subsequent attendance. These may be saying,

“How dare he write such a book. We all know you can’t be a Christian without going to

Church!” I imagine fundamental Christians waving their King James Version (KJV) of

the Bible at me while expressing their disgust at anyone who would write on this

subject. I understand their frustration.

Yet, when I talk to people about God, they admit this is one subject that they wish that

people (especially people who are part of the Church) would discuss. These express

great dissatisfaction and/or frustration with the Church or what offers itself as the

Church and many of these have found no solace in their church attendance or

membership. Some of these express to me that they “hate church” or “hate the church”

or that they “hate religion”. Hate seems like a

strong word, but that is the word that is

generally used. Internet blogs and forums are

full of people asking this and other similar

questions.

I wonder what these mean when they say, “I

hate the church”. Is their statement a

declaration against God? Are they opposed to

the extended family of believers in Jesus Christ

gathering to break bread? Or is their frustration

11

something else? Those that say they ‘hate church’ seem to be greatly annoyed with the

institution that the church has become rather than the message, values and

fundamental truths of the followers of Jesus Christ. Here is how one person explained

the statement:

I love Jesus, but I hate "church". I hate what "church" has become. I'm tired of being a

part of an organization that encourages people to prove how close they are to God by

staying busy teaching Bible class and volunteering to bring food to the newly bereaved.

I'm tired of having my relationship with God measured by the number of baby showers I

attend. I'm tired of showing up at the next appointed time only to sit on the pew and

struggle with knowing that there are people "out there" who won't come "in here"

because they think we're perfect and they aren't. I think busyness is numbing. I think it's

Satan's way of keeping us so in tune with what is next on the schedule that we forget to

form relationships. Meaningful relationships. Relationships that form disciples of Jesus.

Relationships that, by the grace of God, multiply the kingdom.2

Like Apostle Paul, this author confesses that after the

manner some call heresy; I worship the God of my

fathers.3 Let me make it clear that I am not against

people “going to church”. Neither are we opposed to

people having specific buildings dedicated to the

worship of God or activities that are Christ centered.

“Going to church” or going to a place people

reference as the church has been a very important

part of my life. My family and I have benefited

immeasurably from what I have learned while “going to church”. As far back as the 11th

Century my family has been actively involved in the Christian faith and faithfully serving

as ministers and subsequently going to church. Personally, I have gone to church since

I was two weeks old. As a small child I was often found asleep on the pew after the

evening service. Most of my life we have gone to church multiple times a week. So, for

our family going to church has not been some casual (twice a year) event. At our home

church there were times when we had church meetings every day for weeks. Someone

said we once had church meetings everyday for 19 weeks – continuous revival.

The challenge is what constitutes the Church and the Biblical Christian? In the 2000

years since the advent of the Church we have seen a vast transformation. There have

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

23, 2007. 3 Acts 24:14. KJV. King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way

which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: http://bible.cc/acts/24-14.htm

12

been abundant attempts (reformations or restorations) to return the Church to the

original doctrine as taught by the Apostles of Jesus Christ. The largest of these is

generally termed the Protestant Reformation. A term attributed to the ‘protest’ of these

reformers of the State approved church system(s). Today, many of these self

proclaimed reformations are little different than the groups they once protest. There has

been a pattern of groups protesting the inaccuracies of others and forming new and

reformed efforts. In the Old Testament there was a similar pattern. One king would

restore Israel to worship of the one true God and then the following ones would

gradually allow the people to fall back into idol worship. In the last 2000 years we have

repeated this familiar pattern leaving the Church in 2012 looking very little like its NT

founders and much more like its Roman contributors.

So, if the church today is not like the original, then what have we changed and why? By

what authority were these changes made? Almost everyone in the debate would agree

that Jesus Christ is the ultimate authority of the church. So, since He certainly did not

make the changes, then by whose authority were these changes made? The Apostles

gave us certain instruction on who could make such departures from the original.

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than

that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8

Every Sunday (and sometimes on weekdays) tens of millions of people go to church.

On Christmas and Easter Sunday the number of people who go to church increases

substantially. Congregations that have 100 on a normal Sunday could experience 4 or

5 hundred in attendance on Easter and Christmas Sunday. All of these, whether they

attend once or twice a year or every Sunday consider themselves Christians.

Regardless of the week of the years, at these Sunday gatherings they listen to sermons,

sing, some clap, give money, and a wide variety of other ‘Church’ activities. Those in

attendance range from active participants to observers. In most cases, observers vastly

outnumber the participants. To most of these people the idea of not going to a building

designated as the church building seems strange, foreign or even false doctrine. In

many cases, their families (like mine) have gone to a building designated for church for

generations.

When I ask people, Can you be a Christian and not go to church? They are generally

shocked or think that I am trying to trick them. Often, I am asked, “How can you be a

preacher, an apostle, a bishop (or whatever title they want to associate with me) and

even ask that question?” It is as though the very idea of being a Christian and going to

church is inseparable. Perhaps being a Christian and going to church are inseparably

connected. That is the purpose of this book. To uncover the roots of our faith and to

13

see if it is anchored in church attendance, property ownership and management or in

something far more imperative.

What I wonder aloud is why do we go to church? Again, I know that some will think that

I am offering sacrilege by questioning. I am sorry to tread on their sensitivities, but I

need to know in what it is we believe. Do we go to church simply to meet some

expectation or obligation? In whichever case what is the frequency of this obligation?

Is this a weekly obligation or just something we do for weddings and funerals and twice

a year at Christmas and Easter? Who decides or decided how often one must attend?

Do we go to church because that is what our family has done for generations? Do we

go because of peer pressure, business opportunities or appearances? Or, is there

some deeper meaning and purpose in our church going? Is being in attendance what is

important or is there some other measuring stick of our piety?

On the one hand, I am not convinced that ‘going to church’ is near as important as

‘being the church’. On the other hand, I am also not saying that one should not go to

church in the sense of attending a place called the church (building). However, what is

the meaning of all this that we are doing? Blind faith is wonderful, but purpose driven

faith seems far more effective. While I appreciate all the attention to attendance at a

building designated the church, I wonder if we have not missed something far more

important.

Billy Graham on “Going to Church”

According to Reverend Billy Graham, the 20th Century evangelist it

is possible to be a Christian without going to church. Of course

there are also many who would contend with the Evangelist that

this is not so, but let us observe his comments on the subject.

Reverend Graham was asked this question:

“I haven't been a Christian very long, and going to church is kind of

intimidating to me. In fact, I've almost quit going because I'm afraid

I'll stand at the wrong time or won't know what to say when

everyone is repeating a prayer. Can I be a Christian without going to church? — N.S.”4

Reverend Billy Graham’s answer, “It's possible to be a Christian without going to

church but you will be missing out on an important part of what God wants to do in your

life. Just as we need a balanced diet to be strong physically, so we need a balanced

"diet" to be strong spiritually—and part of that "diet" is the Church. Let me explain.

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

14

“What you have done by accepting Christ into your life is very important—in fact, it's the

most important decision you will ever make. But becoming a Christian is only the

beginning—the beginning of a whole new life with Christ. Now God wants you to grow

and become strong in your faith, so you can resist temptation and become more like

Jesus.”

“One of the ways we grow spiritually is through our fellowship and worship with other

believers—in other words, through a church where Christ is honored. Not only do we

learn from the Bible as it is taught, but we also learn from other believers who can help

and encourage us. The Bible says, Let us not give up meeting together, as some are

in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another (Hebrews 10:25).”5

It is interesting that in his response Reverend Graham makes the point that by not going

to church the follower of Jesus Christ is “missing out” on what God wants to do in

his/her life. It may seem that he is connecting the life of a believer with a church

building or this could be semantics as he never equates the building as the church. Yet,

we know in practical application that is where people go to church. Reverend Graham

does not make a distinction of being part of the church in a daily interaction like the New

Testament church would have instructed. Perhaps the change has been necessary.

How can we tell? While Reverend Graham’s point may be true in the sense that in our

culture we have made it necessary to go to church to get spiritual instruction we must

ask if it should be that way. Do we need to go to a building called the church to receive

spiritual instruction? Should we have a plethora of other methods for spiritual

instruction so that we do not miss these important things that God wants to do with our

lives?

In his answer, Reverend Graham makes a defense of the church more as an institution

as manifested in denominations rather than a defense of the Church. This should not

be surprising. Reverend Graham was raised as a Presbyterian and then ordained by

the Southern Baptist Convention.6 His response is representative of both of these

denominations (schisms) organized into separate, distinct groups. The Presbyterian

Church originated in Great Britain and the Southern Baptist Church tracing its roots also

to Great Britain but more recently to schism between them and other Baptists over

slavery; with the Southern Baptist Convention choosing to retain slavery as acceptable.

While Reverend Graham‘s response points toward participation in an organized church,

the main focus of his own ministry has been outside of the institutional church. He is

widely known for his crusades which had the support of the church but certainly are not

perceived as going to church.

5 Billy Graham.

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

15

Reverend Graham connects going to church as fulfilling Hebrews 10:25. This is his

proof text for his answer. Is this a correct application of the text? Was this passage in

Hebrews speaking about church attendance? Was the New Testament writer speaking

about going to a church building and being counted on the roles, stopping at the church

book store, getting a latte at the church coffee shop, getting your hair done at the

church beauty salon and working out in the church gymnasium, or was he speaking to

New Testament Christians who were facing persecution and encouraging them to

continue to meet in their “as likely that it means here private religious meetings, for the

purpose of mutual exhortation”.7 This is obviously important instruction being given to

the followers of Christ. So, the proper application of that instruction is important.

Breaking Bread

“Let us not give up meeting together, as some

are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage

one another.” Hebrews 10:25

From the standpoint of Scripture, the writer of

Hebrews seems to be addressing and

reinforcing that basic tenet of the early church

when they went house to house ‘breaking

bread’. "Breaking bread" was an idiomatic

phrase among the people of Israel. Indeed, it is

an idiomatic phrase among a great many

peoples of the world, both primitive and modern, both biblical and non-biblical. It is a

phrase fraught with richness of meaning, both spiritually and culturally.” 8 These Biblical

Christians used the opportunity of their family meals as an opportunity for evangelism,

fellowship, encouragement and more.

“At the same time, we must not overlook the reality that originally, and in its most

common and frequent usage, it simply referred to people eating a meal. Any deeper

significance to be associated with the partaking of food would come from the depth of

relationship of the participants and the motivation underlying the meal itself.”9 We

understand that the Biblical Christians of the New Testament were using these daily

occasions to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. There are many references to the

subject.

7 Clark Commentary. Hebrews. Pg. 523

8 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005.

9 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005.

16

“To “break bread” in Bible times referred to the eating of common meals. God once

warned His prophet Jeremiah not to “break bread for the mourner” (Jeremiah

16:7, RSV). Jesus “took bread...and broke it” with the disciples to whom He appeared

on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:30, 35). The early Christians are said to have

continued daily “breaking bread from house to house” eating “food with gladness and

simplicity of heart” (Acts 2:46). Paul once “took bread and... broke it” and instructed his

companions on board a ship to Italy to eat it for their “preservation” (Acts 27:34-

35, NASB).

In ancient times, to “break bread” was a figure of speech known as synecdoche where a

part (to break bread) was put for the whole (to eat a common meal, regardless of the

kind of food and drink consumed).”10 “For example, at the feeding of the 4000 (Matt.

15:36; Mark 8:6) we see that Jesus "directed the multitude to sit down on the ground;

and taking the seven loaves, He gave thanks and broke them, and started giving them

to His disciples to serve to them." We also see the same at the feeding of the 5000

(Matt. 14:19; Mark 6:41; Luke 9:16), where "He blessed the food and broke the

loaves ... and they all ate and were satisfied." We

understand at these occasions that Jesus was teaching,

but He took time to also address the physical needs of

His following.

At the town of Emmaus, following His resurrection, Jesus

dined with a couple of disciples, and it came about that

when He had reclined at the table with them, He took

the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began

giving it to them (Luke 24:30).”11 This took place in His

resurrected body. Giving rise too many questions about the need for food in that state.

It is evident that the breaking of bread was important to the Lord. “Later on they came

to realize that they had been dining with the Lord. They went to Jerusalem, found the

eleven and some of the other disciples, and "began to relate their experiences on the

road and how He was recognized by them in the breaking of the bread".12

This breaking of bread for the New Testament Church was not merely getting together

to eat, but it was the fellowship, encouragement and daily interaction in each other’s

lives that gave the NT Church it’s strength. The NT church was born during Roman

occupation. Assembly of large groups would have drawn suspicion but going to a

neighbor’s house for dinner was very normal. So the house to house method was an

easy path to maintain communication and fellowship while growing in strength and

10 Apologetics Press. Breaking Bread on the First Day of the Week. Eric Lyons.

11 Apologetics Press. Breaking Bread on the First Day of the Week. Eric Lyons.

12 Reflections. Breaking Bread. Meal or Memorial. Al Maxey. Issue 168. January 15, 2005.

17

number. While some have attempted to take the fact that they were sharing a meal with

each other out of the equation, this is simply not the case. Even Jesus when He was

teaching the multitudes took time to stop and feed them and it was so important to Him

that some of his greatest miracles were in these times of breaking bread.

The Methodist preacher and commentator, Adam Clarks notes about the passage from

Hebrews 10:25:

“It is evident that the Church was now in a state of persecution,

and therefore their meetings were most probably held in private.

For fear of persecution, it seems as if some had deserted these

meetings as the custom of certain persons is. They had given up

these strengthening and instructive means, and the others were in

danger of following their example.”13

So, is the instruction from the Apostle more about going to church

or about continuing to interact with and congregate with other

believers for spiritual strength? Are they the same thing? We

should realize that while we have relative freedom in many places

in the world, there are a number of countries where followers of

Jesus Christ live in circumstances similar to that of the NT church in Jerusalem. Many

followers of Jesus Christ worship in what we refer to as ‘the underground church’. For

these, this passage from Hebrews has even deeper meaning. It is difficult to continue

to break bread under circumstances where your life could be in peril, but the Apostle let

us know that this interaction was important.

In his answer to the questions about church going for Christians, Reverend Billy

Graham continues:

“Don't be embarrassed or feel awkward because you haven't been in church much;

you'll soon become familiar with its ways. And remember: You are now part of the

family of God, and no one is going to look down on you if you make an occasional

mistake.”14

Billy Graham makes good points in this response. We expect as followers of Jesus

Christ to have become part of a larger family of humankind. Those who follow Jesus

seek out the common bond we have with each other through our faith in Christ. While

we would applaud the words of encouragement, most Christians would say that the idea

that no one is going to look down on you is extremely optimistic on the part of the

Evangelist. Billy Graham also speaks about being familiar with the ways of the church.

13 Clark Commentary. Hebrews. Pg. 523

14 Graham.

Adam Clarke

18

Is this really what Jesus had expected when He left His church in the care of the

Apostles? Did he intend for the Church to be something that you had to become

“familiar with its ways” or was the interaction to be natural, dynamic and spontaneous?

Were the ways of these Biblical Christians that different than others of their day who did

not follow Christ? While the breaking of bread became a method of the New Testament

church; this was simply part of their culture that they used as an evangelism tool or a

teaching tool. This breaking of bread was not some unique concept developed by the

New Testament believers, nor something that was unique to Biblical Christians.

Breaking bread was common among the Jewish people. They fellowshipped in this

manner.

A Jewish friend of mine explained to me that this continues to be part of Jewish culture

till this very day. She said this is the guiding concept behind Jewish holidays. Jewish

holidays are a celebration of life. Somewhat tongue in cheek my friend explained it this

way, “Jewish holidays are about they tried to kill us, we survived, let’s eat!” We realized

that even a good thing can be abused and some of that may have happened, but we will

leave that for another study.

The Family of God

Learning about family on a

daily basis is how children

learn. By interaction with their

parents, siblings, and

extended family children learn

everything from talking, to

where to sit at the dinner table,

to how to interact in various

social environments and much

more. These are not foreign

to the family; they are part of

family. Families of all faiths

operate in a somewhat similar manner. So there are no apparent differences in the

ways of a follower of Christ and others. What is different is our faith in Jesus.

It is evident that going to a house does not make someone part of a family. The reality

is they were either born or adopted into their family. Birth or adoption made them

family. It is not their entrance into a house that makes them family. They may learn

how to enter the house but it does not make them part of the family or secure their place

in the family. Now it could be said that they go to their house because that is where

19

their family lives. Yet, this does not make them family; it is where their family resides. If

they leave the house and never return they do not cease to be family? This not how a

natural family operates; why should a family of Biblical Christians be any different?

What we call church in the modern world is something that is external to the family or

body of Christ. The reality is that even mature Christians would be uncomfortable in

some or even many of what we call churches. These churches are not merely

extensions of the family of God; they are social organizations under the framework of

American religious corporations. These have a plethora of rules, regulations, and

expectations not found in either general society or the bible. Followers of Christ can

find these unfriendly and unnatural. I know many people who have been asked to leave

the church because of a decision by the pastor or the board or even an usher. You

probably know someone who has faced a

similar situation. Can you imagine being

asked to leave the family? If the church is an

extension of the family of God (as some

propose) then how could anyone be asked to

leave?

Could you imagine asking your brother,

sister, father, mother, aunt, uncle, or

grandparents to leave the family? Is this

even possible? If they ‘left the family’ would they not still technically be family? I hope

that these questions sound absurd to you, because that is the environment what we call

church has fostered. In reality, if the church as we operate it is the family of God then

we are more like an orphanage or foster home than a family. Can you imagine singing

the song, “I Am Glad to Be a Part of the Family of God” like this, “I so glad to be part of

the orphanage of God!” What happened to “joint heirs with Jesus”!?

In the example given by Jesus of the Prodigal Son was there ever a moment when he

was no longer considered family? Was he ever not part of the family even though he

was no longer in attendance for family events and the traditional Sabbath get-together?

The answer is no, this was not the case. The Prodigal Son was part of the family

whether or not he was in attendance. Even though he had left the family home, left the

father who loved him, left friends and no longer participated in the family get-togethers

he was still part of the family. The father never asked or encouraged him to leave.

20

“And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather

together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the

prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased,

the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.

Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is

ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner

offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent,

saying Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over

which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by

the deacons. And they who are well to do, and willing, give what each thinks fit;

and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans

and widows and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want,

and those who are in bonds and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a

word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the day on which we all

hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having

wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ

our Savior on the same day rose from the dead.”

– Justin Martyr c.155AD

21

22

Family has always been part of the plan of God. Long before He gave imprimatur to the

New Testament (NT) Church He designed the family. Family is the beginning. In Eden

God forms the first family. From this the family becomes the cornerstone of civilization.

God never changed His mind on the importance of the family. The idea of Church was

not some foreign idea but rather it was to be an extended family (a gathering) with

common interest being those who were born of the water and of the Spirit and thus

becoming part of the family. This was as spiritual restoration of the natural family.

There was no original intent or design for a long process to become part of the family

but rather like joining a natural family it was to be by birth. In this later case it was

through commitment and actions that constitute new birth.

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except one be born of water and the Spirit,

he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God!"

2000 years after Jesus Christ said, “It is finished”, we are in a quandary about, “What is

church?” This seems like an easy question. The sort of question one might answer in a

simple sentence, or a word or two. Some might ask the question as “What is a

church?” What is a church and what is church could result in at least two different

answers. “A church is a building in which Christians meet for worship,” is one obvious

possibility. “A church is a group of Christians who gather for religious purposes” is

another. A critic of Christianity might says, “A church is a club for insiders and

23

hypocrites.”15 Further inquiry will reveal that this is not a simple issue and there are a

plethora of answers that are perceived to be correct on the subject.

Some religious groups claim that only their particular group is the one true church; thus

placing all other groups as illegitimate. This would include the Roman Catholic Church

(RCC) with a billion adherents which postulates that all other Christians have come out

from their ‘one true universal church’.16 They reference their group as the “one, true,

catholic and apostolic church” and call these words the “four marks of the church”.17

While there is little doubt that Jesus intended for his church to be all of those things:

holy, universal, apostolic and one; there are more than 38,000 Christian denominations

and many of them claim they are the only legitimate one!18 In direct contrast many

groups, most notably the Wisconsin Synod Lutheran’s claim that their religious group is

the one true one and that the Pope (leader of the RCC) is the Antichrist. From their

vantage point this doctrinal positions not only positions them as the true church but puts

the (RCC) in the position of being in support of the enemies of the cross.

The RCC not only claims to be the only church they

make it quite clear that they hold contempt for

Protestant congregations (like the Wisconsin Synod)

and do not even consider them part of the church. To

this end the RCC proclaims to all groups who do not

answer directly to the Pope and the RCC, “These

ecclesial communities which, specifically because of the

absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not

preserved the genuine and integral substance of the

Eucharistic mystery cannot, according to Catholic

doctrine, be called churches in the proper sense.”19 This

has prompted some Protestants in the last 50 years to seek out the imprimatur of the

Pope to bring some perceived legitimacy to their group. However, the RCC does not

find its beginning in Jerusalem but in Rome.

According to the RCC’s Vatican II Counsel, “membership in the Catholic Church is

necessary for salvation.”20 The RCC further asserts, “This has been stated numerous

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

16 Catholic Church Alone is One, True, Catholic Church says Vatican Congregation. Catholic Online.

www.catholic.org 17

Wikipedia. The Four Marks of the Church. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Marks_of_the_Church 18

Wikipedia. List of Christian Denominations. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations 19

Catholic Church Alone is One, True, Catholic Church says Vatican Congregation. Catholic Online. www.catholic.org

Opening ceremony of the Roman Catholic Church Vatican II Counsil

24

times from the Bible (Acts 4:12) and Tradition (Unam Sanctam). No one can be saved

apart from the Catholic Church.”21 The Scriptural text is correct but the application is a

huge stretch.

While this may seem extreme, nearly every Christian denomination or group asserts the

same thing; that heaven is predicated (in some form or fashion) on membership in their

group. In contrast to the idea of the authority of the RCC some Christian denominations

make statements like, "The Bible is the only God-given authority which man possesses;

therefore, all doctrine, faith, hope, and all instruction for the church must be based upon,

and harmonize with, the Bible."22

Despite the corporate efforts of the RCC, which is the largest

religious body in the World, it is doubtful that anyone reading

this book is surprised that the explanation of what the church

is has hundreds of answers. Could Jesus have intended for

His Church to be so confusing? Or have men just gotten us

so far from the original plan that we have become

disoriented? It is interesting that when we asked people

about their perceptions of the NT Church that there is

general agreement among ministers and laypersons alike

that the Biblical Christians met in houses, synagogues and

even in Temple (Herod’s Temple or the Second Temple at

Jerusalem). While this is the general perception the questions remains, “Is it true?” It is

interesting that what is often generally believed among us is not necessarily the truth of

the matter.

“The New Testament does reference the Church in Jerusalem meeting together in a

public space (e.g., the outer court of the temple in Acts 2:46) and in smaller groups in

houses (e.g., the house of Mary, mother of Mark, in Acts 12:12). This practice must

have been carried on in many cities of the Roman Empire. For the most part, the

church was dependent on members or supporters (patrons) who owned larger houses,

providing a place for meeting. In Rome, there are indications that early Christians met

in other public spaces such as warehouses or apartment buildings. Even when there

20 Cfr. Leo XIII, Epist. Apost. Praeclara gratulationis, 20 iun. 1894; AAS 26 (1893-94) p. 707. Cfr. Leo XIII,

Epist. Encycl. Satis cognitum, 29 iun. 1896: ASS 28 (1895-96) p. 738. Epist. Encycl. Caritatis studium, 25 iul. 1898: ASS 31 (1898-99) p. 11. Pius XII, Nuntius radioph. Nell'alba, 24 dec. 1941: AAS 34 (1942) p. 21. 21

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

Meet the United Pentecostal Church International, p. 46

25

were several meeting sites in a city, the Christians had the sense of being one

church.”23

Today, most people equate the church building with going to church. This perception

was begun by the RCC. As an approved state religion of the Roman Empire the RCC

was afforded a unique place in history. Like Judas these leaders were willing to do

what they needed to accomplish their agenda. The RCC had the imprimatur of the

Roman Emperor, the finances and military assistance of the Roman Empire and the use

of facilities controlled by the Empire including a plethora of temples formerly dedicated

to a pantheon of pagan deities such as Mithras and others. Did Jesus intend for Biblical

Christians to build a large collection of buildings that we call the church? Or did he

intend something quite different?

The Church as a Building

“On Reformation Sunday it is common for many

Protestant Churches to sing Martin Luther's wonderful

hymn, "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God." A portion of

those words:

A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never

failing; our helper he amid the flood of mortal ills

prevailing. For still our ancient foe doth seek to

work us woe; his craft and power are great, and

armed with cruel hate, on earth is not his equal.

But I think if we in the Western Church in the 21st century were honest, we would admit

that we treat our church buildings more like a mighty fortress than the God in whom we

trust in all times and places and circumstance..”24 Most people driving by a cathedral or

modern place of worship would call the building “the church” or ‘a church’. These are

both indications that the building is identified as the church. If riding in a taxi cab in a

modern city one may get the cab driver to point out “the church” or more likely

“churches” as in most cities in the Western world we have a collection of buildings that

we refer to as churches from a variety of different denominations. While we recognize

that this is merely a building called the church, the idea of the church as a building is

definitely part of our culture.

23 Why and when did Christians Start Constructing Special Buildings for Worship? Everette Fergusson.

Christian History. 24

The Church Has an Ediface Complex. Alan D. Bevere.

26

When I was in London (UK) some years ago the cab driver was pointing out various

sites of interest and then he said, “There is the gay church”. When I looked I instantly

knew, because of their red doors, that this was an Anglican (Episcopalian in America)

building. The cab driver had connected the Anglican’s encouraging people who are

homosexuals to serve as ministers with the place they hold as the church and thus the

reference to that being the gay church. How sad it was to me that common people

referred to the church as a building and in this case associated some of this particular

denominations failed policies with their membership and buildings.

