An
inquiry into the doctrines and practices of church bearing the name
of or otherwise claiming to be the church of Christ or the church of
God is very likely to be confusing and misleading. A number of
different fellowships advertise themselves as the “Church of
Christ.” But you are not even through when you have investigated all
of these. There remains something called the “Church of God.”
Eventually you run into such things as the “Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter Day Saints,” the “United Church of Christ,” and the
“Church of Christ in Christian Union.” Even the Methodist Church
claims to be “a church of Christ in which ‘the pure Word of God is
preached and the Sacraments duly administered.’”
One soon realizes that anyone can nail up a sign!
All of these groups—and I must apologize to any I have omitted—in
one way or another claim to be churches of Christ. Yet each of them
gives a different impression as to what a church of Christ is.
The only infallible source of information about the
church of Christ is the New Testament.
The
first appearance of the word “church” in the New Testament is at
Matt. 16.18. “I will build my church.” So spoke Jesus Christ near
Caesarea Philippi. “My church,” he said. Jesus has a church. It
is his—the church of Christ. It is “the church of God, which he
hath purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20.28). “His own blood”
shows that Paul was speaking of Christ when he spoke of “the
church of God.” It is Christ’s church—the church of Christ.
It belongs to Christ. He purchased it with his own blood. “The
churches of Christ salute you.” So wrote Paul in Rom. 16.16.
The
church of Christ is also the church of God (1 Cor. 1.2; Gal. 1.13).
It belongs to Christ and to his Father. Jesus was speaking
of persons belonging to him when he indicated that all of these
belonged to himself and his Father alike (John 17.9-10). Thus the
church which belongs to Christ belongs also to his Father. It is
the church of Christ and the church of God.
What is that thing which is called a “church,” and which is not just
any church, but is specifically that church which belongs to Christ
and to his Father?
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
The church is people.
“Tell it unto the church”; “if he neglect to hear the church” (Matt.
18.17). It can hear and can speak. It is people—not bricks and
mortar. It can fear (Acts 5.11). It can be persecuted (Acts 8.1).
It can pray (Acts 12.5). The church is people.
The
church which belongs to God and to Christ is, then, those people who
belong to God and to Christ—the people of God. The church of Christ
is those people whom Christ gave his life’s blood to purchase (Acts
20.28; 1 Cor. 6.19-20; 1 Pet. 1.18-19), and who, therefore, belong
to him. They are his people, redeemed by his blood, and serving him
as his loving servants.
Preachers often say, “Get saved; become a child of God; then join
the church of your choice.” Such preachers know nothing of the
church of Christ. Every saved person, every child of God, is a part
of Christ’s church. That is what his church is, his people who
belong to him by virtue of the redeeming power of his blood.
Saul of Tarsus persecuted the church. God’s
historian described it at Acts 8.3. “As for Saul, he made havoc of
the church.” The next chapter tells us Saul was “yet breathing out
threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts
9.1). See the point! The church persecuted by Saul is the disciples
of the Lord. The church of Christ and his disciples are one and the
same. Then in Acts 9.13 those people persecuted by Saul are called
the saints of the Lord. The church of Christ is the saints.
Saints are not some special group in the church—men canonized after
death. They are the people who belong to God, God’s holy ones
(which is the meaning of saints).
The
same point appears in 1 Cor. 1.2. Paul writes “unto the church of
God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ
Jesus, called to be saints.” The church is the sanctified ones,
those called to be saints.
The
fact of the matter is, the word “church” is just a collective noun
(like herd, flock, group, etc.) that refers to God’s people as a
group, a collectivity. Church is the translation of the
Greek noun ekklesia
which means a congregation, a gathering, or an
assembly. Ekklesia
is a compound word formed by putting together the preposition
ek meaning out
of and the noun klesis
meaning a calling. The church is, therefore, God’s called out ones.
It is composed of those whom God has called
“unto his kingdom and glory (1 Thess. 2.12); those who are called by
the gospel “to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ”
(2 Thess. 2.14); those whom God has called “out of darkness into his
marvelous light” (1 Pet. 2.9). Thus the definition of the word
itself suggests the conclusion already reached that the church is
God’s saved people, those redeemed by the blood, called out of
darkness into light. The church of Christ is those people who are
of Christ, who belong to him, who are his disciples.