We should ask, how did this idea of the church as a building become a part of our

common understanding? “Among first century Greeks the word "church" had nothing to

do with a structure used for religious purposes. In fact, it had nothing to do with

religion.”25 Its literal meaning was of people in groups, gathered together for a common

purpose. So a church was a gathering of people. There were various kinds of

churches. A city council meeting would be a "church" of citizens gathered to consider

matters of public concern. Calling religious-purpose buildings "churches" began about

the fourth century of our Christian era.26

For the first three centuries of the New

Testament church there is no reference to or

reason to believe that they had buildings

dedicated solely to activities for or referred

to as a church or the church building. Some

have reasoned (and have it as part of the

tenets of their denomination) that early

Christians met in Jewish temples or

synagogues they simply have not thought

this through or referenced the historical facts

on the subject. Most Christians agree that

the early church met in the Temple and in

synagogues even though there is no Scriptural or historic evidence for such claims.

We know assuredly that early Christians met in homes. There is reference to meeting

in public places such as the Outer Court of the temple. This later reference has given

rise to the idea that the New Testament church met in Jewish synagogues and in the

Temple in Jerusalem. Certainly, to the uninitiated this reference sounds like the

Christians were meeting in the Temple. Yet in reality, nothing could be farther from the

truth.

25 The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

26 The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

Model of the Temple

27

During the first century (before the advent of the ministry of Jesus Christ) King Herod

enclosed the outer court of the Temple with colonnades. This area was referred to as

the Outer Court. “Gentiles" (non-Jews) were permitted to enter the Temple area; but

they were never allowed entrance into the Temple itself. They could walk within this

area, but they were forbidden to go any further than the outer court.27 This was not a

small thing. Separation was an integral part of the Jewish culture. Among the Jewish

people there was great segregation. Their culture was segregated by gender, birth

right, interpretation of the Torah, religious faction, financial status, tribes, families,

occupation, race and more. There were 10 gates to enter the area of the Outer Court.

Women were only allowed to enter through one of them.

Women had their own area in the Outer Court called the Court of the Women. "The

length of the Women's Court was a hundred thirty-five cubits, and the breadth a

hundred thirty-five cubits. And there were four chambers in the four corners of it, each

forty cubits, but not roofed."28 In traditional Judaism, women are for the most part seen

as separate but equal. Women's obligations and responsibilities are different from

men's, but no less important.29

The Court of the Gentiles

27 The Outer Court. http://www.newjerusalemcommunity.net/?c=54&a=2188

28 Ezekiel 46:21, 22

29 Judaism 101. The Role of Women.

28

The Court of the Gentiles area was primarily a bazaar, with vendors selling souvenirs,

sacrificial animals, food, as well as currency changers, exchanging Roman for Syrian

money because the Jews were not allowed to coin their own money and they viewed

Roman currency as an abomination to the Lord, as also mentioned in the New

Testament account of Jesus and the Money Changers. Guides that provided tours of

the premises were also available. Jewish males had the unique opportunity to be shown

inside the temple itself, but not Jewish women. This fact alone shows the impossibility

that a diverse group of men and women met in the Temple in some ‘Christian’ service or

meeting.

The Kohanim (Priests), in their white linen robes and tubular hats, were omnipresent,

directing pilgrims and advising

them what kinds of sacrifices

were to be performed. Behind

one as they entered the Court of

the Gentiles was the Royal

Portico, which contained a

marketplace, administrative

quarters, and a synagogue as

well. On the upper floors,

the great Jewish sages held

court, Cohanim

and Levites performed various

chores, and from there tourists were able to observe the events. To the east of the

court was the Portico of Solomon, and to the north, the Soreg, a giant stone structure

separating the public area from the area where only Jews could enter. Within the Soreg

was the temple itself.30

There is a general idea that the New Testament Church was meeting in the Temple.

This would be the Second Temple not the one built originally by Solomon. This is

simply not close to being true. The disciples were hated throughout the realm by

Jewish people. They were not meeting in their places of worship. Yet the perception

exists that the followers of Jesus were meeting in synagogues.

An example of this is that some years ago we had a meeting on Pennsylvania Avenue

in Washington DC. In fact at one time our ministry had an office on Pennsylvania

Avenue in Washington, DC. Because of this some people assumed that we had some

close connection with the US leadership or at least had access to them. Some might

even associate our meeting in such a place as we had a meeting at the White House

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

29

but that would also not be true. We didn’t meet at the White House, Congress or with

any member of the US Congress. The fact is it is unlikely to think that they even knew

we were there even though we were in close proximately to where they meet. It is true

that the White House is on the same street as our office, but the similarities end there.

Even if the New Testament had met in some synagogue it holds no value. The

synagogues were merely places for meeting. They were not considered particularly

holy.

Like my Pennsylvania Avenue example, the Outer Court was nearby the Temple and

the outer court but access was provided to nearly everyone not just a privileged group.

Yet, most of those gathering in the outer court had nothing to do with the activity of the

Temple. The Outer Court was known as the Court of the Gentiles because Gentiles

were allowed no further into the Temple area.31 Now, the reference to the New

Testament believers gathering in the Outer Court is not without significance. To the

contrary, it is most significant. It shows clearly that these followers of Christ even

though they were Jews were held in contempt by other Jews and were considered no

different than Gentiles. Like Gentiles they were permitted in the Outer Court their

entrance into the Temple for the worship of Jesus Christ was not tolerated. The idea

that the early church was having their meeting in the Temple or that the Upper Room

was in the Temple is based in fantasy. As a

popular commercial says, “It sounds good if you

don’t think about it.”

“According to Jewish Law, men and women

must be separated during prayer, usually by a

wall or curtain called a mechitzah32 or by

placing women in a second floor balcony. There

are two reasons for this: first, your mind is

supposed to be on prayer, not on the pretty girl praying near you. Second, many pagan

religious ceremonies at the time Judaism was founded involved sexual activity and

orgies, and the separation prevents or at least discourages this activity. Interestingly,

although men were not permitted to see women during prayer, women were permitted

to see men during prayer. This seems to reflect the opinion that women are better able

32 The Mechitzah is a divider separating the men's and women's sections of the

synagogue. The fundamental principle of prayer is to establish a relationship between

one's self and G-d. The social dimension and distraction which sometimes accompanies

mixed groups is therefore eliminated. In some synagogues instead of a mechitzah,

there is a separate women's balcony.

30

to concentrate on prayer with an attractive member of the opposite sex visible.”33 “The

combination of this exemption from certain mitzvot and this separation often has the

result that women have an inferior place in the synagogue.”34 This is not to indicate that

women are mistreated rather, “women are not obligated by Jewish law to attend formal

religious services, and cannot participate in many aspects of the services.”35 This is

quite surprising to many but is a point that brings greater clarity to a number of

passages in the NT.

To think that the early church was meeting in the Temple or having their services in

Jewish synagogues would have necessitated that the women be excluded from

meetings like the Upper Room where Scripture tells us there were about 120 men and

women gathered together. It is evident that the facts do not support the notion that

there were men and women gathered together praying out loud in some Jewish

Synagogue in Jerusalem. The Upper Room was obviously some building (probably a

home) where the disciples had access either because the home belonged to a believer

or they rented the space for the occasion.

We Hold This Treasure in Earthen Vessels

While much is made in the modern era of going to

church this is a custom borrowed from the pagans. In

ancient times it was the pagans who visited their

temples while followers of Jesus Christ, according to

the New Testament, met in houses. The attempt to

connect this weekly worship with the worship in the

Temple or Tabernacle is ill conceived. The keeping of

the Sabbath was not done by visiting the temple. The

Sabbath was kept at home. There is little doubt that

the early church continued this tradition and no doubt

incorporated the worship of Jesus Christ into their

Sabbath worship. However, this tradition was only

kept by Jewish converts as Gentile converts held no such traditions.

None of the New Testament church had a shrine or temple. Many are unaware that

even the Jewish Temple (the Second Temple) was only a façade. When Jesus was on

the cross the veil of the Temple was ripped in two. This revealed the hypocrisy of those

who hid from the people that there was no Ark of the Covenant in the Temple. The

33 Judaism 101. The Role of Women.

34 Judaism 101. The Role of Women.

35 Judaism 101. The Role of Women.

31

expectation of the people in the First Temple was the continuation of the presence of

God from the Tabernacle in the Wilderness would continue in the Temple because of

the Ark of the Covenant.

In the rebuilding of the Temple there was no Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the

Covenant had been carried away by Nebuchadnezzar and never recovered. Since it

was between the cherubim of the Ark that God had promised to dwell the idea of the

Temple in Jerusalem being the dwelling place of God was a popular myth, not a reality.

Because of the obvious ease of the Ark being lost, God’s gift to mankind of the Holy

Spirit dwelling in man was a welcome upgrade from the vulnerability of the Ark of the

Covenant.

“The Ark could not be found when the Jewish people rebuilt the Temple at the time of

Ezra and Zechariah.”36 “Thus, the Holy

of Holies in the Second Temple was an

empty chamber, without the Ark of the

Covenant. When the Roman General

Pompey conquered Jerusalem around

63 B.C., he demanded the privilege of

entering the Holy of Holies. When he

did, he came out saying that he could

not understand what all the interest was

about the sanctuary, when it was only

an empty room.”37

The last mention of the Ark of the Covenant in Scripture was King Josiah of Judah

ordered the caretakers of the Ark of the Covenant to return it to the temple in Jerusalem

(2 Chronicles 35:1-6; cf. 2 Kings 23:21-23). Forty years later, King Nebuchadnezzar of

Babylon captured Jerusalem and raided the temple. Less than ten years after that, he

returned, took what was left in the temple, and then burnt it and the city to the ground.

The veil being torn from top to bottom at the time of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a

fact of history. The profound significance of this event is explained in glorious detail in

Hebrews. The things of the temple were shadows of things to come, and they all

ultimately point us to Jesus Christ. He (not a man made curtain) was the veil to the

Holy of Holies, and through His death the faithful now have free access to God.

Likewise we (the people of God) comprise the Church and God did not intend for us to

return our focus to a building.

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

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

32

The veil in the temple was a constant reminder that sin renders humanity unfit for the

presence of God. The fact that the sin offering was offered annually and countless

other sacrifices repeated daily showed graphically that sin could not truly be atoned for

or erased by mere animal sacrifices. Jesus Christ, through His death, has removed the

barriers between God and man, and now we may approach Him with confidence and

boldness (Hebrews 4:14-16).

'Like most new ‘religions’ the New Testament believers had no houses of worship, nor is

there any record that they sought to have buildings. Buildings would have required

finance that they did not have in order to build and maintain. Additionally for a

persecuted Church as the New Testament Church was, to have buildings would have

made them more predictable and vulnerable. The emphasis of the New Testament

Church was on people. Unlike their forefathers they were not seeking a temple made

with hands or a Tabernacle in the Wilderness, but they held interest only in the treasure

they held in earthen vessels.

“But we have this treasure in earthen vessels that the Excellency of the power may be

of God, and not of us. We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed; we

are perplexed, but not in despair; Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not

destroyed; Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life

also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body. For we which live are alway

delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest

in our mortal flesh. So then death worketh in us, but life in you.”38

When asked, most people will indicate that they thought the New Testament church met

in the Temple or in Jewish synagogues. This is really a laudable notion that has been

passed down to us through tradition and by

imprimatur of the RCC. The history revision that

accompanies this notion is a work of art.

However much this concept is liked is not the

point. This notion is not what Scripture records

nor, for those who think about it, does it make

any sense.

First, in Jerusalem there was little space given

to anyone who did not worship the one true God

and while followers of Jesus Christ know that

He is the one true God, those in power in

Jerusalem did not share this view. Neither the

Jews or nor the Romans were going to welcome a new religion. There was a great deal

38 KJV. Cambridge Edition. 2 Corinthians Chapter 4.

Temple to Mithras at Hadrian’s wall in the United Kingdom

33

of political unrest in Jerusalem and there was little tolerance for religious zealots. Even

the Romans who occupied the land did not have a building that they could call a true

temple. They were not worshippers of the one true God they primarily worshipped

Mithras. There were temples to Mithras built in other places by Roman soldiers, like in

Scotland near Hadrian’s wall where the remains of a temple built by the Roman to

Mithras still stands; but not in Jerusalem. The idea of a temple to another entity would

have had the potential to cause the people to riot and the Roman directed government

was cautious not to incite the people over something like which god they worshipped.

The Romans were fairly tolerant of other religions but the Jews were a special case and

the wanted no trouble. Under these circumstances, how could an upstart group of

people expect to have a building for worship when even the rulers of the world had no

designated house in Jerusalem for their idols? “The early

Christians were small in number and often persecuted, so

they couldn't build special buildings for their own use.

Instead, they used whatever buildings were available to

them when they came together - private homes, public

halls).”39

Secondly, it would have been wonderful if the Jewish

synagogues had been among those buildings that were

made available to the New Testament believers for worship.

Synagogues were religious clubs much like our modern

churches. These synagogues had very particular rules

about membership and the use of their facilities. No doubt,

some of the Biblical Christians held membership in these synagogues previous to their

conversion to following Jesus Christ. As such, these members held access to the

synagogue and we have record of some of them using their access for debating with

others. However, to expect they would be allowed to openly worship Jesus Christ at

such a place is not likely. It would be about as likely as a large, black, Southern Church

allowing the Klu Klux Klan to hold a meeting in their building. Anything could happen,

but it is highly improbable. To expect this to have been some kind of norm is unrealistic.

There is simply no evidence that such was the case and when you think about it you

can readily realize that such availability would not have been offered. What

synagogues there were would NEVER have allowed followers of Jesus Christ to meet

there. We need to realize that from the perspective of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish

Supreme Court, Jesus Christ was a criminal convicted by their counsel of 71 men of

“Blasphemy”. Not just any form of Blasphemy. The Sanhedrin convicted Jesus of

39 Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. Billy Graham’s My Answer.

http://www.billygraham.org/articlepage.asp?articleid=3566

34

claiming that He was God. The leader that represented all the Jewish religious system,

the High Priest, rent his clothes in protest to Jesus Christ. We might notice that Jesus

Christ ‘returns the favor’ by rending the veil in two. Remember, Jesus was crucified not

for proclaiming to be a son of God. This would have been a general reference which

would not have been generally offensive. Jesus is crucified because He proclaims that

he is “I AM” a reference to God speaking to Moses and clearing meaning that He was

God. For this offense the Jewish court found him guilty of blasphemy.

Mark 14:61: "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One? Then Jesus

answered, ‘I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the

Power."

Jesus is asked if He was the promised Messiah; when God would come in the flesh.

Under Jewish law this was a crime that was punishable by death. Generally the guilty

person would be stoned. Under Roman law the guilty would be crucified. The

synagogues that were in Jerusalem represented the Jewish religious system with the

Temple being their most Holy place. None of the leaders of this network of nearly 500

synagogues would have allowed the followers of someone condemned of blasphemy to

hold services in His name in their synagogues. The name of Jesus Christ for followers

of Judaism was anathema40. An example of this: For those of us who live in the United

States it would be like a lower court defying the Supreme Court of the United States.

Thus, as Scripture plainly states, the New Testament believers went from house to

house. They had no ‘church’ buildings. Now, make no mistake, this is not a treatise

against having a special building. If a group of people is blessed enough to have a

separate building that they meet in a couple of times a week solely for worship, that is

certainly wonderful, but the New Testament Church had no such expectation or

requirement. The idea of a separate building only for worship was completely foreign to

them. They worshipped in the way they conducted their everyday lives. Their homes

were dedicated to God. Their very lives were an expression of living for Christ. Christ

Jesus had instructed them to live for Him. As part of their continued heritage they held

their most important religious services not at the Temple or a synagogue, but at their

homes.

There was no substitute for the temple for Jewish believers. The local synagogue was

not a replacement for the Temple. There was only one Temple and if they did not know

it before, they certainly did after the crucifixion; the temple was only a pretense, a form

of Godliness. These Biblical Christians were not looking for a building or seeking to

40 Meriam-Webster Dictionary. Anathema: a ban or curse solemnly pronounced by ecclesiastical

authority and accompanied by excommunication. In the case of Jesus Christ he was summarily executed.

35

build a temple. They were looking for a building not made with hands, eternal in the

heavens.

“For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a

building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we

groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: If so

be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do

groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that

mortality might be swallowed up of life. Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame

thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.” (2 Cor. 5:1).

The New Testament believers relying on their faith in Jesus Christ and understanding

that they held this treasure not in the Temple and not in a substitute building for the

Temple like a synagogue held that they were the Temple of God. The Aramaic Bible in

Plain English (©2010) says it this way:

“Do you not know that you are the Temple of God,

and that The Spirit of God dwells within you?”

The economy in Jerusalem was difficult, taxes were

high41 and the land was under Roman rule. In order

to give even a little relief to their economic plight the

Jerusalem followers sold everything they had and

brought it to the Apostles in the expectation that

living in a communal environment would relieve

some of the burdens. This worked for the New

Testament church in Jerusalem. However, there is

no evidence that this pattern was repeated in other

places as the church expanded.

This author is not so naïve to suggest that we all

return to communal groups like the church in Jerusalem. We, especially Americans, are

like the rich young ruler, too focused on what we have to consider such a notion. Most

Americans are not willing to be slightly inconvenienced in such a manner. As a chief in

an African village related to me, “In America you live as individuals; in Africa we live as

family.” In the New Testament times, these Biblical Christians lived as family. It was in

this communal environment that the early church nurtured its fledgling following, grew,

expanded and flourished. This simple model of living for Christ and living as followers

41 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar

Augustus that all the world should be taxed.

36

of Christ was a lifestyle that they lived 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. There was

no idea of ‘going to church’ like the pagans or ‘going to temple’ like some Jewish

people. These New Testament believers simply were the church. They lived as the

church in their daily activities and lives. They gathered wherever there was a place to

gather, a home, a market or in the outdoors. Later, it would be the pressure and

influence of the Greeks and pagans to bring ‘legitimacy’ to these followers of Christ by

them having their own temples. It seems strange that there would be pressure to be

perceived as being ‘legitimate’. Yet, peer pressure is a powerful thing.

The Upper Room

After the departure of Christ the disciples almost

immediately go to the now famous “Upper Room”.

This Upper Room was most likely in the home of one

of the disciples.42 The Upper Room was not as the

RCC has attempted to offer, some palace or grand

place. It was humble, simple and normal to the

lifestyle of the everyday follower of Christ. Later, the

RCC would make the claim that the upper room was

also the site where the Last Supper took place and

was in the Cenacle.43 The RCC claims that this

structure ‘miraculously survived’ the destruction of

Jerusalem in 70 AD. This is a great fairy tale offered

by the Catholics as not only did the Apostles not use

such a grand place; the real upper room (wherever it

was) was destroyed in 70 AD by the Roman Army. All the historians of the day

(especially Tacitus and Josephus) record that not only was Jerusalem totally destroyed

but that they even used plows to plow the ground where the city stood.44 The historian

Josephus wrote this:

“That there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been

inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that

were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among

all mankind.”

We are left with a choice to believe the historians who were there or to believe the

revisionist account changed to make a religious system seem more viable or relevant.

42 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page 364.

43 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cenacle

44 Josephus. Wars of the Jews. XX. Chapter VIII. Chapter 5.

37

The RCC claims that the original structure was a synagogue and used by the followers

of Christ on the day of Pentecost. This is another fabrication. As we have discussed

Judaism regarded Jesus as a heretic, they had just crucified him and His followers were

certainly not going to be welcomed to tarry in one of their synagogues for the better part

of two weeks (through at least 1 or perhaps 2 Sabbaths) to wait for the promise from

what in the minds of more Jews was a false Messiah, a charlatan, a fake.

The RCC has offered this answer as part of

vast history revision they have propagated

on the rest of the world. Scripture records

that the activity in this upper room was one

of prayer with both men and women

participating. This was an innovation that

was simply not allowed in the synagogue. It

is uniquely Christian and just like Apostle

Paul said, “In Christ there is neither male nor

female.”

“For as many of you as have been baptized

into Christ have put on Christ. There is

neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond

nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”45

Yet from the inception of the Church there is strong representation of a plan to not just

spiritually establish the Church in Jerusalem but also legally. It was not among the

disciples merely that he stood, but among the whole company, which amounted to one

hundred and twenty. “It is remarkable that this was the number which the Jews required

to form a council in any city; and it is likely that in reference to this the disciples had

gathered together, with themselves, the number of one hundred and twenty, chosen out

of the many who had been already converted by the ministry of our Lord, the twelve

disciples, and the seventy-two whom he had sent forth to preach (Luke 10:1). Thus,

they formed a complete council in presence of which the important business of electing

a person in the place of Judas was to be transacted.”46

Later, the legitimacy of the original church with its seat in Jerusalem was transferred to

Rome by the strength of an Empire, not by the will of God or the power of the Holy

Spirit. There was no transfer of leadership, lineage of leaders or a plethora of other

dogmas offered as the reasons we should be inclined to believe those who pretend to

be the continuation of the Jerusalem Church.

45 KJV. Cambridge Edition. Galatians Chapter 3.

46 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page. 365-6.

World’s Largest Synagogue

In New York, USA1

38

The Synagogue

There were nearly 500 synagogues in Jerusalem at the time of Christ and none of them

would allow a woman to pray openly in their synagogue. Women were not allowed at all

in the Temple. At synagogue women were forced to sit in their own section separate

from the men.48 And the women in the

upper room were evidently not in some

serene prayer as the noise of the Upper

Room experience was spread throughout

the city.

“These continued in prayer and

supplication”.49 This inference is not just

simply in prayer. “Prayer may simply imply

any address to God, in the way of petition or

request; supplication, the earnest,

affectionate, and continued application to

God for the blessing requested from him by

prayer. Prayer asks, supplication expostulates, entreats, urges and re-urges the

petition.”50 It is of note that there is only one synagogue that historians agree visible

today that dates from the first century; this is the building excavated at Masada.51 In

those days, “any qualified Jewish man could read from the Scripture as Jesus is

recorded doing in the Scripture.52

The word synagogue comes from a Greek root meaning "assembly” (The most widely

accepted term for a Jewish house of worship. The Jewish equivalent of a Catholic

church, mosque or temple) has come to mean a building. Yet, the original Jewish idea

was for this to be a school or a place of study not a temple like the pagans. For Jewish

believers there was only one Temple, but after the destruction of the temple and the

subsequent return from Babylon Jewish people began building substitute ‘temples’.

This infuriated (and still does) Orthodox Jews as they see no substitute for the Temple

and prefer the term synagogue.53 So, like the migration of the followers of Christ who

started as a family meeting in their tents and houses, the Jewish people migrated to

adopting the pagan idea of a building as a place to meet God. Unlike Church buildings

48 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996.

49 KJV. Acts. 1:14

50 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page 365.

51 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996.

52 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996.

53 Judaism 101. http://www.jewfaq.org/shul.htm

Ancient Synagogue in Capernium

39

the Synagogue is the center of the community rather than merely a proposed house of

worship as adherents to Judaism live their lives around the tenets of their religion.

The Jewish synagogue was not birthed from Scriptural context. Some expect that all

things from ancient Judaism are somehow God ordained, but that is certainly not the

truth. The synagogue is an innovation borrowed from the pagans. Like the idea of

putting the Ark of the Covenant on a cart, Jewish captives returning from Babylon

decided to build their own dedicated places. These were not places of worship as no

place could usurp the Temple. The Jews had learned this idea from the multiplicity of

temples to various gods in Babylon and brought the idea to Jerusalem in the 6th Century

BC.54 These synagogues were divided up by class with the wealthy having separate

synagogues from the poor or the servants.55

There was even a separate synagogue for the

slaves so that the wealthy class of patrons did

not have to go to their synagogue with them.

As they expanded the New Testament Church

continued to meet in more homes such as

Philemon whom Apostle Paul addresses in a

letter to him and the Church that is in his

house indicating that there was a group of

believers that met in the home of Philemon.

Evidently, Philemon had enough resources to host a gathering of believers in his home.

This was the church. Throughout history there have been others who have used this

same simply New Testament model with great success. Among these would be Francis

Schaeffer.56

“Nowhere in the Bible is the place where Christians meet referred to as a “church.” This

word appears around 75 times in our English Bibles, depending on the translation

(around 110 times if you include the plural). In almost every instance “church” is a

translation of the Greek ekklesia (from which we get words like “ecclesiastical” and

“Ecclesiastes”). Never does ekklesia refer to a building in which people gathered, for

worship or for any other purpose.

Ironically, one might say the same thing for the use of the word ekklesia in the Greek

translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, abbreviated as LXX). This word

appears about 100 times in the LXX, almost always translating the Hebrew term qahal.

Both words, ekklesia and qahal, have the basic meaning of “assembly” or “gathering.”

54 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996.

55 The Bible Knowledge Accelerator. 1995-1996.

56 http://www.labri.org/history.html

Modern day women at the “Wailing Wall”.

40

They can be used to describe a gathering for religious purposes, but the words

themselves don’t have religious connotations. They need something like “of the Lord” to

make the religious setting clear. “In Rome, there are indications that early Christians

met in other public spaces such as warehouses or apartment buildings.”57 The Roman

followers of Jesus also met in the Catacombs.

So, if “church” in English always suggests something religious, whether buildings or

gatherings of people or organizations, and ekklesia does not have this meaning in the

time when the New Testament was written, then translating ekklesia by “church” almost

certainly leads to some level of misunderstanding on the part of the reader. When it

comes to the vocabulary of the New Testament, truly “a church is not a church.”58

From our modern perspective, where most people closely associated a building as the

church, the fact that the association of a separate building for church meetings has

historically been the exception is hard to imagine. Yet, for nearly three centuries there

were no ‘church’ buildings.

As some early church congregations grew they began to remodel homes to

accommodate more people. “One example of this is the famous home of Dura-Europos

(AD 232) in modern Syria, which is the earliest identifiable Christian meeting place. It

was a private home remodeled by removing one interior wall, so that it could hold about

70 people.”59 While most followers of Christ were focused on living for him and

gathering together with friends and neighbors for fellowship, encouragement,

impartation and spiritual strength there were others who were seeking ways to control

the church. The Roman Emperor Constantine was one of the later.

Constantine Creates His own ‘Church’

The Emperor Constantine saw Christianity as a powerful tool to

control the people. Although he held no particular affinity to

Christianity. While he gave official state recognition to the

RCC he also gave the same to a plethora of other false church

systems that worship a pantheon of God. You might say that

Constantine was an ‘equal opportunity worshipper’. He really

didn’t care what god the people worshipped as long as they

gave him (Constantine the Great) his proper obeisance. To

57 Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson.

Christian History. 58

What is a Church? Mark D. Roberts. 2011. 59

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

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

41

ensure that this is would be the case he made himself Pontifus Maximus of all the

approved religions of the Roman Empire, including the Roman Catholic Church which

claimed to be the sole voice of all those who followed Jesus Christ. Yet, nothing could

be further from the truth.

The stance of Biblical Christians Constantine found of interest. As a General he had

seen the bravest of the brave. Yet, none of those compared to followers of Christ who

were willing to die for their faith. This was a tool that Constantine could use. However,

there were many parts of the New Testament experience that did not fit with

Constantine’s image, so he decided to sponsor change to those and/or use his power

and affluence to influence those within the church at Rome that he could get to see

things his way. Of great importance here to Biblical Christians is that in all of the

changes the RCC would make that detoured them away from Biblical Christianity, they

did not follow the model of the New Testament church in consulting with the Apostles

and key church leaders in Jerusalem like the

Antioch church did in Acts Chapter 15. Thus,

from the standpoint of the Biblical model, Biblical

Christians should consider their corporate

decisions as illegitimate.

While the RCC makes much of Constantine’s

supposed conversion there is no record that

Constantine ever obeyed a single

commandment from Jesus or the Apostles as

they answered to the question, “What must we do to be saved.” Constantine was not

baptized in Jesus name nor filled with the Holy Spirit. Instead the RCC offered that as

Emperor and nearly God himself, Constantine was above such formalities. The story of

Constantine’s conversion is just that, a story. It is a clever tale that Eusebius wove that

included symbolism of all the pagan religions in the Roman Empire. The RCC hangs

their hat on Constantine’s use of the Cross. However, the cross he used on his legions

was an X not a T as is commonly used by people today.60 The T cross is even older

than the X cross finding its root in Egypt.

Whatever the mystery behind the ‘conversion’ of Constantine it is obvious that he

became part of the RCC but not a convert to Jesus Christ. This instituted a powerful

change from being converted to Christ (as mandated by the NT Church) and “joining the

church” as mandated by the RCC. Those who joined the RCC were compelled to go to

church on Sunday. Today people are still encouraged to ‘join the church’ by many

denominations as opposed to following the instruction of Jesus Christ and the Apostles.

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

42

“Mixing the Church and State together is like mixing manure and ice cream. It’s

not a big deal to the manure, but it sure ruins the ice cream.”

It would be amazing to think that Constantine converted to following Christ and even

more wonderful to suppose that he converted an Empire. Yet, Constantine, like most

politicians, was willing to be whatever he had to be to control his empire. The RCC

claims Constantine has a conversion experience based on seeing the cross, yet in all of

Scripture there is no basis for such a claim. No one was ever converted by or

encouraged to convert by ‘seeing the cross’, venerating the cross, or anything even

close. Further, the cross is a symbol that is pagan in origin and predates Christianity by

centuries. Only the imprimatur of an empire could invoke such a claim. When Jesus

was approached by the rich young ruler (obviously one not nearly as rich as Emperor

Constantine) he gave him this instruction:

And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal

life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that

is, God. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not

steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother. And he said, All

these have I kept from my youth up. Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto

him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and

thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. And when he heard this, he

was very sorrowful: for he was very rich. And when Jesus saw that he was very

sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that

have riches enter into the kingdom of God! For

it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's

eye, than for a rich man to enter into the

kingdom of God. And they that heard it said,

Who then can be saved? And he said, the

things which are impossible with men are

possible with God.61

While it is evident that Constantine had not kept

the Commandments of God from his youth nor

for that matter at any point in his life, neither did he follow the instruction of Jesus Christ.

Constantine had a better plan. He did it his way. Like King David bringing the Ark of

the Covenant home, Constantine and his minions designed an even better ‘cart’ to carry

the church. Constantine used his power to give imprimatur to those Christian leaders

who were willing to compromise and created a new religious experience which was

palatable to the pagan origins of the Roman people and their leaders and compatible

61 KJV. Cambridge Edition. Luke Chapter 18.

43

with his religious background in Mithraism. Bringing together the power of the Roman

Imperial Cult, Hellenistic philosophy, Neo-Platonism, Gnosticism under one religious

banner Constantine inaugurated his new religious entity as the official State religion of

the Roman Empire (replacing Mithraism). They then claimed the mantle of being the

continuation of the New Testament church and proclaimed themselves the one true

church. Later Pope Benedictine XVI would proclaim that only the Roman Catholic’s

could be called the church.62

Constantine offered protection to his new church, allowing buildings (churches) to be

built or converted throughout the empire, and allowing the new “Emperor Approved”

version of Christianity to spread. This created official places of worship. Like

embassies of a country. These embassies were staffed by a new priesthood approved

in Rome, trained in Rome and dispatched like an army to the far reaches of the Roman

Empire. Those followers of Christ who opposed the new religious system were

ostracized, eliminated, imprisoned or killed. Anyone

who dared take an opposing view was branded a

heretic by the new religion. This is a charge that

usually ended in death. Rome had found a new,

somewhat more subtle, way to kill the followers of

Jesus Christ.

By A.D. 392 his new religion which claimed to

represent all Christians had become a powerful force

in Rome. It was practiced from border to border. In this

same year, the emperor Theodosius declared

Christianity the state religion, and outlawed all other

religious practices. With this new imprimatur Christians

began to organize their church into parishes, which were overseen by new breed of

professional clergy. This new Roman religion merged concepts found in Mithraism and

other pagan practices with historic Judaism and some of the tenets of the New

Testament Church.

\

62 Pope says Protestants not churches 'in the proper sense'". Religion News Service. July 11, 2007.

Retrieved December 28, 2011.

The Temple of Augustus owes its survival to being converted from its pagan use to use by one of the new state religions: Catholicism

44

Pontifex Maximus

“Constantine took the traditional title, "Pontifex Maximus."

The title originally applied to Roman "high priests" who

were the "great bridge builders" between man and the

gods. The Emperors used it to designate themselves head

of all the state religions. I want you to note that Christianity

is not the state religion at this time, although it enjoys

imperial favor. Believing he was "God's man," Constantine

referred to himself as a "bishop, ordained by God to

oversee what is external to the church."63 All religions were

welcome in his kingdom as long as they gave veneration to

his gods and did not invoke some insane notion of there

being only one god. Pluralism was the centerpiece of

Constantine’s religious empire. No doubt, he would have fit

well in the modern political scene. “Constantine did not

patronize Christianity alone, however. After gaining victory in

the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312), a triumphal arch—the

Arch of Constantine—was built (315) to celebrate it; the arch

is decorated with images of Victoria and sacrifices to gods like Apollo, Diana, and

Hercules.”64

“In 321, Constantine instructed that Christians and non-Christians should be united in

observing the venerable day of the sun, referencing the esoteric eastern sun-

worship which Aurelian had helped introduce, and his coinage still carried the symbols

of the sun cult until 324. Even after the pagan gods had disappeared from the coinage,

Christian symbols appeared only as Constantine's personal attributes: the chi

rho between his hands or on his labarum, but never on the coin itself.65 Even when

Constantine dedicated the new capital of Constantinople, which became the seat of

Byzantine Christianity for a millennium, he did so wearing the Apollonian sun-

rayed Diadem.

In the fourth century the RCC organized several parishes formed what was called a

diocese. Each diocese was led by a bishop. These bishops were political titles not

recognition of Apostolic authority in a man’s life such as Apostle James who was the

Bishop at Jerusalem. The New Testament churches had been independent and locally

sovereign answering to the Apostles and Elders. However, under Constantine’s new

religion the bishop in Rome began to claim authority over all other bishops, and gave

63 Constantine and the Christian State. Church History for the Masses. Modified 5/30/2007

64 Constantine the Great. Religious Policy. Wikipedia.

65 Cf. Paul Veyne, Quand notre monde est devenu chrétien, 163.

Statue of Constantine as

Apollo on top of

Constantine's Column

in Forum Constantine.

Divine Emperor of the

Christian Golden Age

45

himself the title of ‘papa’, or Pope. The Western parishes readily accepted the authority

of the Pope; however, the Eastern churches did not. The churches in the West

eventually became known as the Roman Catholic Church, while the churches in the

East joined together to form the Eastern Orthodox Church.

“Before Emperor Constantine recognized Christianity as a legal religion in 313,

corporate ownership of property by the church could be legally ambiguous. It seems

that the first property owned by the Roman church were the catacombs. These were not

places of meeting, however, but burial sites.”66 “The earliest building certainly devoted

to Christian use is at Dura Europos on the Euphrates River in eastern Roman Syria. It

was a house that came into Christian possession and was remodeled in the 240s. Two

rooms were combined to form the assembly room, and another room became a

baptistery—the only room decorated with pictures. Dura was destroyed by the

Sassanian Persians in 256, so the house's use as a church was short-lived. The

church's house at Dura represents an intermediate stage between meeting in members'

houses or other suitable places, and constructing buildings specifically for church

meetings.”67

“Examples like this cannot be called ‘church buildings’ but rather homes modified to

accommodate larger assemblies. They were never called temples or considered sacred

spaces.”68 “As Christianity became the privileged religion of the Roman Empire, simple

utility was superseded by buildings that made a "statement"; they became architectural

expressions of cultural taste and values, and reflections of status and affluence. So

church buildings morphed from being utilitarian places that provided meeting space to

elaborate and sometimes opulent expressions of piety and doctrine.”69 New Testament

scholar Graydon F. Snyder writes:

“There is no literary evidence nor archeological indication that any such home was

converted into an extant church building. Nor is there any extant church that certainly

was built prior to Constantine. The first churches consistently met in homes. Until the

year 300 we know of no buildings first built as churches.”

“In the 1st centuries of Christianity churches were either house churches in whatever

houses were offered for use by their owners, or were shrines on the burial-sites

of martyrs or saints, which following the usual classical practice were invariably on the

(then) edges of cities - the necropolis was always outside the polis. In Rome the

66 Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson.

Christian History. 67

Why and when did Christians start constructing special buildings for worship? Everette Fergusson. Christian History. 68

The Birkey Blog. Randal Birkey. From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals. 69

The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

46

early basilica churches of St. Peter's, Saint Paul Outside the Walls and San Lorenzo

fuori le Mura, all follow this pattern. This distinction was gradually broken down,

perhaps earliest in Roman Africa, as relics of the saints came to be kept in city-centre

churches. By the 6th century bishops were often buried inside their cathedral, and other

Christians followed. After the Peace of the Church, the old pagan temples continued to

function but gradually fell into disuse, and were finally all closed by the decrees

of Theodosius I at the end of the 4th century.”70

“Initially they were shunned by Christians, perhaps because of their pagan associations,

but also because their shape did not suit Christian requirements: "To the early church

(this being the RCC not to be confused with the NT Church), only one sort of building

seemed suitable for Christianization: the basilica", which had previously always been a

secular type of building. Some of these basilicas were private ones in the homes of

wealthy Christians: examples include the 4th century foundations of San Lorenzo in

Damaso and the Basilica di San Clemente. Eventually the prime sites of the pagan

temples were very often occupied for churches, the church of Santa Maria sopra

Minerva (literally Saint Mary above Minerva) in Rome, Christianized about 750, being

simply the most obvious example. However this process did not really begin in Rome

itself until the 6th and 7th centuries, and was still under way during the Renaissance,

when the Pantheon was made a church and Santa Maria degli Angeli e dei

Martiri and San Bernardo alle Terme made from parts of the enormous Baths of

Diocletian.”71

During Medieval times, the Roman Church made

the church building of eminent importance. The

Medieval Church played a far greater role

in Medieval England than the Church does today.

In Medieval England, the Church dominated

everybody's life. All Medieval people - be they

village peasants or towns people - believed that

God, Heaven and Hell all existed. From the very

earliest of ages, the people were taught that the

only way they could get to Heaven was if the

Roman Catholic Church let them. Everybody would have been terrified of Hell and the

people would have been told of the sheer horrors waiting for them in Hell in the weekly

services they attended.

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

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

47

The control the Church had over the people was total. Peasants worked for free on

Church land. This proved difficult for peasants as the time they spent working on

Church land, could have been better spent working on their own plots of land producing

food for their families. This is one reason why the Church was so wealthy. One of the

reasons Henry VIII wanted to reform the Church was get hold of the Catholic Church's

money. People were too scared not to pay tithes despite the difficulties it meant for

them. Like Constantine, King Henry VII, saw an opportunity to control the people

through religion. Creating his own church would give him that control.

In Medieval times one had to pay for baptisms (if you were not baptized you could not

go to Heaven when you died), marriages (there were no couples living together in

Medieval times as the Church taught that this equaled sin) and burials - you had to be

buried on holy land if your soul was to get to heaven. Whichever way you looked, the

Church received money. While none of these were tenets of the Apostles or the

followers of Jesus Christ, these were tenets of the Roman Catholic Church.

The people paid 10% of what they earned in a year

to the Church (this tax was called tithes, but did not

resemble the Old Testament tithing pattern). These

tithes could be paid in either money or in goods

produced by the peasant farmers. As peasants had

little money, they almost always had to pay in

seeds, harvested grain, animals etc. This usually

caused a peasant a lot of hardship as seeds, for

example, would be needed to feed a family the

following year. What the Church got in tithes was

kept in huge tithe barns; a lot of the stored grain

would have been eaten by rats or poisoned by their urine. A failure to pay tithes, so the

peasants were told by the Church, would lead to their souls going to Hell after they had

died. In affect the Roman Church owned the people.

Church congregations, from the 4th century onwards, sought to construct church

buildings that were both permanent and aesthetically pleasing. This led to a tradition in

which congregations and local leaders have invested time, money and personal

prestige into the building and decoration of churches.72 “The epitome of this trend was

the medieval cathedrals, almost worlds unto themselves. This would only change

gradually over the years. John Wycliffe would be one of the first recognized voices to

stir the hearts of men to return to the Scripture to do “only those things that are

Apostolic (meaning like the Apostles) and nothing that the Papacy dictates. Wycliffe’s

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

Roman Catholic Tithe Barn

48

devotion, even in the face of death, to return the church to the doctrine of the New

Testament Apostles produced a bible in the language of the people (English). He was

convinced that the Clergy led church of his day had to be returned to the people.

Returning the church to be based only in Scripture would claim the lives of many who

opposed the Roman Catholic system.

American Pilgrims: A Break from the Puritans

Hundreds of years later the continued manifestation of the ideas of Wycliffe would be

demonstrated through immigrants to America generally known as Pilgrims. The

Pilgrims welcomed the restoration of some of the original Apostolic tenets brought

through the efforts of the Puritans who using the power the growing English empire had

given definition to a church quite different than the one Henry VIII had given them when

he orchestrated the break from the Roman Catholic church. However, the Pilgrims

envisioned a more complete restoration toward those original Apostolic tenets of the

New Testament Church.

The Puritans, like the Roman Catholics

had grown accustomed to having the

favor of the English Monarchy and were

unwilling to ‘rock the boat’. Those willing

to risk disfavor with the Crown were

willing to do so even to the point of

losing their homes and citizenship.

These were generally identified as

Pilgrims. The discovery by European

powers of the New World created a

place for the Pilgrims to live in a new level of religious freedom.

The Pilgrims were committed, “theirs was a religious, not a political agenda; moral and

theological principles were involved, and from their perspective, there could be no

compromise. For them 2 Corinthians made it clear:

"Come out from among them and be ye separate, saith the Lord."

To achieve and preserve a simplicity and 'purity' that they felt had been lost amid the

some of the surviving features of Catholicism--the rituals which continued through into

the Anglican Church and were epitomized in its statement, "'I believe in...the holy

Catholick Church'" (Gill, 19). To establish themselves as rightful interpreters of the Bible

independent of an inherited social and cultural order, they removed from the Anglican

49

Church in order to re-establish it as they believed it truly should be. This of course

meant leaving the country, and they left for Holland in 1608.”73

“After 12 years, they decided to move again. Having gone back to England to obtain the

backing of the Virginia Company, 102 Pilgrims set out for America. The reasons are

suggested by William Bradford, when he notes the "discouragements" of the hard life

they had in Holland, and the hope of attracting others by finding "a better, and easier

place of living"; the "children" of the group being "drawne away by evil examples into

extravagance and dangerous courses"; the "great hope, for the propagating and

advancing the gospel of the kingdom of Christ in those remote parts of the world"74

“The immigration of the Pilgrims to New

England occurred in stages. But that

they had to go somewhere became

apparent soon enough. Theirs was the

position of the Separatist: they believed

that the reforms of the Anglican church

had not gone far enough, that, although

the break with Catholicism in 1535 had

moved some way toward the Puritan

belief in and idea of religious authority

grounded solely in Scripture, by

substituting king for pope as the head of

the church, England was only

recapitulating an unnecessary, corrupt, and even idolatrous order (Gill, 19-21).

In one basic respect, the Pilgrims are a logical outcome of the Reformation. In its

increasing dissemination of the Bible, the increasing emphasis on it as the basis of

spiritual meaning, the subsequently increasing importance of literacy as a mode of

religious authority and awareness, a growing individualism was implicit.”75 So committed

were these Pilgrims to their vision that they would put everything at risk to build and

establish not a church building, but a school – Harvard College.

Pop culture and American holidays like Thanksgiving have given us a tainted view of

the Pilgrims. At the center of each Pilgrim village was a meeting house not a church as

many think. At the meeting house, the men of the village met to make the laws and

settle the problems of the community. The Pilgrims wanted every child to read the

bible. So they passed a law requiring parents to teach their children to read. Another

73 The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments.

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

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

Harvard College in 1770 from an engraving by Paul Revere

50

Puritan law required every village with 50 or more families to have a school. There was

no law to have a separate church building. Puritan children were taught how to read,

write and do arithmetic. “In villages with less than 50 families, children went to schools

run by women in their homes. These schools were called Dame Schools.”76 Harvard

College was a Pilgrim College. It was the first college in America. It was named after

a John Harvard a pilgrim minister77 who donated 400 books to start the school.78

In time this religious freedom would birth a plethora of American based denominations.

What had been a vast blessing to those facing death for their beliefs would become a

stumbling block to the uninitiated. “The growth of American Protestantism, when fine

points of theology and doctrinal differences required five Methodist, seven Baptist, and

at least two Presbyterian churches in a town of 4,000 population, having a "church of

your own" was more important than the quality and usefulness of the building. After all,

pre-destinarian Calvinists could not properly worship with people who held an Armenian

maybe-yes-maybe-no view of eternal salvation.”79

The Pilgrims ‘church’ Building

While we often hear of the religious piety of

some of America’s early settlers (especially

around Thanksgiving), the idea of Pilgrim

Church buildings is a misnomer. Like many of

the reformers who had come before them, the

Pilgrims put no great stock in buildings. While

there was much focus on living for Christ in

their daily lives the idea of a single building only

for Sunday worship was a foreign concept.

Rather, they held church in a building that was

built for other purposes. “The church building

itself had no significance to the Pilgrims, and was kept intentionally drab and plain, with

no religious depictions, crosses, windows, fancy architecture, or icons, to avoid the sin

of idolatry. At Plymouth, the Pilgrim's church was the bottom floor of the town's fort--the

top floor held six cannons and a watchtower to defend the colony. The church room

was also the town's meetinghouse, where court sessions and town meetings took

76 The American Sense of Puritan. Scott Atkins. Context and Develoments.

77 http://www.ministers-best-friend.com/The-HARVARD-PROJECT-Harvard-Theological-Seminary.html

78 Europeans Settle Throughout North America. The Massechusetts Bay Colony.

79 The Church’s Edifice Complex. Jack Wilson.

Pilgrim Fort with the lower level used for all community purposes, including church meetings.

51

place.”80 Those who espouse that the Church is not allowed to meet in public places

based on some perception of separating the Church out of the affairs of the State have

no history on their side.

Isaac de Rasieres, who visited Plymouth in 1627, reported how the Pilgrim's began their

church on Sunday: "They assemble by beat of drum, each with his musket or firelock,

in front of the captain's door; they have their cloaks on, and place themselves in order,

three abreast, and are led by a sergeant without beat of drum. Behind comes the

governor, in a long robe; beside him on the right hand, comes the preacher with his

cloak on, and on the left hand, the captain with his side-arms and cloak on, and with a

small cane in his hand; and so they march in good order, and each sets his arms down

near him."81 During the early years of Plymouth, failing to bring your gun to church was

an offense for which you could be fined 12 pence.”82 Modern proponents of “bring your

gun to church” certainly have nothing new.

Pioneer America

For American pioneers the procedure of the

Pilgrims was much the same. Wherever they

worshipped the ability to be prepared to

defend their homes was important. What we

must realize from our vantage point is for

Pilgrims and American Pioneers, like so many

throughout history, the resources to build a

separate building to use only for Sunday

worship just were not practical. Further, the

Pilgrims did not deem such a building as an

important part of their devotion and worship to

God. The Pilgrims lived a simple, practical

gospel and the building of edifices for worship was not a priority. It did not mean that

they did not hold that the worship of the Lord was not of the utmost importance.

80 Here Shall I Die Ashore: Stephen Hopkins, Bermuda Castaway, Jamestown Survivor, and Mayflower

Pilgrim. Caleb Johnson 81

William Bradford's Of Plymouth Plantation. Along with the full text of the Pilgrims' journals for their first year at Plymouth. Edited by Caleb Johnson 82

Mayflower History. Caleb Johnson. Church and Religion. Mayflowerhistory.com

Methodist Episcopal meetings in Bozeman Montana were held in this schoolhouse.

52

As American settlers went west they worshipped in the great outdoors, caves, schools,

community buildings, wagons, cabins, soddies, saloons, hotels and anywhere else there

was space and opportunity to gather in worship. This was not an opposition to a

separate building for worship, but rather an economic fact. The first church services in

most communities were held in houses or cabins just like in the New Testament Church.

A good example of this is the Methodist Episcopal Church in Bozeman Montana whose

first service was in a cabin. “The first church service held in Gallatin County (Montana)

was by W. W. Alderson, a pioneer

farmer, who had been licensed to

preach in Illinois, and whose license

was also issued in Montana. This

service was at the cabin of Merritt W.

Penwell and Oscar Penwell on East

Gallatin, about 12 miles north of

Bozeman on Sunday, June 4, 1865.

Services were conducted again at the

Penwell Ranch and in Bozeman by

Mr. Alderson, who organized the first

Sunday school at the log house

known as the Masonic Building, in July 1866.

As religious denominations became more influential in America; they also became more

competitive with each other. As the number of denominations increased the number of

church buildings increased. As the number of church buildings increased the

competitive nature of men demanded that these edifices be more and more elaborate in

a massive scheme to either ‘keep up with the Jones’ or to build a more elaborate

building than the church down the street or across town. Evangelism became focused

on the how impressive the edifice of the denomination. These structures were not built

as testimony to the greatness of God, but rather as stations of the denominational

franchise in that community. For some denominations uniformity was also important;

kind of like a McDonald’s franchise. As Chuck Colson said in his book, “Being the

Body”, “the importance and success of the church is directly measured by the size and

grandeur of the structure itself.”83

83 Being the Body. Chuck Colson. Page 20.

53

The Edifice Complex

A common misconception first offered by the RCC

was multiplied by planting the concept in the fertile

soil of America. The palaces (commonly called

cathedrals) built by the Roman Church symbols of

the power and influence of the European World

became the benchmark of what a church building

should encompass – awe inspiring, modern, and an

effort to manifest a convincing argument to the

masses of that the power of God was invested in the

men who served these institutions. These palaces are a long way from the humble

surroundings of the God of the Universe who chose to stage his arrival in a stable

associate with the common people and said publically, “The poor you have with you

always.” Matthew 26:11

There are many who do not agree that this focus on impressive structures is compatible

with Christ likeness nor are they convinced that this is a valid endeavor for those who

carry the mantle of followers of Jesus Christ. “Our houses of worship are not any more

holy than any other place, including our own homes, or public buildings, schools, bars,

and the like. Holiness and sacredness have nothing to do with physical things or places.

Separating the secular and sacred was a Gnostic idea, a heresy that the early church

constantly battled. Ascribing sacred or holy qualities to objects of any kind is idolatry.”84

Howard Snyder notes that "Christians did not begin to build church buildings until about

A.D. 200. This fact suggests that, whatever else church buildings are good for, they are

not essential either for numerical growth or spiritual depth. The early church possessed

both these qualities, and the church’s greatest period of vitality and growth until recent

times was during the first two centuries A.D. In other words, the church grew fastest

when it did not have the help or hindrance of church buildings". Further, the departure

from the key tenets of the Apostles doctrine and the pattern of the New Testament

church came with the promotion of edifices. The Church had remained much the same

during its first 200 years. However, with power, influence and finances the church

changed EVERYTHING.

“There is nothing wrong about meeting in a building per se. However, if a group

chooses to do so it must be careful to not erect a structure or procure internal

furnishings which stifle mutual edification and participation from the saints (e.g., pulpit,

pews, a rigid "order of worship," etc.). In other words, any property or building must be

held lightly and should be an expression of a clear biblical understanding of the true

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

54

nature of the church.”85 This is certainly the general idea of the separation of church

and state. The founding fathers in America did not have in mind a vast network of

religious structures when they ensured the protection of religion, but rather that those

who practiced religion were free from interference by the government. Unfortunately, as

the church has expanded its influence into all realms of society, conflict has developed.