The
Bible speaks of the church at a particular place. Thus: “the
church of God which is at Corinth” (1 Cor. 1.2). The church of
Christ (or of God) at a place is the people of God, the disciples of
Christ, at that place. There were a lot of these local groups in
the apostolic age—churches in Jerusalem (Acts 8.1), in Corinth (1
Cor. 1.2), other places (Rev. 1.11). Paul was referring to a number
of such local groups of disciples when he spoke of “the churches of
Christ” (Rom. 16.16).
But
sometimes the church is spoken of in general terms without reference
to place (Matt. 16.18; Eph. 1.22-23; etc.). In such passages
the reference is to the saints, disciples, Christians, or people of
God in general—that is, all of them in the world.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Who
are these people who belong to Christ and are referred to as his
church? They are the people purchased by the blood of Christ (Acts
20.28; 1 Cor. 6.19-20; 1 Pet. 1.18-19). But that does not completely
describe them. Christ died for all men (1 John 2.1-2). But not all
men admit the claim Christ has upon them. The church is really
composed of those who acknowledge the claim of Christ upon them and
yield willing service to him whom they recognize as their Master.
That point is involved in Paul’s argument in 1 Cor. 1.11-13.
Paul had received word of “contentions” among the Corinthians. He
explains: Some were saying, “I am of Paul”—that is, I am Paul’s man;
I belong to Paul. Others said, “I am of Apollos”; others, “I am of
Cephas”; still others, “I am of Christ.”
Paul rebukes these “contentions” by asking three questions. The
first one is, “is Christ divided?” The answer I got to be “No!”
(compare 1 Cor. 12.12). And the implication is: “All right. Then
this divided state just will not do. It is all wrong.”
Some were saying, “I am of Paul,” and Paul strikes them down with
two other questions. First: “Was Paul crucified for you?” Christ
died to purchase them (1 Cor. 6.19-20), so that they should belong
only to Christ. So the answer is “No! Paul was not crucified for
us.” The implication: “Then you cannot say, ‘I am of Paul.’”
But
that was not the end of it. Paul has a third question: “Were ye
baptized in the name of Paul?” Again the answer can only be “No!”
(compare Acts 19.5). And again the implication is the same: “Then ye
cannot say, ‘I am of Paul.’”
What Paul is teaching is that at least two things would have to be
true before one could belong to Paul: Paul would have to be
crucified for him, and he would have to be baptized in the
name of Paul.
Paul’s logic, one can readily appreciate, applies with equal force
to the other parties. No one has the right to belong either to
Apollos or Cephas, for (1) neither of these men were crucified for
us, and (2) we are not baptized in the name of either of
them.
But
some said, “I am of Christ.” Obviously Paul’s logic is the same for
one who claims to belong to Christ. Two questions must be asked:
(1) Was Christ crucified for you? and (2) Were you baptized
in the name of Christ? One must be able to give a “yes” answer to
each of these questions, or else he does not belong to Christ and
has no right to make the claim, “I am of Christ.”
The
conclusion forced upon us is that there are two necessary conditions
which must be satisfied before a person belongs to Christ and is a
part of that church which is of Christ: (1) The purchase price paid
by Christ. This condition was satisfied when Jesus died on the
cross. But a second condition is equally essential. (2) The
recognition by a person of Christ’s claim upon him, which
recognition is expressed by means of the person’s being baptized in
the name of Christ.
By
means of this act a person yields himself to Christ and begins a new
life of service in submission to his rightful owner and master. It
is the people purchased by Christ and yielding themselves by means
of this act to Christ who compose the church of Christ. These and
these alone are the people belonging to Christ; these and these
alone are the church of Christ.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
But
make no mistake about it. Baptism is not the end of this yielding
to Christ but the beginning of it, the birth into his kingdom (John
3.3, 5), the introduction into a new life (Rom. 6.4). Baptism is
only the beginning of a whole life of submission to the will of
Christ. The church of Christ can well be explained as that church
which is in all points subject to Christ. Paul put it this way in
Eph. 5.23-24:
23. For
the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of
the church: and he is the savior of the body.
24.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be
to their own husbands in every thing.
Christ is the head of his church, and his church is subject to him.