“Buildings, therefore, should be functional and conducive to the body-life principles of

the New Testament (Romans 12:4-8; 1 Corinthians 12:4-14; 14:12,26-32; Ephesians

4:11-16; Colossians 3:16; Hebrews 10:24-25; 1 Peter 4:10-11). Structure, you

see, is important, for the structure of your

congregational meetings can either liberate the

saints for ministry, or it can suppress genuine

interaction and participation!”86

It may be surprising to some, but there are

some in a movement that feel that the idea of

the church as a building is not just off from the

concept of the New Testament Church, but that

the idea of building buildings specifically for church services is error. Daryl M. Erkel

explains it this way, “To spend large sums of the Lord’s money on building projects,

maintenance and renovation is a waste of God’s money (at least in most cases). It is to

squander money on that which is to perish. Instead of using such funds to send out

more church planters, feed the poor, assist needy believers, and promote the spread of

the Gospel, we "evangelicals" have used it to build elaborate cathedrals and huge

auditoriums which, in most cases, are only used once or twice a week. Is this being a

good steward of the financial resources which God provides? How many churches

even stop to consider the necessity of a church building in the first place? Do you think

that on the great Day of Judgment Christ will be pleased with our plush and gaudy

edifices? Does it grieve your heart that most "evangelical" churches have a larger

budget for building projects, staff salaries, and maintenance than for missions, the poor

and people-oriented ministries? What does this reveal about our priorities?”

Erkel continues, “The building of permanent and extravagant structures appears to

betray our belief that Christ is coming soon and that, as believers, we are a pilgrim

people. One brother has said it well, "To spend wasted money and time building large,

beautiful places of worship knowing that the Lord might come at any time was

unthinkable to the New Testament church. The fact that the church today has no

problem with the idea of spending both time and money building large, extravagant

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

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

55

buildings is really only a reflection of just how much we’re not expecting Jesus to come

back any time soon!

The church of the first century followed in the footsteps of Abraham and other Old

Testament saints who were "looking forward to the city with foundations, whose

architect and builder is God" (Hebrews 11:10) . . .

The question must be asked, has today’s church demonstrated this ‘alien’ mindset by its

plethora of building plans? Or is it rather the case that our actions show forth a

materialistic mindset that has been conformed to this world; one that reasons to the

effect that ‘We’re going to be here for a while so we might as well settle down and get

comfortable?’"87

Some have supposed that if Christians were to meet in homes, a great deal of

reverence would be lost. The "service" would lose its formality and the proper

reverence directed toward God would diminish. But this argument assumes that a

Christian gathering is to be "formal," whereas we know from the New Testament that

early church meetings were quite simple and informal. They were nothing like the

highly liturgical and formalistic meetings that mark our places of worship. Moreover, we

must remember that reverence is the attitude of one’s heart

toward God and is, therefore, not dependent upon its

external surroundings. Besides, why can’t reverence for

God be maintained within the house-church setting?88

Even the great Protestant Reformer, Martin Luther,

believed in and understood the value of having Christians

meet within homes in order to have their services. In fact,

Luther wrote about three types of divine services. The

Latin liturgy and the German service were for the unlearned people, many of whom

were not even believers. Those services should continue, he believed, for the primary

purpose of evangelism. However, a third kind of service was most needful – a "truly

evangelical" one. It would be held privately for those "who want to be Christians in

earnest and who profess the Gospel with hand and mouth." Luther describes such a

gathering:

“[They] should sign their names and meet alone in a house somewhere to pray, to read,

to baptize, to receive the sacrament, and to do other Christian works. According to this

order, those who do not lead Christian lives could be known, reproved, corrected, cast

out, or excommunicated, according to the rule of Christ (Matthew 18). Here one could

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

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

56

also solicit benevolent gifts to be willingly given and distributed to the poor, according to

St. Paul’s example (2 Corinthians 9). Here would be no need of much and elaborate

singing. Here one could set out a brief and neat order for baptism and the sacrament

and center everything on the Word, prayer, and love.”89

When settlers came to America many of them brought a hunger for spiritual freedom.

These had no church buildings and it took some time before a structure would be

dedicated solely to church meetings. They were not focused on ‘services’, their lifestyle

was a service to their God. As America pioneered the West there was a great need for

Biblical training, but there was seldom the luxury of a building solely for church. Rather,

they used homes, barns, schools and the like. It was often a rare treat to have a

minister who had actually been formally trained to speak to these gathering, but most of

the people were not worried about the formal training. Rather, like the New Testament

Church there were usually elders (respected men of the community) who lived for Christ

that would lead the gatherings. These were generally focused on prayer, reading of

Scripture and singing.

In like manner, when the Apostolic Faith movement (the mother of both the subsequent

Pentecostal movement and the Charismatic movement) began in the early 1900’s it was

much the same as previous reformations. These were often people who had sold all

they had to follow Christ. They met in houses, hotels, healing houses, tents, schools or

anywhere they could find to gather. Fortunately, as American’s they had the right to

assemble. The focus was not on fine buildings but rather on spreading the Gospel of

Jesus Christ; and they did! Today, all across the world, followers of Jesus Christ meet

in tents, alleys, buses, community centers and more.

89 Ulrich S. Leupold, Liturgy and Hymns, Vol.53 of Luther’s Works, ed. Helmut T. Lehman [Philadelphia:

Fortress Press, 1965] pp.53ff

57

A Child Shall Lead Them

“One of my favorite answers to the “What is a

church?” question came during a children’s sermon

preached by a young seminarian. This story was

related to me by someone who was in the

congregation that fateful day. For those of you

unfamiliar with this genre, a children’s sermon

comes in a worship service when the folks twelve

and under are brought forward for a sermonette by

the pastor or some other church leader. Often the

sermon begins with a question like, “What is God?” The preacher gets a bunch of funny

– and incorrect – answers, and then offers the right answer, usually with a visual aid.

At any rate, a young man was doing his seminary internship at a church. As the low

man on the totem pole, he got tabbed for the children’s sermon and decided to talk

about what the church really is. He gathered the children together in the front, and

began with his question: “So, boys and girls, what is a church?” He fully expected that

the kids would say a church is a building and a place to go on Sundays and so forth.

He’d get to wrap up with the correct answer, that the church is not the building but the

people. As soon as the seminarian uttered his question, one of the boys shot his hand

into the air.

“Yes,” the young preacher said, “what is a church?”

“The gathered assembly of believers in Jesus,” was the boy’s answer.

The seminarian was speechless, not knowing where to go from here. The kid had

stolen his punch line. From the seminarian’s point of view, there wasn’t anything more

to say about the church. So after a few seconds of embarrassed silence, he thanked

the boy for his answer and dismissed the children. What the seminarian did not know

was that the theologically-precocious boy was the son of a seminary professor in the

congregation! It is evident that most people don’t get their ideas of church from their

seminary professor fathers. Rather, they get them from a wide variety of less

sophisticated sources.”90

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

58

A Survey of Church

We need to look toward is not as much

what is a church but rather, What is

Church? Is Church a building, a place,

people? What exactly is Church?

When people are asked to explain what

Church there is a variety of answers. A

Survey revealed the following answer to,

“What is Church?”91

a. The church is a word used to describe followers of Jesus Christ.

b. A place where Christians can worship God be encouraged and equipped.

c. A place where salvation comes to the lost.

d. The redeemed elect united to Christ and gathered in heaven. We also

meet on earth.

e. A way to connect with other Christians, a house for your spiritual family.

f. Church is meeting with Christians with aim for fellowship and worship

g. The kingdom of Jesus being perfected by the work of the Holy Spirit

h. The Church is the Pillar and Bulwark of the Truth.

i. Gods people gathering together

j. A Church is not a building. It is rather a community of people who accept

Christ Jesus as their Savior and are willing to show God’s Grace others.

This community gathers together to profess that Jesus is Lord, through

worship, prayer and biblical teachings.

k. God’s people meeting in God’s place

l. A body of people who seek to build each other up in Christ – through

prayer and encouragement – as they worship together and grow in God’s

Word

m. The new covenant people of God, gathered in temporal local community

and eternal heavenly community

n. Gods people gathering together for His glory

o. Church is Christ’s body – we are the group of spiritual people who do the

work of Christ in the world, particularly spreading the Good news of God’s

salvation and training others in obedience to Christ.

p. The collection of believers, where ever thy gather, to worship the Lord.

91 “Church Is” Survey Results Q1: What is Church? Calum Henderson. The “Church Is” project was an

interactive animation that was made as part of a Christian art exhibit in June 2011. The project was based on a survey of 31 people. All the participants remained anonymous and gave permission for their answers to be used.

59

q. Christ’s body of believers praising God, learning from His Word, and

loving and supporting one another in Christian community.

r. God’s redeemed people

s. Church is not a building, temple or a meeting place, BUT it is the group of

people meeting together to study God’s word and have fellowship with one

another

t. The Church is the body of Christ, made up of believers – a community.

u. A meeting together of God’s people

v. The regular formal public gathering of an identifiable community of

Christian believers.

w. Meeting with God’s people to spur each other on

x. The church is the people, and NOT the building. It is the followers of Christ

being the hands and feet of God, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked,

giving shelter to the homeless and loving people as God loves them.

y. For the Christian, church is the gathering of those who are part of your

family in Christ to build each other up and equip you to bring Jesus’ good

news to the world.

z. Do you mean the local or the universal?

aa. Place of peace, calm, love, goodwill, where people can worship together,

or just reflect on being a better person

bb. Church is the gathering of God’s people

cc. The body of Christ gathered together to bring God praise.

dd. God’s people meeting together

ee. A gathering of God’s people92

As you can see from this survey, there is a wide variety of answers and belief’s as to

what is a Church. In all of these answers there is an element of truth and without doubt

this is what these people have been taught or at least their perception of what they have

been taught. “Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox believers affirm the authority of

Scripture as God’s Word. But they add the parallel authority of tradition, especially as

embodied in the creeds and historic teachings of the church, and in the bishops who

guard and pass on this tradition.”93 Some believe that Christian tradition ought to be

taken very seriously while others have little interest in the history but are only focused

on what the Apostles doctrine was in the New Testament the influence of Roman

Emperor, the Roman Catholic Church, counsels, creeds and other additions made by

men.

92 “Church Is” Survey Results Q1: What is Church? Calum Henderson.

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

60

Have It Your Way

One of Burger King’s advertizing slogans is “Have it Your Way!” In some ways we’ve

made the church into a Burger King or McDonalds; pretty buildings with popular (or

traditional) functions. A choir, wooden seats, a pipe organ, or, hip-hop rock and roll

Jesus parties--and yet, there are a set of rules which are always adhered to. The

“house of God/sanctuary, a “must-have” meeting

place used once-a-week for worship and teaching, but

is this the Church that Jesus died for or that he

entrusted to His disciples?

Those who hold that Christian tradition is important

say, “We Christians have much to learn from our

brothers and sisters who have gone before us and

who have sought to understand and to be the

church.”94 Yet most of these would agree with this

author that, “Scripture trumps church tradition”95.When we look closely at the question,

“A church is either a building used for religious purposes, or it is a group of people who

have gathered for religious purposes, or it is a larger configuration of people who have

been organized for religious purposes.”96

So what then is a church? As we have explained the idea of a Church as a building

really doesn’t apply to the entire history of the church since much of the church

historically didn’t have church buildings and even once church buildings were built many

met in many places other than those designated as ‘church’ buildings. Today there are

vast populations of Christians that do not have ‘church’ buildings and for those who do

one of the things that concerns leaders about

church buildings is “less than ten percent of

those who go to a church building are actively

involved in the congregation.”97

“The Christian church can be seen in two

ways: the visible and the invisible. The visible

church is comprised of all who claim the name of

Christian and who gather together for worship

and participation of the sacraments: the Lord's Supper and Baptism. The members of

the visible church claim the name of Christian (excluding the cults like the Mormons and

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

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

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

97 Connecting With Christians. Bible Truth Tabernacle. Michael Smith. 2011.

61

Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.). The visible church contains both believers and non-

believers; that is, there are people in the visible church who are not really saved.

The members of the invisible Church are the actual body of believers. They are the

ones who are truly regenerate and have trusted, by faith, in the true Lord and Savior,

Jesus Christ. The true Christian is indwelt by the Lord Jesus (John 14:23) through the

Holy Spirit. Therefore, the Christian church is figuratively said to be the body of Christ.

Rom. 12:5, "So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually

members one of another."

Eph. 4:12, "For the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building

up of the body of Christ."

The word "church" comes from the Greek "ekklesia"

which means "gathering" or "assembly." Therefore, the

church is the gathering of the believers who come

together to participate in fellowship with one another as

they worship God and hear from His Word, the

Bible. The church as a whole has been equipped with

people possessing different spiritual gifts (Rom. 12:5-

8). The purpose of the gifts is "for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to

the building up of the body of Christ; 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of

the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which

belongs to the fullness of Christ,” (Eph. 4:12-13).”98 To His church Jesus Christ gave

the fivefold ministry. “When I was young, I learned the little rhyme that goes like this:

Here is the church,

Here is the steeple,

Open the doors,

See all the people.

Of course it didn’t dawn on me at the time that I was getting

deficient theology. Only later in life did I realize that I should have

learned a better rhyme:

Here is a building,

On top there’s a steeple, Open the doors,

The church is the people!”99

98 What is Church? Matt Slick.

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

62

The cause of divisions in the Church:

1. The superintendents lose the life of God, neglect the souls of the people, become

greedy of gain, and, by secular extortions, oppress the people.

2. The members of the Church, thus neglected, oppressed, and irritated, get their minds

alienated from their rapacious pastors.

3. Men of sinister views take advantage of this state of distraction, foment discord,

preach up the necessity of division, and thus the people become separated from the

great body, and associate with those who profess to care for their souls, and who

disclaim all secular views. In this state of distraction, it is a high proof of God’s love to

his heritage, if one be found who, possessing the true apostolic doctrine and spirit, rises

up to call men back to the primitive truth, and restore the primitive discipline.

-- ADAM CLARK

63

64

“If a Christian traveler showed up on the streets of Corinth in the first-century A.D. and

asked for the location of the ekklesia, nobody outside of the tiny Christian community

there would direct him to a religious gathering. Nobody would think he was asking

about anything that had to do with the gods or with religious practices. An ekklesia in

their day wasn’t anything like a church. The Greeks had words for religious gatherings,

words such as thiasos (cultic society) or synagogue (Jewish gathering). But ekklesia

wasn’t one of these words.”100 As we have previously shown, the idea of the Church as

a building was a foreign idea to the New Testament Church. Christians were not people

who went to a building called ‘the church building’. Followers of Jesus Christ were the

Church.

In order to bring clarity to what we mean we have to

identify exactly what is a Christian. This has to go

beyond opinion or simple definition and beyond

people who just claim that they are Christians. On the

other hand, as followers of Jesus Christ, we are not

required to demand proof of everyone’s citizenship.

Ultimately, citizenship is a matter for God.

However, if anyone who claims to be a Christian is

considered a Christian then being a Christian really has little meaning. So, we have to

do better than just lip service. Being a Christian is about citizenship. It’s not about

some rogue claim of being a citizen, but genuine citizenship. For example, there are

many people around the world who would love to be citizens of the United States.

Some of these are more than willing to do whatever it takes to become a citizen; legal or

illegal. In both cases, earthly and heavenly, in the end result only legitimate citizenship

will matter. Some are willing to even violate our laws in an effort to appear as citizens.

Everyday people illegally come into our country in an effort to be part of our nation.

While these illegal residents may be present in our country they are certainly not

citizens. Citizenship requires that one is either born in our country or go through a

process to be made citizens.

In like manner, Christians are those who have completed citizenship with the Kingdom

of Jesus Christ, not just people making claims. Jesus gave clear instruction on those

who would attempt to come to come into the Kingdom of Heaven by means other than

legitimate citizenship. In the Gospel of John Chapter 10 Jesus gave this instruction:

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

65

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold,

but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.101

Thieves and robbers make claims about many things that are not true. Nothing stops a

thief or a robber from making illegitimate claims about their citizenship. We are not

talking about mere claims. Scripture gives us clear instruction on the ‘application

process for citizenship into heaven. Apostle Peter in Acts Chapter 2 gives the

assembled multitude direct instruction on the subject. In his directive he says that all

followers of Jesus Christ must:

A) Repent of their sins,

B) Be baptized into Christ while invoking his name and

C) Received the gift of ‘citizenship’ from heaven, the Holy Spirit.

These are earmarks of those who have heavenly

citizenship while here on earth. Those who do not meet

these citizenship requirements are the same as thieves

and robbers. Those who have not repented of their

sins, been buried in baptism with Jesus Christ and

received the manifestation of His Spirit in their lives

have not completed the application process and have

not been adopted as sons into the Kingdom of Heaven. These are things that other

believers can understand and know about those claiming Christ. Belonging to a

religious order, denomination, religious corporation and the like are not proof positive of

heavenly citizenship and are attempts to enter into heaven another way. These are not

my rules or ideas. This is not my Kingdom. This is the Kingdom of Heaven and God

Himself, manifested as Jesus Christ set the rules and entrusted them to His disciples.

When I think about what is a Christian I think of a story from when my mother was in

high school (circa 1960). They had an exchange student come to their school in

suburban Cleveland Ohio. Mom became friends with the exchange student. When my

mother asked the student what religion she was, she replied, “I am a Christian like

everyone in America”. While there certainly were more Christians per capita in America

in 1960 when this took place it is safe to say that ‘everyone’ in America is not a

Christian, now or then. While there are Christian principles that are part of our

Constitution even those who signed the Constitution and the previous Declaration of

Independence were not all Christians. Yet, the perception is that America is a

‘Christian’ nation.

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

66

In America, apostasy has reared its ugly head in the

church. There are those who do not hold Christ in the highest of

regard, as God in flesh, and because they fail to do that, they

fail to understand the gospel, they fail to become saved, and

they fail to understand what it means to be a Christian. Take

the following quote as an example. "Glide Memorial Methodist

Church in San Francisco has this Call to Worship in their printed

bulletin on Sunday and recited by the leader:

"We are all of us Christians, Jews, liberals, Bolsheviks,

anarchists, socialists, Communists, Keynesians, Democrats, Civil Righters, Beatniks,

ministers, moderate Republicans, pacifists, teachers, doctors, scientists, professors,

Latin Americans, New Africans, Common Marketers, even Mao Tse-Tung. Doubtless.

From Lyndon Johnson to Mao Tse-Tung, we are all Christians."

When I first saw this I thought it was someone playing a sick joke. However, these folks

are serious. John Wesley is doing the proverbial, “turning over in his grave”. This

church once preached the Gospel and from which, several decades ago, a most

powerful evangelistic note was sounded. Today, many of its services are performed in

the mode of the modern dance. Suggestive gyrations are indulged in and the church

has become a haven for dope addicts, hippies, homosexuals, and sex-pots."102 Those

that adhere to such religious edicts are attempting to find another way into heaven.

These are some of those thieves and robbers that Jesus warned were not His followers.

According to recent polls 92% of all Americans believe in God while 83% call

themselves Christian. If you went to any major American city and asked, "Are you a

Christian?" you would get all sorts of answers:

"I was raised in a Christian home."

"I'm a baptized Catholic."

"I'm a Methodist."

"I go to Woodland Park Baptist Church."

"I read my Bible every day."

"I walked an aisle, said a prayer, signed a card, and raised my

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

67

hand."

“Humpty-Dumpty or you could make it

simpler and say, "A Christian is anyone

who calls himself a Christian," which is

basically how the pollsters came up

with that 83%. It's very American to

say, "I'm a Christian if I say I am." That

reminds me of Humpty-Dumpty who

said, "When I use a term, it means

whatever I choose it to mean--nothing

more, and nothing less." Is this what

Christ intended when He gave Himself

for His Church? Did being a follower of Christ simply have to do with saying you

followed Christ? On the one hand we often hear the verse recited, “Confess with your

mouth…” While on the other hand there is a volume of Scripture dealing with those

who obviously worshipped with their lips while their heart was far from God. Since only

God can see the heart we must have other indictors to understand what being like

Christ really comprises.

One pastor in the United Methodist denomination gave this tongue in cheek retort, “A

Christian? I have been a Methodist all my life, why would I want to be a Christian?”

This is not a profound statement, but it does point to the problem of the generic use of

the word Christian and in impending influence of denominations.

Here is another example of a creed offered for what is a Christian. “We accept as

Christian any individual or group who devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully

regards themselves to be Christian. Included are: the Roman Catholic church; the

Eastern Orthodox churches, conservative, mainline, and liberal Christian faith groups;

The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons); Jehovah's Witnesses

and a thousand or so other religious organizations that identify themselves as Christian.

Also included are those who consider themselves to be Christian even though they do

not identify themselves with any particular religious group.”103 These are nice words but

as we have pointed out the idea of anyone who says they are a Christian being one is

as weak as gravy made from the shadow of a starving chicken.

Seriously, all of these are Christians because they say so? People that hold that Jesus

Christ is the brother of Lucifer are Christians by this explanation. Also adulterers,

homosexuals and pedophiles as long as they regard themselves to be Christian.

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

68

Strangely missing from these manmade creeds is the supporting Scriptural references

for their dogmas. Apostle Paul’s charge of turning the Grace of God into lasciviousness

is wantonly disregarded in pursuit of labeling almost everyone a Christian.

If this is what Christianity is then it really is not very valuable. Certainly not important

enough for men and women to hazard their lives in defense of a Gospel that already

included almost everyone. This simply cannot be Biblical Christianity. These are not of

those who gave their lives, their fortunes and sacred honor to bring the Gospel to those

who needed something to live for and the hope of eternal life.

What we are looking toward in this effort is an explanation of Christianity that explains or

addresses what the intent of our founding fathers (in this case the New Testament

Apostles and other followers of Jesus Christ) held as tenets of a follower of Jesus

Christ.

John Piper explains the situation quite well in this quote, “A Christian is not a person

who believes in his head the teachings of the Bible. Satan believes in his head the

teachings of the Bible! A Christian is a person who has died with Christ, whose stiff

neck has been broken, whose brazen forehead has been shattered, whose stony heart

has been crushed, whose pride has been slain, and whose life is now mastered by

Jesus Christ”.104 None of these self made creeds offering to include everyone who says

he or she is a Christian include this most important criteria and no one will attain the

goal of Christianity without giving their life first and foremost to Christ. Just saying that

you are a Christian will NEVER suffice.

“Sadly today, many accept only a profession of faith as evidence of true salvation,

whether or not there is any behavior that shows a commitment to Christ. John the

Baptist was the first to chide those who held such uncommitted lives and instructed his

followers to show ‘fruit’ for repentance. This meant “the proper fruits of reformation; the

proper evidence that you are sincere. Do not bring your cunning and dissimulation to

this work; do not carry your hypocrisy into your professed repentance, but evince your

sincerity by forsaking sin, and thus give evidence that this coming to Jordan to be

baptized is not an act of dissimulation. No discourse could have been more appropriate

or more cutting.”105 “Fit for repentance; appropriate to it the proper expression of

repentance.”106 Profession alone does not give evidence that one has truly accepted

Christ as their Lord and Savior. Without any evidence of a changed heart there can be

no assurance of one’s’ salvation.”107

104 Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson.

105 Barnes Notes on the Bible. Fruits. See Matthew 7.

106 Ibid.

107 Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson.

69

Two Groups of Christians

It was the believers at Antioch that were first called

Christians. These who demonstrated, just like Jesus

Christ, forgiveness for even those who despitefully used

them earned the designation of being like Christ or

Christians. Never before had the World seen such Grace

or forgiveness. Christ had modeled a level of forgiveness

foreign to the ways of the world when He even forgave

those who put Him to natural death, “Father forgive

them…” We obviously realize that all those claiming to be Christians do not fit the

definition.

Comparing those who lay claim they are Christians by simply saying, “I am a Christian”

or answering in the affirmative when asked, Are you a Christian?, to those who actually

are endeavoring to be followers of Jesus Christ by a lifestyle that makes Him the center

of their life or who demonstrate forgiveness like Christ is a lot like comparing apples to

oranges. Both are certainly fruit, but not of the same tree. What has happened is that

the definition and use of the word Christian has become so broad that the term Christian

has no distinct meaning.

Using the word Christian for almost every related application would be like calling

everything in the ocean a fish. The rationale we would use is that if it is in the ocean

then it is a fish. Sounds kind of silly but it is infinitely more reasonable than calling

anyone who says they are a Christian a Christian. You would ask what kind of fish,

what size fish? Are turtles fish? What about sharks? You call it a shark but if I call it a

fish does that make it so?

Strangely, there is no similar inclusiveness in other religions. One is not included

among the Muslims, Buddhists, or adherents to Judaism based simply on something

they say. While there may also be those who claim to be followers of those religions

because they say so, their lifestyle and decisions will show otherwise. This was the

point that John the Baptist was focused on. There is more to a changed life than

confession and for Biblical Christians that is only the beginning.

For lack of a better term, we have to agree that there are at least two distinct groups of

Christians. You may decide to divide them up into even smaller designations but for our

purpose here we have chosen to use these two so that people can understand the

difference we are making in explaining what really encompasses one who is a Christian.

70

Humpty Dumpty Christians

Humpty Dumpty Christians are those

who are Christians because they say or

in some cases someone else labels

them a Christian. The first group is

comprised of those who are Christians

by association, default or by joining a

religious order, denomination or group.

These might identify themselves by a

number of designations. These would

consider their faith a casual matter and

certainly not a top priority in their life.

These may well find their numbers

included in the numerous polls, censuses and other efforts to label, catalogue or group

them among some religious denomination with roots in Evangelical thought, historical

religious bodies or the State sanctioned religions. These are what we would call the

everything in the ocean group referring to our previous point of calling everything in the

ocean a fish.

For some reason people confuse doing something good with being a Christian. It is true

that people referred to Jesus Christ ‘the one who goes about doing good’ but this is

solely a Christian tenet. Almost all religions have the auspices of doing good as part of

their religious make-up and lots of good people realized that was not good enough, but

that they needed to follow Jesus Christ. Among these is the first recorded non Jewish

Christian; Cornelius. “Cornelius is depicted in the New Testament as a God-fearing

man who always prayed and was full of good works and deeds of alms.”108 In spite of

his record of being good Cornelius recognizes that he is not a Christian, but comes to

understand that he needs to follow Christ. It may be that because he was accustomed

to doing good he is propelled in the direction of Christ but just doing good and saying

that he followed Christ would never suffice. In Acts Chapter 10 Cornelius becomes a

Christian not by saying, “I am a Christian but by baptism both in the Spirit and in water.