The church of Christ obeys Christ; it yields to his orders; it moves
only upon his direction. Any church that will not be subject to
Christ thereby disowns Christ as its head and is therefore not a
church of Christ.
1.
The churches of Christ are subject
to Christ respecting the conditions of pardon and communion.
According to the head of the church, sinners are saved by faith
(John 3.16; Rom. 5.1). But just as the walls of Jericho fell down by
faith, not the moment faith was conceived in the heart, but only
after the walls had been compassed about for seven days (Heb.
11.30), so the sinner is saved by faith, but only after that faith
has found expression in an act of faith—the act of baptism. The
Bible gives numerous examples of people who have faith in their
hearts, yet remain unsaved because that faith does not find
expression in the life (John 2.23-25; 8.30-34; 12.42-43; Acts
26.27-29; James 2.19). Faith must act! It must lead a person to
repent of his sins (Luke 13.3, 5; Acts 17.30), to confess his faith
in Christ (Acts 8.36-37; Rom. 10.9-10), and to be buried in baptism
for the remission of his sins (Mark 16.16; Acts 2.38; 22.16; Rom.
6.3-4; Gal. 3.26-27; Eph. 5.25-27; 1 Pet. 3.20-21).
These are the terms on which Christ and his Father
receive men into their fellowship. And the members of Christ’s
church yield to the wisdom and authority of their head, receiving
one another even as Christ received them (Rom. 15.7). They dare not
change the terms of communion by either addition or subtraction; nor
do they receive one whom Christ has not received or reject one whom
Christ has received. How can a church change those terms
on which persons are made members of Christ’s church and still claim
to be a church of Christ?
Of
course Christ will also reject one once received if he turns from
serving Christ and walks disorderly (John 15.1-6; 2 Pet. 2.20-22;
Rev. 3.15-16). And in this regard also the churches of Christ are
taught to respect the will of their head by withdrawing from the
disorderly member (1 Cor. 5; 2 Thess. 3.6, 14-15).
2. The churches of Christ
are subject to Christ in the practice of baptism.
According to the order of Christ, (1) the
element of baptism
is water (Acts 8.38-39), not rose petals, as one preacher is
reported to have used; (2) the action of it is a burial (Rom.
6.4; Col. 2.12), not sprinkling, pouring, or moistening the
forehead; (3) the subject of it is a believer (Mark 16.15-16;
Acts 2.38, 41; 8.12), not an infant; (4) the purpose of it is
to obtain pardon (Acts 2.38; 22.16), not to express outwardly the
pardon that has taken place inwardly; and finally, (5) it is a
baptism “into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit” (Matt. 28.19, American Standard Version), not into the name
of “Jesus only.”
The
churches of men will do as they please, but the churches of Christ
are subject to their head, yield to his direction, and respect his
authority.
3. The churches of Christ
are subject to Christ in organization.
The
local group is the only organization Christ gave his church. The
church was simply not organized into a complex denominational system
on a universal basis. The local group of saints is the beginning
and end of it.
According to the direction of the head of the church, each local
group is to have its own elders (Acts 14.23), also called overseers
(Acts 20-17, 28) or bishops (Tit. 1, 5, 7),
whose work is not to act as a board of directors over the work of
either that one local group or several local groups combined but to
oversee, shepherd, or tend the flock (Acts 20.17, 28-31; 1 Pet.
5.1-3). Such work cannot be done by unqualified persons, and Paul
gives the qualifications one must have to act as an overseer of the
church (1 Tim. 3.1-7; Tit. 1.5-9).
Christ also gave
deacons (servants, ministers) to the church
(Phil. 1.1), men whose function is to act as special servants,
especially over the charity work of the church (compare Acts 6.1-6),
and such work was not turned over to a board of directors separate
from the local church.
Christ also gave the church
evangelists charged with the work
of preaching the word (Acts 21.8; 2 Tim. 4.1-5).
Finally, in the early days of the church Christ provided
apostles
and prophets, the former as special ambassadors
and representatives of Christ (apostolos:
one sent) and special witnesses of Christ (Acts 1.21-26), and both
as instruments of the divine revelation God was making in
the early days of the church (Eph. 3.5; 4.11). The functions and
qualification of an apostle (Acts 1.21-26; 1 Cor. 9.1) and the
manner in which a prophet received his ability to prophesy (Acts
8.14-19; 19.1-7) make it clear that these offices could only be
filled by men living in the early days of Christianity. However,
Peter, Paul, James, John and the other apostles still function in
the church as apostles of Christ through the word they have left,
just as those of the time of Christ “had” Moses and the prophets
through the Old Testament scriptures left by them (Luke 16.29).
The
local church was the beginning and the end of the organization
Christ gave the church, and we read nothing of other “church
organizations” or “church related” or “church supported”
organizations such as colleges, seminaries, hospitals, and
benevolent “homes.” The church did the work laid upon it without
these “extra” organizations. Any work the church could not do was
not the work of the church in the first place.
4. The churches of Christ
are subject to Christ as to if mission and function in the world.
Christ did not leave his church free to do whatever occurred to it
to do, but charged it with a special mission in the world—preaching
the gospel to the lost (Phil. 2.15-16; 2 Tim. 3.14-15; 1 Pet. 2.9).
That is its function in the world, and there is no record of Christ
directing the church to try to effect revolutionary changes in the
social order, to engage in political, secular, or general social
projects, or to furnish entertainment and recreation to people in or
out of the church. Many of such projects are worthwhile and needed,
but they are not the work of the church and are foreign to its
mission in the world.
Neither is a church of Christ a fund raising organization obligated
or even authorized to support human benevolent, evangelistic, or
educational organizations.
Paul was sent “not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor.
1.17). He did some baptizing (vv. 14-16), but that was incidental,
and not his main mission. So the churches of Christ in the New
Testament did some work that was not their main mission but which
was accomplished as incidental to their mission. Such was charity
work. The first obligation fell to relatives of needy people (1
Tim. 5.4, 8, 16). The church acted only in such an emergency
situation as when a needy person had no family to care for him (1
Tim. 5.16).
Even then the church had no general program of benevolence. It
aided needy Christians (Acts 11.29; Rom. 15.25-27; 1 Cor. 16.1-2),
but there is no record of a church collection being made for anyone
not a Christian. Disciples are instructed to help even
non-Christians independently of the church (Luke 10.30-37), but the
church is not a Red Cross or General Welfare agency, and was charged
with the welfare of the souls of men rather than their bodies. The
apostles would not “leave the word of God, and serve tables” (Acts
6.2). Neither should the church be diverted from its real mission to
use its energies and resources for a less vital function in the
world.
The
churches of men likely will do as they please in this area as in
others, but the churches of Christ will remain subject to their
head.
5. The churches of Christ
are subject to Christ in the use of their material resources.
Christ ordered his disciples to raise what money needed for the
functions of the church by giving of their means on the first day of
the week (1 Cor. 16.1-2). There is no record of pie suppers or other
such fund raising projects being carried on by New Testament
churches with the approval of Christ.
Nor
was the church authorized to take a collection for just any purpose
or project. It could make a collection for needy saints (1 Cor.
16.1-2) and for the support of gospel preachers (2 Cor. 11.8-9;
Phil. 4.15-17). But the head of the church never authorized his
church to collect money for the support of human institutions of any
kind or for recreational programs. Nor is there scripture
authorizing a church to send funds to another church for a big
evangelistic program, nor in fact for any reason except when the
receiving church is destitute and in physical Reed (Acts 11.27-30;
Rom. 15.25-27; 2 Cor. 8.13-15). It was needy churches, not wealthy
ones, who received funds from other churches in the New Testament
era.
6. The churches of Christ
are subject to Christ in their worship.
The
New Testament disciples, observing all things Christ commanded
(Matt. 28.20), met on the first day of the week to break bread (Acts
20.7)—that breaking of bread which is a part of the Lord’s Supper
(Matt. 20.26; 1 Cor. 11.24), for that is the only breaking of bread
which was allowed in the public assemblies; the breaking of bread in
a common meal was not to be a part of the public assemblies
according to Paul’s direction in 1 Cor. 11.33-34. Together with the
bread they took the fruit of the vine as a reminder of the sacrifice
of Christ (Matt. 26.27-29; 1 Cor. 11.25-26). The churches of men
will do as they please. But the churches of Christ will meet on the
first day of the week to remember Christ.