“While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who

heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were

astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the

Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter

said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have

108 Wikipedia. Cornelius the Centurion. Biblical Account

71

received the Holy Spirit just as we have." So he ordered that they be baptized in

the name of Jesus Christ.

The pattern for those who become Christians is consistent and repeated often by the

New Testament Church. Those who were inclined to follow Christ repented of their

sins, and received the Holy Spirit evidenced by speaking in other tongues subsequent

to being baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

In contrast to these Biblical examples of Christianity we find these Humpty Dumpty or

some might say politically expedient Christians. Many of these embrace creeds like the

one from the aforementioned Methodist Church embracing virtually everyone as

Christians. Humpty Dumpty Christians find much agreement with the religious views of

men like Constantine. From their view anyone is a Christian who says he is a Christian

or doesn’t deny he or she is a Christian. Biblical Christians understand that we must be

light to the whole world, but this does not mean that the whole world is Christian.

If we were to compare this group of politically expedient Christians to Old Testament

times this group would compare to the mixed multitude mentioned in Exodus Chapter

12. Some say that Humpty Dumpty Christians include anyone who is not a follower of

Islam, Buddha or Judaism. This broad based inclusivity is probably even too general for

the most all-encompassing of Christian groups, but in a media directed world it makes

sense to someone. Under this explanation Atheists, Agnostics and a plethora of smaller

religious groups who would not be identified as Christian would be included. For the

purposes of this discussion we will consider all those who say they are Christians part of

this first group. People who live in countries that are predominately Christian fall into

this politically expedient or some would say PC (politically correct) category.

Humpty Dumpty Christians are the predominate political force in what is historically

referenced as Christianity. Surveys show as high as 83% of Americans consider

themselves Christians.109 These surveys ask if you are a Christian. Since Christian

thought dominates most of the civilized world (primarily because of European and

American Colonialism) most are inclined to answer in the affirmative. According to the

Barna Group 90% of Americans are committed to some religion. This leaves those who

are not saying they are religious in the minority. Even the Supreme Court of the United

States has chimed in on the debate declaring the United States of America a Christian

Nation.110 A point that is hotly debated in factions both pro and con.

109 Robert D. Putnam and David E Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites

Us (2010) Ch 1 at note 5 110

Church of the Holy Trinity VS the United States. 1892. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/143/457/case.html

72

According to the Barna Group's survey while 90% of Americans claim some religious

affiliation only 12% of American adults say that faith is a top priority in their life. This

would be the point of vast discrepancy between those who say they are Christians

(more than 80%) and those who are Biblical

Christians (less than 10%).

The Humpty Dumpty group of Christians embraces

and promotes an Ecumenical movement that

embraces all who claim the designation of Christian

and many are strong proponents of inter-faith

meetings hoping to include adherents of Islam,

Judaism, Hinduism and more. In the United States

most politicians fall into this first group. Some

politicians are committed to their religious beliefs but

just as many see their association with the Church

as a necessary evil or a place to connect socially. This was powerfully demonstrated in

the 2012 Republican Primaries in the United States. In 2012, a U.S. Presidential

candidate in Minnesota left her Wisconsin Synod Church for political convenience

hoping to distance herself from controversial doctrinal positions held by that religious

denomination.111 It is the position of the Wisconsin Synod Lutherans that the Roman

Catholic Church is a perversion from Biblical Christianity (a view held by most

Protestants) and further they hold that the Pope is the Anti-Christ spoken of in the Bible.

Thus in distancing herself from her long association with her church the political

candidate expected to curry favor with more voters, especially Catholic voters which

make up a large voting bloc. From a purely political standpoint this is understandable.

Politicians are concerned about votes not the Bible.

It is evident, at least till this point in our history, that a US candidate for President

(regardless of political party affiliation) would have little chance of election if they did not

make some claim to be a Christian in a nation where the majority of the population

identifies themselves as Christians. Politicians curry the favor of these Humpty Dumpty

Christians. These same politicians if they lived in Israel would claim to be adherents of

Judaism or if they lived in Pakistan (where you cannot be President if you are not a

Muslim) claim to embrace Islam. These are politically expedient choices. These are

not Christians in the sense of those we find immortalized in Hebrews Chapter 11 or in

Foxes Book of Martyrs.112

111 http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/15/michele-bachmann-officially-leaves-her-church/

112 http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html

Buddhist Monks and Catholic Priests at an inter-faith meeting.

73

I know a funeral home director who is a great example of a Humpty Dumpty Christian.

Those who know him would speak about him as a Christian. He holds membership in a

number of Churches. His interest has little to do with the function of that particular

religious schism. Rather, his interest is strictly business. By holding membership in a

number of congregations he places his name among them as a ‘member of their

church’. It is like joining a number of country clubs. It helps those seeking funeral

services decide to do business with his funeral home. After all he is a member of their

church and there is a comfort level with doing

business with fellow church members. There is

certainly nothing illegal about such activity. There

are many people who go to church or attend a

particular church because of similar social, business

or political reasons. While these are generally

labeled as Christians it has nothing to do with their

following Christ and everything to do with their

membership in a religious denomination. Churches, like country clubs, have various

levels of social acceptance. The reality is that many of these would be better described

as religious country clubs, but that is not politically expedient. Humpty Dumpty

Christians cling to these religious denominations for part their identity.

Humpty Dumpty Christians include those who attend services only on religious holidays

because of family, tradition or social obligation. These are sometimes referred to as C

& E (Christmas and Easter) Christians. If asked these would say that they are

Christians but would be in the 88% of people that do not consider their religious faith a

high priority in their life. While there are many devout Roman Catholic Church (RCC)

followers; the predominate number of RCC adherents would fall into this Humpty

Dumpty group. This is not about their religious denominational affiliation, doctrine, or

dogma but about their proximity to the tenets of the Biblical Christians as preserved for

us in the writings of the Bible.

In many places, particularly Spain, when someone identifies themselves as a Christian

they are saying there are a Catholic. Many followers of Jesus Christ are offended to be

lumped together with Catholics under a generic label of Christian. Unfortunately over

time, the word “Christian” has lost a great deal of its significance and is often used of

someone who is religious or has high moral values but who may or may not be a true

follower of Jesus Christ.

Many people who do not believe and trust in Jesus Christ consider themselves

Christians simply because they go to church or religious social club or they live in a

“Christian” nation. As we have previously discussed going to church, serving those less

fortunate than you, or being a good person does not make you a Christian. Going to

Coptic Christians in worship

74

church does not make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage makes you an

automobile. Being a member of a church, attending services regularly, and giving to the

work of the church does not make you a Christian.

Here are some points to consider on the word Christian.

The name "Christian" was not invented by early Christians. It was a name

given to them by others. It was offered partially as a slur and partially as

a compliment as this designation was given to followers of Jesus Christ at

the Antioch church because of the level of forgiveness that they

demonstrated being reminiscent of Jesus Christ.

Christians called themselves by different names—disciples, believers,

brethren, saints, the way, the elect, etc.

We can get a flavor for it if we take the word "Christ" and keep that

pronunciation. You "Christ-ians."

It literally means "Christ-followers."

Over time a derogatory term became a positive designation.

Occasionally you will hear someone spit the term out in the same way it

was used in the beginning. "You Christians think you're the only ones

going to heaven."

There was a sense of suffering and reproach attached to the word in the

New Testament. It was a “Red Badge of Courage”.

The Bible teaches that the good works we do

cannot make us acceptable to God. Titus 3:5

says, “He saved us, not because of righteous

things we had done, but because of his mercy. He

saved us through the washing of rebirth and

renewal by the Holy Spirit.”

So, a Christian is someone who has been born

again by God (John 3:3; John 3:7; 1 Peter 1:23) and has put faith and trust in Jesus

Christ. Ephesians 2:8 tells us that it is “…by grace you have been saved, through

faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God.”

“Many think they are Christians because they claim to believe in Jesus. But, believing

in Jesus often means nothing, or anything, particularly here in America where pluralism

and relativism are rampant. Many say they believe in Christ but without any evidence of

the transforming work of the gospel in their lives it is only a profession of belief. Does

75

your life bear evidence to what you say you believe?”113

“Christ will be master of the heart, and sin must be mortified. If your life is

unholy, then your heart is unchanged, and you are an unsaved person. The

Savior will sanctify His people, renew them, give them a hatred of sin, and a love

of holiness. The grace that does not make a man better than others is a worthless

counterfeit. Christ saves His people, not IN their sins, but FROM their sins.

Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord.” C.H. Spurgeon

Joining the Church

One thing that may surprise the uninitiated, joining one of these politically correct

religious groups may not be as simple as one might expect. Many Humpty Dumpty

Christians have rules and regulations for joining and continuing membership. These are

much different than those adhered to by Biblical Christians in 33 A.D. and most often

more is required to join their religious group than one would have to do to become a

follower of Jesus Christ. While an initiate could expect membership in the New

Testament Church after repentance,

baptism and infilling of the Holy Spirit

(which could be accomplished in as little

as a day or less) modern initiates may

find they are required to take as long as

several years to come in ‘full communion

with the church’.114 The primary

difference is that New Testament

believers were expected to be baptized

into Christ while modern believers are

most often join and/or are baptized into the church. The follow-up to being baptized into

the church is going to church. This highlights a primary difference in those who adhere

to going to church in contrast with those who expect to be the church. The Humpty

Dumpty Christian is content with going to church even if it is only once a year while the

Biblical Christian understands that a follower of Christ will have to be more committed

than just joining a religious group.

113 Thoughts to Ponder. The Evidence is Apparent. Clark Nelson.

114 Our Catholic Faith. Joining the Catholic Church. What are the Steps of the RCIA.

http://www.ourcatholicfaith.org/rcia.html

76

CHURCH RULES

Rule #1 - You can’t come to

church naked.

(If you don’t have clothing we will

help you get some).

Rule #2 - You can’t stay if you

cause trouble.

Ongoing there are also a volume of expectations denominations have of members from

continuing educational requirements to attendance expectations, and the list is virtually

endless for the various factions of Humpty Dumpty Christendom.

Like a smorgasbord a Humpty Dumpty Christian can choose the denomination with the

requirements that they are most comfortable. With 38000 schisms there are certainly

more than 38000 expectations of those who adhere to these religious systems.

Historically, there have been other interesting requirements to being part of some

religious denominations. Some have required that a couple give one of their children to

the church. While it was not slavery, there was an expectation placed upon families to

indenture at least one of their children to the service of the church. There are volumes

of stories (some positive and some extremely negative) about children who were

‘pressed into service’ by this religious system.

Some years ago while pioneering a new church plan in a large metropolitan area I was

surprised to often hear the question, “What are the rules for coming to your church?”

The area the church was in was an area where there were many people from large very

liturgical religious denominations. The people were accustomed to thinking about

church in the terms of rules and regulations. They understood Christians from the

vantage point of Humpty Dumpty Christianity. When I would explain that to attend our

meetings we did not have such requirements most of those questioning seemed to be in

disbelief. Like, I was trying to fool them or something. From their vantage point a

church had to have rules even for basic attendance.

Our church met in an old, large warehouse building. We called it Church in the

Warehouse. We were anything but conventional or traditional. After a number of these

“What are the rules” inquiries I asked one of the men in our church to make a sign for

us. We posted this sign on the door of our

church. It read:

Rule #1 You can’t come to church naked (If

you don’t have clothing we will help you get

some).

Rule #2 – You can’t stay if you cause trouble.

Now, I realize that these are certainly not

tenets of New Testament or Biblical

Christianity and we did not offer them as such.

Rather it was our hope to differentiate our

gathering from those of Humpty Dumpty

Christians.

77

I am not certain that these simple rules satisfied all the questions about church rules but

people started coming and our sign caught the attention of the local media. When I

would talk with people in the city and at the mention of Church in the Warehouse I

would often get, “Is your church the one where you can’t come naked?” I would

smile and say “Yes”, and then I would smile and say, “You know that you can’t come

naked!”

Pay to Pray

There are other barriers erected by these

religious systems that attract Humpty Dumpty

Christians. Some are financial, some are racial,

some of political and the list goes on.

Denominations operate very much like country

clubs. It is not a generally appreciated

comparison but in practical application most

churches and the denominations that they belong

to operate like clubs and/or a network of religious

clubs or some say religious country clubs.

Membership into one of the various 38000 sects or schisms will likely be much more

difficult than joining a country club or lodge. Like a country club or lodge membership is

often predicated on finances. Being a member of denomination costs money; it is not

generally free for a local congregation to belong to a religious denomination.

Now, I am not explaining away biblical requirement on giving. There is no evidence that

tithing was abolished in the New Testament and by all appearances they took giving to

a new level. Tithing is not a tax or a system of tariffs. Tithing is about connecting to

inheritance, blessings and favor. This is not the topic of this book but those who seek to

live for Christ and keep their finances separate for that commitment are deceiving

themselves.

Religious denominations operate overseers, staff, head quarters buildings and more.

This all costs money and someone has to pay the bill. This money comes in the form or

fees or dues or assessments (each of the 38000 has their own words for this money)

that are paid to the denomination. These fees are based on the membership numbers

or the income of the local assembly. Essentially, the local church is like a franchise.

Just like in a franchise the local church is required to adhere to a list of rules and

regulations and financial considerations.

In recent years it has become increasingly common for members of a denominational

church to be asked to pay to pray. What I mean by pay to pray is that many churches

78

require members to make a financial contribution either annually or monthly or they will

find that they no longer have membership. Can you imagine being asked to leave the

family? Especially the family of God? No, but there is where most of us make a

mistake. These churches are NOT posturing as the family of God. They are religious

groups operating as American Corporations and functioning much like country clubs

and virtually nothing like the New Testament Church.

The Humpty Dumpty creeds could well be defined by the postmodernists. Intolerance is

the only thing not tolerated by the postmodernist who says, "My truth is different than

your truth, so don't judge me with your outdated morals."115 “Such commentary by

the non-thinking and spiritually dead is all too common. But it doesn't change the true

meaning of what it means to be a follower of Christ. So, what does it mean to be a

Christian?”116 Some denominations have something as simple as a membership class

others required years of study and instruction. So, the simple answer of a Christian by

definition may not really be close. Even someone who is a Christian by definition may

find entrance to some denominations difficult.

Biblical Christianity

The second group of Christians is more

than just Christians by virtue of being born

in a Christian country, by virtue of infant

baptism, infant dedication or to parents who

profess Christ. These are followers of

Jesus Christ because of their professed

belief that Jesus Christ is the manifestation

of God in flesh.117 Biblical Christians hold

that Jesus Christ came to redeem mankind

from our sins. We chose to explain this

group, Biblical Christians. When

someone says, “I am a Christian” you can respond by asking, “Are you a Biblical

Christian?” This will generally invoke the response of either “Well, not like those in the

Bible” or a confirmation that they are trying to live their life for Jesus Christ. This will

help you to understand if they perceive themselves as a Humpty Dumpty type Christian

or a Biblical Christian.

115 What is a Christian. http://carm.org/christianity/devotions/what-christian

116 What is a Christian. http://carm.org/christianity/devotions/what-christian

117 1 Timothy 3:16. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the

flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

79

Biblical Christians are people who are followers of Jesus Christ and the tenets handed

down to us by his disciples (Apostles) through the New Testament. Historically, this

group has been in the shadows of the history of what has called itself the Christian

church. Biblical Christians have been overshadowed, by the State sponsored church.

Biblical Christians have numerically been in the minority. Yet, for the most part this has

not dampened their resolve to follow Jesus or promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Oft

times, Biblical Christians have been condemned to death or relegated as heretics by the

State sponsored church system.

Today because of the advance of personal and religious freedoms Biblical Christians

appreciate the greatest amount of freedom in recorded history. Based on the surveys of

top church marketing consultants like the George Barna group Biblical Christians would

be the largest share of the 12% that hold faith as a top priority in their life. It may be

that some of the remaining 71% who claim to be Christians would also be in this group.

However, it would be hard to imagine someone as a Biblical Christian who did not

consider faith a top priority in their life. Biblical Christians object to those who claim

Christ because purely for social relations, business connections or because it is

politically expedient. This group rejects the notion that those who have rewritten the

bible or have other books that they consider equal to the bible are Christians. This

would include the ‘Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (Mormons), a cult

with more in common with the Free Masonry than Christianity.

Biblical Christians are not necessarily defined by a particular faith or movement

although there have been movements that were committed solely to Biblical Christianity.

Certainly the general theme of the Protestant Reformation was a movement toward

restoring Biblical tenets of Christianity and away from State run religious systems in

general and the Roman Catholic Church in particular. Biblical Christians have been

represented by people like the Pilgrims, the Lollards,118 Anabaptists119, Quakers,

Apostolic Faith movement and other like minded followers of Jesus Christ who reject the

non biblical tenets of the established or State sponsored church in favor of the Biblical

118 Lollardy was a late medieval reform movement ca. 1382-1430. The movement was based on the

writings and teachings of the Oxford University theologian, John Wyclif. The movement started from Oxford and spread. The term Lollard was used as a abusive term for its questionable religious views. http://www.exlibris.org/nonconform/engdis/lollards.html 119 Anabaptist comes from the Greek meaning "rebaptiser". The term was usually used as a form of

derision. Individuals did not refer to themselves as Anabaptists, some groups used the term Brethren to

describe themselves. By 1525, Anabaptist congregations were spreading across most of German

speaking Europe. Continental Anabaptist congregations rejected the corrupted doctrines and practices of

the Roman Church, and the new Reformed Protestants Churches of the Reformation. Anabaptists sought

instead to reestablish a true Christian community based on their concepts of the early New Testaments

congregations. They saw themselves as the new saints of the one true Church.

80

model established by Jesus Christ and promulgated by his Apostles. This is not to

proclaim that adherents of these groups are perfect or that all factions of these groups

and movements achieved the ultimate goal of restoring the original doctrines of the

Apostles. Rather, we are recognizing their commitment to such a goal. Like the church

at Antioch where people were first called Christians, these have ‘earned the right’ to be

considered genuine followers of Christ. Only God Himself can make the final

designation and determination if these are

worthy to hear the words “Well Done My

Good and Faithful Servant…”

“A dictionary definition of a Christian would be

something similar to “a person professing belief

in Jesus as the Christ or in the religion based

on the teachings of Jesus.” While this is a

good starting point, like many dictionary

definitions, it falls somewhat short of really communicating the biblical truth of what it

means to be a Christian. The word “Christian” is used three times in the New

Testament (Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16). Followers of Jesus Christ were first called

“Christians” in Antioch (Acts 11:26) because their behavior, activity, and speech were

like Christ. The word “Christian” literally means, “Belonging to the party of Christ” or a

“follower of Christ.”

A Biblical Christian is a person who has put faith and trust in the person and work of

Jesus Christ, including His death on the cross as payment for sins and His resurrection

on the third day. John 1:12 tells us, “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed

in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” The mark of a true Christian

is love for others and obedience to God’s Word (1 John 2:4, 10). A true Christian is

indeed a child of God, a part of God’s true family, and one who has been given new life

in Jesus Christ.”120

It was at Antioch, the predominately Gentile church that the reference was first given to

followers of Christ as like Christ or Christians. The reason for this designation was that

they were like Christ in the way that they had unconditional love and forgiveness. No

other group of people had ever manifested such a spirit of forgiveness. This was

exemplified by Jesus Christ when he was undergoing His trial and subsequent

execution at the hands or unrighteous men. The epitome of this was when Jesus Christ

said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”121

120 http://www.gotquestions.org/what-is-a-Christian.html

121 KJV. Cambridge Edition. Luke Chapter 23.

81

Followers of Christ faced similar great persecution when Saul of Tarsus (later Apostle

Paul) came to their area and brought letters leveling great tribulation on the people of

Antioch. This resulted in many followers of Jesus Christ being killed, imprisoned and

more. Later, after his conversion, Apostle Paul comes to Antioch under the tutelage of

Apostle Barnabas. These followers of Jesus Christ in Antioch embraced Apostle Paul

and forgave him just like Jesus had given as example prompting observers to labeling

them Christ like, thus the idea of a Christian was born. Volumes could (and have) been

written about Biblical Christians. This is the model, the true, the goal for all those who

are genuinely following Jesus Christ. Like the lyrics of an old song,

“To be like Jesus, to be like Jesus, on earth I long to be like Him.”

82

The church was not merely a

thermometer that recorded the

ideas and principles of popular

opinion; it was a thermostat that

transformed the mores of society.

- Dr. Martin Luther King

83

84

In contrast to those we talked about in the introduction who say they “hate church”, I

would say that I love church. No, not the politics, the Humpty Dumpty mentality, the

deacon board wrangling with the pastor, the pomp and ceremony, the long robes, the

pompous who watch what everyone else is driving, or wearing and so forth. These are

frustrating to say the least. However, I love the people. I love coming together with

those of like precious faith and corporately worshipping our God together. God seems

to delight in it as well. I enjoy hearing a choir sing (even if they are not the most

polished group of vocalist). To me church is a welcome safe haven from the storms of

life. Time spent with fellow believers is time to forget

(even if only for a little while) the trials of life.

I could go on, but the question that I ask is does God

love church? I am not talking about does God love

The Church. That would be a no brainer. Of course

God loves The Church. He gave Himself for His

Church (Ephesians 5:25). The question is does God

love what we call church? You might ask, “Does God

love the church where I attend?” Or is my church a

haven for Humpty Dumpty Christianity? Again, Jesus

Christ definitely loves the people. Remember, Jesus loved the people and was always

kind to them. However, the pretentious religious leaders received the full blunt of the

wrath of Jesus including being physically chased from the Temple. These religious

leaders had inherited the mantle leaders of the people of God, but they had abused that

trust. First Jesus makes definite attempts to reform these religious leaders, but they

only sought to keep their positions safe. They had no interest in seeing their religious

movement reformed. Humpty Dumpty would have been proud of their efforts.

Instead of reforming the existing church Jesus brought a total reformation. The New

Testament church had to be the answer to the confusion that had become the people of

God. Biblical Christianity became the model. However, in the process of time we have

returned to this same abuse by religious leaders in what was originally entrusted to the

Apostles. We now have socially relevant denominations and churches that are

becoming more ‘socially relevant’, they are also becoming even less ‘spiritually

relevant’, as they continue to water down the word of God and His instruction in

righteousness in an effort to embrace more and more Humpty Dumpty Christians. The

dogma of inclusion has developed in direct opposition to the word of God. Western

churches have become more and more inclusive, as the Law of God is given lip service,

but the core values and instructions of the scriptures have been so chopped up that

85

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

Beth El – The House of God

In the Old Testament Jacob found himself in a serious predicament. He had gone back

to his mother’s people, found a wife (or two, or four, depending on how you count). He

had a full quiver of children, lots of material blessings, and life was good. Yet, God is

calling to Jacob. As he began to make his journey back to his homeland his thoughts

turned toward his walk with God and the promises that he had made. As a child I recall

hearing a favorite minister, the late Roger Evens, 123sing an old song, “Back to Bethel”.

I remember him so well with his according and singing the familiar words, “Bethel is

calling and I must go!”

Bethel was calling to Jacob. Here at the place where he had a close encounter with the

eternal Creator of the Universe. Here where a ladder appeared to him that went up into

the heavens. Here Jacob gets not only a dream but a prophetic glimpse into his destiny

and that of his family. The dream “was probably a type of CHRIST, in whom both

worlds meet, and in whom the Divine and human nature are conjoined. The LADDER

was set up on the EARTH, and the TOP of it reached to HEAVEN; for GOD was

manifested in the FLESH, and in him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

Nothing could be a more expressive emblem of the incarnation and its effects; Jesus

Christ is the grand connecting medium between heaven and earth, and between God

and man. By him God comes down to man; through him man ascends to God. It

appears that our Lord applies the vision in this

way himself, 1st, In that remarkable speech to

Nathanael, Hereafter ye shall see the heaven

opened, and the angels of God ascending and

descending on the Son of man, John 1:51.

Secondly, in his speech to Thomas, John 14:6: I

am the Way, and the truth, and the life; no man

cometh unto the Father but by me.”

Here Jacob makes a proclamation, “This is none

other but the house of God” and “I knew it not!” Jacob is at a place by the road where

there is nothing but a stone for a pillow. However, it cannot be ignored that he calls this

place the “HOUSE OF GOD”. What no building? No pews, no altar? Jacob realizes

122 How Many Churches Can a Community Support. A. W. Bowman.

http://hatalmidim.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=aw&thread=210 123

Apostolic Archives. Who’s Who. Rev. Roger Lloyd Evens. http://www.apostolicarchives.com/whoswho_e.html

86

that his church needs an altar so he stands a stone up to form a pillar. This was not an

effort to place furniture but rather to give proper attention to prayer. Jacob’s church has

an altar. This is the house of God. He anoints it with oil and dedicates the place to

God. He vows a vow to God to dedicate his life and that of his posterity to God. He

references the connection that he has to his grandfather, Abraham, and the Divine

promise that God made to Abraham and confirmed through the encounter with

Melchisadec. This place Jacob dedicates for worship to his God. “I shall worship God

in this place.”

So, Jacob returns to his homeland. However, life comes at Jacob hard and a plethora

of ugly things happened to him and his family. Finally, Jacob calls for a change. It is

time to go back to Beth El. In returning to Bethel, Jacob gives instruction to his family to

get rid of those things that should not be in their home. For all of us, it is past time to

go back to Bethel. Time to turn our focus from Humpty Dumpty Christendom and

toward Biblical Christianity.

38000 Schisms

Apostle Paul warns us that we would see division in the body of Christ if we failed to

follow Christ. We call these denominations; Apostle Paul called them schisms. Did he

imagine that we would have 38000

major divisions and so many smaller

ones that I doubt anyone has an

accurate count? Probably no one

could list all the various sub sects.