Jesus instructed his disciples to sing praises to God and
edification to each other (Eph. 5.19; Col. 3.16). But unlike Old
Testament times when animal sacrifices, instrumental music, and such
things were a part of the worship, there is not a hint of authority
from the head of the church for the use of any music but vocal music
in the worship of the church of Christ.
God’s people are found praying to him (Acts 2.42; 1: and listening
to God’s word taught by a man (Acts 20 Women were taught to be
silent in the church (1 Cor. 14.34-35). The churches of men may
decide that this practice discriminates unduly, even unjustly,
against women, but the churches of Christ will not question the
authority of their head.
Also, as we have seen, disciples were taught to contribute of their
means for certain specified purposes as a part of the first day of
the week activities (I Cor. 16.1-2; compare also II Cor. 11.8-9 and
Phil. 4.15-17 for the uses of church funds).
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
In
all of these areas discussed, human institutions with human heads
can only be expected to do as they please, obeying the dictates of
the human heart. But the churches of Christ have Christ as their
only head, and are subject in all things to their head. Only a
“Thus saith the Lord” will move them into action. But when they
hear that “Thus saith the Lord” they will move without argument or
delay.
Any
church which will not submit itself to the authority and direction
of Christ as its only head, ruler, and lawgiver, whatever it may
claim for itself or whatever name it may wear, really has no claim
to being a church of Christ or church of God.
All
of this is not to say that God’s people are perfect in obedience or
faultless in judgment. They will make mistakes. (Look at the
Corinthian church!) They must constantly guard against being led
astray. They must continually renew their appeal to God for
forgiveness of their sins by the cleansing power of Christ’s blood
(1 John 1.5-10). They must ever be willing to correct faults made
manifest by the word of their head (as did the church at Corinth: 2
Cor. 7). Any church which will not thus yield to its head and
correct any faults pointed out by his word will be disowned by
Christ as his church. Jesus warned one church that if it remained
impenitent he would remove its candlestick (Rev. 2.4-5), and the
candlestick is explained as representing the church itself (Rev.
1.20).
“FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT
SO!”
That was Jesus’ response when the divorce question raised (Matt.
19.8). He went back to the beginning and to G original
institution. When we turn back to the early days of Christianity as
it is depicted in the original source documents, the New Testament
books, much that passes for Christianity in the twentieth century is
not to be found. But look first at what is found already in the
first century A.D.
In the first century
Jesus
promised his apostles that the Holy Spirit would guide them into all
truth (John 16.13). The Holy Spirit did come to them (Acts 2), and
revealed to them the mind of God (1 Cor. 2.6-13). In the first
century the faith had been “once for all delivered unto the
saints” (Jude 3, American Standard Version), and early Christians
were “complete in Christ” (Col. 2.10), lacking nothing necessary to
moral and spiritual completeness but having “all things that pertain
unto life and godliness” (2 Pet. 1.3). In the first century and on the basis of that truth of the gospel which “endureth for
ever” (1 Pet. 1.25), and which has been preserved for us in the New
Testament, people were able to obey God, to do whatever God wanted
them to do: they were being saved; they were complete in Christ,
lacking nothing that pertains to life and godliness; they were dying
in hope of heaven. According to the New Testament records, all of
that was already true in the first
century.
That was centuries before the first human creed was written;
centuries before the Catholic Church was present to establish
“Divine Tradition” or to “interpret” the scriptures; centuries
before there was a universal Pope, long before the doctrine of
celibacy, sprinkling for baptism, instrumental music in worship,
transubstantiation, purgatory, extreme unction, holy orders,
Mary-worship, confession before the priest. It was over 1800 years
before the doctrine of Papal Infallibility became the law of the
Church.
It
was fourteen centuries before Luther’s revolt against Catholicism
produced the Lutheran Church; fourteen centuries before there was a
Church of England (Anglican or Episcopal) or a Presbyterian Church;
over fifteen centuries before the work of John Smyth resulted in the
first Baptist Church in history; over sixteen centuries before John
Wesley and the Methodist Church: over seventeen centuries before
Joseph Smith and Mormonism and William Miller and Adventism. It was
over 1800 years before Mary Baker Eddy and Christ Science. It was
over 1800 years before there was a Jehovah Witness to knock on your
door and sell you Watchtower publications.
Do
you realize what this means? It simply means that all the creeds,
the traditions, the “revelations,” and the institutions of men that
have cropped up over the past 1900 years to clutter the religious
scene and to confuse the minds of the people are at best unnecessary
... unnecessary to obedience to God, unnecessary to salvation,
unnecessary to completeness in Christ, unnecessary to life and
godliness, unnecessary to the hope of heaven. But it also means
that the whole concept of modern denominationalism is no part of the
true Christianity originating in the mind of God, revealed by the
Holy Spirit, and preserved in the New Testament.
But
we live in the twentieth century, not the first! How can we
possibly be simple Christians like those of the first century in
this complex and confused age? That question must now be met.
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
After his resurrection Jesus ordered his apostles to go “into all
the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” He further told
them, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that
believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16.15-16).
According to Jesus’ instructions the apostles began this work in
Jerusalem. Peter’s message on Pentecost struck to the heart of many
of those Jews whom he charged with the murder of the Messiah, and
they inquired, “What shall we do?” Peter’s answer was, “Repent, and
be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the
remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost”
(Acts 2.37-38). About three thousand persons received Peter’s
message, were glad to find that a way of pardon was open, and
happily complied with those terms (v. 41).
What were these people religiously? What did compliance with the
divine terms of pardon make of them?
What we shall find, upon reading further into the book of Acts, is
that such baptized, penitent believers were the church of Christ.
They are referred to as believers, “them that believed” (Acts 2.44;
4.32; 5.14). They were “such as should be saved” (Acts 2.47). They
were “the disciples” (Acts 6.1, 2, 7). They were “brethren” (Acts
6.3). They were the “saints” (Acts 9.13). Later on we are told that
the “disciples” were called “Christians” (Acts 11.26; compare Acts
26.28; 1 Pet. 4.16). They were also referred to as “the church”
(Acts 5.11; 8.1,3). As we have already noticed, “the church,” “the
disciples,” and “the saints” were interchangeable terms, all applied
to the same group, those persecuted by Saul of Tarsus, so that
“church” was just a term referring to Christ’s disciples, the
saints, as a collectivity, a group, a body of people. There is no
reference to denominationalism or denominational organization.
These baptized, penitent believers are just disciples or saints
working together to do the Lord’s work.
Simple, is it not? Would it not be a delight if men and women could
just turn back the calendar 2,000 years and restore this primitive
simplicity by being just what folk were when the apostles were on
earth speaking the pure word of God? Oh, to be just a believer, a
disciple, a Christian, a member of Christ’s church, as God wanted
men to be!
Is
it possible? Perhaps, living as we do amidst the complexities of
denominational organization and the confusion of human creeds,
doctrines, and traditions, such a view of Christianity appears to
you a wonderful dream but impossible to attain. Is it possible in
such an age as ours to break free from the trappings of modern
denominationalism and be just a simple believer, a disciple of
Christ, a Christian, a member of the Lord’s church, without adopting
the creeds or joining the institutions of men?
The answer has got to be,
“Why not?”
Jesus said, “The seed (in the parable of the sower) is the word of
God” (Luke 8.1 1). And long before that God had established the law
in nature that every plant would reproduce after its kind (Gen.
1.11-12, 21, 24-25). Corn seed produces corn and never anything
else. If you want to grow wheat you will have to have a different
kind of seed.
The
word of God was planted in the hearts of honest men and women in
Jerusalem, and the result was a crop of believers, disciples,
saints, the church of Christ. When the same seed was sown in
Samaria (Acts 8.4-5, 14), the harvest was the same. So it was in
Antioch, Philippi, Thessalonica, and Corinth. It could never be any
different as long as the same seed was sown.
If
that same seed is planted in your heart today, and you make exactly
the same response to it that honest men and women did in the first
century, you will not and cannot be anything more, less, nor
different than they. Nobody ever became other than a plain, simple
Christian by following the Bible. You will have to do something not
in the Bible to be anything else.
Do
you think you could be a Muslim by following the Bible? Of course
not. No one would say so. But teach someone the Koran get him to
accept Mohammed as a prophet; and that will make him a Muslim.
What verse of scripture would one obey to get in the Jehovah’s
Witness organization? There is none. No one ever became a
Jehovah’s Witness by following the Bible. You would have to have
Let God Be True and other such books. You could become a
Jehovah’s Witness by following these, but not by following the
Bible. Even Jehovah’s Witnesses will tell you that. They will tell
you that one cannot understand the Bible without the infallible help
of the Watchtower organization.