Some say there are more than 1000

further schisms under just the Baptist

denomination. The root concept of the

word denomination signifies the dividing

of the nation. Jesus Christ died for one

church. Men have divided what he died

for into various chunks and parts. Jesus Christ shed His precious blood to claim His

church. Men continue to experiment with that which Jesus gave His life. Men taking

parts and pieces of the body of Christ and creating different concepts have turned the

body of Christ into a spiritual Frankenstein.

In Matthew chapter 23 our Lord pronounces eight woes, or rather pathetic declarations,

against the scribes and Pharisees. These are equally applicable to the 38000

denominations that claim to be the Christian church. This explains Humpty Dumpty

Christendom.

87

“1. Their unwillingness to let the common people enjoy the pure word of God, or its right

explanation: Ye shut up the kingdom, etc., Matthew 23:13.

2. Their rapacity, and pretended sanctity in order to secure their secular ends: Ye

devour widow’s houses, etc., Matthew 23:14.

3. Their pretended zeal to spread the kingdom of God by making proselytes, when they

had no other end in view than forming instruments for the purposes of their oppression

and cruelty: Ye compass sea and land, etc., Matthew 23:15.

4. Their bad doctrine and false interpretations of

the Scriptures, and their dispensing with the

most solemn oaths and vows at pleasure: Ye

blind guides, which say, whosoever shall swear

by the Temple, it is nothing, etc., Matthew 23:16-

22.

5. For their superstition in scrupulously attending

to little things, and things not commanded, and

omitting matters of great importance, the practice

of which God had especially enjoined: Ye pay

tithe of mint and cummin, etc., Matthew 23:23, 24.

6. Their hypocrisy, pretended saint-ship, and endeavoring to maintain decency in their

outward conduct, while they had no other object in view than to deceive the people, and

make them acquiesce in their oppressive measures: Ye make clean the outside of the

cup, Matthew 23:25, 26.

7. For the depth of their inward depravity and abomination, having nothing good, fair, or

supportable, but the mere outside.-Most hypocrites and wicked men have some good:

but these were radically and totally evil: Ye are like unto whited sepulchers - within full-

of all uncleanness, Matthew23:27, 28.

8. For their pretended concern for the holiness of the people, which proceeded no

farther than to keep them free from such pollutions as they might accidentally and

innocently contract, by casually stepping on the place where a person had been buried:

and for their affected regret that their fathers had killed the prophets, while themselves

possessed and cultivated the same murderous inclinations: Ye-garnish the sepulchers

of the righteous, and say, If we had been, etc., Matthew 23:29, 30.”124

124 Adam Clark Commentary. Matthew. Chapter 23.

88

A Form of Godliness

The challenge for Biblical Christians has long been how to embrace the tenets of the

Apostles in the modern world. The State sponsored or denominational franchise that

has replaced the Biblical Church, and those who have continued or in some manner

embraced the same tradition, have exchanged structure for substance and are focused

more on pomp, hierarchy and religious ceremony than on the tenets of the Apostles.

This has led the modern ecclesiastical organization to fulfill the Scripture in 2 Timothy

Chapter 3:

3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

3:2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud,

blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3:3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce,

despisers of those that are good,

3:4 Traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

3:5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn

away.

Adam Clark commented on this passage,

“The original word signifies a draught,

sketch, or summary, and will apply well to

those who have all their religion in their

creed, confession of faith, catechism,

bodies of divinity, etc., while destitute of the

life of God in their souls; and are not only

destitute of this life, but deny that such life

or power is here to be experienced or

known. They have religion in their creed,

but none in their hearts. And perhaps to their summary they add a decent round of

religious observances. From such turn away — not only do not imitate them, but have

no kind of fellowship with them; they are a dangerous people, and but seldom

suspected, because their outside is fair.”125 It would seem that Adam Clark wrote this

about the plethora of denominations and mega church entities that dominate the

modern church, but Adam Clark wrote this more than 100 years ago. Perhaps he knew

of Humpty Dumpty.

125 Adam Clark Commentary. Second Timothy. Pg. 231.

89

Biblical Christians focus on “the early church which believed that Jesus was the very

presence of God and that the body of Christ (the church) constitutes his temple.”126

“Jesus made some radical statements about the Temple127 in Jerusalem that angered

the Jews of his day. One that angered them the most was the claim that if the Temple

was destroyed he would build a new one in three days! (John 2:19-21) Though he was

referring to the architectural temple as an example, he was actually referring to the real

temple – his body – which he did raise up as Himself on the third day (Ephesians

2:6).”128 Jesus did not make this point to just make the Jews mad. He made the point

in an attempt for them to understand that His interest was in people, not buildings.

“The New Testament teaches that since Christ is risen, we Christians have become

God’s temple through his “life giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:45). Through his spirit, he takes

up residence with his believers, making them his house or temple. This is why the NT

never refers to the church as a building, but as a people.”129 With Jesus, we no longer

need a specific or special place to worship God. We can worship Him in spirit and truth

from anywhere. “When Christianity was born, it was the only religion on the planet that

had no sacred objects, no sacred persons, and no sacred spaces.” (James D. G. Dunn).

As another scholar has put it, “The Christianity that conquered the Roman Empire

was essentially a home-centered movement.”

Reformation

This is not the first time in the history of the church that

there has been a general call to restore the church to

its original concept. Throughout history we have had

these calls. In reality, the origin of the New Testament

church comes from one of these calls. That call was

away from the formalism of a building as the central

theme of worship and to embrace a God that would

come and dwell in you! This was revolutionary concept

available to ‘whosoever will’.

Since that time, what has generally come from these reformations or calls to reform is

either a new denomination or a new movement. This approach is part of the problem.

What happens is that denominations and other religious entities have either no

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

127 Pagan Christianity. Frank Viola and George Barna.

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

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

90

mechanism for this type of radical change or are simply unwilling to let this happen.

The fact of the matter is that we don’t need another denomination, we have too many

already. We have denominations that are for baptizing people three times forward and

those against. We have denominations who all women must wear white hose and

those who do not. We have denominations that allow women to pastor and those who

do not even allow women to clean the furnishings on the pulpit area. I am not making

these up! These are only a beginning of the multitude of reasons (or excuses) we have

made to divide from one another. I often wonder what would happen if we just worked

on reasons to come together.

What is needed is not another denomination, but a simple return to the vision, mission

and doctrine of Biblical Christianity. I know that I will be called a radical but why do we

need any denominations? What is needed is simplicity. How to navigate through the

maze that we have built around that simplicity over the past 2000 years may not be

easy. The task may very well resemble peeling layers from an onion. When you

remove one layer you will find just another similar

layer. Yet, eventually you will reach the core which

is the seed bed and the beginning of the onion.

This is what needs to be done in stripping away

the thousands of coats of paint that have been put

on the church. We could liken the outer layer to

the Humpty Dumpty Christians and the core as the

Biblical Christians. As we know there is a skin on

the onion that is discarded and not used.

Denominations are very sensitive about their turf

and they are not going to readily embrace anything

that seems to challenge their territory. This is

exactly the problem that Jesus faced when He came. The Pharisees, Sadducees and

other religious leaders in Jerusalem were not about to listen to this upstart Jesus Christ

fellow no matter how many miracles He did among the people. Jesus railed against the

pseudo religious system that had been assembled to look like the continuation of the

Torah, railed against the hypocrisy of the Jewish polity and sought to wake the leaders

up to repent and return to the true. Over and over again He rebuked the Pharisees for

their hypocrisy. What happened was a great awakening but it was forced to become a

whole new movement; a New Testament, rather than renewing the Old Testament.

Jesus saw this problem ahead of time and declared, “You can’t put new wine in old

wineskins.” Thus, there for change to come it will have to come from outside of the

organized Church. Humpty Dumpty Christendom is not going to lead the charge to

return us to our roots. This will have to come from Biblical Christians.

91

“And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the

bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must

be put into new bottles.” (Mark 2:22).

Sola Scriptura

“Let God-inspired Scripture decide between us; and on whichever side be found

doctrines in harmony with the word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of

truth.” – Basil of Caesarea (c. 330 – 379 A.D.)

The words of men opposed to empirical authority and the doctrines of men and devils,

words of wisdom like those quoted above from Basil of Caesarea were apparently not

heeded in the development of the State run and denominationally oriented church

structure. It is hard from our vantage point, to see what Basil was seeing in his day, but

looking back through the telescope of time, we can certainly see what came as a result

of men tinkering with the church. In the first 1000 plus years after the advent of the New

Testament church there were so many changes made by men under the guise of ‘new

truth’ or church counsels or whatever seemed to be the flavor of the day. The end

result was something that had little resemblance to the original leaving us with the

current maze of denominational schisms.

Most of this change was accomplished because of a ministry that became dominated by

the educational elite in contrast to men full of the Holy Spirit. These educational elite

became the only ones who could read the Scripture because there was no translation

into the languages that the common people could read. By the mid 1500’s the distortion

has become so bad that it was difficult to tell if the State run and denominational

churches had ever been based on Scripture. The Reformers began to rally around the

concept of Sola Scriptura.

Sola scriptura (Latin ablative, "by scripture

alone") is the doctrine that

the Bible contains all knowledge

necessary for salvation and holiness.130 It

is hard to imagine that anyone in the New

Testament would have questioned such a

position. Yet, this became a battle ground.

“The issue of Sola Scriptura was an issue

regarding the question of authority.

130 Wikipedia. Sola Scriptura.

92

Specifically, “is God’s authority invested in a book or in an Institution (the Church)?” The

Protestant Reformers believed in Sola Scriptura (the Scriptures Alone), and would

declare the Roman Church to believe and practice Sola Ecclesia (by the Church Alone),

for quite simply, what the Roman Catholic Church says to be true, is true because the

Church speaks with infallibility and cannot possibly be wrong.”131 Unfortunately, those

who came in the wake of the various reformers and various waves of the Reformation

stopped where they found some truth and erected monuments to that truth. These

became the plethora of denominations that are now 38000 schisms.

Duplicate Fade

How different these Biblical Christians operated from what we call Christians today. I

remember reading an author who after writing the manuscript for his book shared it with

one of his friends. The book was primarily about the function of the New Testament

church. It was an effort to separate what we have generally

believed (or what are denominations have taught us to

believe) verses what was actually practiced by Biblical

Christians. After his friend had read the book he commented

to the author, “They were sure off on some points”. The

friend did not see the obvious that if someone is off it cannot

be the New Testament church which remains as the example

or the original pattern. The Biblical Christians are those from

which we should be patterning the current church. If there is

something wrong then it is with what we offer today as the

church not with Biblical Christians. It is we that have strayed

from the original pattern. It is like Jeremiah prayer, “We

have sinned against you O’ God and against you alone!”

One of the things we have to get is a clear picture of what

Biblical Christians believed. This is not as complicated as

some would like to pretend. The picture has faded due to the passing of time, but

restoration is quite possible. Dr. Robert Straube offered this word picture of our

difficulty. “Ever hear of duplicate fade? It is a term used in image quality when a

photograph is taken of a photocopy of a photocopy, etc. The 500th copy of copies

would not be near as crisp as the first copy.

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

2011.

Duplicate fade. After multiple reproductions a perfectly clear image becomes terribly distorted.

93

This term, duplicate fade, is also used in organizational management. There has been

some 500, 40 year generations since our church founder, Jesus Christ, first uttered the

Great Commission to His disciples. That's 500 times when one generation copied the

previous generation's methods, that copied its previous generation's method that

copied…”

Dr. Robert Straube continued, “I believe that we not only have the Empirical agenda of

Constantine, but also a measure of duplicate fade in the church, even with the best

intentions.” In some cases duplicate fade is done on purpose and there is a relative

science to the process. This may be applicable in the case of the modern church

movement. Whether by accident or by design there is no doubt that we have faded

from the original pattern. Being a Christian is now a generic term and Biblical Christians

are a minority.

We need to realize that function is preferable to presentation. Too often the church has

decided that the main thing is the presentation. So while we build beautiful edifices,

with the best equipment, and the most wonderful of furnishings, we have lost the point

of accomplishment. While our modern presentation is wonderful we seem to have lost

sight of the mission.

It was said that Saint Francis Assisi was walking through the counting houses of the

Vatican where there were vast sums of money being counted. Saint Francis was with

the Pope.

The Pope comments to Assisi, “Francis, no longer can the church say, ‘silver and gold

have I none.”

“Yes, your Excellency”, St Francis responded.

“Unfortunately, we can also no longer say,

“but such as I have give I thee, in the name of

Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk!”

So there we have the quandary. It seems

that like Rehoboam we have traded our gold

for brass. Instead of the demonstration and

power of the Holy Spirit deemed so important

by Apostle Paul we have buildings, wealth

and influence. I expect that most concur that

we did not do well in that trade. We have

traded the gold of Biblical Christianity for

Humpty Dumpty.

94

Orthodox

When you write a treatise like this one,

people will ask you, “Are you saying that

2000 years of church history is wrong?” or

more to the point, “Are you arguing with

2000 years of church history?” What they

are indicating is that only the group(s) that

has swayed history in their favor is correct.

My response is simple. Yes! I am standing

on the Word of God and with 2000 years of

opposition to those who would change or

alter Biblical instruction. I do so with good

reason.

The Apostles gave us a volume of warnings

on this subject. They warned us not to

accept anyone, even an angel from heaven,

who brought doctrine contrary to what is in Scripture. Unbelievably there is even one

cult that claims that very thing, that an angel instructed their founder to change the

Word of God. “The Apostle Paul warned in the strongest possible terms about the

attitude of God toward those who would pervert the gospel of Jesus Christ. We can

understand this, as it cost God his only begotten son, Jesus, a horrible death by

crucifixion:”132

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than

that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before,

so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye

have received, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8, 9

The definition of orthodox is “conforming to the Christian faith as represented in the

creeds of the early church.” The challenge is, unless you use the Bible as the orthodox

position there is no line of demarcation or line in the sand. When faced with this type of

problem the great general Joshua made is simple. He drew a line in the sand and

challenged those who were on the Lord’s side to join him. This is the position that the

reformers have always taken. Using the Word of God as the Lord’s side, they have

drawn their line in the sand there.

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

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

95

What has happened is the State sanctioned churches and denominational cousins first

offered their own dogma’s to “explain” the doctrine of the New Testament church.

These became the ‘new’ truth.

This is not really a new approach. In the Old Testament the Pharisees and others did

almost the same thing. The Old Testament manipulators did so under the guise of

claiming they were building a fence around the law.133 God had given them the law but

they took it upon themselves to build the fence. Jesus railed against this abuse of His

law! This ‘fence’ was the major point of contention that

Jesus had with the religious leaders of His day. So it is

with the modern times. These changes, additions and

subtractions from the State sanctioned church are simply

not acceptable to Biblical Christians and with very good

reason. God warns of severe eternal penalty for those

who would make such alterations to His Word.

I warn everyone who hears the words of the

prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to

them, God will add to him the plagues described in

this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will

take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are

described in this book.134

This change of the New Testament beliefs was accomplished by the imprimatur of kings

through the commitment of elitists who generally assumed that they alone could

understand truth and the rest of the people were unable to understand the things of

God. Then, these groups decided that anyone who did not agree with them was a

heretic. These quickly and viciously dispatched of all who disagreed with their ‘new

truth’ and then declared that they alone held the orthodox view. The orthodox view

being not really orthodox but just the truth as they defined.

This book is not about the abuses of these self proclaimed ‘orthodox’ groups. It would

take volumes to expose the hypocrisy of such men who have changed the word of God.

To further complicate the matter, one would have to choose which group is orthodox as

there is more than one religious entity making such claims. One of these groups even

calls itself the Orthodox Church. This revisionist version of orthodoxy would be like a

group of assassins going to the Ford Motor Company headquarters taking over

133 Judaism 101. Halakhah: Jewish Law. The Third Talmudic Claim: The oral law is a fence around the

written Torah. 134

THE HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®, NIV® Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica. Revelation 22:18-19.

96

operations, firing or if necessary killing anyone who opposed the takeover, changing the

name from Ford to Universal, putting in a motor from a Vega and calling it their new

Universal vehicle the original (orthodox)!

Now, it would still look like a car, possibly even run

like a car, but original? Hardly. Yet, this is what

we have in this self appointed “orthodoxy”.

Reformers for the last several hundred years have

faced this same hurdle. Fortunately, these

Reformers, men like John Wycliffe and John

Wesley have hazarded their lives to give us a

platform for turning the people of God to the bible

and away from the dictates of men. John Wycliffe,

who is considered the “Morning Star of the Reformation”135 for repudiating doctrines that

the State sanctioned church called orthodox that were not.

I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the

blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue

of Satan. (Revelation 2:9).

Practical Christianity for Biblical Christians

There are some things that are just not up for change or debate. We have basic

salvation instruction given to us in Matthew chapter 28 by Jesus Christ. This instruction

places all power in heaven and in the earth in the name of Jesus Christ. This is very

important. It is evident that when we look toward salvation we should be inclined to look

toward the one with all the power. The Apostles are often asked by whose power or

under whose authority have you done these things? The people all knew that there was

a genuine orthodoxy in the doctrine of the Apostles of the New Testament Church.

In Acts chapter 2, when the Apostles are asked the formula necessary for salvation they

reference the commandment of Jesus Christ in Apostle Peter’s instruction to repent, be

baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and receive the Holy Ghost. These are given

instructions. Any attempts to alter or change these should be ignored and/or opposed.

The book of Revelation makes it very clear that the penalty for those who add to or take

away from the word of God is very severe.

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that

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

97

are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the

book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and

out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book."

Church Counsel

In Acts Chapter 15 there is a debate in the church about other necessary things for

Biblical Christians. Here in the only church counsel ever recorded in New Testament

times are assembled the leaders of the church.

Factions that had developed from both Jewish and Gentile converts had agreed to have

their leaders work toward an agreement. These were all already adherents of the

commandment of Christ to repent of their sins. They had been baptized into Jesus

Christ and filled with His Spirit. The topic of this counsel was whether or not the laws of

circumcision and other related things were applicable to the New Testament church.

Apostle James invokes the law of the Gentiles that was given in Genesis to Noah as the

solution. From this we are reminded that we are not to worship idols, not to eat things

dedicated to idols and certainly not to engage in sexual immorality. This combined

expectation from Acts Chapters 2 and 15 is the foundational doctrine for Biblical

Christians. Study this; commit it to memory and to your heart.

As a Biblical Christian, once you have these basics, practice living for Christ. Your

home and life should be tuned to Jesus. When interacting with people always be aware

that people are hurting and have needs. Many times, if you are listening, they will ask

for your help or your prayers. Be ready for these occasions and remember they have

probably seen a number of ‘plastic Christians’. Plastic Christians are part of the Humpty

Dumpty Christian group. These are those that say they are of Christ, but possess

nothing. The Apostle Paul had some men mimic him in like manner. They invoked the

“God that Paul serves” in an effort to exorcize some demons. The result was they

became demon possessed.

“A group of Jews was traveling from town to town casting out evil spirits. They tried to

use the name of the Lord Jesus in their incantation, saying, "I command you in the

name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, to come out!" Acts 19:13.

98

Keep the Main Thing the Main Thing

We are not suggesting that there is anything inherently

wrong with going to a building designated for meetings

of the Church. Neither is the idea of having a place

designated for worship or prayer. However, we cannot

allow these to be the main thing. As a friend of mine

explains it tongue in cheek, “We have to keep the main

thing, the main thing.” We must accept that having a

building designated for church and gathering there is

secondary to the mission. The mission of taking the

Gospel into the highways and the byways must continue with or without nice buildings

and all the finery associated with them. It must continue absent from the dictates of

men and denominations.

The idea of going to church was a foreign concept to the New Testament follower of

Jesus Christ. Their focus was not on attendance. Rather, they were focused on

results. Impacting the world with the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ was too

wonderfully important not to entirely focus on the mission. The mission given to the

followers of Jesus Christ is really simple.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every

creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not

shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they

cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if

they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and

they shall recover. (Mark 16:14-18)

From this simple instruction by Jesus, generally referred to as the Great Commission

we have evolved (or some say devolved) into the current 38000 denominations creating

a great turf war we have come to commonly refer to as Christianity. It is time to boldly

admit that this is not the church that Jesus Christ commissioned. While various

denominations vie for recognition as the one, true church it is likely that neither Jesus

Christ nor the Apostles would recognize them as the continuation of the church that they

left to their posterity.

“The Christian church (ekklesia) was meant to be an alternative society, a society of a

radically different order with radically different values. It was a thumbnail sketch of the

kingdom of God. So, for example, in the ekklesia of God, Jews and Gentiles, so often

separated in Roman society, shared life together as brothers and sisters. Slaves could

also be full participants in the Christian gatherings, enjoying equality in Christ with non-

slaves, even with their masters. Women could actively participate in the gatherings just

99

as long as they didn’t engage in the scandalous behavior of the pagan cults. The

theological truth that in Christ “there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave

or free, there is no longer male and female” was lived out in the Christian assemblies

(Galatians 3:28). Thus, they were a kind of alternative society, one that implicitly

rejected the domineering, separatistic, and elitist values of the Roman world.”136

Many denominations have adopted some of the same divisive ideas of ancient cultures

giving rise to the segregation of people in their worship services by class, gender,

nationality, and financial status. While in the early church women were actively involved

in the church. 2000 years later many churches do not allow women an active role and

women often find they have to contend for the place given to them by God.

Going to Church

Some people think that simply going to a church will

make you a Christian. As we have pointed out this is

the Humpty Dumpty Christian method. First join a

church (some denomination of the 38000 claiming to

alone possess all truth) and then you must go to church

(a place franchised by the denomination as their official

location in that area).

Is it fair to say that Church attendance alone will

suffice? If the point is just church attendance then why

didn’t Jesus and/or the Apostles build buildings? Not only did they not build any

buildings Jesus was very pointed about the one building that they reverenced - the

Temple. While Jesus is being led to Calvary He instructs the women not to weep for

him but to weep for themselves and their children. Then he speaks to the emptiness of

the Jewish religious system in particular and to the Temple in particular,

“Behold, I leave you your house desolate.”

“The temple: this is certainly what is meant. It was once the Lord’s temple, God’s OWN

house; but now he says, YOUR temple or house-to intimate that God had abandoned

it.”137 “Our Lord plainly foresaw that, in process of time, a spiritual domination would

arise in his Church; and, to prevent its evil influence, he leaves the strong warnings

against it which are contained in the former part of this chapter (Matthew 23). As the

religion of Christ completely spiritual, and the influence by which it is produced and

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

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

100

maintained must come from heaven; therefore, there could be no master or head but

himself: for as the Church (the assemblage of true believers) is his body, all its

intelligence, light, and life, must proceed from him alone. Our forefathers noted this well;

and this was one of the grand arguments by which they overturned the papal

pretensions to supremacy in this country (England).”138

In a note on Matthew 23:9, in a Bible published by Edmund

Becke in 1549, the 2nd of Edward VI., we find the following

words (translated by this author from old English modern: “Call

no man your father upon the earth. Here is the Bishop of Rome

declared a plain Antichrist, in that he would be called the most

holy father; and that all Christen men should acknowledge him

for no less than their spiritual father, not withstanding these plain

words of Christ. It is true, nothing can be plainer; and yet, in the

face of these commands, the pope has claimed the honor; and

millions of men have been so stupid as to concede it. May those

days of darkness, tyranny, and disgrace, never return!”139

The Whole Church

Apostle Paul chides the Galatian church for trying to perfect in the flesh what was begun

in the Spirit (Galatians Chapter 3). Apostle Paul calls them foolish. Like the Galatian

church we have been busy with our ‘cookie cutter’ trying to perfect in the flesh what

began in the Spirit. We have used the flesh to decide what the church is, what a

Christian is and who can participate in God’s church. In this experiment we have left

behind too many of the body. We have systematically decided who is part of the church

and what they should look like. While there are many different segments of society we

have marginalized to some platform of ‘ministry’ rather than just acknowledging them as

part of the church. We will examine some of these.

Let us start with those we call sick or shut in. This designation is offered under the

guise of some kind of humane gesture as though someone’s Christianity is predicated

by location or physical ability or both. While we are busy ‘ministering’ to these people

we might want to consider that they could minister to us were we to allow that

opportunity. Rather than requiring or expecting attendance from these why not go to

them. Or, should we expect that their Christianity gets repealed at some point due to a

lack of attendance at a place approved by some denomination at a church? While this

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

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

Becke Bible of 1549

101

is may or may not be a stated position of religious denominations it is how most

religious organizations operate in regard to these good people of God.

I think of my late Grandmother who was unable to attend church services during the last

several years of her life. We called her Mammaw. Mammaw was a young woman who

came up in rough times. Born to a poor family that did not go to church or speak of God

she lived like the world. She married my Grandfather who had once been baptized by

representatives of a religious denomination and would be categorized as a non

practicing Southern Baptist. Had you asked him if he was a Christian he would have

certainly said, “Yes”. However, if you had asked him if he was living a life style that

would take him to heaven that would have brought an entirely different answer. While

not living for Christ he understood what being a Biblical Christian really entailed.

Together, my grandparents they lived life like most non believers in the 1920’s. As we

say in the South, Mammaw was rougher than a corn cob. Then in the height of the

Great Depression my Grandfather visited an Apostolic Faith Church was born again of

the water and of the Spirit and it changed his life. Later Mammaw had her own

conversion experience. My Grandparents became mainstays of their local church. If

there was a meeting of virtually any kind my grandparents were there. They were

instrumental in impacting two churches (one in Cleveland Ohio and another in Knoxville,

Tennessee). After their retirement they help establish another church in Columbia

Station, Ohio). Then in their later years they moved back (again) to their home in

Knoxville, Tennessee where my grandfather eventually went to his eternal reward.

Mammaw lived on for another 20 years after my

Grandfathers death. This was a woman who’s walk

with Jesus Christ was a model to the believer for

over 70 years! Those who knew her often spoke of

her witness for Christ. She was more than just one

who claimed Christ. She lived Christ. It was not

uncommon for her to be cooking (something she

really enjoyed) and begin speaking in tongues,

shouting and praising God. I recalled in my book, I

Was the Ugly Duckling140 a Thanksgiving dinner

where Mammaw danced out of the kitchen with a

bowl in hand stirring and dancing and praising God

with her eyes closed! What a sight to see! It made the unbelievers in the family

uncomfortable but thrilled the believers. I have never forgotten this wonderful woman of

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

Freedom Press. 2011.