So
with Catholicism. No one ever became a Catholic by doing anything
taught in the Bible. Again, people are told they cannot understand
the Bible without the guidance of the church. When they look at the
Bible through the colored glasses of the Catechism, traditions, and practices of the Catholic Church they become
Catholics. But no one ever became a Catholic by following the Bible
alone.
You
can become a Mormon if you want to – but not by following the Bible
and the Bible alone. That would be impossible. Latter Day Saints
know that. They will tell you the Bible is not enough; that you
need the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and
other latter day “revelations.” It takes all of this to make a
Mormon. You might as well try to use the Koran to make a Catholic
as to try to use the Bible to make a Mormon. The Koran does not
make Catholics does the Bible make Mormons.
Nor
did anyone ever get into any one of the human institutions called
denominations by following the Bible. Years ago I had an exchange
of articles on the sabbath question with a Seventh Day Adventist.
The man who was printing the paper in which these articles appeared
said to me, “I agree with you that we ought to keep the first day of
the week. That is why I am a Baptist.” He was wrong. That is not
why he was a Baptist. I keep the first day and that does not make a
Baptist of me. No one ever became a Baptist by obeying anything in
the Bible. What is there in the Bible that one could obey to become
a Baptist?
The
Baptist Church is not mentioned in the Bible, and there is simply no
information given in the word of God on how to become a Baptist.
The Baptist scholar Edward T. Hiscox confesses as much in The
Standard Manual for Baptist Churches, page 22.
Under the general heading of “Church-Membership” he writes
It is
most likely that in the Apostolic age when there was but “one Lord,
one faith, and one baptism,” and no differing denominations existed,
the baptism of a convert by that very act constituted him a member
of the church, and at once endowed him with all the rights and
privileges of full membership. In that sense, “baptism was the door
into the church.” Now, it is different; and while the churches are
desirous of receiving members, they are wary and cautious that they
do not receive unworthy persons. The churches therefore have
candidates come before them, make their statement, give their
“experience,” and then their reception is decided by a vote of the
members. And while they cannot become members without baptism, yet
it is the vote of the body which admits them to its fellowship on
receiving baptism.
“Now, it is different.” Hiscox acknowledges the Biblical practice,
but confesses that the Baptist way is “different.” And he is right.
There is nothing in the Bible like this “different” plan. No one
ever became a Baptist by following the Bible.
If
a person were taught the doctrines of the Methodist Discipline,
believed them, and carefully complied with them
would be a Methodist. No one could ever become a Methodist without
that set of doctrines; and no one could ever become anything else
with them. No one could ever become a Presbyterian by following the
Methodist Discipline. A different book or set of
doctrines is required for that.
If
a person is taught The Westminster Shorter Catechism,
believes, and obeys it, though, he becomes a Presbyterian—not 99
44/100% of the time, but every time. He would have to have Luther’s Catechism
to be a Lutheran and the Prayer Book to be an Episcopalian.
I
do not mean to be offensive, but let us have the truth before all
else. No one ever became a member of any of these denominations by
following the Bible. Start reading your Bible at Genesis 1.1. Read
it through from cover to cover. Mark everything God ever told
anybody to do. You can do it all—and never be a member of any of
these denominations. God never told anyone to do anything which
would put him in any one of them. You will have to depart from the
word of God to join one.
Can we be just Christians?
Certainly. No one ever became anything else by
following the Bible. Every intelligent person can and should turn
to the Bible and obey God, not men. Follow the word of God as it
stands, not after it has been filtered through the creeds and
doctrines of men. Then let that make of you whatever it will.
But
you know what that will make you. You can turn to the Book of Acts
and find out what following the pure word of God made men. It made
them believers, disciples, saints, Christians; it made a group of
them a church of Christ. And that is all that kind of seed ever
produced. If you do exactly what those people in Acts did to be
saved, the things they did to become what they were, then you will
be just what they were—just a Christian. You will have to do
something else, something in addition to or other than the word of
God, to become anything different. But when you do that you are
obeying men, not God; you become what men would have you to be, not
what God would make of you.
Don’t you want to be just a Christian?
L.A. Mott, Jr.
www.sunesispublishing.com