102

God who gave as a continual example her devotion to Jesus Christ or the power of the

Holy Spirit that was demonstrated in her life.

As she aged into her 90’s her physical ability to attend church meetings was often

affected by her body’s ability to get out and to sit through a church service, but she lived

for Christ and was the church in action. As Mammaw neared 100 years (her age at

death) she was often visited by nurses. Many of these nurses became believers in

Jesus Christ because of the powerful testimony of this woman of God.

The conventional wisdom offered by a plethora of religious folks says that those who do

not attend a church building are back slid or cold in their faith or a plethora of other

adjectives used by religious organizations to control their adherents. Mammaw loved

God, often talked about how she wished attendance with the greater body of believers

was more possible and those who visited her always heard her talk about Jesus! Like

the scripture in Malachi, “They that loved the Lord spake often one with another…”

I know that the pastor of her home church and his wife, Bishop Billy McCool and his wife

Betty, never forgot this faithful saint of God. They were faithful to visit and encourage

this aged saint. These were highlights of her day to day life. Her home church, First

Apostolic remained a constant thought in her life, but attendance was not attainable.

This woman remained a valuable part of the church till the day of her death. Her role in

the body of Christ and her commitment as a Biblical Christian was not predicated on her

location, church attendance of physical participation. She had made a commitment to

her God, a commitment that never wavered through more than 70 years.

This is not one segment of the body of Christ that has been affected by “the church is a

building” mentality. Of the more that 38000 denominations only a couple of small ones

offer regular meetings at their buildings they call the church on a day other than

Sunday. These primarily do so due to some religious tenet rather than a sense of

church. Thus, all those who by virtue of vocational responsibility that are unavailable to

gather on Sunday morning are relegated to non church status by the majority of these

religious entities. The current model of going to

church has been with us for so long it is entrenched in

our very society. Most that say they are Christians

think Sunday worship is a Biblical commandment

rather than an Empirical mandate.

No longer do most people call the body of Christ or the

people the church; rather they refer to the building as

the Church because that is where their denominational

leaders have taught them they go to church. If we

apply this model to practical question we would ask:

103

Do you cease being a Christian when you don’t go to a building called the church? The

answer from many might surprise you. The reality is that many church groups teach

that if you don’t come to their building for your going to church you are not a Christian.

This would include if you go to another building that the people there call ‘the church’.

To this idea Apostle Paul chided, “IS CHRIST DIVIDED?” (I Cor. 13:1) Even the best

of followers of Jesus Christ are confused by this division of the body of Christ into

separate sects or groups. Indeed it is evident that like the Galatian Church the modern

church has concluded that which was born in the Spirit will be perfected in the flesh.

In an appeal to reason Apostle Paul asks, “Was Paul crucified for you?” (I Cor.

13:1). As if he said: Did I ever attempt to set up a new religion, one founded on my own

authority, and coming from myself? To the contrary, have I not preached Christ

crucified for the sin of the world; and called upon all mankind, both Jews and Gentiles,

to believe on Him?

Let us be honest. Today we have a plethora of religions all claiming to be of Christ and

they are founded on men and on the authority of men and some of these men claim

they alone are speaking for God. Unfortunately, none of these are like the New

Testament church nor are they preparing people to live as Biblical Christians.

The Church as the Body of Christ

Because of the obvious abuse by the church is a

building mentality some have adopted names for

their religious group like “Church without Walls”

to emphasize a new approach to the church

structure. This may be a step in the right

direction or it may be just a façade. Only God

really knows. Unfortunately, many of these

efforts end up being more structured, authoritarian and legalistic

than the denominations they propose to replace. However, it is evident that we must

include the whole church and not just those who attend the variety of buildings we have

designated as the church.

In Acts chapter one verse 4 we find these simple words describing the New Testament

Church at Jerusalem, being assembled together. Which refers to “living or eating

together.”141 Indeed Jesus Christ had modeled the behavior of His Church in the way

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

104

that he conducted His life. Jesus spent His earthly ministry in close proximity to his

disciples, teaching and ministering. Like His forerunner John the Baptist there were no

fine cathedrals or the invitation for the use of the Temple for the followers of Christ.

Rather they met in the country side, or by the Jordan River, on the shore of a lake or

other natural amphitheaters, in houses or wherever they could safely and peacefully

gather. They were not welcomed into the fine places of Jerusalem and any large

gathering was certainly suspect to their Roman masters. Today it is no different. No

large well placed group with a national presence and fine edifice is going to offer the

use of their facility to some small, what they would consider insignificant group who

claims to follow Jesus. People in Jerusalem were divided by many things as we have

outlined. People today are equally divided even those who claim to follow Christ.

We have to admit that the idea of a building as the church is a terrible distortion. A

building may indeed be a place where the church meets but it is certainly not the

church. When Apostle Paul gives instruction to take matters to the church he is not

referring to a building and he is not referring to a hierarchy or denomination. What he is

referring to is the local body of believers. In the myriad of references to the church in

the New Testament not one of them is speaking about a building.

In Acts Chapter 12 we find THE CHURCH in prayer concerning the imprisonment of

Apostle Peter. God answers in a miraculous way and delivers Peter. Then Peter goes

to THE CHURCH. This is not a building, but it is the gathering of the body of believers

who in this case are meeting in a house. Yes a house. THE CHURCH was not having

a concert or a social gathering, they were praying. Acts chapter 14 talks about the

gathering of the Church together. This is a reference to calling all the body of believers

to come together. They were not building some edifice called the church.

In Acts chapter 15 the writer talks about Paul and Barnabas being received by the

church and the Apostles and elders. Clearly, the writer is making sure that the reader

(or hearer) understood that the church was the

people and included the Apostles and elders who

were the leadership of the body of Christ. The

reference here is to “the whole body of Christian

believers.”142 Further, it is evident from the passage

that Paul and Barnabas were submitting themselves

to the church body at Jerusalem and to their

leaders; the Apostles as representative of the

fivefold ministry and the elders as officers that were

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

105

in the church under them.143 There was never a transfer of power from the New

Testament Church in Jerusalem to the leaders of the RCC in Rome. The Jerusalem

Church working with other church bodies like those in Antioch was the body of Christ

working in harmony. When Acts 15:32 refers to the “whole church”. This is a reference

to all the body at Jerusalem; the people not a building.

In stark contrast to the reference to the followers of Jesus Christ as the church, we find

that Apostle Paul referring to the pagan (Greek) buildings to their pagan gods as their

churches. While the followers of Jesus Christ were referenced as being the church, to

the pagan buildings were their church. The pagan churches were obviously deposits of

some wealth as the town clerk makes it clear that the Apostles were not ‘robbing’ the

pagan churches. In verse 6 of Acts chapter 1 we are again reminded, “When they were

therefore come together”, this is reference to “assembling on one of the mountains of

Galilee there meeting our Lord.”144 If the church is, as Scripture offers, the gathering of

the body or followers of Jesus Christ then we should see many examples of this beyond

the buildings so fondly called “the church”. Scripture is filled with references to the

church as the body of Christ and none about the church as a building. Much of what we

have classified as ‘ministry’ is really the gathering of the body of Christ and should be

considered church. These would include:

Campus Church

In fairness we have seen some softening of denominational positions in this area.

Campus ministry used to only be an out cropping of some church system but we have

had some recognize those gathering at college campuses to be the church in their own

right. These groups are on the front lines and in many cases facing persecution like

that forced upon the early church. Here is one recent example of an active campus

church:

“Christian student organizations at Vanderbilt

University may be forced to go underground or

meet in secret after university officials doubled

down on a policy that bans student religious

groups from requiring their leaders to hold

specific beliefs, according to a university law

professor. Vanderbilt University said their

nondiscrimination policy ensure that campus

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

144 Clark Commentary. The Acts of the Apostles. Page. 361.

106

groups are open to all students. But opponents said the ban restricts their freedom of

speech and could force some nationally-known groups off campus.”

“There are people on campus who are very threatened by the idea of religious freedom

and they would like to create an environment where no one hurts anyone else’s feelings

– unless it’s Christians,” said Carol Swain, a Vanderbilt law professor and the advisor to

the Christian Legal Society.145

This article sounds like the headline from a church in a country not receptive to

Christianity. A country like China where the church is vibrant and relevant but does not

meet in public places or buildings they call the church building. This is very much like

the New Testament church. Public meetings and public buildings were not conducive

for these Biblical Christians. This is the church.

Prison

One of the most powerful conversion stories of the entire New Testament is that of the

Phillippian jailer. The story is related to us in Acts Chapter 16. The Apostles (Paul and

Silas) are thrown in jail because of accusation from Jewish people that they were

teaching things that were against law. Notice, this was not the Romans who were

concerned with the Apostle’s doctrine but rather their fellow Jews. Comparing this to

one of our earlier topics where we discuss that people think that the New Testament

church was having their meetings in Jewish synagogues. We need to realize that there

was great opposition to the message of Jesus

Christ as brought by the Apostles and other

Biblical Christians. The Apostles are thrown in

jail over this message. It is unfathomable that

these same people were opening up their

synagogues to them.

At any rate, the Jailer of the prison in a fabulous

story becomes a convert to Jesus Christ. He

and his family are saved. That very night they

are baptized and received the Holy Spirit. This is the New Testament church in action.

His story has been told all over the world. There is no doubt through this and other

stories that the Apostles considered even prison a suitable place for church. Today the

church establishment has either ignored or relegated the growing prison population to

145 http://nation.foxnews.com/vanderbilt-university/2012/02/01/vanderbilt-university-defends-crackdown-

religious-groups#ixzz1lC7dHNEc

107

‘ministry’ ignoring the vast number of inmates that are part of the church. I can only

imagine that many of the Apostles and New Testament believers who were imprisoned

for their faith, would feel more at home in a meeting with prisoners than they would in

some of the places where people “go to church”. Whether we appreciate it or not there

are many prisoners that are part of the church. We can reduce their role to ‘prison

ministry’ if we like but they are church none the less. This is the church.

Nursing Homes

We are so focused on attendance that a gathering

at a senior home or care facility is generally ignored

as being church. Much like sick and shut ins we

have relegated these people to a secondary role

rather than embracing their inclusion as part of the

church. Those Biblical Christians gathering in the

nursing facility are church. This is the church.

Gatherings

Around the world there are many incidents of the body coming together which qualify as

church whether we recognize them as such or not. On Monday mornings our family

gathers to pray, read scripture, sing, teach, share, learn and grow in Christ. This started

while my mother was living as just a prayer meeting for our immediate family, but has

grown to be much more. Though we are scattered across a number of states in the US

we are able to communicate due to the telephone and communicate quite effectively.

This activity usually takes most of our Monday mornings. We have added the benefit of

setting this aside as a day of fasting.

Traditional church goers and denominations would not sanction our activity as church

since we are not meeting in one of their franchise locations. Nevertheless there can be

no doubt that we are being the Church. For us church is not something we do on

Sunday, rather we are the church. How to be a Christian without going to church? Just

be the Church! This is the church.

108

SUPERCHURCH

Few people would think of going to Wal-Mart

as connected to the continuation of the New

Testament church. However, Wal-Mart is

much like a modern version of the Outer

Court of the Temple. It is a place where

people meet, gather, exchange, buy, sell,

fellowship and more. We have modeled

going to Wal-Mart as church or at least it can

be depending on how you go to Wal-Mart.

Some reading this will say, “NO WAY!”

Others are saying, “Count me in, I want to

know more about Wal-Mart Church!”

This is not about a shopping experience. This is about being the church. We have to

realize that the church is not something you do; rather it is who you are and how you

conduct your day to day activity. Living for Jesus Christ should be such a part of your

daily life that it is as natural as breathing. Here is the thing that is so important, live your

life for God. Make every activity the outcropping of that life and church will happen in a

variety of ways and places. This is the church.

This is not a commercial for Wal-Mart. My point is much more important than some

shopping activity. In our American society Wal-Mart (Kmart, the local Mall, or wherever

people gather) is a place that most people go to shop. In our local ministry we have

always regarded our trips to Wal-Mart as much more than shopping. When we go to

Wal-Mart we usually see a number of our fellow believers. We take time to visit, share,

and often pray. We expect to have these encounters and are prepared for them.

“In the middle of Wal-Mart!?” Yes. This is not some activity to draw attention to

ourselves but we have ministered many times to both Biblical Christians and

unbelievers while at Wal-Mart. These are not planned meetings, there are no offerings

taken up or announcements for church services (Wal-Mart might be making

announcements but we are not paying too much attention). This is church, the

gathering of the body of Christ. We are breaking bread with the body. I sometimes

refer to some of our ministers as “pastor at Wal-Mart”. Wal-Mart is a mission field and

people going there are hungry for more than natural food. These folks may never come

to our church buildings but if we will change our mind set we can have church almost

anywhere. This will work at any place people are gathering including but not limited to

flea markets, garage sales, and more. This is the church.

109

In America we are privileged to enjoy the opportunity and availability of many places of

worship. This has not always been the case nor is it the case for many. In many places

in the world they do not have this luxury. In America’s early days there were many

places that also did not have the luxury of church buildings. Yet, there were many

Biblical Christians in these times and places and Christianity flourished. The ability to

have, build or attend a building did nothing to separate them from Christ. Can a building

or attendance truly separate us from the love of Christ? I expect not.

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or

persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, for your

sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor

powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any

other creation, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in

Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:35-39).

Church Membership by Country

110

McChurch

Yes, this is really about church at McDonalds. No

commercial here just some thought on the activity of

the Church. Some years ago we created a program to

reach children through McDonalds. This will work at

other places as well. There have been a number of

jokes about McChurch but we found there a real

opportunity for church.

The concept is simple. Go to your local McDonalds or

some similar establishment. Many of these type places have separate party rooms

where you can have an hour for meetings or parties or groups. In this environment you

can organize some simple teaching and outreach to children. The local establishment

is not likely to be willing to endorse a church but they are not going to be opposed to

some people getting together to break bread and offer activities to children. There are

many ways that you can offer this depending on your area.

McChurch could be a very viable option or replacement for what most church

movements call Sunday School. While Sunday School has become a part of most

denominational church movements its origin was not about church at all. “It is important

to realize that Sunday schools were originally literally schools: they were places were

poor children could learn to read. The Sunday school movement began in Britain in the

1780s. The Industrial Revolution had resulted in many children spending all week long

working in factories. Christian philanthropists wanted to free these children from a life of

illiteracy.”146 This is the church. Because of this millions have been impacted by the

Gospel of Jesus Christ.

For the simple cost of a few cheeseburgers (must less expensive than a church

building) you can find plenty of people open to ministry. Children love McDonalds so

why not give them a drink and a cheese burger while sharing the Gospel message with

them. This can be done on a weekday or weekend. The time when most churches are

meeting (typically 10 am) is one of the slower times of the day for most McDonalds

because most of the people who are up at that hour are at church, but you can find the

time that works best for your McChurch.

Let’s face it; many children would rather go to McDonalds than to church especially

those who are unchurched. Rather than fight against the trend, embrace it, meet the

challenge and win a generation for Christ. How many McChurch pastors could we train

and dispatch? Do not be surprised if other local churches are not happy if you are

146 When did Sunday Schools start? ChristianHIstory.net

111

having such activity on Sunday morning when they are trying to get everyone to come

to their church building.

Disaster response

The idea of disaster response being part of the church should not come as a surprise to

anyone. Galatians 6:1 instructs us to “bear one another’s burdens”. People in

disastrous situations like floods, earthquakes, hurricanes, fires, etc., need people to

step up and help them. Here the Church can be actively involved in the lives of others.

While it might not seem religious to give a hungry neighbor a meal this was the exact

type of activity that Jesus equated with serving Him.

"Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the

fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the

world." James 1:27

“Then shall the King say unto them on his right

hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the

kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of

the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me

meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a

stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed

me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison,

and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous

answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an

hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and

gave thee drink?

When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in?

or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came

unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you,

Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have

done it unto me.” Matthew 25:34-40.

Disaster should not be the only time we are there to serve. Those who need help are

around us every day. We need to do all that we can to impact the lives of those around

us. This is what the New Testament church accomplished. Some years ago a friend

had youth gatherings at his home. He has a large home and organized lots of activities

from four wheeling to swimming and more. They would gather on Friday evening, pray,

read some Scripture and then the youth would have a night of fun and fellowship. His

church denomination condemned this activity as not having enough ‘church’ involved.

Groups like Cities of Refuge Network are doing the work of the New

Testament Church in reaching out to help those prepare for uncertain

times.

112

What that means in anyone’s guess but it certainly shows how out of touch that group is

with people. So, he quit having the gatherings. What a sad commentary on what we

have done with what Jesus Christ entrusted to us.

We could dedicate volumes to this subject of being the church. My expectation is that

you will be inspired to just be the church. Other gatherings of the church include but are

certainly not limited to: home bible studies, coffee houses, Christian concerts, cowboy

church, tent meetings, pot luck dinners, men’s breakfasts, and a long list of other

gatherings even those which might have other purposes could be church. Jesus said

where two or three were gathered in His name He would be there. This is model of

church as practiced in the New Testament.

The Online Church

Technology had brought us a

plethora of opportunities to

spread the Gospel of Jesus

Christ. While we have had

telephone for decades the

introduction of I recently asked

some of my Facebook friends to

define Church. I received

various answers. Some of them

are reflected on other pages of

this book. Of most interest was that some of them felt that our time of fellowship and

sharing on the forum on Facebook could be considered Church.

From this vantage point they explained that we were assembling together to share and

encourage each other. While this may not be the ideal it certainly is in some ways more

than some followers of Christ have been able to experience before the onset of

technology.“What is Facebook, after all? It’s a community. What is church, after all? It’s

a community. For us, doing church on Facebook isn’t innovative. It’s intuitive. Church

and Facebook are places where we share in life together, learn about one another,

encourage each other, laugh together and live our lives in some kind of ramshackle

harmony with one another”147

Then there is the impact of the Internet on individual churches. Some Christians find

that their primary interaction with other Christians comes in the form of an online church.

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

113

They believe this is an adequate experience of church. Many other churches see the

Internet, especially the social media dimensions of the Internet, as crucial for the

church, but they’re not quite sure what to make of it. I will not be focusing here on this

issue, but I do believe that we will be unable to use the Internet wisely as churches

unless we have a solid, right biblical ecclesiology. The church can assimilate via the

internet. Does it meet the requirement of assembly?

Consider this, “If all the churches were locked shut or were destroyed tomorrow would

that force you to stop being a Christian?” While this line of thought is seldom voiced, it

is a reality for many. Throughout history Christians have been restricted or forced not to

meet in public places. This is common today in some countries. In these places or

times church buildings were destroyed or simply not allowed. This is certainly the

environment that the New Testament church faced when the Apostle encouraged them

not to avoid meeting with other Biblical Christians. Now and then there was great risk in

assembling. To assemble with other Biblical Christians increases the risk of exposure

to the enemies of followers of Christ. The penalty is often torture or imprisonment.

Modeling the Church

“A newly single mom was visiting with her Christian co-worker about her pending

divorce. She was scattered, stressed and almost at her breaking point as she described

how money was tight, her landlord wanted her out of her apartment, and she couldn't

get a thing done because her youngest was ill. The co-worker, obviously feeling sorry

for her knew she needed to help the woman. After hugging her and telling her that

everything will turn out OK because God has a plan for your life, the co-worker couldn't

understand why the single mom didn't feel any better. So, she took a deep breath and

went out on a limb, "Why don't you come to church with me on Sunday morning?"148

“Although I admire the woman's courage, extending an

invitation to church isn't always easy; the single mom

wasn't in any shape to accept such an invitation. What

she needed was someone to buy her some groceries,

to come help her pack, to load the moving truck, to

babysit the kids while she cleaned out her apartment.

What she needed was a friend. Someone to share her

burdens, someone to go along beside her and assure

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

23, 2007.

114

her that she isn't alone. Sometimes an invitation to church just doesn't make it better.”149

“This is the reason I want to simplify my life. I want to slow down enough to really see

people. To form relationships with them. To be trusted by them. To be allowed to

share their burdens. To be allowed to open my life and share my struggles. What could

be a better testimony to the love of God than to watch a Christian struggle, handle the

crisis in a Godly way, and come out on the other side more deeply in love with the

Father? My passion is to be the kind of person who can love others so completely that I

can find ways to serve them and meet their real needs. I want my hands and feet to

deliver the love our Father has for everyone. When I am being this kind of friend, she'll

get to know Jesus.”150

One of the things that the systematic denominalization which we commonly refer to as

church has taught us is that church is difficult. As a popular radio commentator would

say, “don’t try this at home”. We have lost the simplicity of the Gospel and the simplicity

of the implementation of the Gospel. It is apparent that the two are connected. When

the Gospel is presented as a long list of rules and regulations it loses simplicity. When

it loses simplicity it loses ease of implementation. When we think about Jesus and His

twelve disciples we envision a model that is nearly impossible to duplicate.

Pardon the personal reference but let me tell you about my maternal Grandmother,

Olive Ann (Brewer) Gillespie. I know of no better example of the church fulfilling its role.

Grandma was a young woman who earned a living cleaning houses. That is how she

met my grandfather. They married and in the process of time had 12 natural children.

While few people would consider her a minister, nor did she ever claim such a

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

23, 2007. 150

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

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

115

designation there is no doubt that she raised her own ‘church’. Jesus had twelve

disciples one of whom turned out to be a devil.

Grandma Gillespie had twelve children, one of which died as a baby. You might ask

here, “Are you really going to make the case that your Grandma was like Jesus?” I

hope so. Isn’t that the point for all of us, to be like Jesus? This is what the church

should be comprised of; people following Jesus. These followers should expect to

strive to be like the example that Jesus gave to us. I am reminded of the refrain from

song,

“To be like Jesus, to be like Jesus, on earth I long to be like him…”

Grandma Gillespie’s church was more than her 11 surviving children. Her children like

the fulfillment of the passage in Malachi, have done exploits. Grandma Gillespie’s

children all became followers of Jesus Christ. All of them became core leaders in the

church. Four of them founded local church congregations. Four of them have pastored

churches. Three of them founded Christian schools. At least three served as the

Principal of a Christian school. Several play musical instruments. At least four play or

played the accordion for church; three the organ and/or piano. Several have served in a

variety of roles including Sunday school teachers, church board members, and more.

The full impact on local and national church by Grandma Gillespie’s church can only be

recorded in heaven.

Grandma Gillespie’s church continues into two more generations

as her grandchildren and great grandchildren number a plethora

of evangelists, pastors, teachers, prophets and apostles. Her

church has expanded to minister in countries all around the

world. Her church members have served as missionaries to

Asia, Africa, South America, and Europe. They have served

as teachers in a number of Christian schools. They have

served a variety of roles in ministering to others including

founding charities, serving as overseers, Bishops, and a long list

of other accomplishments. Her church has continued to plant

church congregations and schools, all around the world.

The point is that one woman with nothing special about her

other than she was committed to Christ, impacted her family

who in turn has impacted the world. I didn’t mention that she

spent the last 25 years of her life in a wheelchair because she was crippled by arthritis

and could neither stand nor walk on her own. She could have complained, but like the

blind poet John Milton she persevered and birthed a church. Family get-togethers at

their home were more than just a family coming together; they were the assembling of

Olive Ann and George Gillespie

116

the body of Christ. I have often remarked that our family gatherings were more like

church meetings. I guess they were. This is the church.

When I consider how my light is spent

Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,

And that one Talent which is death to hide

Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent

To serve therewith my Maker, and present

My true account, lest He returning chide,

"Doth God exact day-labour, light denied?"

I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent

That murmur, soon replies, "God doth not need

Either man's work or his own gifts. Who best

Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state

Is kingly: thousands at his bidding speed,

And post o'er land and ocean without rest;

They also serve who only stand and wait."

John Milton (1608-1674)

117

A Biblical Christian Home

One of the things we seem to have lost is simply living for Christ. This starts with the

environment in our home. Our Jewish forbearers dedicated their homes to God,

anointed the door posts, sacrificed, celebrated and worshipped with a variety of services

in their homes. Christians seem to think the home

should be separate from worship. To whom you

dedicate your home your family will be dedicated.

To this end, I am reminded of reading the story of

infamous atheist Madelyn Murray O’Hare from

the perspective of her son. He talked about how

his grandfather purchased a television in the

1960’s, brought it home, put it in the living room,

turned it on full volume and it was never turned down or off again. He explained that the

family took their meals in the living room where the TV was blaring. Communication

was done over the sound of the loud television. The center of their family home was

obviously chaos. The result was chaos played out in their lives in hundreds of negative

ways.

The home of a Biblical Christian should be the model of moderation. Everyone has to

determine how to make their home a sanctuary for the presence of the Lord. As

followers of Christ we should be careful to keep a wholesome environment. Cleaning

house from time to time is a great idea. I am not speaking about day to day house

cleaning although that certainly helps. I know that is was John Wesley that said,

“Cleanliness is next to godliness” but it is still a good idea.151 What I am speaking of

is taking inventory of those things that creep into our lives and affect our walk with God.

Apostle Paul referred to these as the ‘cares of life’. These things come into our life slow

151 CLEANLINESS IS NEXT TO GODLINESS - "This ancient proverb is said by some to have come from

ancient Hebrew writings. However, its first appearance in English - though in slightly altered form - seems

to be in the writings of Francis Bacon. In his 'Advancement of Learning' (1605) he wrote: 'Cleanness of

body was ever deemed to proceed from a due reverence to God.' Near two centuries later John Wesley in

one of his sermons (1791) indicated that the proverb was already well known in the form we use today.

Wrote Wesley: 'Slovenliness is no part of religion.' Cleanliness is indeed next to Godliness.'" From "Morris

Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins" by William and Mary Morris (HarperCollins, New York, 1977,

1988). There are a couple more details in "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings"

(1996) by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996): ".According to the fourteenth edition of

'Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable,' it is an old Hebrew proverb used in the late 2nd century by

Rabbi Phinehas ben-Yair. First attested in the United States in the 'Monthly Anthology and Boston

Review' (1806). The proverb is found in varying forms."

118

but steady and taking occasional inventory and discarding some of these things is a

good practice.

When I was a child my parents made what seemed too many to be a

radical choice. They decided to get the television out of their

home. This was not the result of some right wing legalistic

dogma or denominational edict. They just wanted to be closer to

Jesus. I read recently where people were offered $100,000 to

give up television for one year and declined! I thought you must

be kidding we gave up our television for free! Now we would

probably generally agree that the television programming in the

1960’s was not bad. Compared to today’s standards television in

the 1960’s was not even ‘G’ rated. However, it was not so much

about the television as it was the time. Mom and Dad were

focusing on dedicating more of their time to the Lord and the

television was a terrible distraction. So, out to the trash went a

perfectly good TV.

In place of the television Mom and Dad bought a record player and a number of gospel

records. Our home was instantly transformed. Always in our home was the sound of

Gospel music. The music of the Rambo’s, the Happy Goodman’s, Red Folley, and

others set a tone in our home. Visitors to our home would often comment that they

could feel the presence of the Lord. This was because He was welcome in our home

and we invited his presence often. Prayer was the center of our home, not just at meal

time.

Later, my parents would pastor a number of churches, but the pattern of being an

example of the believer began in our home. Our family prayed in the morning, prayed

together every night before bed, read the bible individually and together. Without the

television in the way; we played board games, talked, had bible drills, bibles studies and

much more. As Biblical Christians church was never something that we did, church is

who we are and we lived it in every aspect of our lives.

Going to Church

As I stated in the very beginning of this book, going to church has been a very big part

of my life. I thank God for it. Going to church is like going to a nursery school. Going to

church should help us prepare to be the church. I don’t know that everyone should

graduate from growing to church, but it should certainly be possible. There will always

be a need for people to facilitate those type ministries that give birth. However, these

oft times feel like they need to control the new convert for the rest of their lives.

Georgia Wade with her new record player circa 1969

119

Imagine a nursery or primary school where no one

ever graduated. Can you see grown people trying to

fit into those tiny desks? Who would have confidence

in a school that never graduated students? This is

what the going to church model is producing. Church

has become much more about entertainment and

production than in teaching and dispatching disciples.

I am all for Christian entertainment.

My goal in talking about going to church versus being

the church is to encourage and empower those who

feel like they should be leading a group much like the

New Testament church. These can accomplish the

same things the New Testament church did by

gathering wherever they can find a place. All of the

Church reformation efforts throughout history were

accomplished through grass roots efforts. We need to do all we can to help those who

are disenfranchised from the church as an institution. We are available to help you. If

you want to connect with other Biblical Christians in your area, start a church meeting in

your area, connect to fivefold ministry or just need encouragement feel free to contact

me at International Churches of Faith. Phone: 502.410.4263 (ICOF). Email:

bw@icof.net

120

121

“Church is not where you meet. Church is

not a building. Church is what you do.

Church is who you are. Church is the human

outworking of the people of Jesus Christ.

Let’s not just go to Church, let’s be the

Church.”

- Bernie Wade (1995)

122

Kenneth and Barbara were a young married couple with a child when they first became

involved with going to church. They had just graduated from college and were busy

running a fledgling computer consulting business. Barbara a new mom and a young

wife met a lady through who had a common interest with her as an extreme shopper.

During one of their coupon clipping sessions together the lady invited Barbara to come

to church with her. Barbara agreed and a few days later accompanied her friend to a

local church. Barbara was wowed! She had never been to a church like this one! Her

limited church experience had been mainly as an observer. She had grown up

attending church with her family in a very ‘high church’ environment.

Barbara had been raised in a ‘Christian’ home. This meant that both of her parents

were baptized as into the church. In reality, Barbara’s family had only actually attended

church services a couple dozen times in her 20 years at home, but she had been

baptized as an infant and gone through her church’s confirmation process which verified

that she also was a Christian. Barbara was accustomed to church beginning with a

processional where the clergy entered the service with much pomp and ceremony. The

service consisted of congregational hymns

backed up by a pipe organ, a performance

by a couple of choirs (sometimes even the

Bell Choir), offering, sometimes

Communion and then a sermon by the

Pastor.

The church where Barbara grew up was

nothing like her new friends church.

These people at her friend’s church acted

as though they had a personal relationship

with Jesus! I mean like they talked with Him or something. The people at Barbara’s

friend’s church greeted her warmly before the service. They were so friendly and

somewhat strange. She noticed that they called each other ‘brother’ or ‘sister’

depending on gender. These people expressed a genuine love and concern for each

other that Barbara had never experienced. Barbara thought they acted more like a

family than a ‘church’. During the church meeting the people stood on their feet and

clapped and praised God. To Barbara the service seemed more like a concert than the

church where she had grown up. No one would have been this demonstrative at the

church where she was raised.

However, Barbara loved what she had found and started going to church with her friend

on a regular basis. She loved the singing and the worship. The minister seemed to

speak right to her about living for God rather than pontificating on some subject that was

not relevant. One night Barbara responded to the message and ran to the front, poured

her heart out to God, repented of her sins and then something amazing happened!

123

Barbara was speaking in another language that she did not know. The Spirit of God

was working through her. Later she would learn that she had received the Holy Spirit

just like those in the book of Acts chapter 2. She had, of course, heard of such of thing

but never thought it would happen to her. The pastor told Barbara that she needed to

be baptized in the name of Jesus and Barbara was only too happy to comply. That

night she was buried in baptism. Old things were passed away in Barbara’s life, all

things had become new. God became very real to Barbara that night.

Reading the Bible

When Barbara arrived home she was shocked to find Kenneth with a bible. They had

been talking about Barbara’s growing interest and attendance at their friend’s church

and Barbara had been reading her Bible. While Kenneth was an avid reader, Barbara

did not ever remember him reading the bible. She could not wait to tell Kenneth what

had happened to her! Kenneth was amazed. He had grown up in a Baptist Church and

had friends who talked about receiving the Holy Spirit

and stuff like that, but that this could happen to his

lovely wife had never really crossed his mind. Kenneth

told Barbara that he wanted the Holy Spirit too! Barbara

said, “Next time there is a church service we will go

together.” This was not enough for Kenneth.

“Why can’t I get it tonight just like you did?” he asked.

Barbara did not know. How did you get this Holy

Ghost? Kenneth continued? Barbara told Kenneth that

she had poured her heart out to God and repented.

Kenneth began the work of repentance right there in their living room. Time stood still.

Barbara, fresh from receiving the Holy Spirit launched into prayer and began to speak in

other tongues as the Spirit gave utterance. Kenneth continued his repentance. Then

suddenly, it happened to Kenneth! The power of the Holy Spirit filled the room where

they were praying and Kenneth began to speak in other tongues! What a happy day for

Kenneth and Barbara. Later they recalled they could not believe that the baby slept

through the whole thing.

Kenneth and Barbara became avid members of the church. Over the next few years

they read their bibles, prayed, attending every meeting at church from the normal

church services to bible study to pot luck dinners! It was a wonderful life. Praise the

name of Jesus!

Several years later found Barbara, with four children now, and leading the Ladies

Auxiliary at Church. She also taught a Sunday school class and helped with the

124

Children’s Choir. Kenneth was now the Assistant Pastor. God had blessed their

computer consulting business and Kenneth and Barbara were doing quite well

financially. Then one Sunday morning, their whole world went into a tail spin. That

Sunday it was revealed that one of the main families in the church was in severe

difficulty. The husband had been having an affair with the pastor’s wife for several

years. The church family was shocked. People began to cry and weep. Finally,

Kenneth got his wife and four children and put them in their SUV and went to their

home.

This was a terrible time for the family of Barbara and Kenneth. Their whole life following

Jesus revolved around that church. They were not sure they could function as

Christians without their church. They felt betrayed, confused and angry. In time, their

church rebounded. The pastor left the church. The family that the husband had been

sleeping with the pastor’s wife continued to be part of the church. A new pastor came

and the church continued. However, Kenneth and Barbara did not return. Instead, they

resigned their positions at the

church. They started having a

little service at home with their

family. In time some of their

neighbors asked if they could

come and on Sunday about 15

people gathered with Barbara

and Kenneth in their home for a

small worship service.

The folks at the former church of

Kenneth and Barbara sometimes

invited them to come back.

Usually, in conversations among

them they talked about how Barbara and Kenneth had ‘backslid’ and given up on God.

They prayed that they would come back to the church. One of Kenneth’s clients, a

member of the church, asked him when he was coming ‘back to God’. Kenneth was

angry and confused by this question. The man had been a long time member of the

church and a solid Christian example. When Kenneth explained that he was

uncomfortable with the un-repented sin in the church and felt like he could better help

his family by worshipping at home with a few others his client scoffed at such a notion.

125

Church: An American Corporation

This story is fictional. However, for many across America and around the World the

scenario is too real. While we would hope they would function like the New Testament

church the fact is that churches in America are corporations. They are generally run like

corporations. The pastor is most often the Chairman of the Board or the President. The

Church may or may not belong to some denomination. They are overseen by a board

usually made up of the members. These members run the gambit from the very

committed to Christ to those who are just going through the motions.

“Let’s be honest. Church folk sometimes say and do hurtful things. Unfortunately every

Christian is not a perfect example of their faith. But that’s no reason to give up on the

church.”152 We can make necessary changes that may include changing the group of

people we worship with; this is not giving up on God or His church as we need to

continue to interact, meet with and fellowship other followers

of Christ. While it is true that Going to Church will not

make you a Christian anymore than going to a garage

will make you a car, it is equally true that cars do go to

garages.

In its basic application a car should be put in a garage to

keep it out of the elements. This is a form of natural

protection that shelter can offer. Valuable cars, antique

cares, collector cars and other are stored in heated garages

to give them even more protection and to keep them in

pristine condition. Cars that are not ‘garage kept’ are susceptible to many things that

garage kept cars are not, including the elements. Cars not kept in a garage are sloshed

with salt, rain, snow, sleet and hail. They are pummeled with wind, leaves, branches,

stones and other elements.

Cars that need repair are taken from their home garage to a place where an expert

works on them. These experts range from a small one man operation to large

dealerships. Generally all of these are places that can handle repair. Some are

specialized in repair of different makes of cars and others specialize in different areas of

the car. There are mechanics that don’t have garages and while some of them have

merit most people will not entrust the repair of their car to such. These are often

referred to as ‘shade tree’ mechanics.

The comparison is this, Christians are not Christians because they go to a building that

is called ‘the church’, but rather Christians are part of the church and as such Christians

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

126

may go to church. Now, this is not just any ‘shade tree’ church. We are not to entrust

our souls, the souls of our family and friends to just any situation, but we are also not

required to go to some mega dealership or local church franchise in order to get service

for our walk with God.

While it is acceptable to find a group of Biblical Christians

to worship with and these are not required to meet in a

building that they call ‘the church’ we must remember that

none of us are an island. If our group of Biblical

Christians happens to meet in a building specifically

designed for that purpose that is wonderful. The most

important thing about the church is that we must

remember that we are the church. As Biblical Christians

we are accountable to God and to each other as part of the family of God. God has

given us the five-fold ministry to assist us in this effort. There are Christ like elders that

are part of the Church like in the New Testament these assisted the Apostles and other

fivefold ministers their insight and advice is key in assisting us on our spiritual journey.

So, you can be a Christian without going to Church. As we have covered, even great

evangelists like Billy Graham agree that it is possible to be a Christian without going to

church. At some point, we need to face the facts. Many people hate church as it has

been defined in their lives. It is evident that we need to separate what they mean from

what they are saying. Because most people define the church as a building or the

institution that occupies a building those claiming to hate church are really saying that

they hate what denominations or organizations have decided to define as church.

These people are generally not saying they hate God or hate people who live for God.

Rather, they are expressing their frustration with what they have been taught that they

must do to serve God. The bible does not say that those who are Christians will go to a

building that they call ‘the church’. Rather, Jesus told Peter that he would give him the

keys to the kingdom.

Remember: Religion is what men say that God said. This does not mean that it IS

what God said. Religion since the Tower of Babel has been a means to control people.

It was no different in the days of Nimrod and his Babylonian Kingdom than it was in the

days of the Apostles with The Roman Emperor establishing His own church under the

guise of Christianity. Then as now, religion is something created to control the masses.

Like all good lies, religion usually has elements of truth. Yet, in the words of a Yiddish

Proverb, “A half truth is a whole lie”.153 So, if religion is filled with half truths (and it

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

127

is) then it is merely a collection of lies. Jesus took the religious leaders of his day to

task for their poor application of Scripture and failure to obey God.

We have chosen to use the term Biblical Christians and Biblical Church. It almost

seems like an oxymoron to say Biblical Church. However, it is our expectation to

distinguish what the Bible intended for the church to be verses what men have

determined. Some have used the term ‘organic church’ to describe the Biblical Church.

We are not opposed to the term but the word organic seems to be more of a word that

is popular. The Bible has stood the test of time and represents something that men

have given their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to protect. Thus, we have

opted for a term than is related to the church throughout history and points toward the

source of our doctrine; the word of God.

Stallone on Christianity

New Testament churches were full of problems. There were church bosses, false

doctrine and people living in sin. But did the apostles give up on the church? No—they

worked hard to help it become all God intended it to be: the Hope of the world. Did they

instruct people to build building? No. There were much more interested in the people

living for God. Their focus and instruction was to that end.

Most of the New Testament is written proof that the Apostles of Jesus Christ were not

willing to write off the church. Time and again they wrote to correct problems in the

churches and to encourage Christians to live out their faith. The church is not a

museum for perfect Christians. It’s a repair station to fix problems.

Sylvester Stallone, who played Rocky and Rambo in the movies,

told a group of pastors, “Living without the church is like

working out without a trainer. You need to have the expertise

and guidance of someone else. You can’t train yourself. I feel

the same way about Christianity.” This is fairly good advice.

“The church is the gym of the soul,” Stallone continued.

“Pastors are like trainers that guide you through difficult times

and take you to places you don’t believe you can go. A lot of

people say, ‘I can do it on my own, I have a one-on-one

relationship with God.’ Well, it’s not quite the same…The more I

turn myself over to the process of believing in Jesus, listening

to His Word and having Him guide my hand, the more I feel as

though the pressure is off me now.”

128

Stallone is right from the aspect that we need pastors. These are part of the fivefold

ministry and were a gift from God to his church. No matter whether you have church

you need to have the input of qualified ministry in your life. The Apostles set the tone

for this type of leadership for Biblical Christians. The responsibility for Biblical Christ

likeness begins in the home. From the beginning of time the home was the first and last

bastion. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were the models of being the priest of their home.

This model did not end with the New Testament.

In God’s economy the husband and/or father is to function as priest of that home. Just

like your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, your home should be a prepared place

for God. Your home should be dedicated to God. The atmosphere in your home should

welcome the presence of the Holy Spirit.

We have a generation that often quotes, “We are a nation of Kings and Priests, but they

want the reward without the sacrifice and responsibility. Christian living does not take

place in a building designated as the church building it takes place in the lives of

followers of Jesus Christ.

The Lone Ranger

All roads have two ditches. While on the one hand we realize

that the institution or state run denominational church has gone

much too far away from what God intended for his church. On

the other there are people that have decided to “throw the

baby out with the bath water”. We are not advocating that one

person or even one family unit is the church in and of

themselves. One person or one family is part of the church.

While we move toward returning to Biblical Christianity there

are some that have decided because of the abuse of the State

run church, that we no longer need the fivefold ministry. This

is a dangerous precedent. This is one of many errors religious

denominations have made we should not repeat the errors of

our past.

We need NOT to start a campaign to do away with all church buildings. These are

assets and tools that we have available to us. While we need not place emphasis on

building buildings those congregations with them need to use them and all that are

connected with them to help bring a restoration to the Church. It has happened before

and will happen again. We need to fall on our faces and seek God for direction, open

our bibles, study and apply all of this to restoring the Apostles doctrine. We realize that

not everyone will want to see change. The Humpty Dumpty Christians and their

129

denominational overlords will be in opposition to our efforts. They will call us all lone

rangers; claiming that we are rebels.

There are many dangers for Christians who have been set free from the institution of

Church. One of them is a tendency toward being a lone ranger. “Lone Ranger

Christianity- when a person tries to be a follower of Christ all on their own, without any

authority, relationships or accountability.”154

“There has been much said about Lone Ranger Christians (LRC). “The straw man of

the LRC is someone who is arrogant and impossible to please. He is looking for the

perfect church, and thinks he is the fount of all wisdom as to what that might be. When

people don't listen to him, he picks up his jacks and runs away, thereby making himself

vulnerable to heresy, pornography, drugs, and bad hairstyles. I've never known an LRC

who was happy with his choice. They are just less happy with their options.”155

“I respect the mission of the organized church. I respect the people who give their time,

tithes and energy to it. And I hope they'll accept us for who we are; conscientious

objectors from the kinds of peace they wage. I don't know of any class of Christians so

routinely and unanimously vilified as the "Lone

Ranger Christian (LRC)." Not that it's difficult; you

won't find an anti-defamation league or

denomination of lone rangers to unite our voices in

our own defense. Pretty much, the LRCs are

sniped at from safely within groups of happily

bonded believers - until that happy bond is

broken.”156

“An assembly of believers is a precious thing wherever it gathers. “Within its walls all

the fellowship of the Godhead is exchanged between saints. Unfortunately, that is not

all that is exchanged between saints. There is also the mountain of doctrine and

politics. I know saints in Australia, the Isle of Man, Scotland, Hungary, Romania and the

US who are going it alone these days.”157 So, what we need to focus on is the

gathering of the saints, the exchange of bible doctrine, encouraging and uplifting one

another. Leave the Humpty Dumpty stuff to the denominational schisms.

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

155 The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian.

http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 156

The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 157

The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html

130

“If anyone ever writes a statement of faith that says things like,” We don’t reject _____

or ______, “then maybe my resolve will be at risk. But denominations don't work like

that, now do they? Denominations denominate. And that's a rub for me and my

scattered brothers.”158 We respect the need for the church, all of us. We have to work

hard to assemble ourselves together as Heb 10:25 demands, but we do it. All the LRCs

I know find some way to assemble themselves meaningfully with brothers and sisters,

even though sometimes those brothers and sisters would only barely fellowship with

each other. It's worth the extra work not to be looked at askance when we assemble

ourselves with "them”.159\

Chad Missildine pastor at LifeChurch.tv said this about the LRC syndrome, “I used to be

a Lone Ranger Christian- set my own rules, played my own game. Yeehaaw! Sounds

like fun, but even the Lone Ranger had Tonto by his side, watching his back, helping

him out and kicking some serious tail! As a Lone Ranger Christian I got my tail

seriously kicked, over and over again. Sadly, I see a lot of people go through the same

thing every day. Lone Ranger Christianity breeds all kinds of forms of faith, with no real

limit or constraint other than one’s personal belief

or opinion. It is a reality of the world we live in and

a struggle for many of us.”160

“Lone Ranger Christians don’t think they need the

church or anyone else. They believe they can get

along just fine by themselves. One once told me,

“I can worship God on the tree stump in my back

yard just as well as on a church pew.”161 “Often

they became loners because, like the Lone Ranger, they were “ambushed”—usually by

well-meaning church folks. With their feelings hurt, they retreat to a hermit-like faith.

The reality of Christianity is not about “Lone Ranger Christians.” It’s not just about us.

The early church “devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to

the breaking of bread and to prayer.” Community is necessary for the church to be the

church.”162

158 The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian.

http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 159

The Familyhood Church. The Lone Ranger Christian. http://familyhoodchurch.blogspot.com/2007/01/lone-ranger-christian.html 160

The Way it Could Be. Lone Ranger Christianity. Chad Missildine. 161

Just a Minute. Observations from a Biblical World View. Christian Becker. Monday October 29, 2007. 162

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

131

While you can be a Biblical Christian without attending a building identified as the

church there are several things that we need to remember are important.

1. Do you have the Word of God in your life regularly; centering your life on who you

believe has authority on your life (Christ as revealed through the Word) not your own

opinions?

2. Do you have accountability, living life close enough with others to help you live the

way you say you believe?

3. Do you have prayer in your life? This is the way God will empower your belief and

help you to be who He has called you to be, through His Spirit.

4. Are you helping meet other’s needs because of your belief? This includes

trusting God with your resources as you help meet these needs.

5. Are you seeing growth or “fruit” in your life as a result of what you believe?

What is different in your life because of your relationship with Christ? Who is different in

your life, because of Christ living through you? The Bible uses the example of trees

without fruit, claiming fairly harsh consequences of trees without fruit.

If the answer to any of these is no, you may be some version of a Lone Ranger

Christian! Without his Word, you have no authority in your life. Without relationships,

you have no accountability. Without prayer, no have no source of connection or power.

Without serving others or meeting other’s needs you have real love for others (yeah, I

said it). Without others in your life helping you grow, you have no legs to your faith.

Don’t Be a Lone Ranger Christian! Even the Lone Ranger had Tonto! Ask God to give

you the wisdom to see what you need to do to leave the prairies and step into

community. What can you do to take a step in the right direction? Who can you seek

out?” 163 Remember you are NOT alone. There is already a Church. You don’t have to

build the entire body of Christ. You role is to be part of that great international body of

believers. There are many people willing to help you. If you are hearing from God you

are not alone. God has spoken to people throughout the ages. You don’t have to act

alone. The gifts that God gave the first Biblical Christians are still available for us today.

Those are the Holy Spirit, the gifts of the Spirit and the fivefold ministry. We have never

needed them more than we do today. For more on these see the book, The Next Wave

– Restoration of the Charismata by Dr. Bernie L. Wade.

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

132

Five Fold Ministry and Leadership

It has been suggested that the New Testament Church was a poorly organized effort

with no key leadership. This idea is proffered primarily by those who are not committed

to Biblical Christianity. We cannot ignore the fivefold ministry and its essential role to

the body of Christ from the New Testament church until now. I boldly say that

everything rises and falls on leadership. Careful study will show that the New

Testament church had the fivefold ministry active, operational and effective. This would

be replaced by a professional clergy, overseen by political hacks appointed by various

kings and politicians who changed the vision, focus and doctrine of Jesus Christ and His

Church into a form of Godliness.

A Paradigm Shift

It is our expectation that this book will help to bring a paradigm shift to the church. It is

past time for us to return the church to its New Testament roots.

133

Bibliography

Barnes, Albert (1956), Notes on the Old and New Testaments: Acts (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Behm, Johannes (1965), “klao, klasis, klasma,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed.

Gerhard Kittel (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).

Jackson, Wayne (2005), The Acts of the Apostles: From Jerusalem to Rome (Stockton, CA:

Christian Courier Publications).

Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic

Database: Biblesoft).

Miller, Dave (2003), Sunday and the Lord’s Supper.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2304.

Mounce, William D. (1993), Basics of Biblical Greek (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).

Pliny the Elder, The Natural History, trans. Bostock and H.T. Riley, [On-line], URL:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext

Robertson, A.T. (1997), Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament (Electronic Database:

Biblesoft).

Woods, Guy N. (1976 reprint), Questions and Answers (Henderson, TN: Freed-Hardeman

College).

Wycliffe Bible Commentary (1985), Electronic Database: Biblesoft.

Takes a Church to Raise a Christian: How the Community of God Transforms Lives. Tod

Bolsinger.

Will the Theologians Please Sit Down? Stephen Bercot

The Purpose Driven Church. Rick Warren

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

Pagan Christianity. Frank Viola and George Barna.

Conflict and Community in the Church. Ben Witherington

Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up? Stephen Bercot

Adam Clark Commentary

Vision of the Church. http://www.visionofthechurch.com/Dontgotochurch.pdf

Del Birkey, The House Church: A Model for Renewing the Church (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press,

1988).[ed. Steve Atkerson]

Toward A House-Church Theology (Atlanta, GA: New Testament Restoration Foundation, 1996).

John R. Davis, "How Church Structures Can Effectively Help or Hinder Church

Growth," Evangel (Autumn – 1992), pp.73-83.

Robert Banks, Paul’s Idea of Community (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers Reprint, 1994).

See also Robert & Julia Banks, The Church Comes Home (Australia: Albatross Books, 1986).

Frank A. Viola, Rethinking the Wineskin: The Practice of the New Testament Church (Brandon,

FL: Present Testimony Ministry, 1997).

Lois Barrett, Building the House Church (Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1986)

134

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Dr. Bernie Wade has dedicated his entire life to working in

ministry. As a child he helped his parents pioneer a number of

church plants. As a young man he served as an evangelist,

assistant pastor, pastor and more. Today, he fills his busy

schedule writing, teaching, preaching and traveling around the

world ministering the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

He is a focused on the restoration or reformation of the Church

to the tenets that were taught by the New Testament Church and

the original Apostles of Jesus Christ. Toward this end most of

his writing focuses on those essential biblical doctrines. He is committed to teaching

and focusing other church leaders to return to our Biblical foundation.

He serves as President to the global ministry of

International Circle of Faith (ICOF). ICOF is a global

network of ministers, churches, ministries and more.

ICOF’s global network has more than 40,000 ministers

and some 20 million adherents, with representation in

nearly every country in the world. For more information

visit: http://www.icof.net International Circle of Faith

Colleges Seminaries and Universities (ICOF CSU) is a

global network of Christian schools of higher learning and

represents ICOF’s leaders collective commitment to

quality Christian education.

Dr. Bernie Wade sees the current spiritual climate as

another great wave of the Holy Spirit similar to the wave of

the Spirit that swept the world after the Wales and Azusa

Street revivals a century ago.

With this wave of the Holy Spirit in mind, Dr. Wade is instructing leaders to position

themselves and their followers to get ready for The Next Wave. In this light a magazine

was launched appropriately called, “The Next Wave”. To learn more about The Next

Wave Magazine visit: http://www.icof.net/index.php/thenextwave Welcome to The Next

Wave!

Bishop Daniel Joseph, Bishop Joseph Rankin and Bishop Wade with many other ministers at an ICOF Leadership Summit in Ghana West Africa.